Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Aug 2012 22:52 UTC
Linux Miguel de Icaza: "To sum up: (a) First dimension: things change too quickly, breaking both open source and proprietary software alike; (b) incompatibility across Linux distributions. This killed the ecosystem for third party developers trying to target Linux on the desktop. You would try once, do your best effort to support the 'top' distro or if you were feeling generous 'the top three' distros. Only to find out that your software no longer worked six months later. Supporting Linux on the desktop became a burden for independent developers." Mac OS X came along to scoop up the Linux defectors.
Thread beginning with comment 533073
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
...
by Hiev on Wed 29th Aug 2012 23:10 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

I agree with him.

Reply Score: 3

RE: ...
by tanzam75 on Thu 30th Aug 2012 01:53 in reply to "..."
tanzam75 Member since:
2011-05-19

Indeed.

CS in academia has been very UNIX-centric since the late 1970s. Around 2002, I began to notice Macs appearing among hard-core CS majors in college. By 2010, even the faculty had converted over. The people who weren't using Macs were Windows users who were happy to use Cygwin or to ssh into Linux machines. Linux was practically gone from the academic desktop.

I can empathize with Miguel's frustrations with Linux audio, because that was precisely what caused me to give up on Linux.

Once, after a system update, audio failed. I'd been using Linux casually until then, never having dug into the source code, so I figured I'd try it at least once and see how painful it'd be. In the sound card driver, I discovered that several of the boolean settings were backwards -- in other words, 0 meant true and 1 meant false! Not too bad -- an easy fix. Smugly, I thought that all bugs indeed were shallow.

Six months later, it broke again after a system update. The same fix no longer worked.

Screw this, I said, I'm going back to Windows. And since then, I've never lost audio after a Windows Update.

Reply Parent Score: 4

v RE[2]: ...
by ze_jerkface on Thu 30th Aug 2012 06:02 in reply to "RE: ..."
RE[2]: ...
by 1c3d0g on Thu 30th Aug 2012 13:11 in reply to "RE: ..."
1c3d0g Member since:
2005-07-06

Audio on Linux is a bloody mess indeed. The same can be said about their graphics, but at least there's Wayland to look forward to, which will make huge improvements to Linux in general.

But on the audio side, Jesus! ALSA, OSS, JACK, PulseAudio, Phonon, Gstreamer, KLANG...I mean, what the hell is going on here?!? Developers, let's get some consensus and put the focus on only one major audio system.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: ...
by kragil on Thu 30th Aug 2012 09:17 in reply to "..."
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

I think he is full of it.
Run your old OSX programms on Mountain Lion?
No, not possible. Lion killed official support for PPC binaries. He should know what he is talking about.

And anyways, he switches OS because he loves his phone so much. That is just pathetic IMO.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[2]: ...
by nej_simon on Thu 30th Aug 2012 09:53 in reply to "RE: ..."
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Define "old". OSX for intel was released in 2005 so if your applications are more than seven years old then they aren't supported any more. Of course not everything written for an old version of OSX will run on ML but compared to Linux backward compatibility is pretty good which is his point.

"And anyways, he switches OS because he loves his phone so much. That is just pathetic IMO."

That might be because the dev tools for the iPhone only run on OSX.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ...
by akrosdbay on Thu 30th Aug 2012 15:17 in reply to "RE: ..."
akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09

I think he is full of it.
Run your old OSX programms on Mountain Lion?
No, not possible. Lion killed official support for PPC binaries. He should know what he is talking about.

And anyways, he switches OS because he loves his phone so much. That is just pathetic IMO.


When have you ever been able to run a different arch binary on Linux without recompiling? Never!

Removing PPC/Rosetta support more than 5 years after an complete architecture change is industry standard practice. Almost every company follows a 5 year EOL practice.

Your point is dubious at best and completely inaccurate.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ...
by Drumhellar on Thu 30th Aug 2012 17:25 in reply to "RE: ..."
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

I think he is full of it.
Run your old OSX programms on Mountain Lion?
No, not possible. Lion killed official support for PPC binaries. He should know what he is talking about.

And anyways, he switches OS because he loves his phone so much. That is just pathetic IMO.


That is a helluva stretch. Best case, you're being disingenuous, but I think you're actually trolling. I mean, besides OSX, what other OS runs binaries from a different CPU architecture natively? HP-UX is the only one I can think of. NT4 on Alpha did, also.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: ...
by bassbeast on Thu 30th Aug 2012 18:54 in reply to "RE: ..."
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Uhhh 7 years for a Mac is oooolllld, and Apple did go through an entire arch switch. I still run programs from the late 90s on my Win 7 X64 and from even earlier with DOSBox which is now packaged preset from places like GOG, no problem.

The problem is Linux guys think everyone should be on the bleeding edge, and there is a reason they call it BLEEDING edge, because it will be a bleeding pain in the butt! I have customers running 7-8-9 year old software on still supported versions of Windows, no problem.

Whether the Linux guys like it or not you NEED the proprietary software because it fills niches that Linux devs are never gonna have enough experience with to support, things like medical billing and electrical supply and salvage yards and all these little niches that small firms write software for, but they can't support you because everyone from Linus on up is constantly futzing and fiddling so things that work in foo are broke in foo+1 and won't work again until foo+5 and that's if the software devs fix it, otherwise you're just stuck.

You have to give folks want they want or they go somewhere else, period. They will not bend to your will, you have to bend to theirs. Again like it or not OSX came along and gave those that prefer the Unix way of doing things a well supported platform where third parties could write software and still sell it a year later, and for those that need incredibly long backwards compatibility there is always Windows.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: ...
by bassbeast on Thu 30th Aug 2012 18:35 in reply to "..."
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

And the sad part? Retailers like me that have been saying these exact same things for years have been attacked and called every filthy name in the book for daring to point out the emperor is bare assed.

I mean do you think we small shops LIKE shelling out so much of our potential profits to MSFT? Think they give us even a teeny tiny discount? Hell they've been royally screwing system builder FOR YEARS, yet every time guys like me would test the 5 or 6 distros that the community deemed "ready for the desktop!" and point out the same stuff he's pointing out we'd get told we were "dirty M$ shill poo poo heads!" and told we were liars for reporting what we were seeing with our own two eyes, the broken drivers, updates borking systems, the same problems year after year after year.

I had tried for 7 solid years, from 2003-2010, to find just one that could take the place of Windows Home, but none did. Now when someone claims "Distro X is ready for the desktop!" I'll simply download whatever version they offered 3 years ago and update it to current. Since Windows has 10 years of support its not a fair test, but too many distros have come out in the past few years to make a fair test possible. What do I find? broken drivers, updates breaking stuff, alpha quality software, googling for fixes. the same problems I ran into in 2003.

I hope it gets better, i really really do. I make less than $50 a sale thanks to how badly MSFT gouges, but I can't give a customer a system that is gonna break the first time they update and I can't afford to give away lifetime support with such low margins. And before somebody trots out "support contracts" (which I've been told multiple times is my "solution") I'd like to point out home users HATE Best Buy for their trying to shovel extended warranties, they certainly aren't gonna jump on support contracts.

Fix this and I will promote the living hell out of Linux, but until then I have no choice, its Windows only at my shop.

Reply Parent Score: 6