3 ms·

This sounds like something someone would say if they had not used Linux since 1998. I personally would not pay for or probably even use software that only "sup

This sounds like something someone would say if they had not used Linux since 1998. I personally would not pay for or probably even use software that only "supports" Linux through WINE since it will have all kinds of fit and finish issues that make it painful to use. I'm actually in the process of converting all my old files so I can move to open source Linux-native apps and remove WINE entirely. Win32 apps look and perform horribly on GNOME. The Linux binary distribution "problem" (from a Windows user's perspective) has been solved for a while by things like AppImages or Flatpaks that bundle the libraries the program needs without static linking. Most Linux users simply prefer the old repository based way of distributing software.

dTal 5y ago
You don't need Flatpaks or AppImages, those are just "convenient". Lots of well known software is distributed using the "unzip the folder and run the binary" scheme - the same scheme commonly used for win32 apps that don't have an installer. Firefox and Blender spring to mind. "Linux" just doesn't have an ABI problem. Provide all the libraries your app needs, and it will run.
Shorel 5y ago
I use HeidiSQL in Linux because for me, it is superior to any other MySQL client that's native or Java based and runs in Linux. And I don't see how Flatpaks are better than static linking, except for some sandboxing.