What is Digg?33 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The interesting thing is that the Linux desktop market is just about as big as the Apple and Windows markets were at one point. And back then we got companies developing software such as Wordperfect, etc.
Eventually, some small developers will FLOCK to Linux.
The fact is there is NO COMPETITION on Linux, you could make good profits if you were the only option available for a whole platform and achived some sort of popularity.
Huge % of smaller base COULD = larger profit than small % of larger base. - wysiwia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Maybe anybody interested in this theme should once look at the messages I've dugg so far (see profile). There are at least 10 different opinions from various writers.
- mfearby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@arcanelinux, treating Linux like a charity case isn't going to improve it. People that don't have to sing for their supper never learn how to sing for it. They just get the free ride.
Until Linux learns how to compete with the cut-throat world of commercial software, where usability and a refined, clean, look-and-feel count for something (except those misguided software companies that think "skinning" is the way of the future; Linux would be well advised to avoid some of the skinning horrors, as committed by certain DVD playing software), then Linux will continue to exist on the fringes. - ra3ndy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that first paragraph is supposed to be in quotes....
Man digg needs an "edit" button - fyre2012, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I use quick books on linux with ubuntu on a dell inspiron 8200 using wine
Yes, a native app would be nice, but it works for now.
and, of course, it's omgwAAAAAAAY++++++++ub3rl337!!!!!!!!!!!~!@ - arcanelinux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ya Know what how many of you here have actually bought a commercial distro? I have purchased 2 so far and am looking at Red Hat next. And to the guy who thinks Its ALL about gimme gomme get real put yourself in the poor persons perspective. $200 for M$ then up to $65 for apps like Nero.
Im proudly support linux and its developers. Maybe you should to, then we would see some Linux Desktops in the near future!!!!!!!! - fyre2012, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0linsys
how do you handle the file server? ldap / AD? - fyre2012, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0makes perfect sense, i didn't catch the thin-client part, i thought you were using full blown linux builds (with local filesystems/home directories on HD's)
They used to use a similar system for a call center i worked for, ran on novell wares tho
btw, don't ever work for a call center :p - masterzora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I would like to add something I forgot.
It's not that Linux users don't want to buy things (they pay money for lots of stuff, including services), it's that a lot of them don't like to use non-open things.
Make open source software, charge for the services, and you'll get lots of Linux buyers. - masterzora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ra3ndy:
It has much less to do with "free as in beer" than it has to do with "free as in speech". It's not that (most) Linux users are cheap bastards so much as (most) Linux users believe in Open Source (whether for moral reasons or because it's trendy or whatever). The exception to this is usually businesses and many universities, who are more concerned with money than morals. But they'd be the ones willing to buy things, too, if the tool worked. - bsharitt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Welcome to 1999. Still the same old problems.
- hwood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Until the Linux Distros get together and figure out a standard structure for folder layout and software installation etc, Linux will never grow beyond it's current state.
Installing software sucks so much that If a distro doesn't come with it, I don't install it.
I've gone months without touching my Linux computers, but use my ibook every day.
Linux is great as a server but sucks for everyday useage. - ahmerhussain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Doesn't GNUCash work ans a Quickbooks for linux?
- DeputyDawg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I forgot to mention that after having spent money on R&D you wouldn't want just anyone to have access to it.
- qurk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0 I've never had a problem getting a USB mouse to work under linux.. well other than the like 10 days I was walking around wondering where the heck my mouse was in the /dev folder and having fun using all terminal programs, until I really missed having a GUI for web browsing and such and sat down with google and forums and figured it out. Must have been bad luck with the last guy, a friend got started from XP with SuSe and her USB mice and nearly everything, including scanners worked great on first install.
I guess windows just has a ton of annoyances that you get used to..but when a newbie to computers sees these annoyances and you try to explain, "well this happens a lot in windows..I don't know why..just wait a little while or try this or that". It has been my experience that I can eventually fix most annoyances in Linux pretty easy (haven't had any big annoyances for a few years now though). And while to some whipping out the registry editor for whatever may be a great way to fix something, I have personally always liked the .config files of like win3.1 and /etc dir and .hidden dirs in Linux. Sometimes you have to dig through like the .kde subdir to find stuff, but in general it's been my experience that Linux is easier to get running annoyance free. To each their own I guess. It's my opinion that Linux just works more often for me (and my observations of others with like XP, which I never have had the fortune of running, nor 2000).
As for the chicken, egg syndrome: the only thing I miss from my old windows days is like the sheer number of games available, I've been fortunate that my favorite computer games (quakeworld, whole quake series, unreal tourney) have worked with Linux, but theres like a million old and current games windows only (and wine and winex don't matter to me as other than the games above I just mud a lot.)
