3 ms·
Serenity and Ladybird aren't written from the perspective of the user though. They're written from the perspective of the developers, who write functions they'd
by Deukhoofd 4y ago
Serenity and Ladybird aren't written from the perspective of the user though. They're written from the perspective of the developers, who write functions they'd like, and that they'd like to learn more about, or as the Serenity website states:
> This is a system by us, for us, based on the things we like.
- vesinisa 4y agoAnd funnily enough, this is exactly how Linux was born. It was literally started as "just a hobby, won't be big and professional."[1] Nowadays it runs in almost every home at least in the developed world. [1]: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~awb/linux.history.html https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~awb/linux.history.html
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y agoLinux was inevitable as there was no GNU licensed kernel anger there was a need for one. If not Linux, something else would have emerged within months. New browser is not inevitable, as the need for free-ish browser is already satisfied.
- voidskull 4y agoHurd was in development and it still is I guess. Hurd was a predecessor of Linux
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y agoHurd stalled precisely because Linux appeared: there was an urgent need for a GNU kernel, but there was no urgent need for another GNU kernel.
- wpietri 4y agoThis is correct, and it's why most open-source software will never have much in the way of users: > They're written from the perspective of the developers And I get it. A few years back I had an open-source project [1] get users and it was terrible. What had previously been a fun technical exercise became a pain in the ass that felt a lot like actual work. I was relieved when my hardware broke and I had an excuse to archive the project. But that does create a huge gap that mostly gets filled by commercial interests. [1] https://github.com/wpietri/sucks https://github.com/wpietri/sucks