3 ms·

This is kind of anecdotal to Meego, WebOS, FirefoxOS and all the other forms of them that happened in the past. I don't think that people will use the phone so

This is kind of anecdotal to Meego, WebOS, FirefoxOS and all the other forms of them that happened in the past. I don't think that people will use the phone solely because it's Linux. They'll use it if it can solve their tasks at hand. Personally I think that Linux will never take off if we won't create financial incentives to make and deploy apps, additionally to fix the mess that's user rights/permission management in GTK and QT. Currently there are no working native alternatives on Linux, libhandy is still a joke for simple tasks like a fading sidebar (or even swipe gestures!) and QT can't be used for anything serious due to their license. My hope for servo, FirefoxOS and WebOS was that there will be some day an alternative to Electron that's focussed on permissions and sandboxing, and that allows to be externally configured and is more modular on the environment (VM) level. Basically like a settings app on Android that can toggle GPS, toggle Networking access, toggle Camera access etc. Layouting-wise CSS has won the masses. Everyone that tries to reinvent it for their own opinionated views has failed and given up (including me who spent over 6 years developing an isomorphic App Engine full-time). It's time to let go. The web has won and there's no point in denying it. React has won most of the developer crowd because of React Native and convenience of staying in the same language and more importantly, being able to reuse the same code architecture. I think in order for Linux to succeed there has to be a compile pipeline (and runtime?) that allows to deploy those apps easily. If that's not possible (due to whatever reasons) the platform will never really take off. Privacy and Security and Openness is just no argument for the average user that doesn't care and just wants to get their tasks done.

hutzlibu 6y ago
"I don't think that people will use the phone solely because it's Linux. " Of course they will. It is just that hardcore linux people are not enough, to bring enough money in. " Privacy and Security and Openness is just no argument for the average" And it actually is a argument for average users, it is just that their priorities to get their tasks done are higher, which is rational. And since their tasks usually involve whatsapp and co. they won't be able to use a Linux phone.
mch82 6y ago
I think you’re right. I don’t understand why more UI toolkits aren’t adopting CSS for layout, especially the newer CSS grid. It’s so much simpler than alternatives like TKinter. I get the memory/performance issues with Electron. Those can be solved. I’m able to open large XML files in VSCode that simply crush other apps like Notepad and XMLSpy.
ldiracdelta 6y ago
What is this idea that Qt can't be used? You can license with the community license under LGPL. If Qt can't be used with an open source license, then nothing LGPL can use open source commercially, but the point of LGPL is to not scare away businesses with viral copy-left code. Yes, you have to deliver your object files and a Makefile, et c. Also, you have to open source your Qt library edits, but who needs to do that for business reasons? Are Qt library edits the industrial secret of your business? Probably not. Since when is letting other people run the linking stage on your code tantamount to giving them the keys to your business?
- cookiengineer 6y ago
  > What is this idea that Qt can't be used? You can license with the community license under LGPL. The Terms and Conditions on their website [1] say otherwise, especially "APPENDIX 4: SMALL BUSINESS AND STARTUP". No, sir, I'm not touching that library for anything I want to make money with. [1] https://www.qt.io/terms-conditions/ https://www.qt.io/terms-conditions/
  - ldiracdelta 6y ago
    Qt is dual-licensed. You're referring to the commercial license. See https://www.qt.io/download-open-source https://www.qt.io/download-open-source https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations and https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations#lgpl https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations#lgp... . If you go to this page, you can see which pieces are LGPL: https://www.qt.io/product/features#js-6-3 https://www.qt.io/product/features#js-6-3
lytefm 6y ago
> I think in order for Linux to succeed there has to be a compile pipeline (and runtime?) that allows to deploy those apps easily. If that's not possible (due to whatever reasons) the platform will never really take off. I agree. An important difference to the situation a few years ago is the availability of actually viable cross-platform development frameworks like React Native, Flutter, Capacitor,... If all I need to do in order to support a new niche OS is configuring one additional build target, I might just go for it. Otherwise, certainly not.

hutzlibu 6y ago

"I don't think that people will use the phone solely because it's Linux. " Of course they will. It is just that hardcore linux people are not enough, to bring enough money in. " Privacy and Security and Openness is just no argument for the average" And it actually is a argument for average users, it is just that their priorities to get their tasks done are higher, which is rational. And since their tasks usually involve whatsapp and co. they won't be able to use a Linux phone.

mch82 6y ago

I think you’re right. I don’t understand why more UI toolkits aren’t adopting CSS for layout, especially the newer CSS grid. It’s so much simpler than alternatives like TKinter. I get the memory/performance issues with Electron. Those can be solved. I’m able to open large XML files in VSCode that simply crush other apps like Notepad and XMLSpy.

ldiracdelta 6y ago

What is this idea that Qt can't be used? You can license with the community license under LGPL. If Qt can't be used with an open source license, then nothing LGPL can use open source commercially, but the point of LGPL is to not scare away businesses with viral copy-left code. Yes, you have to deliver your object files and a Makefile, et c. Also, you have to open source your Qt library edits, but who needs to do that for business reasons? Are Qt library edits the industrial secret of your business? Probably not. Since when is letting other people run the linking stage on your code tantamount to giving them the keys to your business?

cookiengineer 6y ago
> What is this idea that Qt can't be used? You can license with the community license under LGPL. The Terms and Conditions on their website [1] say otherwise, especially "APPENDIX 4: SMALL BUSINESS AND STARTUP". No, sir, I'm not touching that library for anything I want to make money with. [1] https://www.qt.io/terms-conditions/ https://www.qt.io/terms-conditions/
- ldiracdelta 6y ago
  Qt is dual-licensed. You're referring to the commercial license. See https://www.qt.io/download-open-source https://www.qt.io/download-open-source https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations and https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations#lgpl https://www.qt.io/licensing/open-source-lgpl-obligations#lgp... . If you go to this page, you can see which pieces are LGPL: https://www.qt.io/product/features#js-6-3 https://www.qt.io/product/features#js-6-3

lytefm 6y ago

> I think in order for Linux to succeed there has to be a compile pipeline (and runtime?) that allows to deploy those apps easily. If that's not possible (due to whatever reasons) the platform will never really take off. I agree. An important difference to the situation a few years ago is the availability of actually viable cross-platform development frameworks like React Native, Flutter, Capacitor,... If all I need to do in order to support a new niche OS is configuring one additional build target, I might just go for it. Otherwise, certainly not.