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 533194
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: ...
by kragil on Thu 30th Aug 2012 09:17 UTC 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[3]: ...
by kragil on Fri 31st Aug 2012 09:49 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

Yadda, yadda. He is talking about Photoshop from 2001 and that won't work on Mountain Lion. Full of shit I say.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Supported software and OS
by Lennie on Sat 1st Sep 2012 14:55 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

64-bit windows doesn't support DOS or 16-bit Windows 3.x programs either.

Linux is source-compatible with pretty much any commandline program from the 1990's.

And many original Unix programs.

Modern Linux programs do have some bloat:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nbv9L-WIu0s

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[3]: ...
by tidux on Thu 30th Aug 2012 18:34 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

Wrong! QEMU has the "qemu-user-foo" executables on Linux, which lets you run Linux binaries compiled for architecture foo, no matter what the host architecture is.

Reply Parent Score: 1

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[3]: ...
by phoenix on Fri 31st Aug 2012 03:21 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Or, use FreeBSD. A couple people are running FreeBSD 1.1.5 binaries on FreeBSD 9.0. That's over 10 years of backward compatibility.

Reply Parent Score: 3