Extent of cross-platform development in free applications - Linux

This is a discussion on Extent of cross-platform development in free applications - Linux ; Matt wrote: > Thanks for your reply. > > Linonut wrote: > >> * Matt fired off this tart reply: >> >>> I am talking about part of a five or ten or twenty year program to break >>> Microsoft's ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 136

Thread: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

  1. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Matt wrote:

    > Thanks for your reply.
    >
    > Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>> I am talking about part of a five or ten or twenty year program to break
    >>> Microsoft's (for that matter anyone's) general stranglehold on software
    >>> development. This is to be done partly by removing OS dependencies from
    >>> the source code of increasingly-many applications---by using tools such
    >>> as GTK+, Qt, OpenGL, and Java in increasingly-many apps.
    >>>
    >>> Get the idea?

    >>
    >> We do. We're already quite a few years into this program.

    >
    > I see that _you_ do.
    >
    >>
    >> Unless you are already steeped in Microsoft lore, it is very simple to
    >> write cross-platform apps, even in C. There are so many libraries
    >> already out there, that there is little excuse to not make your
    >> application cross-platform to start with.

    >
    > Agreed that it isn't so hard to do. As I mentioned, we have FF, TBird,
    > and OO. I am asking about the extent to which smaller-niche apps are
    > _actually_ being built to run cross-platform. Lew Pitcher provided an
    > informative link to winlibre.com.


    You can get wasted propping up closed source. Best to stick to open source.


  2. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Matt wrote:

    > Thanks for your reply.
    >
    > Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>> I am talking about part of a five or ten or twenty year program to break
    >>> Microsoft's (for that matter anyone's) general stranglehold on software
    >>> development. This is to be done partly by removing OS dependencies from
    >>> the source code of increasingly-many applications---by using tools such
    >>> as GTK+, Qt, OpenGL, and Java in increasingly-many apps.
    >>>
    >>> Get the idea?

    >>
    >> We do. We're already quite a few years into this program.

    >
    > I see that _you_ do.
    >
    >>
    >> Unless you are already steeped in Microsoft lore, it is very simple to
    >> write cross-platform apps, even in C. There are so many libraries
    >> already out there, that there is little excuse to not make your
    >> application cross-platform to start with.

    >
    > Agreed that it isn't so hard to do. As I mentioned, we have FF, TBird,
    > and OO. I am asking about the extent to which smaller-niche apps are
    > _actually_ being built to run cross-platform. Lew Pitcher provided an
    > informative link to winlibre.com.


    You can get wasted propping up closed source. Best to stick to open source.


  3. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Matt writes:
    > Grant Edwards wrote:
    >> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.

    >> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >> Windows.

    >
    > I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    > desktop to rise above one-half percent.


    Can you imagine that software which isn't intended to ever run on a
    'desktop PC' at all is actually being developed? Apart from that, why
    should anybody care about anybody else's choice of 'desktop PC
    operating system'? Use what you like and/ or what suits your needs,
    same as I do.

  4. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Matt writes:
    > Grant Edwards wrote:
    >> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.

    >> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >> Windows.

    >
    > I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    > desktop to rise above one-half percent.


    Can you imagine that software which isn't intended to ever run on a
    'desktop PC' at all is actually being developed? Apart from that, why
    should anybody care about anybody else's choice of 'desktop PC
    operating system'? Use what you like and/ or what suits your needs,
    same as I do.

  5. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Matt wrote:

    > We have seen a start to this scenario with the rise of several
    > large-niche cross-platform apps, most importantly Firefox,
    > Thunderbird, and OpenOffice.
    >
    > The next step would be cross-platform implementations of
    > smaller-niche applications, such as those for image processing,
    > internet conferencing, and music composition, to name a few.


