On 12-Jan-08, at 12:42 PM, Raj Mathur wrote: >> i myself back in the days had to switch to windows because i bought >> an unsupported video card and did not have the money to buy an new >> one. > > The reason you may face issues with some hardware with Linux is > that the > OS grew organically, not from committee. The first developers of > Linux > were all programmers.
you mean other operating systems were not developed by programmers? Or that the current developers of Linux are not programmers? > As a programmer, what do you think I'd want to > develop first for a new platform, a good text editor that allows me to > write more code, or a set of pretty icons that make my desktop look > beautiful but don't help me with my job at all? there are many kinds of programmers. And many programmers *need* those icons to help them in their job. They aren't all sitting around coding in vi. Significant number of them use macs. It is not that they didn't want icons, or that they didn't need all the ease of use - it is just that the os was evolving - and is still evolving. And new products are, by their nature, crude. > > Today there's enough momentum and stability with Linux to enable > developers to look at other aspects of computing, namely ease of use > and aesthetics. ease of use and aesthetics are fundamental to computing - not some frills to be added on. But definition of ease of use and aesthetics differ. Most people dont understand the difference between 'ease of use' and 'familiarity'. A windoze user finds windows easy to use because he is familiar with it. Accustomed to it. I have seen people for whom linux was their first OS totally bewildered when trying to negotiate windows. They say mac interface is easy to use - but even after a year and a half using it, I still struggle to do things that are dead simple in linux. I also struggle the few times I am forced to use windows, but the interface that drives me nuts is gnome. > Also note that a lot of the issues that you have in mind are due to > vendors not providing Linux developers with adequate specifications to > allow them (the developers) to build drivers for utilising their (the > vendors') hardware. why should they? They are in business to make money. Our job is to convince them that releasing their specs will help them make more money > If you find that Linux doesn't support your > Phillips webcam (because Phillips refuses to share interfaces with the > developer community), would you blame Linux or Phillips? I would blame linux > If your > proprietary Nvidia drivers crash your laptop on suspend or resume, > wouldn't you agree that the blame lies with Nvidia for not working > with > developers and assisting them in developing open source drivers for > their graphics cards? The developers are willing but the company is > weak ;) the company wants to be strong - and will support linux when they realise that 'linux compatible' means something to the customer - not before > > So yes, problems remain; some of them are because of low interest > in the > developers for a particular feature, and some are due to close-minded > vendors who cling to some perceived business advantage at the risk of > alienating a growing part of their market. But keep writing, at least > we have a great support infrastructure (voted the best in the world a > few years ago :) true -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate, NRC-FOSS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/ Foss conference for the common man: http://registration.fossconf.in/web/ _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Next Event: http://freed.in - February 22/23, 2008 Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
