Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Aug 2012 22:52 UTC
Linux Miguel de Icaza: "To sum up: (a) First dimension: things change too quickly, breaking both open source and proprietary software alike; (b) incompatibility across Linux distributions. This killed the ecosystem for third party developers trying to target Linux on the desktop. You would try once, do your best effort to support the 'top' distro or if you were feeling generous 'the top three' distros. Only to find out that your software no longer worked six months later. Supporting Linux on the desktop became a burden for independent developers." Mac OS X came along to scoop up the Linux defectors.
Permalink for comment 533511
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Luminair
by darknexus on Sat 1st Sep 2012 05:39 UTC in reply to "Comment by Luminair"
Member since:

android wouldn't be the way it is without all the hectic effort put into the linux desktop over the years. almost all of the practical result has been a waste because almost nobody gives a damn about any linux desktop. but android is taking over the world and the linux desktop gets some credit.

How do you figure that? I'm honestly asking, as I just don't see the connection. Android is a custom Linux kernel and a basic core userland, and that's as much resemblance to traditional desktop Linux as I see in it. The rest of it (the Dalvik VM, the core APIs and frameworks, the graphics stack, etc) bare about as much of a resemblance to your typical Linux desktop as iOS does to the Apple II as far as I can see. Am I missing a piece of the puzzle?

Reply Parent Score: 2