Slashdot Mirror
Windows Loses Ground With Developers
An anonymous reader notes that InfoWorld is covering a survey of North American developers that claims that Linux is gaining share as the number of developers targeting Windows fell 11 percent over the last year. Evans Data has been conducting these surveys of client, server, and Web developers since 1998. Evans Data says that the arrival of Windows Vista likely only kept the numbers from being even worse. The big gainer wasn't developing for a Web platform, but rather for Linux and "nontraditional client devices." Windows is still dominant, with 65% of developers writing code for this platform. Linux stands at almost 12%, up from 8% a year earlier. The article says that Evans Data collected information on Mac and Unix development but did not include them in this year's report.
What we're seeing here folks is a diversifying technological ecosystem. Windows does not "fit all", and neither does Linux. (Though arguably, Linux does fit lots more than Windows does)
Linux will never replace Windows, because nothing else ever will. Windows is an artifact of a time when having a single platform was more important for development than having the best platform. Now that the industry is maturing, the needs are rapidly becoming commodities behind standards-based interfaces (TCP, XML, etc) while the platform itself is becoming less and less relevant. The Internet met a need that Microsoft simply couldn't provide, and now the cat is out of the bag. Vista is Microsoft's attempt to lock users in before erosion gets too bad, and it's pretty evident how well that's going.
Windows' market share will slowly erode, slowly being beaten by an increasing number of products, services, and wares on an increasing number of platforms.
Go standards!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Windows is satrated with third party apps. Anything you do for windows will most likely compete with someone elses program and you will have an uphill battle to get adoption. Linux there is a huge gap of programs that it needs allowing programmers a better chance to get a good foothold as a key app. Or the more ambition the next killer app. Making software for windows will either be medocre at best (In terms of sales) or if it is a really good app Microsoft will make a clone of it and imbed it into windows so you don't have a chance of competing, or discredited for some other application. Linux apps have a better chance of getting some staying power and your new app may get some ground.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
If you carefully pick your 400, your survey isn't legit.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Really not that surprising, since every other device runs on embedded linux. Everything from handheld GPS devices, electronic locks, routers, switches to satellite receivers/decoders runs on embedded linux now. It's cheapest embedded platform.
http://www.mhall119.com
"Linux's lack of a standard GUI layer in the OS - modern menus, buttons, lists, even windows - is the primary issue for us."
It shouldn't be. The solution is really simple
Qt if you are going to GPL your code and want to code in C++
Qt if you don't want to GPL your code and code in C++ just pay Trolltech for the none free version.
GTK if you want to code in C or C# GPL or not since you can use it under LGPL.
GNUStep if you really want to use Objective C and don't mind being different.
I mix Qt and GTK apps at will on my Linux desktop. For many applications your choice between GTK and QT really doesn't matter. Okay I hate GTKs file dialog Qts is a lot better IMHO but even that isn't a really big issue. I use Eclipse CDT which uses SWT-GTK for it's interface on Suse 10.1 running KDE. No big problem.
The lack of a standard windowing tool kit just isn't a big deal. Frankly I suggest just going with QT and then you can make your code run on Windows, Mac and Linux with very little effort at least as far as the UI goes.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Wow, that is an amazingly uninformed post.
X-windows together with any of the popular graphical toolkits is every bit as fast as windows GDI primitives, and very similar to what apple's DPS does to draw widgets. The old fashioned integration of graphical primitives directly into the operating system is exactly what everyone is trying to get away from, as it tends to make everything suck. Take one look at beryl and youll see the future of eye candy is going to be coming from the free software camp.
Now, in addition to that, you are taking the licensing issue 100% backwards. With any OSS toolkit, the terms and source are 100% disclosed, and many times simpler than proprietary licenses. The toolkit you choose will be around forever as surely as if you own it yourself. I don't suppose you have ever read one of MS or Apple's EULA's, but to sum them up you are essentially placing yourself and your company at their mercy when you develop for their platforms.
If your reason for choosing proprietary products is because you plan to make proprietary products, that at least would make sense. But keep in mind that the product model for software is receding into history, and you may need a change of business model in the forseeable future.
TFA seems to be saying that there is a smaller *percentage* of people working on Windows as compared to other things:
"Just 64.8 percent targeted the platform as opposed to 74 percent in 2006."
That does *not* automatically mean that the number has declined. There may still be the same number of or more Windows developers, but their percentage is smaller because the other categories have increased.
I hate misleading article titles. The numbers should be thought of as multiple line graphs, not a pie chart.
I see what you mean, and I agree. A computer should be programmable by its users.
One correction though: it wasn't the PC that turned kids into programmers. It was (a) Unix systems at universities and (b) the cheap home computers of the 1980s, with a BASIC interpreter and a demo scene, like the Commodore 64.
What's the point of polling North American developers?
The 11% decrease in Windows targeting could be because one of the 9 still working here switched to Linux.