Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th Nov 2009 23:05 UTC
As we all know, Mac OS X has support for what is called 'fat binaries'. These are binaries that can carry code for for instance multiple architectures - in the case of the Mac, PowerPC and x86. Ryan Gordon was working on an implementation of fat binaries for Linux - but due to the conduct of the Linux maintainers, Gordon has halted the effort.
Thread beginning with comment 393331
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.
RE: Linux advocates to ISVs: you're all stoopid heads
by Redeeman on Sat 7th Nov 2009 19:00
in reply to "Linux advocates to ISVs: you're all stoopid heads"
Member since:2006-03-23
In theory ISVs could also build their own live cd in asm and distribute their program that way, but would it be worth the effort?
Until there is an msi equivalent that can be installed across Linux distros without worry of some random library update breaking your program expect the current situation of Linux getting the shaft from ISVs to continue.
Telling ISVs that they're stoopid heads for not wanting to write a bunch of scripts for not only multiple distros but also multiple versions of those distros is insane. Don't forget they also have to support all those multiple distros and versions as well. It isn't like open source where you can just dump the program and then have all the distros figure it out. When customers ask why program whizbang doesn't work in distro version combination xyz you can't tell them to fix if themselves if they don't like it (which really means f off since very few can actually fix such problems).
You win ISVs over by creating an appealing and stable platform for them, not by telling them to figure it out a chaotic mess on their own.
The real problem is at the end of the day Linux is designed around open source applications. Most Linux advocates have no idea as to how many headaches you run into when you try to distribute proprietary GUI applications in Linux, especially compared to Windows or OSX. Until the distros get together and acknowledge that more needs to be done to bring in ISVs expect the Linux desktop to continue to flatline.
I don't expect much to change however, given the entrenched FOSS ideology, the ongoing window manager war and failure of the LSB.
Until there is an msi equivalent that can be installed across Linux distros without worry of some random library update breaking your program expect the current situation of Linux getting the shaft from ISVs to continue.
Telling ISVs that they're stoopid heads for not wanting to write a bunch of scripts for not only multiple distros but also multiple versions of those distros is insane. Don't forget they also have to support all those multiple distros and versions as well. It isn't like open source where you can just dump the program and then have all the distros figure it out. When customers ask why program whizbang doesn't work in distro version combination xyz you can't tell them to fix if themselves if they don't like it (which really means f off since very few can actually fix such problems).
You win ISVs over by creating an appealing and stable platform for them, not by telling them to figure it out a chaotic mess on their own.
The real problem is at the end of the day Linux is designed around open source applications. Most Linux advocates have no idea as to how many headaches you run into when you try to distribute proprietary GUI applications in Linux, especially compared to Windows or OSX. Until the distros get together and acknowledge that more needs to be done to bring in ISVs expect the Linux desktop to continue to flatline.
I don't expect much to change however, given the entrenched FOSS ideology, the ongoing window manager war and failure of the LSB.
this just further proves you know NOTHING what you speak of.. you CAN very much create a single downloadable application bundle that will work for all distributions and architectures, and it doesnt take nearly as much scripting and messing around as creating microsoft installers(which i can only assume you know nothing of aswell)..
theres really no great wisdom in it, no great thing missing before this is doable, nothing much to do to work at different distributions, its all MYTHS created by stupid people, which other stupid people happily eat, and im sorry, you fell into that micetrap...
i must fall back to my previous statement, stop talking about shit which you know NOTHING of..
and btw, if isvs are idiots, then they f--king deserve to be called idiots, i see no reason to cater to their idiotic non-existent needs for stuff that isnt really needed.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2009-08-26
In theory ISVs could also build their own live cd in asm and distribute their program that way, but would it be worth the effort?
Until there is an msi equivalent that can be installed across Linux distros without worry of some random library update breaking your program expect the current situation of Linux getting the shaft from ISVs to continue.
Telling ISVs that they're stoopid heads for not wanting to write a bunch of scripts for not only multiple distros but also multiple versions of those distros is insane. Don't forget they also have to support all those multiple distros and versions as well. It isn't like open source where you can just dump the program and then have all the distros figure it out. When customers ask why program whizbang doesn't work in distro version combination xyz you can't tell them to fix if themselves if they don't like it (which really means f off since very few can actually fix such problems).
You win ISVs over by creating an appealing and stable platform for them, not by telling them to figure it out a chaotic mess on their own.
The real problem is at the end of the day Linux is designed around open source applications. Most Linux advocates have no idea as to how many headaches you run into when you try to distribute proprietary GUI applications in Linux, especially compared to Windows or OSX. Until the distros get together and acknowledge that more needs to be done to bring in ISVs expect the Linux desktop to continue to flatline.
I don't expect much to change however, given the entrenched FOSS ideology, the ongoing window manager war and failure of the LSB.