Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th Nov 2009 23:05 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 393254
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
ISVs port to OSX and Windows but not Linux
by nt_jerkface on Sat 7th Nov 2009 01:27
in reply to "RE[7]: Always On the Cards"
Jesus, open your eyes. ISVs don't distribute Linux versions because they develop their software with MFC, .Net and even more rare APIs that are not available in multiple architectures, and they use 32bits specific integers, etc.
You open your eyes.
I can list one-man micro-ISVs that port to both OSX and Windows.
The iphone was getting better support from developers when it had less than 10% the share of Linux.
Linux is a total clusterf*** for proprietary developers. Not only is there a lack of standards between distros but individual distros are designed around open source. It's mess and denial isn't helping the situation.




Member since:
2005-07-22
Linux distributions should handle only their own packages. Everything else should go in /usr/local. There are installers (like those for Windows) that companies can use to make the install process more friendly. And just as you said ISVs are not distributing versions for Linux of their software, I remember have installed many closed source software for testing. Most of them had an install script that did the job and installed successfully in /usr/local.
Why does it matter? Can the package manager update the closed source software itself? No. In Windows, if you want to update an application, you have to buy a new version and reinstall. You are really thinking that ISVs aren't distributing Linux versions because the package managers don't integrate well with them? Silly.
As amateurish as in the Windows world, where most applications provide their own copy of libraries which are already available in a normal Windows installation. That doesn't stop them from delivering.
If anything, the LSB should really be enforced.
Oh, but you have the solution right? Because last time I checked, ISVs are not distributing Linux solutions because they are not developing them for a start. And then you have the flash plugin shit that almost recently got 64bits support for Linux. Distribution was never a problem, development was.
But you seem to think that ISVs have Linux developers and have ported their software to work on Linux but they are unable to package their software and that's why they dont' deliver, right? Sweet Jesus, open your eyes. ISVs don't distribute Linux versions because they develop their software with MFC, .Net and even more rare APIs that are not available in multiple architectures, and they use 32bits specific integers, etc.