Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Oct 2010 19:00 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Well, this is sure to raise a few eyebrows here and there. Today, at the Ubuntu Developer Summit, Mark Shuttleworth held his keynote speech, and in it, he announced that Ubuntu will switch to the Unity user interface come release, for both the netbook as well as the desktop, leaving the GNOME user interface behind (but keeping the GNOME platform).
Thread beginning with comment 447320
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by Luminair
by sorpigal on Wed 27th Oct 2010 13:06 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Luminair"
sorpigal
Member since:
2005-11-02

Porting from Windows to two Linux distros costs more than porting to OSX, especially if the application uses sound or video.

First "Porting to two OSes costs more than porting to one." - Is anyone even surprised? Second, I was talking about (and we were discussing) Desktop Linux fragmentation in the form of GNOME vs KDE, not distro fragmentation.

Keep in mind that porting for a commercial ISV include testing and support, which is further increased by distros like Ubuntu that are constantly releasing major updates.

Pick a version target and stick with it. This is why enterprise distros and Debian are good. Again, don't change the subject: Multiple DEs are not the problem here.

Linux is a PITA for commercial developers and it has been that way for years. Distro differences are mitigated by releasing the source and then having package maintainers handle the porting and distribution. Once you step outside this model the costs go up.

Which has exactly what to do with a choice of Desktop Environment? Pick a distribution and target it, pick RHEL if you want a stable target.

You can't argue that fragmentation is a net positive or neutral aspect for commercial developers when there is clearly an additional cost involved.

All I have to show is that fragmentation is not a net negative, or that it cannot be proven to be a net negative. But I don't even need to do that: I am not arguing against various platform problems surrounding Linux in general, I am arguing about whether GNOME vs KDE vs GNOME+Unity fragmentation is hurting Desktop Linux. It isn't. You still haven't even attempted to describe how it might.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by Luminair
by nt_jerkface on Wed 27th Oct 2010 16:01 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Luminair"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


Pick a version target and stick with it. This is why enterprise distros and Debian are good.

That works for a database company targeting a conservative distro like RHEL but a gaming company needs to support the latest version of Ubuntu.


I am arguing about whether GNOME vs KDE vs GNOME+Unity fragmentation is hurting Desktop Linux. It isn't. You still haven't even attempted to describe how it might.

It makes Linux less appealing to ISVs since multiple environments increase development and support costs. Proper Qt integration within Gnome is really what is needed.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Comment by Luminair
by sorpigal on Wed 27th Oct 2010 17:00 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Luminair"
sorpigal Member since:
2005-11-02

A gaming company cares less than most about Qt vs. GTK nonsense, much less the environment. Most games are full-screen affairs that care about the WM and not much else at the DE level.

I put it to you that if gaming companies ported their games to RHEL only then the RHEL versions of libs would find their way on to a lot of people's systems, even if via chroot, and a lot more desktop users would run RHEL.

Granted that multiple desktop environments have a non-zero support and development cost, but I don't know of any case where it's been a deal breaker for a porting effort. Do you?

Proper Qt integration with GNOME will help a lot. What would help even more if writing Qt apps from C were painless. Or, how about a libgtkqt which can act as a run-time drop-in replacement for gtk and actually use Qt? It's not as if emulating an API is a new concept and it would certainly be a nice way to bring a swift end to the toolkit wars.

Reply Parent Score: 2