Slashdot Mirror
Impact of Windows Programmer Hordes on Linux?
Dr Dobbs Journal analyses the impact that
Windows Programmers could have on Linux arguing that they
could boost Linux' usability drastically.
So what do you think Windows programmers
could do to/for Linux? Do you think the ensuing culture
struggle will be positive or negative? Link from
LWN.
Perhaps I suffer from a tad bit of multiple personality-identity disorder, but I actually rather like the way many Linux and *NIX apps look different. It's my belief that different jobs need different tools; and you don't ever see a crescent wrench and a screwdriver that look the same, do you?
:-)
Not to mention the fact that I would very quickly get bored with my X displays if they looked just like the standard MS UI. I got very sick of seeing the same gray, day after day, and all my tools and applications just became a blur. They all could do some of the same things the others could do, they were almost all bloated, and it just stripped the usefulness of even investing the time and effort to learn something new, because I had already done it before.
But then, I am also more inclined to want to learn how to use my tools properly than the ordinary random person. You won't catch me using a tire iron to carve a chair leg, just like you won't see me using a MicroSoft Word-style word processor to write HTML. You'll see me using proper carving tools in the former, and either vi or Emacs and possibly a perl script to check my work in the latter.
In other words, I believe that the tools I use in Linux have (for the most part) been designed from the ground up to be as efficient in both form and function as possible. I wouldn't change that for the world; efficiency is very valuable IMHO. More so than a "standardized UI".
Just my humble opinion.
The early *BSD systems didn't even recognize the standard DOS partition scheme. Linux, on the other hand, quickly supported the FAT filesystem and worked on DOSEMU, and with UMSDOS, you could even run Linux off of a MS-DOS filesystem! The *BSD developers were, in a large part, old-time UNIX gurus who were more comfortable with a VAX or a Sun workstation than a PC. Linux users came from the Minix/MS-DOS/Windows crowd and were sneered at as not known how a "true Unix" should work. This additude still exists among many *BSD people.
I'm an old-time Unix user, but I don't fear an influx of Windows programmers, any more than I feared the "hords of unwashed masses" that have "invaded" the Internet over the last 15 years that I have been on it. Yes, the Internet has changes much because of them, and in many ways for the worse, but if there were still only a few million people on the entire Internet, there would be no Linux, no WWW, no
SPF support for most open source mail servers can be found at libspf2.
There are windows programmrs and then there are REAL windows programers. Let's really consider what a who a *programmer* before we start going off on how horrible windows programmers are.
Just because you know VB or enough C/C++ to write a notepad clone (as someone else mentioned) does not make you a windows programmer, please that's an insult to anyone who REALLY knows how to spit out code.
I'm a windows programmer.. and no I don't use VB, I write drivers and custom applications to run the production line hardware in my company's factories. Most of the stuff I write is low level C/C++ with some assembler thrown in for good measure. In my experiance I wouldn't call anyone who hasn't dug through with the crap lowlevel windows API or driver model to be a REAL windows programer.
My personal opinion is that windows programers for the most part will be good for Linux, the good ones will be added man power.. and the *hobbyists* won't hurt it any.. who cares if there are 50 notepad clones for linux? And besides the core linux developers are not going to let Joe hobby programmer screw with the kernel anyways.
-Ex-Nt-User
If you cut open a windoze hacker and a un*x hacker, would there internals appear to be any different? No.
It is not the programmers that gives windoze its "use-ability." The MFC makes it easy for windoze programmers to include all those "use-ability" features in their applications. M$ programming tools include wizards that make it easy to pop up some decent looking GUI interface in minutes. The problem with many windoze apps is that the underlying logic and operation of the program too often fails to live up to the high expectations that the GUI helps to engender.
In contrast, un*x hackers more often focus on getting the basic functionality implemented correctly. Often there is only a simple command line interface. There is a far greater probablity that if a un*x programmer takes the time to implement a GUI version of an application, that the underlying logic and functionality is already stable and debugged.
There is a great deal of influence imposed by each different development environment on the look and feel and functionality of applications.
M$ -> Easy to generate some kind of spiffy GUI. Sometimes impossible for highest gurus to circumcode buggy os calls.
GNU-Linux -> Rock solid system implementation, but lacks the wizards that allows anyone who can click on "OK" to generate a GUI based application.
This too shall pass...
It's fashonable in Linux circles to express contempt for all things Microsoftian. But this is a mistake; we can learn a lot from looking at what works on the Microsoft and Mac platforms, while leaving behind what does not work.
Many people who have spent all their time in the Unix world have never seen a good GUI. A good GUI is one that enables an expert in an application area to be highly productive. One reason why users are highly productive is that the applications they need to use work consistently. In that sense, X's configurability has worked against us ... it makes it too easy for every app to work differently. In many Unix/Linux shops, no one can sit down at his neighbor's desktop and help with a problem, because everyone has a different window manager and has rebound all the keys to work differently.
Too many people on Slashdot say "I don't like it because it looks like Windows". What you are saying is that you would rather be different for the sake of being different, and you don't care that this will make life harder for new users.
Windows made lots of botches that should not be copied, e.g. to shut down your computer you first press a button named "Start".
One thing Microsoft spends a lot of money on is human-factors research. What is easiest for people to use? Coming up with a theme per day is fine and dandy, but it would be nicer to conduct studies on what works the best for different types of users.