Slashdot Mirror
Where Linux Gained Ground in 2007
christian.einfeldt writes "Computer scientist and media maven Roy Schestowitz takes a look at platforms where GNU Linux gained the most ground in 2007. In a thorough review which is the first of a two-part series, Schestowitz looks at trends in supercomputers, mobile phones, desktops, low-end laptops and tablets, consoles, media players and set-top boxes. Schestowitz finds that GNU Linux solidified its dominant grip on supercomputers; made huge gains in low-end laptops and tablets; won major OEM and retail support on the desktop; gained new entries into game consoles; and also spawned new businesses in set-top boxes while holding its ground in pre-existing product lines. He sums it all up by saying that '2007 will be remembered as the year when GNU/Linux became not only available, but also properly preinstalled on desktops and laptops by the world's largest companies.'"
Article nor the summary says that.
Google is your friend... I'm being general.
Unix is not important to me, I also don't think the majority of people who use Linux, use it because they want something Unixy.
Wow... well, I think you just might be wrong there.
Tons of high quality third party applications and you are going to mention OS X? Can I have what you are smoking?
What do people do most of the time? Photo editing, surfing, word processing, spread sheets, movie watching, music playing, IM, email and gaming. Adobe Creative Suite, Omniweb (very nice app, by the way) - Firefox - Safari (not great), MS Office, Apple office suite (very very slick, IMO), Quicktime with codecs (quite nice, in fact), iTunes (not great, but not bad), Apple Mail (very nice app), various IM progs are all pretty decent, games... I don't play games, so I don't comment. You've got great interoperability in these apps, drag and drop is superb, man... it all just works.
But as well, how about artists? Incredible audio app support like no other. Most of the apps that windows has (and some it doesn't) but supported in an OS that understands how these things should be done - CoreAudio and CoreMidi - not bolted on by some third party guys after the fact. It's integrated and works extremely well. People are tossing out their synthesizers and studio gear for a powerful Mac and their favourite apps, and they're not afraid to take the gear on stage. Try this stuff with a linux box... I still have my wife using a linux box and she can't even get her email to work right because people send her attachments that are *still* a bitch to read on a Linux box, and I am not about to put in the effort to get it all working right... I've grown very tired of doing that stuff.
But! If I were to choose a system for Unix capability, I would choose windows over OS X...
For Unix compatibility, you would choose a non-Unix over a Unix... Thanks for playingThis sig used to be really funny...
That's a brilliant observation and it's one I tend to overlook, but you're totally right. People don't necessarily want to use Linux, OSX, freebsd, Joe's OS, but they simply are tired of using Windows and desperately need an alternative. OSX doesn't immediately run on their Windows hardware, so the next choice is Linux.
Thanks for the insight.
This sig used to be really funny...
All I can say here is that you seem to be missing the point. It's not that such things don't exist, they certainly do. All of the different types, the different implementations and flavours are all very nice and fun to have, but they simply don't measure up - they *really* don't. OSX CoreAudio and CoreMIDI are engineered properly. There's only one choice and you only need one choice. It's fast, it's clear and concise, it requires ZERO (read that word very carefully and then ask yourself how much work is required for any of the linux variants) user intervention to work with, there are no "interesting" bits of information that need to be known or configured, or tweaked and played with... etc etc...
Musicians write and perform music and the apps themselves are designed to let them do that with a minimum of hassle. Do you really think that any pro musician wants to spend any time whatsoever setting up the OS audio, let alone even having to choose which audio code to run, when OSX requires nothing of the sort and outperforms Linux anyways? I think that's the point of this whole thread (and others)... Linux may not have missed the boat here, since time is fluid and who knows what the future will bring, but OSX has given the Linux community what it's been craving for years - Unix on the Desktop - and it did it while the Linux community is still trying to figure out how to do it. Closed source simply did the better job here - it does happen. Apple could ignore any hardware issues since they controlled everything, and they could focus on the job at hand. OSS has much more "cowboy" related hardware issues to tackle, and it's not nearly as focused - OSS writes "everything" while closed source writes "something".
Who the hell could be surprised at the outcome?
This sig used to be really funny...
[quote]Making software that works right out of the box requires a grown up sitting at a desk working their ass off 40 hours a week getting paid a nice fat wage.[/quote]
This is why most of the best open source software is written by people who work for a company which derives its profit from elsewhere.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
"Linux" is not a single operating system, it is just a kernel. The kernel can be run without GNU utils, without X11, etc.
Palm trees and 8
Musicians write and perform music and the apps themselves are designed to let them do that with a minimum of hassle. Do you really think that any pro musician wants to spend any time whatsoever setting up the OS audio, let alone even having to choose which audio code to run, when OSX requires nothing of the sort and outperforms Linux anyways?
