Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
Callaway: Chromium: Why it isn't in Fedora yet as a proper package
Posted Dec 2, 2009 19:35 UTC (Wed) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454)
To take a real-world example, just because an army of bicycle postmen can deliver an astounding number of small letters in a city, does not mean they won't fare miserably as soon as you give them a big parcel,something to deliver long-distance, a container, or some refrigerated content, live animals, etc to distribute
You can try to avoid dealing with the problem by bundling everything in one place (as Apple does, and SUN tried to with Java). It only does so far before the impedance mismatch between different un-cooperating binary bundles forces you to dedicate separate un-upgradable systems for every one of them (as is commonly seen in the Java world, where supposedly multi-purpose flexible app servers are usually dedicated to a few closely cooperating apps, as they can't cope with real diversity). It is highly ironic that you point out the Apple Appstore where this logic led to two special-purpose products, ipod and itune.
I suppose one could claim this model is "efficient" at the software level. It only multiplies your hardware needs many times over. Unsurprisingly, SUN and Apple are in the hardware business.
Posted Dec 2, 2009 20:48 UTC (Wed) by robilad (guest, #27163)
I am not sure I can follow your 'Apple is in the hardware business' line of thought. You seem to believe that Apple designed their software distribution mechanism to force users to eventually buy an iphone/ipod for each application separately, multiplying their hardware needs many times over, if I understand you properly?
Posted Dec 2, 2009 22:35 UTC (Wed) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454)
1. mostly trivial stuff, declined many times over to increase the advertising surface in the app store and get more customers
2. not a complex code ecosystem (unless you remove most of the content, and then the numbers don't look so good)
It is easy to inflate numbers when counting trivial apps (Palm did it a decade before Apple). A site like tesnexus is at ~ 30k (their latest mod today is 28515) that would all qualify as applications under Apple's definition. I hope you're looking hard at this new software power house
And yes, I claim Apple is very happy to foster habits where you by one device for music, one to telephone, etc even thoug most of the hardware inside is the same.
Posted Dec 2, 2009 22:48 UTC (Wed) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454)
Suddenly 100k does not look such a high number
And that was one Linux distribution. I could have inflated the numbers even more by counting its predecessor (Red Hat Linux), all its derivatives (OLPC, RHEL, EPEL, CentOS, Moblin, etc)
Posted Dec 3, 2009 12:03 UTC (Thu) by robilad (guest, #27163)
Thank you for looking up the Fedora package numbers. They are interesting, so let's play a bit with them. As we are comparing single, centralized distributions of upstream software here, I think it's more adequate to pick a single Fedora release - the one you provided numbers for.
As Fedora packages developer-oriented parts of an upstream separately, I'd assume that's around 10k upstream applications for the current distribution. For the sake of inflating Fedora's numbers, let's count libraries as applications, too.
For the sake of deflating Apple's numbers, let's apply the Pareto principle, and weed out 80% of the apps as trivial. That leaves 20k non-trivial apps in November, and 17k in late September.
Let's also assume that the Pareto principle does not apply to Fedora at all - everything that gets packaged into Fedora is a non-trivial labor of love, and so on.
Even with all that, Fedora is still quite a bit behind Apple's distribution in raw numbers. In particular, just the increase in non-trivial apps in Apple's distribution in the course of a couple of weeks is almost a third of all of all applications in Fedora.
I'd be very surprised if the growth of packages in Fedora is remotely close to that. So I think that maybe there is more then 'one true way' to implement 'industrialized', 'efficient' software distribution.
Posted Dec 3, 2009 12:56 UTC (Thu) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454)
Apple counts *all* apps, for *all* its systems (itune, iphone, etc)
So it is not fair to remove older releases, Apple counts them too
It is not fair to count only Fedora but not OLPC, Centos, RHEL, etc Apple counts different lines of products too
And lastly, Apple does not have the aggressive culling processes of a distribution like Fedora. Fedora worries about mirror space, Apple worries about getting the highest number count possible in press releases.
Yet, even given all this, Apple does not manage to equal the Fedora ecosystem alone.
So your chosen example nicely disproves your point.
Posted Dec 4, 2009 15:37 UTC (Fri) by robilad (guest, #27163)
Well, thank you for your polite, respectful and informative words. You have eloquently convinced me, now I see that I was wrong all along.
Posted Jan 7, 2010 21:27 UTC (Thu) by ceplm (guest, #41334)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds