Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Shuttleworth Says Ubuntu Can't Just Be Windows

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the bsod-screensaver-must-suffice dept.

Linux Business 710

ruphus13 writes "When Mark Shuttleworth was asked what role WINE will play in Ubuntu's success, he said that Ubuntu cannot simply be a better platform to run Windows apps. From the post, according to Shuttleworth, '[Windows and Linux] both play an important role but fundamentally, the free software ecosystem needs to thrive on its own rules. it is *different* to the proprietary software universe. We need to make a success of our own platform on our own terms. if Linux is just another way to run Windows apps, we can't win. OS/2 tried that ...' The post goes on to say, 'Linux simply isn't Windows (nor is Windows Linux) and to expect fundamentally different approaches (and I'm not just thinking closed versus open) to look, feel, and operate the same way is senseless.'"

cancel ×

710 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well, not quite... (5, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832185)

OS/2 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows applications while Windows was a $100 way of running Windows applications. It didn't matter that OS/2 was better, it wasn't (in the minds of most consumers) $400 better, especially when it needed $400 more RAM as well.

Re:Well, not quite... (5, Insightful)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832265)

OS/2 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows applications while Windows was a $100 way of running Windows applications. It didn't matter that OS/2 was better, it wasn't (in the minds of most consumers) $400 better, especially when it needed $400 more RAM as well.

Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps. And compared to XP, Vista also needed $400 worth of hardware.

Depressing proof that it's all in the marketing.

Re:Well, not quite... (1, Offtopic)

FLEABttn (1466747) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832623)

Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps. And compared to XP, Vista also needed $400 worth of hardware.

Depressing proof that it's all in the marketing.

Vista cost me $100 the week it came out - legally at that. You're either doing it wrong or you're being disingenuous for the sake of argument.

Re:Well, not quite... (2, Informative)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832901)

Vista cost me $100 the week it came out - legally at that. You're either doing it wrong or you're being disingenuous for the sake of argument.

That was for a retail license? If you are not actually a system builder, ie. someone who assembles and and sells said hardware to customers, then you in a legal gray area. MSFT produces retail version of the full version and upgrades for purpose. It is not for fun.

Re:Well, not quite... (2, Informative)

Rycross (836649) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833059)

Vista Home Basic Retail is around $180 [newegg.com] , and the system builder copies go for $100 [newegg.com] . I believe that you are covered under the system builder license as long as you build the PC yourself. At the very least, the few times I've built a PC I've used the system builder versions (before I had MSDN).

Regardless of the legality of system builder licenses, the cost of Vista is nowhere near $400, and it was dishonest of the original poster who stated this to suggest otherwise.

Well, the retail price was near $400. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832923)

So why the big discount?

OEM (where your OS is stuck on that machine and cannot be sold)?

Student?

MS Employee discount?

Flea Market copy (that passed WGA, so must be valid, right?)

Re:Well, the retail price was near $400. (2, Informative)

Rycross (836649) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832953)

You can get Vista for $100 at newegg. [newegg.com]

Re:Well, not quite... (2, Insightful)

mlingojones (919531) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832655)

Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps.

And that's why XP is still vastly more popular than Vista.

Re:Well, not quite... (5, Insightful)

ImYourVirus (1443523) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832945)

Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps.

And that's why XP is still vastly more popular than Vista.

Or maybe because it isn't bloatware?

Re:Well, not quite... (5, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832859)

Actually it's all in the bundling. OEMs will put in whatever version of Windows you give them, it's not like it costs them $500.

Re:Well, not quite... (4, Funny)

The Grim Reefer2 (1195989) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832931)

OS/2 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows applications while Windows was a $100 way of running Windows applications. It didn't matter that OS/2 was better, it wasn't (in the minds of most consumers) $400 better, especially when it needed $400 more RAM as well.

Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps. And compared to XP, Vista also needed $400 worth of hardware.

Depressing proof that it's all in the marketing.

But the $100 option meant you couldn't have "Team OS/2" in your Usenet signature.

Re:Well, not quite... (1)

Risen888 (306092) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832993)

Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps. And compared to XP, Vista also needed $400 worth of hardware.

And that's exactly why Vista is a ruinous failure, and why 7 will be.

The cost is beside the point. (5, Interesting)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833085)

The cost is beside the point.

I am a long-time Linux (and much more recently OS X) user, and if I am presented with a piece of software that requires Windows to run it, I usually prefer to just do without.

Fortunately in my discipline (biotech) developers are beginning to realise there are alternatives - for instance, Geneious [geneious.com] is a stupendously fine example. It's definitely not free, but it is available on multiple platforms, which is a big step away from where we were a couple of years ago.

Compare this with Endnote [endnote.com] which is rapidly losing ground to Zotero [zotero.org] because the developers refuse to cooperate with the *nix world.

Re:Well, not quite... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832477)

I never paid anywhere near $500 for OS/2.

I could be misremembering -- it's been so long -- but $99 for upgrades is what I recall. Once I paid full price for a standard edition because for some fool reason I didn't want to wait a month for the upgrade, but I'm pretty sure even that wasn't anywhere near $500

Re:Well, not quite... (5, Informative)

Bourbonium (454366) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832691)

I remember only paying $75 for my first version of OS/2 Warp 3.0. Then, a few years later, I was willing to pay up to $119 to upgrade to OS/2 Warp 4.0 to avoid having to use Windows on my home PC the way I was forced to use it at work. I can't remember any of my OS/2 colleagues paying any more than that. Where did you get those pricing figures?

Re:Well, not quite... (2, Funny)

ImYourVirus (1443523) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832963)

Probably out of his ass?

