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 533110
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Photoshop and AutoCAD are the de facto standard in some areas, and some people make a living using them. I know using the computer for professional purposes, what a weird concept...

No, my point is exactly what you said. These programs are for highly specialized, professional purposes. The claim that a lot of people "choose" to run Windows for certain programs especially, and then listing these two specifically, is just false for the vast majority of Windows. That is the claim I was arguing.

They choose a computer; chances are it comes with Windows. Most of the time, Photoshop and AutoCAD don't even come into play. Many people probably don't really even know what the two programs are, and if they did, they would be lost if they tried to use them. Most of the people I know or have heard of that brags about having a program like one of these does it purely to brag that they got a ridiculously expensive program for free; a piece of software that they would have "legally" had to spent a metric shit-ton on just to get, that is way above their heads.

Edited 2012-08-30 02:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 8

tylerdurden Member since:

Perhaps you should consider extending the size of your sample in order to provide a better view of why it is that people use Windows or OSX over Linux on the desktop?

Also extend the scope of application, try Office and iTunes for example. See how things change...

Reply Parent Score: 2

UltraZelda64 Member since:

Perhaps you should consider extending the size of your sample in order to provide a better view of why it is that people use Windows or OSX over Linux on the desktop?

Also extend the scope of application, try Office and iTunes for example. See how things change...

The original claim was about Photoshop and and AutoCAD, so that is what I was arguing about. Nothing more, nothing less--and nothing else. Obviously if you consider Office and iTunes things change, but you made no mention of them in your original post. But that was not the argument; the argument was that such highly specialized, professional pieces of software are NOT why the vast majority of Windows run Windows. Simple as that. I wouldn't consider an office suite to be "highly specialized" or "professional" either really; I learned to use MS Office and other office suites in freaking middle school.

I am not claiming that Windows has no software exclusive to it that helps to propel it above all else. I am just saying that two highly-specialized professional applications don't make much of a dent in the overall mass use of Windows, unless you're a business and need them. Hell, I've even heard claims that even image professionals that use Photoshop would prefer to do it on a Mac. True or not, I don't really give a damn--but the point is, even Photoshop is not exclusive. Not sure about AutoCAD (again, don't care).

Your other two examples are, IMO, better ones--they're something a lot of people use, with Office having a heavy presence on businesses but certainly not exclusive to use by them. iTunes is something more "personal" and unlikely to be on a business machine, but I wouldn't doubt a lot of people--whether they have a business job or not--have it on their personal home machines. On the subject of Windows exclusivity, you sure as hell don't need Windows to run iTunes either--and being an Apple program, it probably purposely runs better on a Mac anyway.

Edited 2012-08-30 04:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

ze_jerkface Member since:

People choose Windows under the assumption that any program they might need will work with it.

It's just a given that it will work with everything. Take away Office, iTunes or Netflix and the streets would run with blood.

Reply Parent Score: 1

bassbeast Member since:

Fine I'll give ya one...quickbooks. I've seen everyone from families to pretty decently sized businesses using QB, the express version if free so it doesn't even cost a dime if all you are wanting to do is manage a household. And there is nothing, absolutely nothing, that even comes close to QB in FOSSland. a Single QB girl (and its always a girl for some reason, you'd think they had a union or something) can run an entire supply house with nothing but QB and a printer, everything from inventory to payroll, all nice and neat.

But even if you are talking about "granny users" that use NOTHING but a browser, well then they'd still be in trouble on Linux, why? Well in just the past 3 years we've seen the DEs gutted and replaced, ALSA for pulse (still buggy and more likely to fail than work BTW) and the entire wireless subsystem is a lousy mess. So grandma gets that new Ubuntu machine, see the "you have updates!" and like any sane normal user pushes the button, it asks to reboot and...whoops! Sound is gone, wireless toast, and depending on the GPU she may be looking at a single user mode black screen o' death.

Sorry but that ain't user friendly, and its certainly not ready for anyone who isn't a geek which is a problem because most geeks? Have no problems running OSX or Windows either so no point in switching. The ones that need Linux the most, grandma that clicks on anything and gets bugs, can't run it because its too breakage prone and see the problem?

Reply Parent Score: 3