Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Future of Closed Source Software and Linux

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the hand-me-downs dept.

slashy writes "What is the future of closed source software and Linux? OSWeekly.com delves into the subject and emerges with a possible answer. Quote: "I have been struggling with one major problem lately with the Linux operating system and that problem is the amazing lack of new and exciting software. It's frustrating because by the time said software does finally make its way down to the Linux user, the Windows crowd has been using it for nearly a year or longer. Perhaps some of this is because there does not appear to be a clear, simple to follow outline cooperative for companies to design for the open source operating system. Arguably this is because of the perceived need to keep things "open," however, I feel it's time for Linux to grow up and find some kind of common ground with the closed source community. I am a firm believer that both parties could learn a lot from each other; unfortunately I don't see that happening any time soon."

6 of 566 comments (clear)

  1. Boo Hoo by DeathElk · · Score: 0, Troll
    Sook Sook Sook.


    Cry Cry Cry.


    Outlook doesn't work.


    Sulk Sulk Sulk


    Can't find any decent software.


    Bla bla bla. Ra ra ra.


    Diddums.

  2. There's a fundamental mistake in his assumptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It looks to me like this guy just doesn't get the reason behind Linux and
    the other Free(dom) OSes. I use Linux not for the closed source
    applications, but because I don't have to use any closed source applications
    applications.

    I can't speak for anyone else on this, but I got sick and tired of:

    2. Buggy software that would crash at the drop of a hat
    3. Spyware that would try to track me
    4. Being treated like a criminal: you know, would require an "activation code",
      I would give my first born as a hostage, tell them everything about me including
      where I live
    5. Code that ran on only 1 platform and 1 version of the OS
    6. Code that I could only run on 1 machine and God help you if you tried
      to sell it to someone else with out the Brown shirts^h^h^h^h^^h^h^h, sorry BSA
      coming down on you
    7. not being able to figure out what the code was doing --- I had NO input
      into their code other than not using it -- which is exactly what I ultimately did


    I escaped the BillyG matrix in 1997 and I will never go back to that environment.
    If you want closed source software then you know where to find it:
    http://catb.org/jargon/html/I/If-you-want-X--you-k now-where-to-find-it-.html
  3. shit?S! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    standards 5houLd

  4. Re:I believe just the opposite by giorgiofr · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'd like to know what the 10-years-ahead OSS counterparts to the following software are: Oracle, Opera, Photoshop, AutoCAD.
    This was meant to show that yelling "OSS is always teh b3s7es7" is as dumb as assuming that free stuff must be worthless. That's why I use a varied collection of tools at home and at work, and I don't particularly care whether they're OSS or not. When I wanted a graphics package I chose Photoshop. When I wanted a good entry level server I built a box and put Linux on it (I know Linux works well on high level servers too, but my needs were modest). Why can't we judge the merits of software on the basis of its usefulness, effeciency, manageability, security, and support level offered with it rather than by looking at its skin color?

    --
    Global warming is a cube.
  5. Trolling or just hideously misinformed? by metamatic · · Score: 0, Troll
    Samba includes a SMB client AND server for free; OSX (desktop edition, at least) has a bundled client, but no server.

    Wrong.

    Apache/php/perl/etc have been ported, but seem to run most smoothly on linux.

    I don't know why you'd say that, as Apache and Perl come installed by default on OS X. (I don't know about PHP, I wouldn't use that heap of crap if you paid me.) There are nice 1-click installers for Rails too.

    As far as user apps, well, the Gimp still seems to be designed for linux.

    Yup. That's why I paid $30 for a copy of Photoshop Elements, which blows away The GIMP for usability and has all the functionality I need. Frankly, I wish there was something to compare with Elements on Linux. I use the GIMP, but every time I do it does something weird and inexplicable.

    iMovie only lets you save to Quicktime (ugh), and Windows Movie Maker to Windows Media.

    False. What you apparently missed is that when you save to QuickTime from iMovie, it's not saving to QuickTime file format—it's saving to the QuickTime multimedia subsystem. From there you can set your output format to anything you like. Hence iMovie can save to MPEG-4 with H.264, DivX, 3ivX, MPEG-1, DV files, whatever the hell you like.

    I don't care if iMovie can turn junk footage into pure gold - what good is it if I can only save to a proprietary format?

    QuickTime file format is the basis of the MPEG-4 file format. Maybe MPEG-4 is "proprietary", but it's the closest thing to a usable open standard that exists in the world of video. The QuickTime and MPEG-4 formats are both open documented specifications.

    I can't open Quicktime movies in any of my windows software for further editing, and I can't open Windows Media in any of my OSX software for further editing.

    If your Windows software is so crap that it can't open QuickTime, it presumably isn't one of the well-known movie editing packages like Adobe Premier, which is built on QuickTime for Windows. In which case, export from iMovie to whatever format your software needs. To use Windows Media on OS X, you simply need to install the Flip4Mac WMV QuickTime codec plugins, which you can download from Microsoft's web site. Then you can drag-drop your WMV video straight into iMovie.

    As for apps that noone on Windows/OSX seem to use, netpbm is a good example. They are command-line utilities that let you convert image formats, rescale, rotate, crop, etc.

    Nobody uses them because you can do the exact same thing with Graphic Converter, PhotoShop or QuickTime, script using AppleScript, and not have to actually write the code. But netpbm and ImageMagick are available for OS X if you'd rather do batch image processing the hard way. (I speak as someone who's done batch processing with ImageMagick and with GraphicConverter.)

    I'm not sure how to track down all the dependencies on OSX, or whether Apple made any modifications before compiling.

    So download the latest netpbm from DarwinPorts.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  6. Re:"Desktop User" in TFA parlance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    TFA's author, Matt Harley "desktop user" means "user who got locked into a bunch of Microsoft or windows-based closed-source applications, often despite warnings about the potential for lock-in if heshe chose that stuff."

    Well, we can't all be poorly socialized linux dorks with the emotional maturity of a 2-year-old. I mean, if these people didn't exist, who else would you linux lunatics blame for your failures at gaining market share, hygiene, life, and pretty much everything else? Why, you'd have nobody to blame but yourselves.