    How about this list (applications with a '*' still lack a lot of
    functionality, compared with their counterparts, the number of
    stars tells the amount of missing functionality, a '+' emphases
    additional functionality)

    --- Graphics and DTP ---
    The GIMP* - Adobe Photoshop
    Inkscape** - Adobe Illustrator
    Scribus** - Adobe InDesign, Corel Draw, Quark

    --- 3D Modelling and Rendering ---
    Blender - 3DS Max, Maya, Cinema4D
    PovRay, YafRay - MentalRay
    Pixie - RenderMan

    --- Sound ---
    Ardour2+ - Cubase WaveLab
    Audacity - CoolEdit*
    Rosegarden** - Cubase, LogicAudio+

    --- Databases ---
    MySQL, PostgreSQL+ - MS SQL Server**

    Wolfgang Draxinger
    --
    E-Mail address works, Jabber: hexarith@jabber.org, ICQ: 134682867


  6. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Matt wrote:

    > We have seen a start to this scenario with the rise of several
    > large-niche cross-platform apps, most importantly Firefox,
    > Thunderbird, and OpenOffice.
    >
    > The next step would be cross-platform implementations of
    > smaller-niche applications, such as those for image processing,
    > internet conferencing, and music composition, to name a few.


    How about this list (applications with a '*' still lack a lot of
    functionality, compared with their counterparts, the number of
    stars tells the amount of missing functionality, a '+' emphases
    additional functionality)

    --- Graphics and DTP ---
    The GIMP* - Adobe Photoshop
    Inkscape** - Adobe Illustrator
    Scribus** - Adobe InDesign, Corel Draw, Quark

    --- 3D Modelling and Rendering ---
    Blender - 3DS Max, Maya, Cinema4D
    PovRay, YafRay - MentalRay
    Pixie - RenderMan

    --- Sound ---
    Ardour2+ - Cubase WaveLab
    Audacity - CoolEdit*
    Rosegarden** - Cubase, LogicAudio+

    --- Databases ---
    MySQL, PostgreSQL+ - MS SQL Server**

    Wolfgang Draxinger
    --
    E-Mail address works, Jabber: hexarith@jabber.org, ICQ: 134682867


  7. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    On Dec 11, 9:11 pm, Linonut wrote:
    > * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >
    > > I am talking about part of a five or ten or twenty year program to break
    > > Microsoft's (for that matter anyone's) general stranglehold on software
    > > development. This is to be done partly by removing OS dependencies from
    > > the source code of increasingly-many applications---by using tools such
    > > as GTK+, Qt, OpenGL, and Java in increasingly-many apps.

    >
    > > Get the idea?

    >
    > We do. We're already quite a few years into this program.
    >
    > Unless you are already steeped in Microsoft lore, it is very simple to
    > write cross-platform apps, even in C. There are so many libraries
    > already out there, that there is little excuse to not make your
    > application cross-platform to start with.
    >
    > Heck, you can even make it free of Microsoft technology (but just try
    > side-stepping Microsoft patents ).
    >
    > It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    > write code that is Windows-only.
    >


    It's a matter of cost too. Some things like low level hardware
    interaction are OS specific. Also it's one more OS you have to provide
    support for. If it's a general purpose app that you want anyone to
    use, I don't know why you wouldn't make the effort to make it cross
    platform. If it's a specific app for people who will mostly be using
    Linux, then what's the harm it making it Linux specific?

  8. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    * Matt fired off this tart reply:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >> write code that is Windows-only.

    >
    > Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and why people
    > are still writing code that is *nix-only.


    That's a bit different. Some people feel one is supporting a bad
    company by doing it, helping people remain dependent on their flagship
    product, and thus prey to the various bits of trickery (DRM, activation,
    phoning home) it contains.

    Myself, I simply find Windows confining. I have to deal with it at
    work and even code for it (coding is enjoyable no matter what the
    platform), and that is plenty of exposure for me.

    --
    Tux rox!

  9. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    * Matt fired off this tart reply:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >> write code that is Windows-only.

    >
    > Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and why people
    > are still writing code that is *nix-only.


    That's a bit different. Some people feel one is supporting a bad
    company by doing it, helping people remain dependent on their flagship
    product, and thus prey to the various bits of trickery (DRM, activation,
    phoning home) it contains.

    Myself, I simply find Windows confining. I have to deal with it at
    work and even code for it (coding is enjoyable no matter what the
    platform), and that is plenty of exposure for me.

    --
    Tux rox!

