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 533422
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Vordreller
by Yoko_T on Fri 31st Aug 2012 09:32 UTC in reply to "Comment by Vordreller"
Yoko_T
Member since:
2011-08-18

Pretty much.

Regular users whom I've tried to introduce to Linux are often confused by the fact that there are more than 1 versions of it. They understand older versions, but not different versions.

The concept of making specialized distro's for users with different needs strikes most people I've worked with as overkill and they don't understand why you can't just have a single operating system that does everything. Like Windows or Mac.

Users like to know that their choice was a good one and that it will remain that way for a long, long time. With Linux, they have no such thing. Every so many months there's a major update. Every so often 1 distro has a feature before the others do. It bothers the end-user and it's a hassle they don't want to deal with.

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!


You're not paying 1 cent for it so who really cares what losers like you and the people who hang out with you think?

Reply Parent Score: -1