> FOSS apps and software were not optimized for adoption, but as a healthy alternative to further an ecosystem of open development and continue progress when others halt.
I don't see why you can't have both? It seems silly to say that FOSS as a category is not optimized for adoption because there are plenty of widely adopted counterexamples like Linux and Firefox. And in the case of a mobile email client—something that a huge portion of the population uses—why can't/shouldn't it be a daily driver for non-technical users?
> K9 is an example of an app that needs to update their UI. But it is also an app that needs to take its great set of features and innovate a little further on them.
Unless you have unlimited resources, build for a single audience. And that means you are making your app opinionated to the needs of a group. So no, you can't do both.
However, Foss means Others can build the app differently if they wish.
I don't see why you can't have both? It seems silly to say that FOSS as a category is not optimized for adoption because there are plenty of widely adopted counterexamples like Linux and Firefox. And in the case of a mobile email client—something that a huge portion of the population uses—why can't/shouldn't it be a daily driver for non-technical users?
> K9 is an example of an app that needs to update their UI. But it is also an app that needs to take its great set of features and innovate a little further on them.
Can't you do both? What am I missing here?