For this desktop user, chicken and egg are irrelevant, am a very happy Linux user. - carpespasm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Linux is a great server OS, but on the desktop? Puh-lease. People aren't stupid."
no, most people are pretty dense when it comes to computers, most because they have more to do. so they don't bother with say linux or any software that wasn't preloaded at the factory.
if a major manufacturer started loading a copy of linux as a premium package and market the fact that not everyone uses it in the same way apple markets osX as not being used by most people, then the image linux gets would change - TKDWILSON, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0""""Linux is a great server OS, but on the desktop? Puh-lease. People aren't stupid.""""
15 years from now I bet everything will run on linux almost seamlessly. That is the next big step. Right now, if you know what you are doing, you can run anything on linux. Now it is just a matter of making it work for complete idiots.
Eric Wilson - ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There's a simple reason no companies write commercial software for linux:
It's a nightmare. Technically, culturally, economically.... it is hard or doesn't make sense.
Technically: On windows, you write for basically one version of windows. You buy a copy of InstallShield, and you're done. On Linux there's RPM based distros, Deb based distros, source-only distros, etc. There's different versions of gcc, glib, qt, gtk, gnome libs, kde libs, x, etc.
Culturally: The linux community has its roots in free software. When people think Linux they think "I can get that for free!". I have been in linux and windows both for years, and just reading this article it was hard to wrap my mind around the concept of PAYING for a program I'd run on linux. Also, there's the religiously OSS side, who won't run an app unless they have acess to it's source code.
Economically: I don't know economics, but it seems like business types don't like to "think small" where there's an open market and grow... they want a big pay off NOW. Let's see, we could sell 500 copies on Linux this year, 600 next year, etc... or 20,000 on windows this quarter and then do an IPO and retire. - masterzora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ra3ndy:
"So it's morally unethical to charge for software? Or are you saying it's morally acceptable to pirate software as long as SOMEONE pays?"
I'm saying that some Open Source proponents have "moral" reasons for doing so, whatever reasons that may be. It has nothing to do with paying, but with the source being available.
"And honestly, you think software developers can get by solely on Enterprise & Education liscenses? Not likely. Especially not if you want support."
Where did you see that? I said that the people using *nix systems that are most likely to buy non-open software are enterprise & university. I never once made any comment about whether developers can make money on them.
Do you even understand the whole debate about Free (as in speech) software? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Software I have PAID FOR on my Linux system:
* Moneydance (love it!)
* Cedega
* UT,UT2004,Quake3,yadda yadda, most native Linux games
* StarOffice
* Crossover Office
* Hancom Office
* BRU Backup Personal Desktop
Thats just stuff I have bought myself as a full-time Linux user for the last few years.
I think that there is a market for such software as a Tax Applications, Educational Software, Small Business Programs(accounting, inventory etc).
Not to mention that applications like Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, Macromedia etc. would capture some good amount of Linux business.
The fact is that even if there is only about a 2.8% of installed base for Linux desktops(according to IDC) right now that is quite a good size market for a small software company to make a name for themselves.
Estimates are that there are currently 130 million PC desktops. 2.8% of that is still nearly a 4 million desktop market and growing. Come up with a software application that is purchased by a percantage of those people and you still have a good potential amount of money to make. Thats more than the total number of pre-mac apples ever made, and there was a thriving commercial software market back then for apple, and amiga and commodore etc. Without those small markets back then we would not have EA for instance today.
Its just a matter of time before some people realize that they have a clean slate in the Linux software market and they can be the next Lotus or the next Adobe potentially by becoming the go-to application for Linux users.
The attractivness of being able to make software, and sell it in a market without having to compete with Microsoft and Adobes of the world is eventually going to be enough to get people to start putting more commercial software out for Linux. - puneypunk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I haven't read the article or the comments [hey it's a lazy friday] but quickbooks isn't worth using it's a ***** PILE OF *****! I use it at work and theres no end of problems.
- DeputyDawg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Developing commercial software for Linux is always gonna be a pain because of the PR issue alone.
The moment you do something akin to an "Evil Empire" type event, whether it be by accident or on purpose, you will have most of the *nix userbase boycotting your software. Essentially, putting you out of business. The same is not true for Apple and Microsoft software. The mentality of most Windows users is: Git-r-dun. Don't matter how you do it just git-r-dun and if it's easy and looks pretty, even better!
The best example I can come up with is Windows itself. It's buggy, and slow and feels so poorly written but people still use it. If you fail to understand why, you fail to understand the humanity that needs to be integrated into software development. Some of the best software designers are anti-social or right there in the Asperger's gray area. Their products cannot be looked upon to include the subtleties their personalities lack.