Humbly and respectfully think he's full of... (0, Flamebait)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832915)

95% of the people who use computers are using Windows applications. (Don't mod me to -1 'cause you have a stat saying it's actually 93.7%, schmuck). The vast majority of the bazillions of people running computers are running Windows aps on Windows.

  Why? Because they work. They do what needs to be done. And primarily because people know how to use them to do what they are using them for.

    So if you want 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) to be as used by all the bazillions of people who are using computers, then it better run Windows aps,... and run them well. Better than Windows, for that matter. Because nobody is going to shift to 'your' operating system unless Windows either stops working, or evolves into such a pain-in-the-ass to use (with endless pop-up windows and BSODs) that people are willing to risk switching away from Windows. And if Windows works, which it does...currently.. then why bother switching when you can't be sure that the alternative that you are being forced to switch to is actually going to work and you aren't having to go through some mutha-fugging 'learning experience' just to get back to the level of applications computer skills that you already have under Windows.

    So, in the real world, 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) isn't going to be used by the vast majority of people until you need to be a serious computer expert in order to tell 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) from Windows.

    What I'm saying is. You have to be indistinguishable from Windows AND better than Windows before millions are going to switch to 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) from Windows.

    Heresy, talking like this on Slashdot. But truth is always heresy. Get used to it. Move on. Fix the things that people hate about Windows with 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) and everyone will switch.

    But....

    Our operating system is `~free~`. Well, la de da, everything is free if you don't pay for it. And who actually pays for Windows? It comes with computer that you buy. It comes with the computer that was issued to you at your work. It comes with every computer that you buy second-hand on CraigsList. For all realistic perspectives from the average computer user, Windows is -free-, too. If you're buying thousands of licenses for your corporate group, well of course it's not free. But you're not an average computer user.

Ubuntu is not up to scratch (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832199)

For all the freetards do, they still can't equal the ease of use of Windows.It's the universal corporate standard for a reason. Canonical's shit-colored desktop doesn't work.

Don't take my word for it--download the Ubuntu live CD yourself and try it. If you like it better than Windows I'll eat my own ass. (It'll be the color of Ubuntu.)If everyone tried the CD they'd see how bad it was. Windows advocates do download it and know how badly it sucks.

Go on, mod me down, Canonical shills--but you can't hide how much your system sucks forever.

Again, don't take my word for it--download the live CD. Really, do this. You'll see just how much it sucks.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (1, Flamebait)

harris s newman (714436) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832269)

Time to start eating, paytard. I exclusively use Ubuntu, love it, and it's color scheme. Btw=> you can change the colors, paytard.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (4, Interesting)

Nursie (632944) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832279)

I like it much better.

On windows I can't set up my own dns forwarding proxy with a few simple commands, or add a powerful compiler or set of scripting language interpreters and libraries with equal ease.

Ubuntu is great for me. I don't give a crap about running windows apps.

Time to eat your own ass.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (4, Funny)

FTWinston (1332785) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832359)

While I too wish he'd eat his own ass, every attempt I've made so far to configure ubuntu 8.10 to use a static IP rather than a DHCP IP has resulted in failure.

Now I'm probably just being a dumbass, but I'm a reasonably technical dumbass. Even reasonably non-technical dumbasses could do such a thing in windows.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (0, Offtopic)

cptnapalm (120276) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832451)

"Even reasonably non-technical dumbasses could do such a thing in windows."

No they can't.

But this does not solve your problem. How have you tried to do it? Perhaps we can help.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (4, Informative)

snl2587 (1177409) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832547)

http://www.ubuntugeek.com/how-to-set-a-static-ip-address-in-ubuntu-810-intrepid-ibex.html

Keep in mind that the 8.10 release is not designed for broad use and that most users (even now that 9.04 has been released) should still be using 8.04, the last stable LTS release.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832951)

THANK YOU.

I have no mod points, so I'll say it again:

THANK YOU.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (3, Insightful)

doug (926) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833047)

Keep in mind that the 8.10 release is not designed for broad use and that most users (even now that 9.04 has been released) should still be using 8.04, the last stable LTS release.

Untrue.

While there is no long term support (LTS) for anything since 8.04, but for those of us who don't need it, that isn't a concern. There is 18 months of support for every Ubuntu release. That is plenty long enough for most uses.

If I were designing a process that required multi-year support and maintenance, then I'd certainly think about LTS, but that isn't the world I work in.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (0, Offtopic)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832747)

iver never done this but i'd guess you want
killall NetworkManager
man interfaces
nano /etc/network/interfaces
              iface eth0 inet static
                        address 192.168.1.1
                        netmask 255.255.255.0

i think you'll need, to permanently kill NetworkManager with:
update-rc.d -f NetworkManager remove

and /etc/resolve.conf will need configuring for your dns servers

ofc the whole thing is probably covered in a tutorial you could find on the ubuntu forums

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (1)

xonar (1069832) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832851)

I had this same problem, took me forever and ended up switching to dhcp w/ static leases on my router anyway.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27833033)

man ifconfig....... dumbass.

Have YOU ever downloaded it and used it? (3, Informative)

LurkingOnSlashdot (1378465) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832345)

I recently switched to Ubuntu (from running other versions of Linux on my main home computer since 2000) and I have to say it is quite nice. I use WIndows at work because that's what we're told to run. I honestly don't understand why people like you exist that find Linux to be so absolutely terrible. At home I have a laser printer, scanner, webcam, gps, sony ebook reader, digital camera, digital video camera and wireless. All these things work on my Linux boxes and I have no problems with them. I am very productive with Linux.

