3 ms·

The Linux community is a very vocal minority when in comes to the internet. While it would be nice to have available on all platforms, the reality is the majori

The Linux community is a very vocal minority when in comes to the internet. While it would be nice to have available on all platforms, the reality is the majority of people are happily working on the other two major platforms and don't care.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
And Linux[0] is absolutely the worst "platform" you could ever have to port commercial software to. There is a ludicrous level of fragmentation where even individual distributions break compatibility with themselves every few years, and there is no widely accepted standard for binary application distribution[1]. That's without even getting into things like driver issues that are arguably not Linux's fault. As game developers discovered, Linux will often account for a vastly disproportionate amount of your bug reports for its share of installs. I sympathise with people who want to be able to use their favorite software on a FOSS OS, I'm right there with you, but that will always be an uphill battle on Linux because the culture is deeply anti-platform. [0] "Linux" here is taken as shorthand for "The GNU/Linux Desktop". The kernel itself is a fine platform. [1] unless you lump all the different package repos, formats, and managers together. I shouldn't have to explain why this is a problem here.
- fouric 5y ago
  > There is a ludicrous level of fragmentation where even individual distributions break compatibility with themselves every few years Even worse, there is a vocal group of users who believe that this fragmentation is a good thing, and that software developers should target multiple distributions (or be shamed for it), as opposed to doing the sane thing and just targeting Ubuntu (or some common abstraction layer).
  - hitekker 5y ago
    The vocal group you speak of overlaps significantly with the group that wants the price of all software to be voluntary donations. At some point, their desires become parasitical.
- dantondwa 5y ago
  While undoubtedly true, it’s also true that Linux is nowadays the default OS for VFX, for example, and this means that a lot of commercial 3d software targets it (for example, Autodesk Maya or the Substance suite). There is a standard “platform” of reference that allows companies to have a fixed target for their software: https://vfxplatform.com https://vfxplatform.com I think targeting it would be probably the best solution for a company willing to porting to Linux. Alternatively, Flatpaks/Appimages provide a very nice and user friendly solution to this problem.
  - coldtea 5y ago
    >While undoubtedly true, it’s also true that Linux is nowadays the default OS for VFX That's mainly because it's cheap and VFX is like a "factory production line" style job. But VFX is also very much a niche compared to vector graphics and DTP (and even more so, compared to bitmap graphics). In other words, if Affinity's concern is that the Linux market for their stuff if small, then the intersection of "the Linux market for their staff" that "has the standard platform for VFX" is much much smaller.
- themulticaster 5y ago
  Except there is a widely accepted standard for binary application distribution: AppImage (https://appimage.org/ https://appimage.org/). It's a fire-and-forget solution: You download the AppImage and run it. No need to install anything. AppImage was created for precisely this scenario: When you want to distribute a proprietary application without worrying about packaging it for different Linux distributions. And for the driver issues: This is being brought up now and then, but comparing the amount of issues I've had with my AMD graphics card on Linux (essentially none) [1] with the amount of anecdotes of Windows driver issues I regularly see in certain forums, I'd say driver issues are a myth by now (to a certain extent of course, please don't bring up how you had to install a firmware package for your Broadcom wireless chipset...). [1] I'm not saying there aren't ever any driver bugs now and then, but just a food for thought: My graphics card works perfectly out of the box, without any configuration or driver installation at all, on most recent (read: not ancient) Linux versions. On Windows I'd have to look for whatever piece of ad-laden "graphics management suite" I need and then install it as well as regularly update it.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    > Except there is a widely accepted standard for binary application distribution: AppImage (https://appimage.org/ https://appimage.org/) Oh, if only AppImage was widely accepted. Very few developers distribute via AppImage and basically no DEs understand what they are. Not that AppImages need them to, but it'd be nice. > AppImage was created for precisely this scenario: When you want to distribute a proprietary application without worrying about packaging it for different Linux distributions. Yes, and it does about as well as could be expected. Which is to say, it kinda mostly works for most distributions that have some level of sanity. > And for the driver issues: This is being brought up now and then, but comparing the amount of issues I've had with my AMD graphics card on Linux (essentially none) [1] with the amount of anecdotes of Windows driver issues I regularly see in certain forums, I'd say driver issues are a myth by now [...] Consider that there are an order of magnitude more Windows Desktop users than Linux Desktop users. And I know plenty of people experiencing frequent driver regressions who'd disagree with you. > On Windows I'd have to look for whatever piece of ad-laden "graphics management suite" I need and then install it as well as regularly update it. Incorrect. Windows quite often has a driver available via Windows Update, sans overengineered bullshit control panel. It is usually a bit behind the latest-greatest though.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago

And Linux[0] is absolutely the worst "platform" you could ever have to port commercial software to. There is a ludicrous level of fragmentation where even individual distributions break compatibility with themselves every few years, and there is no widely accepted standard for binary application distribution[1]. That's without even getting into things like driver issues that are arguably not Linux's fault. As game developers discovered, Linux will often account for a vastly disproportionate amount of your bug reports for its share of installs. I sympathise with people who want to be able to use their favorite software on a FOSS OS, I'm right there with you, but that will always be an uphill battle on Linux because the culture is deeply anti-platform. [0] "Linux" here is taken as shorthand for "The GNU/Linux Desktop". The kernel itself is a fine platform. [1] unless you lump all the different package repos, formats, and managers together. I shouldn't have to explain why this is a problem here.

fouric 5y ago
> There is a ludicrous level of fragmentation where even individual distributions break compatibility with themselves every few years Even worse, there is a vocal group of users who believe that this fragmentation is a good thing, and that software developers should target multiple distributions (or be shamed for it), as opposed to doing the sane thing and just targeting Ubuntu (or some common abstraction layer).
- hitekker 5y ago
  The vocal group you speak of overlaps significantly with the group that wants the price of all software to be voluntary donations. At some point, their desires become parasitical.
dantondwa 5y ago
While undoubtedly true, it’s also true that Linux is nowadays the default OS for VFX, for example, and this means that a lot of commercial 3d software targets it (for example, Autodesk Maya or the Substance suite). There is a standard “platform” of reference that allows companies to have a fixed target for their software: https://vfxplatform.com https://vfxplatform.com I think targeting it would be probably the best solution for a company willing to porting to Linux. Alternatively, Flatpaks/Appimages provide a very nice and user friendly solution to this problem.
- coldtea 5y ago
  >While undoubtedly true, it’s also true that Linux is nowadays the default OS for VFX That's mainly because it's cheap and VFX is like a "factory production line" style job. But VFX is also very much a niche compared to vector graphics and DTP (and even more so, compared to bitmap graphics). In other words, if Affinity's concern is that the Linux market for their stuff if small, then the intersection of "the Linux market for their staff" that "has the standard platform for VFX" is much much smaller.
themulticaster 5y ago
Except there is a widely accepted standard for binary application distribution: AppImage (https://appimage.org/ https://appimage.org/). It's a fire-and-forget solution: You download the AppImage and run it. No need to install anything. AppImage was created for precisely this scenario: When you want to distribute a proprietary application without worrying about packaging it for different Linux distributions. And for the driver issues: This is being brought up now and then, but comparing the amount of issues I've had with my AMD graphics card on Linux (essentially none) [1] with the amount of anecdotes of Windows driver issues I regularly see in certain forums, I'd say driver issues are a myth by now (to a certain extent of course, please don't bring up how you had to install a firmware package for your Broadcom wireless chipset...). [1] I'm not saying there aren't ever any driver bugs now and then, but just a food for thought: My graphics card works perfectly out of the box, without any configuration or driver installation at all, on most recent (read: not ancient) Linux versions. On Windows I'd have to look for whatever piece of ad-laden "graphics management suite" I need and then install it as well as regularly update it.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  > Except there is a widely accepted standard for binary application distribution: AppImage (https://appimage.org/ https://appimage.org/) Oh, if only AppImage was widely accepted. Very few developers distribute via AppImage and basically no DEs understand what they are. Not that AppImages need them to, but it'd be nice. > AppImage was created for precisely this scenario: When you want to distribute a proprietary application without worrying about packaging it for different Linux distributions. Yes, and it does about as well as could be expected. Which is to say, it kinda mostly works for most distributions that have some level of sanity. > And for the driver issues: This is being brought up now and then, but comparing the amount of issues I've had with my AMD graphics card on Linux (essentially none) [1] with the amount of anecdotes of Windows driver issues I regularly see in certain forums, I'd say driver issues are a myth by now [...] Consider that there are an order of magnitude more Windows Desktop users than Linux Desktop users. And I know plenty of people experiencing frequent driver regressions who'd disagree with you. > On Windows I'd have to look for whatever piece of ad-laden "graphics management suite" I need and then install it as well as regularly update it. Incorrect. Windows quite often has a driver available via Windows Update, sans overengineered bullshit control panel. It is usually a bit behind the latest-greatest though.