Linked by David Adams on Thu 29th Sep 2011 23:47 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
Permalink for comment 491493
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-10-28
Maybe because the most commonly used are the ones you really need or, at least, going to use on a daily basis? Seems like a sensible approach, if you as me.
Except for that, I sort of agree with the rest of your post. Some Linux applications are ugly and/or buggy, or both, some are half baked and some never make it past the alpha stage.
However, let's not forget the quote that started it all: "When you count how many great desktop apps there are on Linux, you can probably name 10. You work really hard, you can probably name 20." See? The subject of contention, so to speak, is not the merits (or lack thereof) of Linux and/or FOSS as a whole, but the lack of "great" applications -- whatever that means.
The applications available on Linux and *BSD may not be great, but surely get the job done and, again, make for a perfectly viable, alternative platform for people who actually "think different". In other words, that statement is perfect trolling material and, judging by the number of posts in this thread, it got its job done! ;-)
RT.