Re:Have YOU ever downloaded it and used it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832861)

Does iTunes work under Wine yet? Is there a native copy? I spent hours trying to get my father's Ubuntu box to sync with his iPod correctly, but never got it to work correctly.

Re:Have YOU ever downloaded it and used it? (1)

LurkingOnSlashdot (1378465) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832891)

I have no idea, never tried iTunes. I prefer Amarok.

Re:Ubuntu is not up to scratch (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832417)

I did so.

I've now converted my webserver over to Ubuntu.

It runs more smoothly and interacting with the services and settings are easier with the console and a secure SSH session.

I also find I'm enjoying the package manager as I do not have to go manually download and install every application I want and worry about the mess Window's Add / Remove program will leave behind.

Mod Parent Up (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832555)

Linux is cool... but let's not forget that we put up with a lot of shit to run this quirky OS.

Ubuntu thinks that dual screens should be positioned vertically instead of horizontal and doesn't provide a reasonably easy way to change this.

Are you fucking kidding me?

Why kind of amateurs green-light this crap?

First Post: GNAA Says Goatse Can't be Tubgirl (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832231)

Goatse [goatse.fr] and tubgirl both play an important role, but fundamentally, shock sites need to thrive by their own rules.

But running windows would help (4, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832241)

No, Linux isn't windows, BUT,if it were very easy to run windows apps in Linux (for common Joe user with Joe user level hardware), I think it would be a boon to Linux.

With me...there are some windows applications I have to use (Quickbooks pro for my company I contract through), and on jobsites often there are tools they have that are only windows based.

I find when I have to use those windows boxes on site, I often really, really miss having my unix tools (sed, awk, etc...) around. If I could have my linux install, and have the hard core tools to use, and be able to also run windows apps when I needed to, I'd be happy to go.

That need, obviously isn't one Joe User needs, but, maybe it would work the other way around with JU. He has his windows apps, and over time, discovers the neat tools and functionality that Linux offers. Frankly, as long as he has his apps he needs from windows, he doesn't care what the OS is.

Re:But running windows would help (5, Informative)

gnick (1211984) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832361)

I find when I have to use those windows boxes on site, I often really, really miss having my unix tools (sed, awk, etc...) around.

1) Install Cygwin [cygwin.com] .
2) Add the Cygwin bin directory to your path.
3) Enjoy - The Command Prompt just got a helluva lot more useful.

Wasted 3 mod points that I'd contributed before posting, but felt the need to share the joy of Cygwin. Makes Windows damned near tolerable for people that have to have it.

Re:But running windows would help (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832565)

I've tried Cygwin before, but the downfall was always the same:

What do you use for a decent console app?!

Admittedly, I haven't tried it since KDE4 came to Windows, so maybe Konsole works... But everything else I've tried has been horrid under windows. Especially cmd.

Re:But running windows would help (1)

Mr. DOS (1276020) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832665)

Windows PowerShell. It's far from xterm, but it's better than cmd.

      --- Mr. DOS

Re:But running windows would help (4, Interesting)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832847)

"What do you use for a decent console app?!"

Well, I use Cygwin...or more precisely CygwinX [cygwin.com] ...basically cygwin, with xwindows thrown in. I fire up cygwin. Start X from that...and open up a bunch of xterm windows. Works pretty well...

Re:But running windows would help (1)

nabsltd (1313397) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833025)

You can always use "bash", which comes with Cygwin. The latest Cygwin installs an icon in your start menu that gets you a bash prompt.

Personally, though, I use 4NT. Although it isn't directly available anymore, Take Command Console/LE [jpsoft.com] from the same company is close to the last version of 4NT, and free (as in beer).

One of my favorite current command lines is:
sort < clip: > clip:
This sorts whatever is on the Windows clipboard essentially "in place".

Re:But running windows would help (1)

doug (926) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833081)

I use rxvt and run an X server. This isn't a smooth as my linux setup, but it does work well enough. Since it does support ssh -Yt me@somebox I'm happy with it.

- doug

Re:But running windows would help (1)

bunglebungle (777874) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832573)

You could also use UnxUtils [sourceforge.net] or GNU win32 [sourceforge.net] , which can just be unzipped and put in the path. Cygwin is overkill, I feel.

rxvt - better command window (2, Informative)

DrYak (748999) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832633)

And to have a nice, beautiful terminal window, instead of running bash in the default WinXP's terminal window, install RXVT [sourceforge.net] (available in Cygwin's installer) and run bash in it.

Support fast mouse cut'n'paste, nice window resizing, acceptable scroll back buffer, etc.

If you're forced to endure windows, Cygwin's bash+rxvt help soothing part of the pain.

Re:rxvt - better command window (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832927)

cmd.exe can do fast mouse cut'n'paste and a big scrollback if you set it up.

Re:rxvt - better command window (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832941)

I don't know if rxvt for windows is substantially better than rxvt for Unix, but if it isn't I think one would be far better off with Terminator [jessies.org] if one can stand the footprint. Many also seem to enjoy Poderosa [poderosa.org] (fear the spurious n)

Re:But running windows would help (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832779)

"1) Install Cygwin [cygwin.com].

2) Add the Cygwin bin directory to your path.

3) Enjoy - The Command Prompt just got a helluva lot more useful."

Actually, I do have cygwin installed...and it helps a LOT, but, there are things I miss with real linux distros.

I really love to use Kate for my coding, the highlighting, auto commenting and uncommenting, etc is great. I can't find a way to do that in cygwin. And I'm having a hell of a time getting fonts and all the way I like them in cygwin.

It is a great tool, and like you said helps to make working in windows at least bearable, but, you can squeeze everything you like into cygwin.

