|
@King: I'm getting the impression Marvin's trying to explain how things are going in relation to software development, not user interaction. The problem being the Program isn't running, or running well on the OS or looking right in the interface, rather than the fact that users are having a difficult time setting up the program. Because of this commercial programs, aren't written for *nix, because *nix is too splintered for adequate testing/support, and the companies are choosing not to support it, rather than planning for everything. (which may or may not be alienating users who want the name brand software rather than the 'generic version') It doesn't matter if the user is stupid or not if the software isn't out there to use.
@Marvin: If OS X were officially opened up to all computers and platforms would you consider this to be a more serious promotion of unix?
Additionally the issue of cost has been brought up multiple times. I don't expect a 'standardization effort' by one or more parties to be necessairly cheap financially. Either you have a core group of volunteers, which hasn't happened yet, or it gets financed. Payment either comes from sale of the OS, or from companies that want to put their product on *nix systems. The second hasn't happened (and I don't think will since Windows is reasonablly standard already), so that leaves the option of selling the OS.
Additionally Jimbo brought up the notion of hardware, I was under the impression *nix has had a pretty standard driver conformation, and that companies weren't adhering to it. What's to say the same won't hold true for software (please correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm not current on this type of information) the companies aren't planning for unix because it has such a small userbase (and users aren't flocking to it because nothing works on *nix. Is this something that can truly be combated?
-MBirchmeier
|