Linked by Stefan Michalowski, M. Sc. on Thu 19th Aug 2004 08:27 UTC
Editorial Lately posted on Slashdot, an article written by Joel Spolsky mentioned the trouble through which Microsoft went to make each version of Windows backwards compatible. In one case, for the game Simcity, they even changed the way memory handling was done when running that application. You can find additional stories of software tricks that recent versions of Windows have to perform in order to run these bug-dependant applications on the web. After reading the story, I discussed with a couple of friends how weird this was and how Free Software completely avoids this problem.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Anonymous
by mystilleef on Fri 20th Aug 2004 18:00 UTC

How in the heck whether software is closed or open sourced make a difference when run in Linux?

It is a lot more easier, less expensive and less cumbersome to manage open source software in Linux than closed source. Qt realizes that. Real Network does too. Nvidia even had to provide open source wrappers to link their modules to Linux.

Will the OS give me a warning telling me that what I am about to run is closed source?

No, it doesn't. I don't see why it should. However, installing, maintaining and upgrading it will one make your life as a user hard.e.g the need to recompile the nvidia driver everytime I upgrade my kernel.

Just because the OS itself is open source, doesnt mean that it was meant to run only open source programs.

In many instances, it does. You can't link proprietary modules to many parts of the Linux kernel, for instance. In several cases proprietary applications can't link to free/open libraries on your system. They need to write their own.

Writing closed software is not impossible, it's just hard. And that's because like I said, the system is inherently designed to thrive in an free/open source atmosphere. Much of these is delibrate by design.