Re:But running windows would help (3, Insightful)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832387)

I agree with the parent entirely, but I'd go one further. I would say that if Ubuntu (and Linux distros at large) are to thrive and gain greater market share they need to beat Windows at its own game by running Windows apps out of the box.

Wine is getting there, but it's not there yet. Emulation might work, but then it needs to be seamless. Until Ubuntu can beard the dragon in its own lair, it will be fighting the overwhelming advantage of incumbent software Windows has rather than making it work for it.

Re:But running windows would help (1)

cptnapalm (120276) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832543)

Primary problem, in my opinion, is that Wine is attempting too much. For example, there are known instances of games which worked okay with older versions of Wine which do not work with later versions.

I would think a practical approach would let several versions of the Wine dlls exist and keep working with apps which depend on them. That plus some sort of database which Wine (instead of the user) can check for "what works best with this program".

Re:But running windows would help (1)

pseudonomous (1389971) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832751)

Ubuntu (or any unix) CAN'T be better then windows at running windows apps. By nature, Wine is ALWAYS going to lag behind windows in application support, becuase Microsoft develops the API and then Wine re-implements it. And if you sell Linux as a platform for running Windows apps, well then, what's the point? Windows does that better and chances are it's what you already have / it's what's pre-installed on the vast majority of new machines sold.

Re:But running windows would help (3, Interesting)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832815)

I've never bearded a dragon, that sounds difficult. What if the dragon hasn't gone through puberty yet? :-o

Joking aside, I disagree. Linux needs to be good (and easy, if you want the same market share and same market demographic) at the SAME THINGS, but not necessarily the SAME PROGRAMS. There's a vast difference.

Now, being able to go between the two - including file formats - is important. But I don't need to run, say, MS Office on Linux. I do use OpenOffice 3 and it works well (except for Impress, last time I tried using it). And going between MS and OO.org isn't a problem, for the most part.

Firefox, chatting (I even used Pidgin on Windows), etc.

Where I see Ubuntu (8.10 and just upgraded to 9.04) right now is multimedia. Video playback isn't all that great, Flash video full screen is jerky (not related to sound) ... (I know, video drivers [ATI], but you're not going to convince the average person that Linux IS better, it's ATI that's the problem...). Sound can sometimes get tied up between applications. PulseAudio is not very standard yet and doesn't work with all apps. Songbird is an OK itunes replacement but it's not as good. Amarok 2 doesn't play well with Gnome/ALSA/Pulse as far as it running and other sound-enabled apps running.

I think the Linux community needs to focus more on being able to do the basic stuff easily and well, and forget trying to run Quake 3 or Far Cry or Half-Life 2 [or whatever] with a higher FPS than native in Windows.

(and by the way, lest anyone think I'm just an Ubuntu guy and not a Linux guy, I used opensuse and only recently switched to ubuntu [after trying a variety of other ones, including Mint, Mandriva, etc) at home, and redhat/SLES[/hpux/solaris/aix] at work)

Re:But running windows would help (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27833061)

Why? OSX has done quite nicely without pandering to the Windows crowd? You want Windows apps in OSX you run full blown Windows in a VM.

Sod 'em, take Ubuntu in it's own direction, let it stand on it's own two feet, like we know it's capable of! The unbelievers will see the light!

Re:But running windows would help (0)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833087)

Why?

What are you running in Windows that you can't get better elsewhere? Need Photoshop? Get a Mac. Need a compiler. Use Ubuntu/Fedora/Gentoo/Whatever. Want to play games that are not available under Linux kernel operating systems? Get a console.

Linux under no circumstances needs to emulate Windoze. I use Windoze here at work because they make me use it here at work. At home I use various flavors of Linux and a Mac Mini. In fact, don't tell her, but my wife uses the Mac. I don't think she knows. I just pointed out Firefox and a few other icons and she does what she needs to do. I have heard no complaints, so I am thinking of rebuilding her computer that broke and installing Ubuntu on it without telling her. :) Her last OS was XP, but I am seriously thinking she won't even notice.

People think they need windows because they think they need Windoze! They use it at work. They think the OS is the computer. Most people don't know that such a thing as a OS exists. And they don't need to know. For them, the Ford Taurus is just fine. For me, the Ford Taurus sucks donkey dick! I require something better, like a Ferrari! :)

doesn't hurt, but be like mac (1)

xzvf (924443) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832405)

With something like bootcamp or virtualization Mac can run windows apps but Linux needs to market itself more like Mac. Different with its own set of applications, tools and unique way of doing things. That of course includes Wine as a seamless way to run legacy apps without buying a copy of Windows.

Re:doesn't hurt, but be like mac (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832599)

We all know what differentiates Macs - photo, video and other "design" applications. Some people buy a mac because its seen as 'cool' too.

Now, what feature drives Linux? So far, I've only seen "its as good as Windows but cheaper". To get the same kind of market share as Macs, we need to make people want Linux for something that it does significantly better than Windows.

On the other hand, if all we're going for is Mac market share, then we might as well be "as good as windows but cheaper".

New record for least content in an article? (5, Insightful)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832255)

So this news story is fluff spun out of two lines of IRC chat?

Re:New record for least content in an article? (4, Informative)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832433)

TFStory

(12:24:03 PM) jcastro: jcastro: QUESTION: Do you see Wine (and Windows-compatibilty in general) or native Linux ports as the more important ingredient in the success of Ubuntu, or do they each play an important role?
(12:24:18 PM) sabdfl: they both play an important role
(12:24:30 PM) sabdfl: but fundamentally, the free software ecosystem needs to thrive on its own rules
(12:24:41 PM) sabdfl: it is *different* to the proprietary software universe
(12:24:54 PM) sabdfl: we need to make a success of our own platform on our own terms
(12:25:08 PM) sabdfl: if Linux is just another way to run Windows apps, we can't win
(12:25:13 PM) sabdfl: OS/2 tried that

Re:New record for least content in an article? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832535)

It does seem to be. But somehow, it makes me feel better.

