18 ms·

Make Apps for Linux

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jstanley 3y ago
The article could do with a few examples. I'm not aware of anyone who is making a distro who should instead be making an application. Maybe LinuxCNC if you squint?? But that has very specific kernel requirements which are arguably best served by a custom distro.
- Barrin92 3y ago
  any desktop environment is effectively just an application that's trivially to install via one or two clicks or commands. Never made sense to me why there's derivatives of derivatives that just ship a different DE.
colesantiago 3y ago
This has always been an issue for Linux adoption. Somebody I know (not in tech) wanted to switch from Windows to Linux and I said: "Which one?" It's the same as Mastodon. "Which instance?" The answer is usually the biggest / most popular instance or distro, but not many applications the masses use are on Linux, the same as there is not many interesting people on Mastodon for people to switch over to it. Applications are the barrier to mass adoption here for Linux unfortunately, and the paralysis of choice is the double edged sword for the massive amount of Linux distros. Thousands of years of effort spread across many distributions that not many people would use.
- righthand 3y ago
  It’s because the answer is “just pick one”. Many people have already made the decision before you and unless you have special requirements. You’ll probably be fine.
- amne 3y ago
  Unfortunately it still takes a lot of effort to actually switch and not just poke around to see what's what. Most things do work these days but inevitably you will have to open the dreaded terminal (or be forced into runlevel 3 because 4 now fails as your new TV doesn't play well with your gpu)
- dragontamer 3y ago
  Just say Download Ubuntu and sign up at Mastodon.world. If they push back that's not a problem. If they're actually noob, they got the info they wanted out of you, which was where to start.
  - berkes 3y ago
    Why would people push back at that? I'd personally say "use mastodon.social", but your advise is just as good. Simply because it is a solid advise, offers a single option and points people at where to start. Ubuntu is good to start¹, and if people say "but it's bad at thingy foo" or "it has default bazoombas! default! on!": no-one said it's where you must now commit yourself to forever. Distro's aren't religions (and even religions can be switched), they are just stuff that sits on your computer. Your next re-install or next machine might be anything else. ¹edit: to be clear: it's also good for experienced people or grumpy bearded linux-veterans like myself (24 years in and counting). I use Ubuntu. It's hardly configured even, just the defaults (well, my shell and vim have some 20+ years of config tweaks).
    - dragontamer 3y ago
      > Why would people push back at that? Because they already have an opinion on which Linux or Fediverse thing to use. Pay it no mind. People are allowed to be wishy-washy with their opinions. Maybe its just a conversation starter, or maybe they enjoy debate / feeling things out through words and discussion.
- cardanome 3y ago
  The Linux ecosystem isn't as splintered as people think it is. Yes, there are technically lot's of distros but most of them are really just derivatives that don't add much. The vast majority of Desktop users just use Debian or Debian-based distros like Ubuntu, Linux Mint and so on. So in the end, it is just a matter of whatever pre-installed software you get. It used to be that vanilla Debian was a bit hard to use but I don't think that is true anymore. (Though I still recommend Linux Mint for the absolute "just works" experience.) For 90% of users, they are not going wrong using Debian or one of the popular Debian-based distros. After that is is basically just a matter of specialized needs. Want to make administering your system a hobby and part of your personality? Have some Arch. Need professional support? OpenSuse. Need reproducible builds? Nix/Guix. Need a minimalist distro that runts on potatoes? Puppy Linux and whatever else. Wayland vs X11? Systemd? If you know these words, you are already way too deep in the rabbit hole.
  - timfsu 3y ago
    This is true for the user, but not good enough for developers, who unfortunately need to stay on top of all of this to build functioning software. If users report bugs you can’t repro, you may have to dive into all of these. And that’s the point of the article really, to try and get more app developers onboard.
    - mcpackieh 3y ago
      Developers don't need to test in every distro, or even all the most popular distros. All they need to do is test in one distro. It will probably work in most of the rest and linux users expect that if something breaks they'll be the one tweaking things to make it work. Sometimes you'll get bug reports from those users saying "I had to do X on distro Y for reason Z" and you can act on those reports, or not. It doesn't matter. Honestly, linux users don't expect more. There's tons of proprietary software out there supporting linux in this manner and it works out fine. Linux users are easy to please. The hardest people to please are the developers with Windows/Mac backgrounds who mistakenly believe they're expected to test on every distro and rightly balk at that.
