Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:18 UTC
Permalink for comment 377654
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-02-05
Instead of copying Microsoft and Apple.
The only non-developer tool OSS I know of that succeeded is Firefox. And did Firefox copy IE? No. They was innovative, they went their own ways.
If you want people to switch to your software it isn't enough that it's "as good"(although it really often isn't) and free, it as to be *better*.
People don't switch products because one is slightly better either, they switch because they are alot better.
I'm baffled by the little amount of innovation in mainstream products in OSS. One would believe it is a less risk for them to try new things.
I think KDE is definitely going a right direction though. I don't like KDE(I prefer less complicated interfaces), but they really deserve praise for trying new and innovative things.
If you look at OSS-software that's meant for technical people (weird window managers for instance) you'll find a lot of different ideas and concept are being explored. Why not do this for software meant for regular users as well?