Re:New record for least content in an article? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832871)

So is bash.org. [bash.org]

In other words... (5, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832301)

We're not going to try and base our business model on WINE.

Much better to have native apps.

Re:In other words... (2, Insightful)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832559)

If you read what he said:
"they both play an important role
  but fundamentally, the free software ecosystem needs to thrive on its own rules
  it is *different* to the proprietary software universe

  we need to make a success of our own platform on our own terms
  if Linux is just another way to run Windows apps, we can't win
  OS/2 tried that"
much better to have open source apps! Proprietary apps running natively on Linux affect the free software ecosystem in the same way that proprietary apps on wine. Proprietary apps may get more users over, but if they hurt the development of free alternatives then its a bad thing.

Re:In other words... (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833011)

@SatanicPuppy: "We're not going to try and base our business model on WINE."

Your business model is not the tools you use. Its a "business" model. If you're tied to a certain set of tools you're doomed to a slow death. Much better to be flexible and use the tools that are right for the job. Frankly, unless your some kind of Microsoft partner making some kind of Microsoft-only widget I've seen very few businesses that truly require Microsoft solutions. Get ready for the cloud; Microsoft will be irrelevant in a few years.

Ubuntu is just not as cool as its competitor (3, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832321)

In a stunning public relations coup, Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MNPLY) has successfully overshadowed Ubuntu Linux 9.04 "Juicy Jubblies" [today.com] by announcing that it is laying even more people off.

Microsoft announced new and expanded roles for remaining key executives as another several lesser, losing quitters deserted upper management. "It shows the fantastic opportunity available to everyone at Microsoft to climb seven or eight reporting levels up the org chart," said marketing marketer Steve Ballmer to pitchfork-wielding Wall Street analysts today. "If we haven't laid them off for making too much money or not kissing enough ass."

The Yahoo! deal is expected to go ahead. "We figure they'll go broke before we do. Probably." Mr Ballmer also plans to run the Yahoo! servers on Windows NT rather than FreeBSD after a similar change worked so well at Hotmail. "Some say synergy's another word for two plus two equals one, but you just have to make the value of one work for you."

Windows 7 betas have been greeted with remarkable positive press. "Of course, the betas preview the 'champagne and hookers' edition, which would be way too much for netbooks and explode users' brains. Imagine thinking those little things are computers! So we're releasing what we call Windows 7 Dumbass Edition(tm). It lets you log in and look at the shiny. Even Spider Solitaire has the ribbon toolbar! And you can buy an upgrade to the version that runs programs! It lets you do that!"

Dumbass Edition(tm) comes with pre-installed viruses to make the computer part of the Storm, Conficker and FBI botnets. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

However, Microsoft has indicated to its press corps, Microsoft Completely Enderlependent Analysts, to ixnay on the evensay and highlight the job openings for work on Windows 8, firmly penciled in for a 2012 release. Windows 8 will be optimised for low-end 32-core systems with a mere 16 gigabytes of memory -- 28 cores for the interface, 3 cores for the DRM and one core for everything else. "'Seven' is just so this year. I hear they'll get $DATABASE_FILESYSTEM done next release for sure!" said ZDNet marketing marketer Mary-Jo Enderle. "It'll be awesome(tm)!"

"I'm sure it'll be fine, fine," said Bill Gates, upping his hours at his charitable foundation and scheduling the sale of several more packages of Microsoft stock.

Larry Ellison of Oracle, who recently purchased Sun Microsystems, merely snickered, muttered "Java. OpenOffice." and let out a long and resounding laugh.

Mark Shuttleworth of Canonical, speaking from his castle on a crag high on a mountaintop in west London, was sanguine at Ubuntu's news being overshadowed. "I lost ten million dollars on Ubuntu last year. I'm losing ten million dollars on Ubuntu this year. I expect to lose ten million dollars on Ubuntu next year. At this rate, I'll be broke in ... sixty years."

Re:Ubuntu is just not as cool as its competitor (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832549)

YUM! Delicious copy pasta.

Re:Ubuntu is just not as cool as its competitor (0)

pwfffff (1517213) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832717)

If I wanted to read your crappy writings I'd go to your crappy website. Stop copy/pasting every time the topic goes near something you happened to write about. It's annoying.

I want MORE monkeys IN Space. NOW! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832341)

France launched two monkey space flights in 1967. The Soviet Union and Russia launched monkeys between 1983 and 1996.
Which makes you think!

Re:I want MORE monkeys IN Space. NOW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832459)

Did any of those monkeys have typewriters? I THINK NOT.

He's certainly got a point. (1)

ausekilis (1513635) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832409)

As long as Linux is playing catch-up to Windows in terms of available applications (Gimp vs Photoshop, Dia vs Visio, Wine...), it will never become a successor in a Windows dominated world. What it needs is to either 1) Do something better or 2) Provide some need that Windows just can't/won't fulfill.

Look at the flip side of the coin, Windows has the games, familiar office applications (the de facto standard, actually), and the familiarity for people. Linux has fewer games, less commercial support, and is sufficiently different and scary for the computer illiterate. Ubuntu has done a great job at minimizing the fear factor, but it needs to go that extra step and beat Windows at it's own game: Solving the problems that users need to solve. Make email/web browsing as easy as possible. Make peripheral attachment as easy as possible (plug and play). Get as much support from software/hardware vendors as possible.

