Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
1–10 of 97 posts
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#2The easiest problem to tackle is .RPM vs .DEB debate that should have ended about 3 years ago. If the LSB had said .DEB it might have happened, but since the "official" standard and the actual majority are diametrically opposed it doesn't want to happen. And of course the filesystems don't perfectly match across distros.
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#3The easiest problem to tackle is .RPM vs .DEB debate that should have ended about 3 years ago. If the LSB had said .DEB it might have happened, but since the "official" standard and the actual majority are diametrically opposed it doesn't want to happen. And of course the filesystems don't perfectly match across distros.
From what I hear, .DEB is a bitch to do anything outside of the norm, whereas .RPM is much easier and less complex of a package format. That said, I much prefer the apt system on Debian, and Ubuntu. What really needs to happen is to take the best of both worlds and merge it into something of a complete system.
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#4I wish talks like these had transcripts. I listened to the first half, but don't have the time for the whole thing.
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#5I think it boils down to what he was talking about at the end: Linux users need to be willing to buy software, and Linux software developers need to be more business savy.
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#6If history is any evidence, nothing. :P
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#7I think it boils down to what he was talking about at the end: Linux users need to be willing to buy software, and Linux software developers need to be more business savy.
upvoted.
We buy our linux-based office software (we do NOT use OpenOffice). There should be more paid-for apps that are of much better quality than what's available.
I believe that Linux (or some distro) should incorporate licensing/DRM into the OS itself - which you have the freedom to turn on or off. More or less, it means an app store, but indie developers will not have to worry about building licensing into their software.
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#8I think it boils down to what he was talking about at the end: Linux users need to be willing to buy software, and Linux software developers need to be more business savy.
The open question is why anyone would buy software for Linux. The key differentiating factor for _most_ people who use it is that it's free (as in beer). There are two other operating systems that for most people work better than Linux. It's hard to see how you can ask people to pay for software now in the hope that it will eventually be good. I'm sure some people will buy software because it's the Right Thing To Do, but considering the population that selects Linux and their reasons, it's hard to picture a big enough market there to draw really good consumer software developers.
An interesting business question.
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#9I think it boils down to what he was talking about at the end: Linux users need to be willing to buy software, and Linux software developers need to be more business savy.
upvoted. We buy our linux-based office software (we do NOT use OpenOffice). There should be more paid-for apps that are of much better quality than what's available. I believe that Linux (or some distro) should incorporate licensing/DRM into the OS itself - which you have the freedom to turn on or off. More or less, it means an app store, but indie developers will not have to worry about building licensing into their…
What? Microsoft and OS X have rich libraries of cost-based applications and they don't require any licensing or DRM embedded in the OS. Why on earth would an operating system that hinges itself on openness take a more Draconian step than any other major OS distributer has (mobile OSes aside)?
Re: Why Desktop Linux (Still) Sucks. And What We Can Do To Fix It.
#10The easiest problem to tackle is .RPM vs .DEB debate that should have ended about 3 years ago. If the LSB had said .DEB it might have happened, but since the "official" standard and the actual majority are diametrically opposed it doesn't want to happen. And of course the filesystems don't perfectly match across distros.
The .rpm vs .deb debate is a fallacy. The real issue is that when packaging for say debian and RHEL you have to care about different glibc, different compiler versions with potentially different ABI, different filesystem conventions, different scripts for post install, etc... The format in which the files are packaged is the least of the issues compared to that. For example, packaging for opensuse once you have a package for RHEL is as much of a PITA than packaging for debian, really.
Once you standardize on what makes packaging difficult across distro, you basically end up with the same system. I think systems like the build service from Suse, etc... are much more useful than wishful thinking on packaging format.