Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:07 UTC
Linux With Linux on the desktop going from a slow crawl to verging on an explosion, many have toiled with the question: How do we make this happen faster? A well-known Austin-based Linux Advocate thinks he has the answer.
Thread beginning with comment 297461
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Simple answer
by Xaero_Vincent on Thu 24th Jan 2008 00:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Simple answer"
Xaero_Vincent
Member since:
2006-08-18

I vehemently disagree with that statement. Allowing users to get comfortable with open source applications like FireFox, for example would make switching to an another OS seamless.


In theory, yes. But what actually happened is Firefox became popular as a Windows app. I would say between 80 to 95% of Firefox's browser marketshare is shared between Windows and Mac OS X users. In fact, there has been some speculation that Mozilla might be treating the *nix version as a second-class citizen.

I think we need to agree on why people would move from Windows in the first place. My opinion is that it will be because they are fed up with Windows. There are some like me who just feel more comfortable having all of my tools at my fingertips (like bash, grep, find, ls, sed, awk and more). But, there aren't really that many people like me in that respect. Windows users don't know about these tools and consequently don't know what they are missing. And, they aren't going to move to switch for end user applications they can't get on Windows either.

The reason they will move is because the want the freedom that comes with Open Source OS's. They will get tired of the never ending BS from Microsoft. They will move *AWAY* from Windows in search of something else. They won't move *TOWARD* Linux for the applications.


If that were true then Linux might have a credible market score on the desktop by now, right? Instead, most people just complain and continue using Windows for the sake of their applications, while a minuscule few might leap over to Macintosh.

I therefore came to believe great exclusive applications are the only way the little guys can prove themselves worthy on well established/owned territory. After all, Windows is so successful for that reason.

*nix is popular today with businesses because of it's lower TCO and great scalability, not so much because of the "freedom" it provides--though I'm sure they take advantage of the freedom.

Edited 2008-01-24 00:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Simple answer
by backdoc on Thu 24th Jan 2008 00:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Simple answer"
backdoc Member since:
2006-01-14

"I vehemently disagree with that statement. Allowing users to get comfortable with open source applications like FireFox, for example would make switching to an another OS seamless.


In theory, yes. But what actually happened is Firefox became popular as a Windows app. I would say between least 80 to 95% of Firefox's browser marketshare is shared between Windows and Mac OS X users. In fact, there has been some speculation that Mozilla might be treating the *nix version as a second-class citizen.
"
I see Firefox's popularity on Windows as a good thing. "There has been some speculation" .... what does that mean? Are you saying that you bet someone out there feels that way?



"I think we need to agree on why people would move from Windows in the first place. My opinion is that it will be because they are fed up with Windows. There are some like me who just feel more comfortable having all of my tools at my fingertips (like bash, grep, find, ls, sed, awk and more). But, there aren't really that many people like me in that respect. Windows users don't know about these tools and consequently don't know what they are missing. And, they aren't going to move to switch for end user applications they can't get on Windows either.

The reason they will move is because the want the freedom that comes with Open Source OS's. They will get tired of the never ending BS from Microsoft. They will move *AWAY* from Windows in search of something else. They won't move *TOWARD* Linux for the applications.


If that were true then Linux might have a credible market score on the desktop by now, right? Instead, most people just complain and continue using Windows for the sake of their applications, while a minuscule few might leap over to Macintosh.
"
I think you just validated my point. Making the applications cross platform prevents that.


I therefore believe only great exclusive applications is the only way the little guys can prove themselves worthy on well established/owned territory.

We'll just have to disagree on that one.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Simple answer
by Xaero_Vincent on Thu 24th Jan 2008 00:44 in reply to "RE[3]: Simple answer"
Xaero_Vincent Member since:
2006-08-18

I see Firefox's popularity on Windows as a good thing. "There has been some speculation" .... what does that mean? Are you saying that you bet someone out there feels that way?


Yes, it is a good thing but it proves my point that people just embrace the software on their existing platform rather than try it on the other platforms it runs on.

The speculation/rumor occurred on Mozilla mailing-lists and Slashdot, Digg, and other news sites. Mozilla denied the accusations, of course. If this were true, it certainly isn't a trend I wish to see happen as a *nix user.

I think you just validated my point. Making the applications cross platform prevents that.


Cross-platform and FOSS have been largely ubiquitous for a long time now; at least in my opinion.

If anything, FOSS is becoming more Windows-specific because how some new FOSS projects target proprietary development tools and libraries on Windows, rather than the cross-platform options.

