OSNews

I would like to challenge your opinion that porting KDE to other platforms hinders Linux adoption.

It shows people the sort of software they can expect on a full-blown Linux system.

If it wasn't for software such as The GIMP and Firefox on Windows, there would be little chance I would be using Linux full-time as I do now.

I would prefer to use Krita on windows over GIMP, if or when a port becomes available.

Likewise, I too would not have tried GNU/Linux if it were not for other FOSS programs having been ported to Windows.

Running the FOSS programs on Windows and watching the rapid improvement from version to version for programs like Mozilla/Firefox and OpenOffice, and also being exposed at the same time to "freeware" which was actually just "adware" (mostly download managers) ... I became curious as to what exactly was the essential difference between "free software" and "freeware", and how to tell them apart (so as not to waste my time with any more adware/spyware/nagware). That was exactly how I became aware of Linux, the GPL and FOSS in the first place.

From that point it was just a small step forward to switch the entire software stack on my computers over to FOSS software.

That experience almost defined the word "liberation" to me.

I completely agree with you. And, I just posted regarding the same issue on the other OSNews Article regarding Linux adoption. I won't repost. I'll just stick the link here: http://www.osnews.com/permalink?297455

"It shows people the sort of software they can expect on a full-blown Linux system. "

Thats the problem

I thinks it's all right to port GNU/Linux software to windows, as long as it runs like shit in windows like all windows software ported to GNU/Linux does Hell even Firefox gets more attention and care in windows than it does GNU/Linux, sad but true

As long as it gives the user a taste of what they could really have if they ran a full blown GNU/Linux OS, then it's done it's job.

If it wasn't for software like the gimp I WOULD be using OSS / Linux.

[jest]
Wasn't the gimp created to put people off OSS and keep them using Photoshop?
[/jest]

I don't think that it is bad for Linux adoption. Just imagine if you could replace the Outlook/Exchange kombo on windows with kontact and some standards base serverside komponents on windows you would lower the barrier to to adopt Linux in many companies.

Mail and calendaring is mission critical to most businesses and unless you can't do that fully cross platform, you will not even try to go cross platform, and if you are not going to go cross platform you will chose the platform with the software that best fits your business in general, and you will not switch to something cheeper in places where it otherwise would be possible.

Windows in itself have no value to the user, its just an necessary evil to run familliar windows apps. If you get familliar with KDE apps why pay for windows if you can get Linux for free?

I think this is true. In fact, I said that in a recent post to OSNews (http://www.osnews.com/permalink?295348). It would be to open source's advantage if the OS could be more or less a commodity. Look at all of the *nix variations. They all run the same applications. But, you choose your OS based on personal preferences regarding things like security and stability. Anybody using Linux today could also be using BSD or vice versa.

Have you heard of Scalix and Zimbra?

http://www.zimbra.com/products/product_editions.html
http://www.zimbra.com
http://www.scalix.com/community/
http://www.scalix.com

Quoted for truth. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here, but it seems to me that the number 1 reason for people staying away from linux has to be complete unfamiliarity with the various apps (as well as the OS itself); some might not admit to that but from my experience it's been true. Most users would rather stick with the devil they know, even if that devil is constantly poking their rear ends with its pitchfork. If KDE apps do become even mildly popular then we start going down that slippery slope: "Linux has these apps, too? And it's free? Then why the hell am I paying Microsoft all this money?!?!"

That is a sentiment which will undoubtedly have the chairs flying once again in Redmond.

So by the same token, Firefox has set back the cause of linux adoption? Would the OSS community have been better served if Firefox only ran on *nix?

Actually, examples like Firefox just go to show that the issues of FOSS applications and FOSS operating systems are decoupled as far as end users are directly concerned. Of course, having a healthy desktop software stack will help a kernel become more popular (if desktop environment is something it strives for). But modern software tends to be portable. At some point, if properly made, all major kernels and OS's should be able to benefit from a common pool of applications. Things like Firefox, Thunderbird or OpenOffice are spearheading this tendency because everybody needs a browser, an email client or an office app. But they also have to be built on a portable base. This is where things like Qt/KDE or GTK come in. If the backend is portable (or ported) and the language too, at some point the rest of the software deluge follows. GTK and Qt have been portable for a long time. It was high time a desktop environment followed. I mean, how many portable desktop environments do you know? How can that not be a good thing, to be able to have as large a pool of applications (good old FOSS apps, not just any junkware) on as many platforms as possible?