Linux in general has come a long way even in the past 3-4 years, but there is still a ways to go.

Re:He's certainly got a point. (2, Insightful)

cptnapalm (120276) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832817)

One thing that has routinely annoyed me is when some of the Gnome devs do stuff and their reasoning consists of nothing more than "that is what Windows does". COM, the awfulness of gconf (*actually* modeled on the Windows registry), and so on.

Big problem is that if your aim is to catch up, then, by definition, you can never lead.

Anywhere I have a choice, I don't use Windows because I do not like it. I never used Photoshop or Visio or Office (I don't like word processors either). I did play a lot of games, but my dislike of Windows was great enough that I just forked over cash for a game console and I don't touch PC games anymore. So, for me, there were no insurmountable boundaries for dumping it; I recognize that there are apps which other people find essential and for which there are no acceptable alternatives in FOSS. Sucks, but again, unless something SUPERIOR appears, we'll always be in catch up mode, because somebody else is the defining example.

So it can't just be "just as easy" or even "a good bit easier". It pretty much needs to be a game changer.

Re:He's certainly got a point. (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832989)

peripherals are plug and play, if something is going to work it will work when you plug it in.

As long as windows is playing catchup:
*file sharing via drag and drop was soo kde3
*command line utilities like grep,sed,awk,bash vs powershell
*widgets, foldermenus, multiple sidebars were in superkarama/kicker/gnome before Google desktop/vista even existed

Then its never going to....oh, oh right.

Shuttleworth is entirely correct on this point, if you want to use the applications that are only available for windows, then do, but Linux is not windows and never will be. Nor is it/should it play catchup with an inferior OS.

If Ubuntu really wants to win the desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832415)

They need to be Microsoft BOB. Or Lotus Notes.

I think he's wrong (2, Insightful)

kazade84 (1078337) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832447)

I normally agree with Shuttleworth, but I don't think he's right here. He's right in the long-term, Ubuntu shouldn't just be another platform for running Windows apps, because ideally long-term all apps will be written cross-platform to hit both markets.

However, in the short term, I firmly believe that Wine is the only way to massively increase Ubuntu's market share. It's the appications that people care about, like iTunes, Photoshop or Autocad. If Wine can run your Windows apps, what do you have to lose by migrating? If Ubuntu doesn't run Windows apps, then whole crowds of people just can't dump Windows for it.

Re:I think he's wrong (3, Funny)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832525)

However, in the short term, I firmly believe that Wine is the only way to massively increase Ubuntu's market share.

Embrace, extend, extinguish!

Re:I think he's wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27833031)

Also, I think a point many people miss is that Linux is just a plain better system underneath. More secure, easier to tell what is going on, simpler to control, etc. Even OSX can't touch Linux in terms of giving power to the user to able to understand what exactly is happening on their system. It's that modular nature that really makes the system clean, and easy to clean if you get my meaning.

Linux would make an excellent base to run Windows applications off of. I do this very cleanly now with VMware but WINE would certainly be good too since it doesn't require a Windows license. Although WINE is a little less clean since it likes to sit right on top Linux which means no state snapshots (a la VMware), tojans and viruses could affect/infect the Linux host directly, etc.

Re:I think he's wrong (4, Insightful)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833041)

If your going to be using windows apps anyway, what do you have to gain by migrating?

Re:I think he's wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27833053)

iTunes. Granted, most people listens to music.

Photoshop and Autocad. Wtf? How big a percentage of the population are graphic artists and architects?
Those are extremely expensive and specialized applications. Not something the "average user" should care about or even know what is.

But They Need a Story! (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832501)

Setting: press conference room. Shuttleworth is standing behind a podium with disheveled hair and sweat stains spreading underneath his arms. Reporters sit in chairs before him.
Reporter A: So ... Ubuntu is trying to ... "be" Windows?
Shuttleworth: Ok, for the last time, I am going to go over this very very slowly.
*Shuttleworth writes Ubuntu and Windows on the chalkboard and puts a massive "does not equal" sign in between them.*
Shuttleworth: Ubuntu cannot and will not ever "be" Windows. I've been over this for the past two hours, can we move away from Windows/Ubuntu comparisons here?
Reporter B: But you want to be a widely used operating system?
Shuttleworth: That is correct.
Reporter B: And Windows is the most widely user operating system?
Shuttleworth: Also correct.
Reporter B: ... so you want to be Windows?
*Shuttleworth lets out a long drawn-out sigh, massages his forehead and takes a drink from his glass of water*
Shuttleworth: *holds up two pieces of fruit* In my left hand I hold an apple. In my right hand I hold an orange. Although both are round, the two taste different and have different colors and subtle shapes ...
Reporter C: Hold on, an "Apple"? I'm not following you, are you saying you're trying to "be" OS X?
Shuttleworth: This press conference is over!

Re:But They Need a Story! (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833005)

Except, Shuttleworth would have said "colour." Sounds much funnier in my head that way. ...because I pronounce it wrong.

windows software is often necessary. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832509)

The problem is that certain software is often a show stopper. When someone can't run it they are back to windows. Having the linux environment along with the ability to run that one specific piece of software seems like a plus to me.

United We Stand (1)

ub3r n3u7r4l1st (1388939) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832511)

Until you see game developers start publishing on Linux, people will be reluctant to change.

That is why you need one linux distro, and backed by one developer who has power and money to sway game developers (i.e. Valve) to publish on their platforms. Don't get me wrong. The concept of free software is supposed to be compatible and tolerant of many different design / distros. But to overturn a powerful, strong enemy, we need to stand united. We need to have one distro that will stand out.

