5 ms·

Or, alternatively, a crowd whose needs aren’t completely met by Linux.

• pjmlp 6y ago
  Then why they develop GNU/Linux software to start with?
  • detaro 6y ago
    Because their needs aren't met by developing Windows or macOS software?
    • pjmlp 6y ago
      Then again why they don't support GNU/Linux vendors?
      • Dylan16807 6y ago
        So if someone installs Linux themselves they don't meet this bar you're setting? That seems pretty far from the normal open source ethos.
        • pjmlp 6y ago
          Ah, so using evil commercial OSes is part of that so called ethos?
          • Dylan16807 6y ago
            No, installing your own OS is very open source.
            • pjmlp 6y ago
              Which isn't a thing with macOS and Windows, so where is that ethos again?
              • Dylan16807 6y ago
                You were confused why people would do things with GNU/Linux without "supporting GNU/Linux vendors". But that's restricting it to people that use the preinstalled OS, which is strange, because of how fitting it is to install your own copy of GNU/Linux.
              • jevgeni 6y ago
                "Yes, you see, you're only free if you do exactly what we tell you." Also, it's a thing on Windows/PCs.
                • pjmlp 6y ago
                  We are talking about GNU/Linux here.
                  • jevgeni 6y ago
                    We are not. You are.
                    • pjmlp 6y ago
                      That was the whole point of this thread, naturally some rather move goal posts to avoid the subject that Linux users rather give money to proprietary desktop platforms than help desktop Linux ever become a reality.
                      • jevgeni 6y ago
                        Yes. Because Linux is not competitive in some cases.
  • pram 6y ago
    People might get paid money to develop (proprietary!) software that deploys to Linux. That doesn't mean they enjoy using Linux.
    • pjmlp 6y ago
      Indeed, I have been doing that for years and am yet to install WSL.
  • jevgeni 6y ago
    One reason might be, is that they might need to in part work with a server-side system that runs on Linux and it’s easier this way. But maybe they also need to work with stuff thats Windows only. Say they need to produce media assets with the Adobe suite. Not everything is vimmable.
    • pjmlp 6y ago
      SSH and X Windows servers also exist for Windows.
      • jevgeni 6y ago
        It takes me 2 minutes to install WSL Ubuntu. Or I could spend half a day on figuring out a hacky solution to a Windows/SSH/XWindows workflow that offers even a comparable level of integration. It will grow into weeks of obsessive tweaking until I feel compelled to write a blog post for HN where I show my sick setup and hours and hours I dumped into this, while meaningful work piled up in my TODOs. ... Or I could just install WSL.
        • pjmlp 6y ago
          Or just install Humming Bird, working just fine for me since 2000.
          • whenitrains 6y ago
            Or just install WSL? What's the problem with Microsoft having an answer to this?
            • pjmlp 6y ago
              In what concerns Microsoft, I praise them for having acknowledged the strategy error that was not giving the UNIX subsystem the same love as Win32. Because as proven by macOS and now WSL adoption, GNU/Linux would never have taken off if PCs already had a mature set of POSIX toys, given that its users care 0% about GNU/Linux, and would be deploying to HP-UX, Solaris, Aix, Irix, Tru64 just as well.