The problem with open source software is the human performance issue. Apple and Microsoft spends tons in R&D figuring just how people use their computers. During production they keep these ideas in mind. It complicates matters greatly and can intoduce flaws and bugs. But if the payoff is that Grandma Martha and Little Johnny and David with Down Syndrome can all use the software then all the discrepancies you introduce is worth it.
Seven guys locked in a 4th story office building hammering out the next great Linux app cannot possibly take all of these human physiological, psychological and emotional factors into consideration. All they can do is build upon what others know or have recently discovered. Linux GUIs are very evident of this. The GUIs only appeal to a single group of users: Geeks (and people who are employed because they know computers). Unless you are a Geek and a small child or a Geek and a an elderly woman you are not going to know how to make a piece of software that appeals to small children and elderly women. The only way to understand them is to study them and their computer habits but that takes lots of time and money.
Do those seven guys understand that women respond better to color cues? Or that their response could be worse if the colors are culturally unfashionable? That men respond well to verbal cues in the form of written text but women perform better to spoken words? Children need repeating patterns and seniors need nolstagic or metaphoric cues to trigger the correct response? - ratsg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This story is just wrong. Linux has the biggest backer of them all. IBM. The worlds largest computer software and hardware manufacturer. And IBM has dumped millions of dollars into Linux.
- b0rg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0y'all can get the tar and feathers ready.
Linux desktops?
Corporate users don't want them. Getting one operating system stable and consistent on hundreds of hardware environments is enough work. The savings just never appear.
Home users? Outside of hobbyists like myself, the OS is irrelevant. (and with so many web-based apps, the application itself is arguably less relevant) Why buy and maintain an email program for family emails when google and yahoo give me one for free?
Some hardcore users are finding that OSX does the trick - giving them a desktop with good application support, and a unix shell with it's rich command line when needed.
Linux is an invaluable resource for developers, for IT and network people who need a platform to support systems from. It has a huge library of software and utilities unmatched in any operating system, ever.
Linux is a fully-loaded machine shop with a million bucks worth of power tools and a huge community of talented experts. Do I want to trade that in for *quickbooks*??? I'll trade in my Oracle cluster for a copy of MS Access while I'm at it. - mfearby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0> Some folks still don't get that Windows is just flat-out more
> expensive and every bit as hard as Linux to keep running. My
> favorite example of the latter is from "Catbert," who wrote, "it
> took a registry tweak to lower the MTU on my sister's W2K laptop so
> that it could share my ADSL connection"
>
> What more need be said?
Um, how about the horror stories of trying to get simple things like USB mice to work with X? Even under SuSE 9.0 could the USB mouse still not work. I had to plug in a PS/2 adapter. Or how about getting the back and forward buttons on my mouse to work? I couldn't imagine Joe Familyman fiddling around with XF86Config to get that working.
At least with a registry edit, it's an easy tree-view to navigate, and with whatever relevant support article in front of you telling you which string to edit, it's just a teeny bit easier, I think!
This article is lame! - ra3ndy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0It has much less to do with "free as in beer" than it has to do with "free as in speech". It's not that (most) Linux users are cheap bastards so much as (most) Linux users believe in Open Source (whether for moral reasons or because it's trendy or whatever). The exception to this is usually businesses and many universities, who are more concerned with money than morals. But they'd be the ones willing to buy things, too, if the tool worked.
So it's morally unethical to charge for software? Or are you saying it's morally acceptable to pirate software as long as SOMEONE pays?
And honestly, you think software developers can get by solely on Enterprise & Education liscenses? Not likely. Especially not if you want support. - ra3ndy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0So wait....you want third party developers to make....and charge money for.... software for an OS that's always existed for the open source community.
And you expect them to believe that one person wouldn't buy it and then BOOM, everyone "accidentally finds it just laying around" on BitTorrent.
People who use Linux very rarely pay for their content. I'm not sure they know how. And developers know this. - kinderstod, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@ra3ndy - Exactly. I have no interest in developing for linux and the like anymore, since the entire fanbase is always "gimme gimme" and then gives nothing in return. If I develop any awesome app for Linux, no way in hell would I give it away for free, which would then cause them to all go into deep Linux fanboy discussion on /.
- sirplus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0i've pondered this often. linux so much better. i OSX along, trying to stay out of the Apple goo that accumulates when you tax the processor and fill up the drive a bit. as you wait for the cursor to return, a happy rainbow swirly reminds you of how much more hideous things would be if you were still on windows! the servers i run on linux apache mysql php - all open source free stuff - are the ONLY computers i have ever used that simply will not crash unless you tell them to (or the hardware fails). i wish i could run audio and macromedia etc on linux, i'd never look back.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is