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  What do you think we'll gain by putting every idea into the same cookie jar? This drive to create One True Linux is commercial behavior. People that want One True Linux want to put products on there to sell. These people need to read the GNU Manifesto and realize they are not in the correct social structures to push for centralization.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
  > Thousands of years of effort spread across many distributions that not many people would use. That's a lot more effort towards improving the commons than we'd have gotten if doing it your own way were discouraged. Effort is not fungible, when you squash somebody's creativity it stays squashed for a while.
zjp 3y ago
Maybe I'm just too ignorant to know the pattern that determines whether I need to specify 'dev' and 'version' on a package or some random trailing '1' or '0', but the first linux distro with a sensible and consistent naming scheme for packages is the one that wins my heart. `libgnutls-dev` `libgtk-3-0` `libwayland-server0` `libxcb1` `libx11-6` `libffi-dev` `libncurses5-dev`
- juunpp 3y ago
  Separating binaries from sources is a Debian convention. If you're just using a library, non-dev is sufficient. If you're developing with that library, you'll also want -dev, which will install the headers. Nothing special about the trailing 1 or 0; that's just part of the package name/version.
- tasn 3y ago
  Arch and its derivatives (mostly) don't have any of that. Though -dev means stuff only needed when developing against it. Number means major version number (so compatibility number). This way you can easily install multiple major versions as dependencies for different packages without clashing or breaking.
  - sph 3y ago
    Arch Linux packaging is the only one that makes sense. If I install openssl, I want everything that upstream ships, which means command line tools, headers, libraries, man pages. The Debian/Ubuntu convention is terrible, and anachronistic. Disk space is cheap, my time is not.
    - account42 3y ago
      You might but most people don't want OpenSSL headers cluttering up their system just because they installed something that needs to make TLS connections.
- o11c 3y ago
  If you are building a program, install the -dev package. Numbered -dev packages are usually not relevant; there should be an unnumbered one that forwards if needed. During the build of a program, you record which numbered suffix (= ABI version, should be the same as the .so.N suffix but that's not how you look it up; this allows you to install multiple incompatible copies of the library and they will be used by the appropriate, though distros usually prune these after each major release) is used. This should be automatic. (if there's more than one number, all but the last are part of the library name itself. There might be exceptions for BSD-style libraries?) When installing, you should be automatically using the dependency you recorded during the build.
bluedays 3y ago
[flagged]
deafpolygon 3y ago
This is one of the biggest issues holding the Linux platform as a whole. It's often cited as a strength, but I don't see it as such. Many times, the plethora of choice is pushed forward by devs as an advantage of Linux ("you have so many choices to pick from!") but for many users this presents the paradox of choice - and pushes many people back to the platform they came from. You get less choice on macOS and Windows, but the choices available are much more polished and less fragmented. i.e. How many different tiling window managers do we need? Can't we take the best tiling wm's and start developing better docks and applets for them? How about apps and launchers that integrate with the tiling WM paradigm? Instead we end up with 10 different varieties of tiling wms and half-baked half-assed workarounds and programs for them.
- cycomanic 3y ago
  I would say there are even more launchers and docks then tiling WMs. Also I don't know what would need to be better about them. Something like ulaucher or Albert is much more powerful than what is available in other platforms and I don't know how one would improve their UI.
  - deafpolygon 3y ago
    Maybe the work needs to go into developing better UX, not so much UI or what the various tools can do. Look at PySimpleGUI (of which I was reminded of from a recent post here) for a good example of a nice project for the masses - we need better software for users. We need better applications that have better UX.
- Muromec 3y ago
  But writing a tiling wm is fun. Writing software collaboratively is the point in itself, not just the means of getting some kind of artifact in the end. Being an open source developer means having agency over your goals and means to get to them, which you often don’t have when doing commercial software development. You sure end up with roughly edges, but the. IKEA-effect kicks in and you like it anyway.
  - 3y ago
Kalanos 3y ago
I recently switched from Mac to Linux so that I can use beefy refurbished machines as my daily driver. I've installed Linux on lots of different machines previously, but this time it's not just a hobby. Ubuntu has great support for my hardware and peripherals, but the app store feels unfinished and forced. Pretty much everything works as expected. I'm interested in checking out Mint (also Debian) and Arch, but it feels like there's a lot of software written with Ubuntu in mind, so I'm wary.
- garrisonhh 3y ago
  There is almost nothing written for ubuntu that won't work on arch or really most current distros. When I ran arch I did have to get familiar with assumptions people make due to ubuntu, but this would never be more than patching a config file or configuring some environment variable. And those are useful and transferable skills.
