|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
RE: [PLUG] More critique of Linux desktop
|
> -----Original Message-----
> From: plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org
> [mailto:plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org] On Behalf Of Art Alexion
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 1:12 PM
> This is such a sham argument. Of course there are at least
> 40 useful programs that run in Windows only as there are
> probably 40 useful programs that only run on *nix.
>
> The real reason for that is momentum, of course. Commercial
> developers (and virus writers) reasonably aim to design
> products that can be run by the most common computers.
> Before MS cemented its monopoly, software more often tended
> to be written for more platforms. Now, with 95% of the
> desktops running Windows, there is a huge disincentive to
> develop for other platforms. It snowballs. When fewer
> programs are written for a platform, fewer people choose that
> platform. And when fewer people choose that platform, fewer
> programs are written for it.
>
> The only way to reverse that trend is to buck the momentum
> and create a rich software selection that attracts people to
> the platform -- until the selection is so rich that it
> attracts people to the platform. Most desktop users don't
> care about operating systems, they get one with their
> hardware, or they [used to] choose one based on the software
> they needed.
>
> OS/2 failed because IBM couldn't attract developers to write
> for the platform. Hence, no software. Hence no customers
> for the platform.
>
> Linux is uniquely situated to buck this phenomenon because of
> the Open Source culture. People chip in to develop software
> because they need or want it themselves, regardless of how
> many copies they will sell. This permits Linux to accumulate
> a rich selection of software no matter how many desktops are sold.
>
> For many of us Linux is already there. For some, it is
> getting there eventually. For others, with special needs
> [that even windows may not be meeting], it will never be there.
How is this a sham argument? Can you find me an ACT equivalent to run on
Linux? You probably don't even know what DeepAnalysis does and I'll wager
you a lot of money that there is no equivalent on Unix or Linux.
I was an 0S2 from the very beginning and I was sad to see it go - it was way
ahead of its time. OS2 disappeared because IBM lacked the balls to properly
fight Microsoft. Years ago before Exchange was invented, I visited my
friend Peter in the Microsoft office in Delaware. He badmouthed OS2 as a
horrible OS - and Microsoft was going to crush it. He said anyone who runs
it is a chump.
When he took me through his NOC I noticed that Microsoft before Exchange ran
their worldwide mail system on OS2.
Howard
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|