This is what the Linux Desktop does NOT Need

This is what the Linux Desktop does NOT Need

You're right, that was a bit rude. I'll try to keep that kinda rage for osnews.

However. Should we do everything in our power to cater to proprietary software dealers?

How much time or money should we spend out of our own pocket to do it?

Unnecessary synchronous stability in a distributed development model can cost a lot of time and possibly slow the rate of progress, if nothing else.

Maybe they should pay for stability.

The customer, for the privelege of running a stable OS like RHEL or SuSE with support for commercial apps, is the one who is paying today.

But I think once there are enough people using it, once there is a market for commercial software on it, the apps will be happily ported over. They just want sales in very large numbers. They follow the carrot.

If Apple released OSX for the PC I bet most PC games would be ported in no time. The market would explode for OSX software on X86, so many people would be running it. The same thing will happen for Linux when its ready.

But it isn't ready, just yet. And if the vendors aren't prepared when it is ready they will have to spend the money to catch up. Not our problem.

The point is everyone gets equal opportunity to be part of the Linux Desktop. Nobody gets special treatment. Secret closed-door meetings to put an AOL icon on your desktop will not be tolerated here. Competition is fierce. Either keep up or quit.