  - Kalanos 3y ago
    hmm. thanks for sharing. that's the kind of stuff I don't want to do though. i already have my own software to write and use a wide array of tools. i can't afford to lose a morning on that kind of stuff. plus i want to be able to tear down and rebuild without a ton of custom config
- cardanome 3y ago
  Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu. You can use all Ubuntu packages just fine. It is really just a strictly better Ubuntu. There is a Debian-based Mint version as well but that is more as a security so that they are not deadly dependent on the Ubuntu people. Though these days, even using exotic distros isn't that problematic, as you can always use appimage/flatpack/snap if you native package manager doesn't have the specific app you need.
  - Kalanos 3y ago
    Mint looks awesome! It seems like it was designed by people that actually compute. My main gripe w ubuntu was the snap store, but embracing flatpak/hub seems like a highlight of mint
seba_dos1 3y ago
> Stop making Linux distributions, make applications instead. Stop listening to people trying to tell you what you should do or not.
- whitepaint 3y ago
  Stop listening to people who say to stop listening to people trying to tell you what you should do or not. It is not all relative, there are good and bad choices.
  - seba_dos1 3y ago
    Not hacking on a distro because someone thinks there are too many is one of those bad choices. If you actually manage to get a distribution rolling with a viable community around it, it means enough people have decided that there weren't too many.
  - SantalBlush 3y ago
    "Gotcha" replies like this aren't helpful. The GP comment is just a pithy retort to the title that uses the same language for effect.
    - whitepaint 3y ago
      Agreed.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- berkes 3y ago
  Yea, the tone was off-putting to me too. But the message and information is good though. I'd personally word it something like "Linux users don't want more distributions. They want software". At least, this is the case for me.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
rubymamis 3y ago
The problem is OSS software not even trying to compete with the market. People using OSS software taking it for granted that the UX is going to be subpar, and it really is. Regular propriety software faces the risk of their users not paying, therefore adapting to make end user experience great. OSS usually doesn't have that risk. Open source needs to be exposed to risk from end users. I tried to change that with Notes[1] but I find it hard to live on solely on ads. I tried to incorporate paying for some premium features (like Kanban) but the app is still fully FOSS therefore everyone can compile it from source easily. I think I'll close-source my next app[2] before it launches. I just can't risk not being paid for my hard work. I also believe the Linux community will benefit from that, since getting paid will allow me to invest more in making UX-focused apps on Linux. I might open source some parts of it tho (or maybe all of it in the far future). [1] https://github.com/nuttyartist/notes https://github.com/nuttyartist/notes [2] https://www.get-plume.com https://www.get-plume.com
- thebigspacefuck 3y ago
  What does this have that Joplin doesn't have?
  - 360MustangScope 3y ago
    For one thing, it’s a lot prettier than Joplin
    - thebigspacefuck 3y ago
      Personally I think Joplin looks better and this looks like a poor macOS clone that lacks many of the features like markdown support or synchronizing across devices including mobile. IMO if Joplin’s problem is the UI, or even just something OP is passionate about, why not contribute and open a PR? Why is the pattern “I care about this one thing so I reimplemented it in a new app from scratch”?
      - rubymamis 3y ago
        - Plume supports Markdown (plus additional plaintext syntax). - Plume is a block editor, unlike Joplin. Therefore plume can have advanced views inside the editor itself (like Kanban, image handling, columns, etc) - Plume is faster than Joplin's non-native editor (the one that renders your Markdown) - IMO Plume is way prettier with far more attention to detail.
blt 3y ago
It's not an attractive scene for GUI developers on Linux. Gnome, Qt, and Electron all have some unappealing aspects. Many people who get the itch to make a Linux GUI app will immediately be discouraged by having to choose between them.
- 360MustangScope 3y ago
  Imo, I think that Flutter is one of the best ways to make native Linux applications at the moment. It can look just like a GTK, macOS and Windows app and you have a more enjoyable experience.
  - blt 3y ago
    Don't know it, but from the website it looks mobile-first and intended for simple apps like Spotify. Don't get the impression that I could build something like Blender or Kdenlive with it. Maybe my impression is wrong, but I would hesitate to use a framework for a purpose that the developers consider fringe.
    - ben-schaaf 3y ago
      To be fair you can't use any gui toolkit to make something like blender. It's all custom.
- alwayslikethis 3y ago
  What's wrong with Qt? It works well enough if you want to write C++ or Python. Electron works on Linux the same way it does on Windows. GTK has some more issues on other platforms, but mostly works on Linux too.
