4 ms·

Well it's about time someone tried it. Computers have been failing the 99% rest of the market for a long time now. I'm a GPL advocate, but I'd argue the problem

by Herring 16y ago

Well it's about time someone tried it. Computers have been failing the 99% rest of the market for a long time now. I'm a GPL advocate, but I'd argue the problem Apple is tackling is more important.

Tichy 16y ago
Linux package managers solved the problem long before Apple's App store.
- ddagradi 16y ago
  And I hear this is the year of Linux on the desktop too
  - gloob 16y ago
    Forgive me if I'm being dense, but in what way is "I can be snarky!" a response to "Apple weren't exactly the first people to pursue this basic idea"?
    - Herring 16y ago
      Package managers dont tackle the same issues Apple does. They're not user-friendly & as a result havent been very influential.
- ugh 16y ago
  You are funny! (To add a bit more detail: Package managers are awesome but not in any way easy to understand. They are more elegant than other methods of installing software but not easy.)
- AlexandrB 16y ago
  Yes and no. It solved the problem for those distributing a fixed set of free software (i.e. other Linux contributors). Anyone who wants to either make money from software or release new versions on their own schedule (not with the next OS release) is not really catered to. Not to mention that each distribution has it's own package manager (or at least its own package servers) so the "market" is horribly fragmented.
- calloc 16y ago
  Sure, but the user experience on Linux is nowhere near that what Apple's Mac OS X or iOS provides. That is the issue, and why Linux has not yet become a major force on the desktop. Too many times stuff will go wrong and it is down to a command line to fix it. Too much configuration exists within the command line there is no graphical user interface for it. There is no single Linux version, so stuff is stored all over the place. There is not a single package manager (Do I need the .deb, or the .rpm?). This is what confuses users, and the choice paralyses them. I am a geek, I absolutely love playing with different OS's and whatnot, but I am sick and tired of having to worry that updating is going to cause my OS to not boot (I'm looking at you Ubuntu and your nouveau graphics driver). Linux package managers may have "solved" the problem, but that is not what you get points for. You get points for getting users to adopt it and use it. Apple gets an A in that category (App Store on Mac OS X and iOS is a success), Linux a D (Package managers are a success, but the user experience isn't).
  - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
    I'd argue the number one reason why Apple's got a bigger marketshare than Linux is that Microsoft delivered Office for one but not the other.
  - zppx 16y ago
    > "Sure, but the user experience on Linux is nowhere near that what Apple's Mac OS X or iOS provides." You mean about installing applications right? Copy to /Applications or click "Buy" in App Store. But if I give Systems Preferences to a "common" user instead of /etc, for the majority of users, in my experience, they feel the same bad user experience of a configuration utility, with a great number of concepts that they do not understand, at least it's prettier. My mother still does not understands why she needs iTunes at all to upgrade her iPhone, and that after upgrading iTunes simply deletes the two applications that she does use, Apple insists she needs it. This last case is anecdotal, but it shows that Apple also does have it's poor user experience with some of its decisions, the common user, contrary to the average Joe iPod user, does not understand why the hell iTunes is necessary if he doesn't listen to music. > " Apple gets an A in that category (App Store on Mac OS X and iOS is a success), Linux a D (Package managers are a success, but the user experience isn't)." I would completely agree with the idea if Apple pricing was not so elitist and if the majority of users that I know that have a Apple product was not a techie nerd at least (ie, he knows how to deal with the basics of a computer, whatever system he's using, can install a program if you provide instructions, he follows technology section of his favorite newspaper, etc.).
Hellsadvocate 16y ago
They're tackling ease of use to the common man. I just pray that Apple doesn't become ubiquitous, their software is pretty walled up.

by Herring 16y ago

Well it's about time someone tried it. Computers have been failing the 99% rest of the market for a long time now. I'm a GPL advocate, but I'd argue the problem Apple is tackling is more important.

Tichy 16y ago

Linux package managers solved the problem long before Apple's App store.

ddagradi 16y ago
And I hear this is the year of Linux on the desktop too
- gloob 16y ago
  Forgive me if I'm being dense, but in what way is "I can be snarky!" a response to "Apple weren't exactly the first people to pursue this basic idea"?
  - Herring 16y ago
    Package managers dont tackle the same issues Apple does. They're not user-friendly & as a result havent been very influential.
ugh 16y ago
You are funny! (To add a bit more detail: Package managers are awesome but not in any way easy to understand. They are more elegant than other methods of installing software but not easy.)
AlexandrB 16y ago
Yes and no. It solved the problem for those distributing a fixed set of free software (i.e. other Linux contributors). Anyone who wants to either make money from software or release new versions on their own schedule (not with the next OS release) is not really catered to. Not to mention that each distribution has it's own package manager (or at least its own package servers) so the "market" is horribly fragmented.
calloc 16y ago
Sure, but the user experience on Linux is nowhere near that what Apple's Mac OS X or iOS provides. That is the issue, and why Linux has not yet become a major force on the desktop. Too many times stuff will go wrong and it is down to a command line to fix it. Too much configuration exists within the command line there is no graphical user interface for it. There is no single Linux version, so stuff is stored all over the place. There is not a single package manager (Do I need the .deb, or the .rpm?). This is what confuses users, and the choice paralyses them. I am a geek, I absolutely love playing with different OS's and whatnot, but I am sick and tired of having to worry that updating is going to cause my OS to not boot (I'm looking at you Ubuntu and your nouveau graphics driver). Linux package managers may have "solved" the problem, but that is not what you get points for. You get points for getting users to adopt it and use it. Apple gets an A in that category (App Store on Mac OS X and iOS is a success), Linux a D (Package managers are a success, but the user experience isn't).
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  I'd argue the number one reason why Apple's got a bigger marketshare than Linux is that Microsoft delivered Office for one but not the other.
- zppx 16y ago
  > "Sure, but the user experience on Linux is nowhere near that what Apple's Mac OS X or iOS provides." You mean about installing applications right? Copy to /Applications or click "Buy" in App Store. But if I give Systems Preferences to a "common" user instead of /etc, for the majority of users, in my experience, they feel the same bad user experience of a configuration utility, with a great number of concepts that they do not understand, at least it's prettier. My mother still does not understands why she needs iTunes at all to upgrade her iPhone, and that after upgrading iTunes simply deletes the two applications that she does use, Apple insists she needs it. This last case is anecdotal, but it shows that Apple also does have it's poor user experience with some of its decisions, the common user, contrary to the average Joe iPod user, does not understand why the hell iTunes is necessary if he doesn't listen to music. > " Apple gets an A in that category (App Store on Mac OS X and iOS is a success), Linux a D (Package managers are a success, but the user experience isn't)." I would completely agree with the idea if Apple pricing was not so elitist and if the majority of users that I know that have a Apple product was not a techie nerd at least (ie, he knows how to deal with the basics of a computer, whatever system he's using, can install a program if you provide instructions, he follows technology section of his favorite newspaper, etc.).

Hellsadvocate 16y ago

They're tackling ease of use to the common man. I just pray that Apple doesn't become ubiquitous, their software is pretty walled up.