We'll just have to disagree on that one.


Regardless who agrees upon what... its evident that whatever is happening now is clearly not helping to bring Linux and other FOSS platforms to the masses.

Edited 2008-01-24 00:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Simple answer
by WereCatf on Thu 24th Jan 2008 00:47 in reply to "RE[2]: Simple answer"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I therefore came to believe great exclusive applications are the only way the little guys can prove themselves worthy on well established/owned territory.

I thought the basic idea behind FOSS software was to give people more freedom to choose and do things their way, not to force them to a single platform?

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: Simple answer
by Xaero_Vincent on Thu 24th Jan 2008 01:06 in reply to "RE[3]: Simple answer"
Xaero_Vincent Member since:
2006-08-18

I thought the basic idea behind FOSS software was to give people more freedom to choose and do things their way, not to force them to a single platform?


Sure...

But this discussion is about why Linux is a failure (in terms of adoption).

That is why I was pondering a new development ideology; one which focuses more on *nix and making it shine in the face of competition than freedom for all users.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Simple answer
by umccullough on Thu 24th Jan 2008 03:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Simple answer"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

In theory, yes. But what actually happened is Firefox became popular as a Windows app. I would say between 80 to 95% of Firefox's browser marketshare is shared between Windows and Mac OS X users. In fact, there has been some speculation that Mozilla might be treating the *nix version as a second-class citizen.


WELL DUH!

I mean jeez - are you saying Firefox was originally developed for Linux and ported to Windows? Why would you simply assume that Open Source software is primarily developed for an Open Source OS and then ported to Windows?

The fact is - Windows has the market share. If you're going to write an application, whether it be open or closed source, commercial or free - you're probably going to build it on the platform that is going to have the most market-share for your target audience. Firefox was developed primarily for Windows, secondarily for Linux and other OSes, period - stop pretending that it wasn't.

edit: fixed quote tags...

Edited 2008-01-24 03:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Simple answer
by ecruz on Thu 24th Jan 2008 04:06 in reply to "RE[3]: Simple answer"
ecruz Member since:
2007-06-16

You are totally correct. But do not expect these guys here, the Linux guys, to ever understand that idea. They probably do not even know the origin of Firefox. It came from Mozilla, which came from Netscape, and both were written with Windows in mind.
While I am on this subject, I have two PC running Vista, no problem. A laptop with XP, fine. Two of the PC's had Linux for a while, but that is gone now. I got tired of having to reformat my hard drive and reinstall everything.
Instead of all the arguments you hear on this site and others, concentrate on getting a more polished OS. Like one poster said, Windows is terrible, how does it come up with that? It works for 90% of users. Can't say the same about Linux. For the rest of you, take a reality pill.
When Linux becomes better than Windows, stable and with the right applications, I will be the first to switch. I love freebies just like the fanatical FOSS guys, I just do not demand it like they prefer to do.
OS's are just software, not religion. Come back to earth kids!
A little poll: Do you think that this guy Stallman, is jealous that he didn't write Linux. That his baby, The Hurd, is of no consequence in the open source world?
I do. And it drives him crazy. Too bad though, without Linux he would be as obscure as he should be. He is nore detrimental to open source software than anyone. Don't believe me, if you had the access, discuss this with IT guys making decisions in big companies and why they worry about GPL 3.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[3]: Simple answer
by archiesteel on Thu 24th Jan 2008 04:49 in reply to "RE[2]: Simple answer"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

You're getting it wrong. Making applications cross-platform isn't a means to bring more people to Linux, but rather to lessen the impact of applications on OS choice, i.e. it makes it less of a hassle for people to use the same application across platforms. In other words, it's not going to convince people to switch, but it won't impede their decision either.

You're basing your argument on the premise that making exclusive applications would bring people over to another OS, but there's no indication that this would happen. In fact, most Linux applications are *not* available on Windows, and yet this doesn't seem to have convinced people to switch - despite the fact that there are *excellent* Linux apps.

Your suggestion would only make life harder for people who use the same apps over many platforms (a trend which ultimately makes the platform irrelevant) without giving *any* guarantees that it would make more people switch. Personally, I'll side with convenience (and more open-source software on *all* OSes) rather than some dubious strategy based on exclusivity.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[4]: Simple answer
by hobgoblin on Thu 24th Jan 2008 11:21 in reply to "RE[3]: Simple answer"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

indeed, linux, bsd, osx, windows.

all this is really secondary to being able to move data across os borders.

Reply Parent Score: 2