United We Stand, Divided We Fall.

Ein Distro, Ein Penguin, Ein Developer!

Re:United We Stand (3, Funny)

slack_justyb (862874) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832739)

Because we all know games = Good selling OS.

That's why AS400 is used in my company! Man, oh man I can't wait for Tetris for iSeries.

Fundamentally different (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832515)

Well, best start with the UI...I've not seen a *nix GUI environment that didn't resemble Windows in more than a few ways...not really cutting edge...Gnome and KDE need to do some work develop a distinctive UI paradigm...Mac OS has an underlying philosophy and guidelines...Windows has some of the same to a lesser extent...What do the *nix windowing environments have?

oh editors (1)

ajmilton (975709) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832575)

what role WINE will [play|serve|insert_verb_here] in Ubuntu's success

Ch Ch Ch Changes (1)

get quad (917331) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832615)

With each successive release, windows just cant seem to be windows either.

Don't Compete on the Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27832695)

It seems to me that the only success stories of competing software companies are the ones that stayed away from the desktop. The desktop computer is a dumping ground for Things To Do With Computers. Microsoft dominates that area and people think about computers in that light. The success stories lie in specific applications of computing devices away from the desktop: phones, gaming consoles, book readers, internet viewers, etc.

Naturally, once one of those areas forms and gets popular, Microsoft dives into it. But if Unix enthusiasts can create a new category of useful devices that it can define, develop, and dominate, then it can become a behemoth in its own right.

WINE is irrelevant... (5, Insightful)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832701)

For running apps in a corporate enviroment. Many current business apps (think more along the lines of ERP/CRM/indrusry specific apps rather than Word/Ecxel) aren't supported by their vendor when running under virtulization with a full version of Windows (e.g. Citrix or VMware) so it is very unlikely that they would be supported under WINE. While it is possible that the apps may run fine under WINE most companies would be unwilling to risk running their mission critical applications (I.e. The apps they make money from) in a completely unsupported environment like WINE.

IBM, Oracle, Shuttleworth, and redhat (2, Interesting)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832715)

need to work together and get companies to port. All they need is a few to move over. The rest will come. Intuit's Quicken, quick books, and taxpro are BIG ONES. Autocad should have moved over eons ago. And OpenOffice should be ROCK SOLID on Mac just like the others.

The question ppl should be asking is WHY is Apple gaining desktop? because they PUSH to get the apps that are needed. Just like Safari. Jobs hit all the banks and got after them to make it work with safari. And Safari is now up and coming. If the Linux world would learn from that, and push a few of the top companies to port their app to Linux, then we would see massive surge in it. As it is, Shuttleworth has realized that having Linux INSTALLED at time of purchase is big.

Re:IBM, Oracle, Shuttleworth, and redhat (1)

cptnapalm (120276) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833035)

Can't forget the marketing campaigns.

Apple has spent gobs of cash to get the bump up in market share and still they can't get to even 10%. The ubiquity of laptops has changed the market to a significant extent and Apple does far better there than on the desktop.

Seeing as Linux has pretty much only word of mouth for promotion for desktop usage, its not doing too shabbily.

Bravo (5, Insightful)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832763)

Ubuntu cannot simply be a better platform to run Windows apps.

Exactly right. Morphing Linux into a Windows software platform would be a major mistake. You'd still be locking users into one way of doing things. I'm sitting here looking at our developers, all working on Linux. One uses pico, one a text editor another uses Eclipse. We all work differently, even different distros, and all manage to get our work done.

In a Windows shop we were all using the same OS, the same development environment and the same tools. Everything was regimented into MSFT's way of doing things and limited by the latitude they decide you get. Their tools, their rules, their training, their way. And it seemed we were always dancing on their string over something. Licensing, product activation, version compatibility issues, so we'd get paid to rewrite working applications for new frameworks, security patches that break things, the upgrade treadmill. Hours of undocumented time pouring through knowledge base articles. It was a constant waterfall of nit-picky little things that we would have to bend our schedule, manage our time to accommodate. The bonus was you always looked stressed out and busy and it was job security. Without regular maintenance, apps would stop working. You have no idea how much time you spend digging sand in a MSFT environment until you move off it.

I think it's nice that Wine exists for those odd times you need to run a Windows app. But that should never be the OS focus. And in the bigger picture of proprietary v free, as long as MSFT dictates your application environment, you're still dancing on their string.

users don't figure out how to install apps (5, Informative)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832765)

I've gotten several people in my family started with Ubuntu, and one weird thing I've observed is that none of them ever seem to spontaneously figure out how to install applications -- they don't even seem to realize that the open-source apps are out there, or that it might be desirable to install them.

Okay, maybe this is a good thing, because maybe it just means that a default Ubuntu does a very good job of including enough apps that the average user can do everything they need to do. Or maybe it just means that most people, unlike me, don't enjoy playing with software.

But it really does make me wonder whether the Linux community could be doing a better job of selling itself based on the availability of a huge number of free, high-quality applications. Apt-cache stats says that I have 25,000 packages installed on my desktop machine at home, all of them free. If even 1% of those cost $10 each, we'd be talking about a massive investment in order to build up a similar software library using proprietary software.

Now it might seem obvious to linux geeks that you should say, "I want to do x, therefore I search on freshmeat for an app that does x, and then I install it." But most people don't even think that way about computer software. They're in the habit of buying it in a store, or on amazon, and they expect it to cost money. Synaptic doesn't exactly advertise itself very well, either. Users seem to putter around for years in Gnome without ever noticing that there's a utility built into the menus that would allow them to download a ton of free software.

