In Defense of A Little Frustration
There is software out there with great features. Their features are polished, refined, and tuned by an army of software engineers, UX designers, product owners, and verified by QA.
I, increasingly, avoid them.
We live in an age where information is the most-sought-after product. We are surrounded by companies that have the desire to monetize the contents of our emails, what sites we browse on the Internet, who we talk to, and where we go. These polished apps and services often come at no out-of-pocket expense, recouping their development costs by harvesting every bit of information they can about you to serve you ads and sell that same data to their business partners.
We aren't limited to these companies' solutions, however. We don't have to sign away all of our information in order to be able to send emails or find nearby restaurants.
Assessing Our Priorities
The alternatives to the Googles and Apples of the world often lack the kind of funding and staffing that the big companies can bring to bear on product design and implementation. As a result, these competitor apps and services often have rough edges and lack features, both advanced and basic: I'm still waiting for my calendar app to implement the ability to clone a calendar event.
The lack of basic features or the extra few clicks it takes to do some things are often enough to turn people away from these alternatives. I can't fault them; they're looking for the tool that gets the job done and gets the job done most efficiently. However, in seeking the tool that streamlines our processes the most and has absolutely every feature we want, we're not seeking out what is truly the best tool for the job. Exhaustiveness of features and slick design are not the only priorities, nor necessarily even the top priorities, that should drive our selection processes.
A Case Study in Gatekeepers
There is a bookshop local to me that has been trying for weeks to correct its listed business hours on Google Maps - its opening is listed as one hour later than its actual opening time. The owner has reported a correction with no action on Google's part. I, also, have reported the inaccurate hours and Google even quickly sent me an email thanking me for the fix and assuring it would be quickly published - yet, to this day, the hours remain incorrect.
If customers don't show up until 10 AM when they could show up at 9 AM, is the business likely to suffer some catastrophic loss? I'm not knowledgeable enough about running a business to say. However, I am concerned about the fact that this change - one that is simple to make and easy to verify - has not happened, and may not happen as long as Google decides that it's not in its financial interest to fix it.
Using Things Makes Them Better
The rough edges of these alternatives aren't inherent. Everything starts with rough edges - try using the first iteration of Google Maps versus today's and see how you feel about Google Maps. Software products - be they made by Google, Apple, or others - only get better through user feedback and, frankly, money to pay people to make them better. If we don't give our patronage to alternatives to Google, et al - using them, buying them, subscribing to them, donating to them - and only orient toward the "free" products, then we're trending toward a future where a select few companies' determination of profitability drives our access to information.
Maybe, then, a little frustration to keep the future more accessible is not only justifiable, but necessary.
How to Start Getting Frustrated
If you're looking for places to start, here are a few I suggest:
Attributions
"Deal with it" sunglasses sourced from freepngimg.com