First of all ARTS and ESD are being deprecated and OSS has been deprecrated already so take them out of the picture. Linux can do low latency scheduling and in combination with PulseAudio, JACK, and ALSA it is a pretty powerful audio workstation. Thrown in Ardour and the whole thing is hard to beat for the grand price of FREE. In fact I would love to know what CoreAudio does so much better than these technologies. Do you have specific features in mind or are you just stating your opinion? I don't know anything about CoreAudio so I would love to know.
As for musicians' ability to install a Linux audio workstation...they don't have to worry about any of that. That's what distro's are for. There are even distro's geared towards audio and others towards video and graphics. It doesn't seem like you have been paying attention to Linux development for the past few years.
Check out 64 Studio
Time makes more converts than reason
Where are the commercial game ports for Linux? No one wants to make them, obviously, save for the FPS crowd (and there's only an Unreal Tournament for Linux because Epic passes the buck to Icculus to get the job done, not because they have the in-house talent to do it themselves). There are a few commercial games for Linux, yes, but only a few, and there's very little variety between them. In the open source world we have a few good games (the majority of them being FPS's, what a surprise), Battle for Wesnoth if you like strategy games (turn based ones, that is). Then we have the unfortunate, ugly ripoffs like "Secret Maryo Chronicles," and other games that look like they were developed for a C64. Plenty of selection, not a lot of quality.
The following publishers develop comemrcial linux games:
http://www.pompomgames.com/
http://www.garagegames.com/
http://www.introversion.co.uk/
http://frictionalgames.com/
http://sillysoft.net/
http://www.basiliskgames.com/
http://www.guildsoftware.com/
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/
http://www.rune-soft.com/
http://grubbygames.com/
http://www.caravelgames.com/
http://www.planewalkergames.com/
http://www.graalonline.com/
There are also the high profile ones such as neverwinter nights, the doom and quake series, unreal, etc.
There are many high quality independant titles such as neverball, you mentioned wesnoth, crimson fields, flight gear, torcs, the spring project, total annihilation 3d, tecnoballZ, powermanga, tile racer, pingus, clonk, freeciv, ultimate stunts, planeshift, scorched3d, VDrift, silvertree (not complete, but being created by the wesnoth guys so likely will not be vapor), ufo: alien invasion, scourge, etc.
http://spring.clan-sy.com/
http://www.wesnoth.org/
http://torcs.sourceforge.net/
http://www.flightgear.org/
https://icculus.org/neverball/
http://ta3d.darkstars.co.uk/
http://linux.tlk.fr/games/
http://tileracer.model-view.com/
http://pingus.seul.org/
http://www.clonk.de/
http://freeciv.wikia.com/
http://www.ultimatestunts.nl/
http://www.planeshift.it/
http://www.scorched3d.co.uk/
http://vdrift.net/
http://www.silvertreerpg.org/
http://ufoai.sourceforge.net/
http://scourge.sourceforge.net/
Many of these are very impressive independently made free games. Perhaps they lack the multi million dollar marketing budget and won't make your geofrce 8800 gtxz 45 x super elite ultra melt, but theya re *fun* games, and they are numerous. Also keep in mind this publisher and free game list is only what I could find in 1 hour of searching.
Then there are freed older commercial games such as warzone 2100, homeworld, descent 1 and 2, doom, quake, etc.
Lets not stop t
The question is, why would you do that when targeting say, Win2k, is adequate for most applications?
If you're running XP with no service packs in 2008 you're going to have a lot bigger problems than running apps from a developer who doesn't know how to target his Win32 applications for maximum compatibility.
And yet the end users rarely sees the issue on Windows. Linux users, on the other hand, often can't run the same package on different versions of the same distribution spanning more than a couple years. Look, I'm no Windows fan. In fact, I dread using the OS for anything more than playing games, but it does have one thing going for it and that is decent backward and forward application compatibility.
I haven't used Slackware since around 1996 so i can't really confirm this, but the fact that so many things depend on your distribution only goes to prove my point.
Well, least you can run apps for PPC on x86 at all. Windows and Linux users are still struggling with 32 -> 64bit on the SAME architecture.
As for OS X versions and backward/forward compatability... 10.3 is pretty much the minimum that you need these days. While not as good as Windows, it is better than the Linux distribution mess.
I'll assume you're using the term "distribution" lightly and are including major versions of an OS such as OS X 10.4 vs. 10.3.
In which case I can only say that you often have little choice. It woudl be awesome if all developers could produce unique builds for every major release of your favorite OS, but it just ain't going to happen. I've been running OS X Leopard since it came out and I don't think I'm running a single application that is targeted specifically for Leopard aside from the apps that came with it. The only reason Linux is even usable when you do a major upgrade is because nearly all the apps are upgraded at the same time. But this isn't very sustainable. At some point there's just going to be too much software out there to include (and test) in the with OS and still maintain a reasonable release schedule. And using commercial software is still a problem.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death