| |||||||||||||
Choosing between portability and innovationChoosing between portability and innovationPosted Mar 8, 2011 0:49 UTC (Tue) by lacos (subscriber, #70616)In reply to: Choosing between portability and innovation by mezcalero Parent article: Choosing between portability and innovation people should just forget about the BSDs You are promoting vendor lock-in. Under this aspect, it does not matter if a given application is free software: unless the end-user has the resources to make the port happen, he's forced to use the kernel/libc you have chosen for him. Portability of application source code is about adhering to standards that were distilled with meticulous work, considering as many implementations as possible. The answer to divergent implementations is not killing all of them except one, and taking away the choice from the user. The answer is standardization, and a clearly defined set of extensions per implementation, and allowing the user to choose the platform (for whatever reasons) he'll run the application on. The Unix landscape was splintered and balkanized during most its history. We finally are overcoming that, and that is a good thing You seem to intend to overcome diversity by becoming a monopoly. The freeness of software (free as in freedom) doesn't matter here, see above.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||