  10. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    * Matt fired off this tart reply:

    > Grant Edwards wrote:
    >> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.

    >>
    >> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >> Windows.

    >
    > I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    > desktop to rise above one-half percent.


    Things (along with the cross-posting) that make you go "Hmmmmmmm".

    --
    Tux rox!

  11. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    * cc fired off this tart reply:

    > On Dec 11, 9:11 pm, Linonut wrote:
    >> * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >> write code that is Windows-only.

    >
    > It's a matter of cost too. Some things like low level hardware
    > interaction are OS specific.


    That's what libraries and drivers are for.

    > Also it's one more OS you have to provide
    > support for.


    Nah. You just issue the standard disclaimer, like Adobe might.

    > If it's a general purpose app that you want anyone to
    > use, I don't know why you wouldn't make the effort to make it cross
    > platform.


    Agreed.

    > If it's a specific app for people who will mostly be using
    > Linux, then what's the harm it making it Linux specific?


    Agreed, especially since it can probably run under Cygwin/X as well.

    --
    Tux rox!

  12. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    7 wrote:
    > Matt wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks for your reply.
    >>
    >> Linonut wrote:
    >>
    >>> * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >>>
    >>>> I am talking about part of a five or ten or twenty year program to break
    >>>> Microsoft's (for that matter anyone's) general stranglehold on software
    >>>> development. This is to be done partly by removing OS dependencies from
    >>>> the source code of increasingly-many applications---by using tools such
    >>>> as GTK+, Qt, OpenGL, and Java in increasingly-many apps.
    >>>>
    >>>> Get the idea?
    >>> We do. We're already quite a few years into this program.

    >> I see that _you_ do.
    >>
    >>> Unless you are already steeped in Microsoft lore, it is very simple to
    >>> write cross-platform apps, even in C. There are so many libraries
    >>> already out there, that there is little excuse to not make your
    >>> application cross-platform to start with.

    >> Agreed that it isn't so hard to do. As I mentioned, we have FF, TBird,
    >> and OO. I am asking about the extent to which smaller-niche apps are
    >> _actually_ being built to run cross-platform. Lew Pitcher provided an
    >> informative link to winlibre.com.

    >
    > You can get wasted propping up closed source. Best to stick to open source.



    Is this some random thought that you wanted to share? Who said anything
    about closed source?

  13. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    7 wrote:
    > Matt wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks for your reply.
    >>
    >> Linonut wrote:
    >>
    >>> * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >>>
    >>>> I am talking about part of a five or ten or twenty year program to break
    >>>> Microsoft's (for that matter anyone's) general stranglehold on software
    >>>> development. This is to be done partly by removing OS dependencies from
    >>>> the source code of increasingly-many applications---by using tools such
    >>>> as GTK+, Qt, OpenGL, and Java in increasingly-many apps.
    >>>>
    >>>> Get the idea?
    >>> We do. We're already quite a few years into this program.

    >> I see that _you_ do.
    >>
    >>> Unless you are already steeped in Microsoft lore, it is very simple to
    >>> write cross-platform apps, even in C. There are so many libraries
    >>> already out there, that there is little excuse to not make your
    >>> application cross-platform to start with.

    >> Agreed that it isn't so hard to do. As I mentioned, we have FF, TBird,
    >> and OO. I am asking about the extent to which smaller-niche apps are
    >> _actually_ being built to run cross-platform. Lew Pitcher provided an
    >> informative link to winlibre.com.

    >
    > You can get wasted propping up closed source. Best to stick to open source.



    Is this some random thought that you wanted to share? Who said anything
    about closed source?

  14. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Linonut wrote:
    > * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >
    >> Grant Edwards wrote:
    >>> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.
    >>> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >>> Windows.

    >> I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    >> desktop to rise above one-half percent.

    >
    > Things (along with the cross-posting) that make you go "Hmmmmmmm".


    That kind of FUD makes you look cheap.



  15. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Matt wrote:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>> Grant Edwards wrote:
    >>>> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>>>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes
    >>>>>> people write code that is Windows-only.
    >>>>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>>>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.
    >>>> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >>>> Windows.
    >>> I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    >>> desktop to rise above one-half percent.

    >>
    >> Things (along with the cross-posting) that make you go "Hmmmmmmm".

    >
    > That kind of FUD makes you look cheap.


    Actually, no, it does not
    It expresses his suspicions. Has nothing to do with "FUD"
    --
    It's not about, 'Where do you want to go today?' It's more like,
    'Where am I allowed to go today?'


  16. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    * Matt fired off this tart reply:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>> Grant Edwards wrote:
    >>>> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>>>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>>>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>>>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.
    >>>> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >>>> Windows.
    >>> I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    >>> desktop to rise above one-half percent.

    >>
    >> Things (along with the cross-posting) that make you go "Hmmmmmmm".

    >
    > That kind of FUD makes you look cheap.


    Ain't that a shame.

    I feel you have just confirmed my suspicions.

    --
    Cheep cheep cheep.

  17. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    On Dec 12, 8:06 am, Linonut wrote:
    > * cc fired off this tart reply:
    >
    > > On Dec 11, 9:11 pm, Linonut wrote:
    > >> * Matt fired off this tart reply:

    >
    > >> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    > >> write code that is Windows-only.

    >
    > > It's a matter of cost too. Some things like low level hardware
    > > interaction are OS specific.

    >
    > That's what libraries and drivers are for.


    Someone has to write those libraries and drivers.

    > > Also it's one more OS you have to provide
    > > support for.

    >
    > Nah. You just issue the standard disclaimer, like Adobe might.


    If you want to treat your customers like that, then yes.

    > > If it's a general purpose app that you want anyone to
    > > use, I don't know why you wouldn't make the effort to make it cross
    > > platform.

    >
    > Agreed.
    >
    > > If it's a specific app for people who will mostly be using
    > > Linux, then what's the harm it making it Linux specific?

    >
    > Agreed, especially since it can probably run under Cygwin/X as well.
    >


  18. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    Linonut wrote:
    > * Matt fired off this tart reply:
    >
    >> Grant Edwards wrote:
    >>> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.
    >>> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >>> Windows.

    >> I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    >> desktop to rise above one-half percent.

    >
    > Things (along with the cross-posting) that make you go "Hmmmmmmm".


    Just what made you go "Hmmmmmmm"? Maybe you disagree with the
    half-percent number? Doesn't matter whether its a half-percent or
    three. Please explain.

    As for cross-posting, it is a designed-in feature of Usenet and
    news-posting programs, and it is there for a reason. Further, I believe
    my use of it was appropriate. Please explain if you still believe
    otherwise.

    I'm sure being a COLA regular has been hard on your emotions, but I ask
    you to have some respect for what I've written---and to think.

  19. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    7 wrote:
    > Matt wrote:
    >
    >> Grant Edwards wrote:
    >>> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.
    >>> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >>> Windows.

    >> I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    >> desktop to rise above one-half percent.

    >
    > You are writing like some kind of loon.
    > The open source movement has no such desires.


    And neither does the software monopolist.

    > What it offers is choice.
    > You are given the choice to run open source or closed source
    > equivalent.
    >
    >> But who do you mean by "we"?

    >
    > Everyone in the open source movement.


    Ha, big trashy talk.

  20. Re: Extent of cross-platform development in free applications

    7 wrote:
    > Matt wrote:
    >
    >> Grant Edwards wrote:
    >>> On 2007-12-12, Matt wrote:
    >>>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>>> It's a matter of ignorance and carelessness, really, that makes people
    >>>>> write code that is Windows-only.
    >>>> Well, it is a problem, isn't it? Now I might ask whether and
    >>>> why people are still writing code that is *nix-only.
    >>> Because we don't have any need or desire to make it run under
    >>> Windows.

    >> I expect that also you have no need or desire for Linux share on the
    >> desktop to rise above one-half percent.

    >
    > You are writing like some kind of loon.
    > The open source movement has no such desires.


    And neither does the software monopolist.

    > What it offers is choice.
    > You are given the choice to run open source or closed source
    > equivalent.
    >
    >> But who do you mean by "we"?

    >
    > Everyone in the open source movement.


    Ha, big trashy talk.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast