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 533091
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Vordreller
by smashIt on Thu 30th Aug 2012 00:16 UTC in reply to "Comment by Vordreller"
smashIt
Member since:
2005-07-06

If there's too much choice, non-specialized users will always have that nagging doubt: did I make the right choice? You don't want a user wondering that about your product!


users have no problem with choice (there are more than a dozen current editions of windows out there)
users have a problem with fragmentation
and users are really pissed off when the first answer to whatever problems they have is "you chose the wrong distribution"

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller
by Mr. Dee on Thu 30th Aug 2012 07:11 in reply to "RE: Comment by Vordreller"
Mr. Dee Member since:
2005-11-13

Incorrect, there are only three main editions of Windows 7 the average user is exposed to in mainstream markets and its tailored to their needs:

Home Premium - for home users
Professionals - for business users
Ultimate - for those who want it all

If you drop in specialized editions, it is still not a dozen:
Starter - introductory edition for basic needs web browsing, emailing, basic office productivity. Most users I know upgrade this Home Premium.

Home Basic - emerging markets, pretty much similar to Starter with more flexible options such as ability to apply themes.

Enterprise - larger businesses who deploy Windows on mass and have multi-lingual sites world wide. Comes with unique management tools such as MDOP.

At the end of the day, they are all Windows at the core. AutoCAD 2013 which can run on Windows 7 Ultimate can also run on Windows 7 Starter.

Linux on the other hand has different distributions, desktop environments, package management and support options. As someone noted, Windows 7 Starter and other editions can be targetted by just having one particular edition and you know it will be supported for the next 10 years.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Vordreller
by smashIt on Thu 30th Aug 2012 09:24 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

Incorrect, there are only three main editions of Windows 7 the average user is exposed to in mainstream markets and its tailored to their needs:


see, you don't even think of the other editions

there are 6 windows 7
8 windows server 2008
1 windows home server
and 1 windows mobilephone whatevertheycallitnow

there are even more, but these 4 groups are popular enough that everyone should at least have heard of them

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Vordreller
by l3v1 on Thu 30th Aug 2012 11:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

Linux on the other hand has different distributions, desktop environments, package management and support options. As someone noted, Windows 7 Starter and other editions can be targetted by just having one particular edition and you know it will be supported for the next 10 years.


What you want could only be done in a coporate setting, one distro in one hand, one decision point, and everyone else falling in line, which would mean the elimination of all other distros.

This was never the goal of Linux, thus it's around high time to stop b*ching about having multiple distros, versions, GUIs and package systems. This is a neverending histeria and it's totally pointless. Use Windows, use OSX, but then for f*k's sake, be done with compaining about how the Linux world works.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller
by raboof on Thu 30th Aug 2012 09:37 in reply to "RE: Comment by Vordreller"
raboof Member since:
2005-07-24

users are really pissed off when the first answer to whatever problems they have is "you chose the wrong distribution"

This seems a popular reply to any type of problem (wrong distro / wrong application / wrong service etc).

Of course it's good to make people aware of alternatives, but the 'you should use product X instead' crowd can be quite persistent, and it's frustrating when you really did make a conscious choice for the product you're using, or worse, you switched to it the last time you had a problem and someone convinced you to switch....

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Vordreller
by l3v1 on Thu 30th Aug 2012 11:54 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

This seems a popular reply to any type of problem (wrong distro / wrong application / wrong service etc).


No, it's just an answer showing that you asked the wrong person. And it's "popularity" is just showing how many self-proclaimed pros are in the forums and channels you ask those questions. Nothing more, nothing less.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller
by Dave_K on Thu 30th Aug 2012 14:53 in reply to "RE: Comment by Vordreller"
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

users have a problem with fragmentation and users are really pissed off when the first answer to whatever problems they have is "you chose the wrong distribution"


I started finding that funny after a while when I was trying to get a Linux distribution working on my Thinkpad.

I must have been told at least a dozen times that the problems I was experiencing were due to running the wrong distribution, with a different "correct" distribution recommended each time. In the end the one I managed to get more-or-less working (Scientific Linux) wasn't even one of the ones I'd been told to use.

The Thinkpad specific GUI utilities (that initially fooled me into thinking that Linux would be as easily installed as Windows) were packaged for different distributions and didn't work when compiled from source. I ended up having to spend a couple of weekends reading howtos and configuring everything manually, but at least I finally got it working OK.

Of course I'd be a lot less sanguine about the experience if I'd had to use Linux as my main OS, rather than it being a hobby that I could set aside as soon as its problems became too frustrating.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller
by Vordreller on Thu 30th Aug 2012 15:53 in reply to "RE: Comment by Vordreller"
Vordreller Member since:
2012-08-29

End users do have problems with choices.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Too+much+choices

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Vordreller
by bassbeast on Thu 30th Aug 2012 19:20 in reply to "RE: Comment by Vordreller"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

I'm sorry but you are wrong and here is why: As far as the average user is concerned there are only THREE versions of Windows, XP/Vista/7, and of those 7 is the one they will encounter on new systems and the other two are "old" and thus will be ignored. You see it doesn't matter if its Home or Pro or Ultimate to the end user because unless you have a specialized task that would actually require a higher SKU they all do the same thing which as the article pointed out the same can't be said of Linux because of incompatibilities.

Like 'em or hate 'em for it (personally I like it) with Windows nearly everything works across system, from old to new. It is only recently we've been seeing games that require DX 10 and I don't think I've seen a DX 11 only game yet and gaming is a small niche. For the software the everyday users are running it works fine no matter if they have XP-7, it just works.

Reply Parent Score: 2