The word "bootstrap" comes to mind. Microsoft tipped because they got into the market at it's infancy and lots of investors were inspired and saw an opportunity for returns on their investments. Later the Macintosh OS was able to tip because they were a unique way of going at the computer experience that promised, again, new markets for people heretofore unwilling or incapable of grasping computer interfaces. And also they shipped several usable apps bundled with the device to get them going, until other developers got up to speed.
Linux strikes me as an OS that hit the market too late to tip the scales, and with no real incentive for new developers to invest money into an OS whose reputation was "the OS where you could get free stuff". I think that Open Source, while a great and very successful approach in terms of community, works contrary to itself in that developers do not want to invest in a market where people who charge for software are rather resented. I know I am going to get lots of responses from all the Linux people. I apologize in advance. But if my opinion is worth anything, I would say let Runrev focus on IDE's and engines for OS'es with a demonstrable hold on existing markets. Bob On May 31, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > Currently, Linux is at the pre-tipping-point stage characterized by this > catch-22 as a key contributing factor: end-users want more apps on Linux > before they switch, and developers want to see more end-users on Linux before > they deploy. _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
