Free is too expensive (Economist)
Posted Apr 7, 2012 1:18 UTC (Sat) by rqosa
In reply to: Free is too expensive (Economist)
Parent article: Free is too expensive (Economist)
> Linux desktop, on the other hand, imposes more restrictions
> breaks applications all the time
But you can still run them, as I've already said…
> and yes, has smaller (and shrinking!) market share.
According to what study?
> Yet it's developers claim everything is peachy and they are on the road to success. Is it honest delusion or inability to face reality?
No, it's because the developer base and rate of development are both increasing steadily. That's all that really matters for the survival of a project — a project that can recruit new developers will survive, whereas a project that can't will die even if it has lots of users.
> But if most users are not on Linux then most developers are not on Linux either.
You seem to be assuming that the proportion of users who are also developers is the same for every platform, but I believe that it's much higher for Unix/Linux than it is for Windows, MacOS, Android, and iOS. And the reason for that is simple: for this category of users, Linux is far more "user-friendly" than any other system.
> Then why all these pointless shiny changes features and breakage to the workflow of the existing users? Why the push for social?
Speaking as a KDE user, I don't know what you're talking about here. The user experience for me hasn't changed much throughout the last 8 years — and that's how I like it!
Whereas what you seem to be saying to people like me is essentially "Go away, you don't exist. The Linux desktop should be designed for the technically-ignorant masses, not for you." But those aren't the ones who are developing the system, nor are they funding its development, so (fortunately!) there's no chance that the changes you suggest will ever happen.
to post comments)