G
GaryG
Guest
"marco" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I tend to agree with you. Ignoring Macs and Linux user is a mistake
> even because it seems that the next step that MS is going to take is
> to develop his own unix based program. As coach in the past I didn't
> buy a lot of software just because it wasn't made for my MAC. This is
> the main reason why I don't buy a perfect rower (who the heck is still
> using DOS?)
> It is not that hard and it might be a very good market move.
> Marco
Well, as a software developer, I think I can comment on this. Although I
would like to develop for the Mac and Linux, I don't. There are several
reasons, both technical and financial (in no particular order):
1) Porting my applications to Mac/Linux (i.e., Java) would be an enormous
undertaking, for a very small market potential.
2) Applications built on Java have (until recently) tended to be slow.
3) It's my understanding that Java applications are very difficult to secure
against crackers (i.e., software thieves), because it is an "interpreted"
language (this same problem applies to .Net).
4) Linux users tend to expect software for free.
5) Applications written for a cross-platform language are unable to take
advantage of many of the built-in features of the operating system. This
means that the program will have a "lowest common denominator" look and
feel, or I'll have to spend a bunch of time and effort emulating those
features by writing my own code in Java.
Actually, I'd like to stand this question on it's head - why is it that
Windows programs are not able to run on Linux or Mac? Windows is the most
popular OS, by a wide, wide margin...one would think that the folks creating
Linux/Mac OS'es would include an emulator to allow the wide range of Windows
programs to run under their OS'es. There are emulators available, but
they're not built into those OS'es - I suspect this has more to do with
religion than technology, however.
GG
>
> Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > Andrew Martin wrote:
> > > Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > >
> > >>Still writing software for Windows? No Linux version?
> > >>bad thing...
> > >
> > >
> > > I can only assume you're not serious. Consumer marketshare is still
> > > vastly Windows focused. You'd have to be an idiot to go into business
> > > for a niche market (bicycle training) supporting a platform with as
> > > small a reach as Linux.
> >
> > You would be surprised to know how many people are using training logs
> > under linux or other various non-windows os!
> > And you would be yet more surprised to know how many of these people
> > actually wrote their own software.
> > If you are a developer and your software is really that great, then
> > people will pay for it -even linux users.
> >
> > (btw, greatest software is usually cross-platform -and mostly free)
news:[email protected]...
> I tend to agree with you. Ignoring Macs and Linux user is a mistake
> even because it seems that the next step that MS is going to take is
> to develop his own unix based program. As coach in the past I didn't
> buy a lot of software just because it wasn't made for my MAC. This is
> the main reason why I don't buy a perfect rower (who the heck is still
> using DOS?)
> It is not that hard and it might be a very good market move.
> Marco
Well, as a software developer, I think I can comment on this. Although I
would like to develop for the Mac and Linux, I don't. There are several
reasons, both technical and financial (in no particular order):
1) Porting my applications to Mac/Linux (i.e., Java) would be an enormous
undertaking, for a very small market potential.
2) Applications built on Java have (until recently) tended to be slow.
3) It's my understanding that Java applications are very difficult to secure
against crackers (i.e., software thieves), because it is an "interpreted"
language (this same problem applies to .Net).
4) Linux users tend to expect software for free.
5) Applications written for a cross-platform language are unable to take
advantage of many of the built-in features of the operating system. This
means that the program will have a "lowest common denominator" look and
feel, or I'll have to spend a bunch of time and effort emulating those
features by writing my own code in Java.
Actually, I'd like to stand this question on it's head - why is it that
Windows programs are not able to run on Linux or Mac? Windows is the most
popular OS, by a wide, wide margin...one would think that the folks creating
Linux/Mac OS'es would include an emulator to allow the wide range of Windows
programs to run under their OS'es. There are emulators available, but
they're not built into those OS'es - I suspect this has more to do with
religion than technology, however.
GG
>
> Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > Andrew Martin wrote:
> > > Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > >
> > >>Still writing software for Windows? No Linux version?
> > >>bad thing...
> > >
> > >
> > > I can only assume you're not serious. Consumer marketshare is still
> > > vastly Windows focused. You'd have to be an idiot to go into business
> > > for a niche market (bicycle training) supporting a platform with as
> > > small a reach as Linux.
> >
> > You would be surprised to know how many people are using training logs
> > under linux or other various non-windows os!
> > And you would be yet more surprised to know how many of these people
> > actually wrote their own software.
> > If you are a developer and your software is really that great, then
> > people will pay for it -even linux users.
> >
> > (btw, greatest software is usually cross-platform -and mostly free)