Freedom. (4, Insightful)

bannerman (60282) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832791)

Ubuntu won't "just be windows" because it is free (NOT as in beer). The more I use my 360 and PS3 to try to play media from my PC the more I understand how bad the protected DRM-everything model is for consumers. That's the future of Windows, guys. People are not going to put up with their hardware refusing to do what should easily be able to do as long as there is an alternative that will do everything else too. Convenience is king, and DRM is becoming increasingly restrictive and annoying.

Re:Freedom. (2, Interesting)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833027)

I don't get your point. Yes, DRM is bad. Ubuntu doesn't ship with it. It allows users the choice to install proprietary codecs if they decide to.

Enabling choice is freedom. Restricting people and telling them they can't do what they want to is just as bad as DRM and all these draconian zealots insisting we have to be 100% through a series of restrictions.

DRM is a series of restrictions that are there to prevent people from stealing (media) intellectual property.

The GPL is a series of restrictions that are there to prevent people from stealing (source code) intellectual property.

Stop saying that GPL equals freedom. The GPL is good, but it does not mean freedom.

Shuttleworth says Ubuntu Can't Just Be Windows (0, Flamebait)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832833)

"Regrettably," he adds, sighing as he drops a Windows XP box with an "Ubuntu Linux" sticker placed over the product name into the trash. "Would have saved me so much money..."

Oh the sweet delicious irony... (1)

Murpster (1274988) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832843)

Coming from people behind the most Windows-like (both in philosophy and appearance) distros, this is fairly amusing.

Re:Oh the sweet delicious irony... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27833093)

Irony? Is that you, Alanis?

If Ubuntu is so much like Windows then obviously they'll want to distinguish themselves from it. I could have told you that from the start, if only you had asked.

Summary and Headline Miss the Mark (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832911)

Why would people go through the effort to change one way of running Windows apps to another way of running Windows apps if it didn't offer other benefits?

Ubuntu can not simply be a platform for launching Windows apps. It must be a viable platform in its own right.

That being said, I hope Shuttleworth uses his wealth, visiblity and sway right now to do more than just raise the visibility level of Linux.

Why not do more? Why not raise a stink about the state of Xorg? Releases always end up cutting features, and then arrive over a year late regardless, and it is largely built on 20-year old legacy code. Now that it is modular, wouldn't it be easier now to rewrite aspects of Xorg and redesign it for modern needs?

He should be pushing for major upstream changes, such as his suggestions regarding notifications (which should jump on the back of KDE's new system tray specs).

GNU/Windows? Debian+Windows Kernel? (1)

sam0737 (648914) | more than 5 years ago | (#27832987)

Someone said they miss the tools on Linux while using Windows...

may be all they need is GNU/Windows instead of GNU/Linux?
Or Debian with Windows kernel instead of Linux or FreeBSD kernel?

Oh well I still miss Linux kernel...the ability to write drivers for my homebrew hardware. Not that it can't be done on Windows, and I didn't try writing one for Windows yet, but I think it's easier to write one for Linux.

Its all about the service (4, Interesting)

Twyst3d (1359973) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833001)

To me the difference between purchasing Windows and choosing to go open source can be compared to the difference between getting a Dell desktop or going to Newegg and making your own.

Sure you can save a lot of money at newegg and make a powerful machine. You need to assemble it yourself (which for myself was much fun). Service wise its only adequate. I had a DVD burner break down, it was still under warranty I consulted my return policy, did what I had to do and had a new DVD burner back in my machine in a week.

But with Dell. You pay much more for a really good rig. You dont have to assemble it (and while assembly is fun - it can be a hassle). Service wise, as someone who works in the industry - Dell is fantastic. With the right warranty they will send a local technician straight to your office to repair anything. Peace of mind can be bought. You can have a warranty so good you can toss your insanely expensive laptop out a window for kicks and have it replaced shortly.

As long as there are people in the world who cant handle the extra hassle of servicing open source - there will be a market for Windows. But given the direction the world economy is taking that could change fairly soon (in my lifetime anyways). Right now whoever provides the best service wins. And in an environment like Open Source. Its hard (not impossible) to guarantee top notch service. Sad but true.

Move past the OS (1)

AdmV0rl0n (98366) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833007)

Years pass and people still argue over the pointless portions of OS argumentation.

Here is the core fact that everyone needs to really grasp.
The OS does not really matter. If it brings noce things to the table, that is nice.
The Applications, Tools, Productivity, and output capability matter 100% more than wether the underlying core is called Ubuntu or Windows.

When Linux provides the API's, Tools, Support for the wider world, people will use it. Linux has a wide range of software, that is true. It also has enormous gaping holes in coverage of widely known applications, and in areas like Gaming, and well beyond. I'm not saying it has no API's, I'm saying that if I were writing an app, I can't write it for Linux, because there is no 'Linux', there is only thousands of distributions, usually with their own cookie issues.

The whole platform benefits from the aspect of having a lot of tools and API's and other things going on, but people need to understand that if you continue to change the core stuff like sound, desktop managers, installers, in a constant churn, you're creating a hostile environment to applications. This 'strength' is also the primary weakness.

The long term support and stability of Ubuntu I am sure is somewhat helpful in this regard, but again, Ubuntu is merely one distribution, not the platform.

If you are a game dev, or Adobe, or THQ, you'll look at Linux and its overall state, and view it as hostile, and a support/dev nightmare. Most development that does happen, is done under the safe wrapper of Wine, rather than boldly coding native (example) - and its very clear why that short cut happens.

wrong (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27833045)

" OS/2 tried that .."

No, Windows tried that with OS/2..and won.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>