  - blt 3y ago
    I should have said "Many people" instead of "Anyone" in my original comment -- edited. I would use it myself, but a lot of developers don't want to use C++ (too complicated) or Python (too slow, dynamicness becomes unwieldy for large projects). Languages in between - like Swift and C# - are the sweet spot for desktop GUI apps.
underseacables 3y ago
Segmentation has been tough for a Linux newbie like myself. I hope there can be greater unification some day so that applications have one install type, and come with greater predictability.
- seabrookmx 3y ago
  It's still annoying even if you're experienced with Linux. Especially if there's multiple install methods for the same app with different levels of support. Flatpak is the closest thing thus far, but certainly hasn't "won" yet.
  - michaelmrose 3y ago
    This is actually a solvable problem. You provide a single store interface where you install flatpaks and traditional packages. Linux Mint does a pretty good job of this. With Arch you can basically rely on system packages and the AUR for 99.9% of everything. Either way wrapping an interface around 1 or more method is a fairly trivial matter.
    - seabrookmx 3y ago
      It doesn't solve the multiple install methods issue. Fedora for instance already has this via Gnome Software, but provides a drop-down if multiple sources are available for an application, so it's still fragmented. Even if you removed that and had some sort of heirarchy, one app might have a better experience via Flatpak whilst one might be better via RPM. Until developers consolidate it's really not solved, IMO.
zer0zzz 3y ago
I think the premise is wrong when there still doesn’t exist a core set of frameworks that are abi stable on Linux. On competing platforms there are way more frameworks out of the box (CoreImage, CoreAudio, CodeML, SceneKit, AppKit, etc) and they don’t break as often. I know in Linux they have fun things like snap and flatpak but it is really solving the problem using a bit of infrastructure and package management instead of doing it in the frameworks and programming languages themselves (which are what you are asking people to write apps in).
- smoldesu 3y ago
  Stuff like Flatpak and Snap exists because the framework side kinda is built-out. Isolation technology had matured, newer desktops emphasized per-window security and needed APIs to portal in and out of each instance. The desktops needed a packaging/infrastructure solution to tie that together and make it presentable to the user.
  - zer0zzz 3y ago
    Yet I still can't compile an app on some arbitrary release of some arbitrary distro and just run the darn exe on another and be 100% sure it will work.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      On a large enough timescale I don't think you can reasonably expect this on any of this big 3 OSes. From a less macro perspective, I think tools like Appimage and Flatpak will fill that role.
      - zer0zzz 3y ago
        On a long enough time scale we are all dead, and Linux doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that in the decades that computer software has to be useful to actual people that things have to suck this badly right now.
        3y ago
squarefoot 3y ago
More software? Wonderful! I'm all for it, but before starting something from scratch why not contribute to something that already exists, or possibly pick some project that was abandoned or simply needs to be worked on for example to be built with newer compilers, run on newer hardware, etc. Which makes me wonder if there is somewhere a database of dormant/dead projects that would deserve to be resurrected.
- nmstoker 3y ago
  Yes, I would echo this. In most categories there are loads of subpar efforts when putting all that effort behind the top few would yield a handful of excellent apps. Collaboration can seem daunting and hard work, but it's work that will yield results which is time better spent than that devoted to projects that end up abandoned.
  - zlg_codes 3y ago
    Who gets to take the credit? I'm not convinced these efforts to put everyone's ideas in one place and one software are good. Often, design disagreements arise which are incompatible. Under this model of "everybody love everybody" lameshit, if you can't get the group to accept your idea, it doesn't happen. You don't run into this problem when you write alone.
    - tripleo1 3y ago
      The point is alot of that software doesn't work with newer compiler, on newer hardware, or solve anybody else's problem. But if it makes the original author feel good (everybody loves themself?), then it's OK.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  That something that already exists may not be built in the way you are aiming for. That other something might be led by a dickhead that you can't get along with, or a community that's not receptive to your suggestions or patches. Social processes and blockages can lead to losing motivation to contribute. Not everyone is cut out to be this happy-go-lucky team player that has no personality. As for myself, I'd rather start from scratch because 1) I'll control every variable, 2) I don't have to mess around with some existing social and tech infra, 3) I don't have to talk to anyone and convince them my ideas are good, 4) who wants to spend more time arguing or discussing than writing code? The solodev experience is just better. You're not hamstrung by politics and social process. Being a team player has only led to misery for me.
pjmlp 3y ago
> Too often they fall into the trap of creating more Linux distributions. We don’t need more Linux distributions. Stop making Linux distributions, make applications instead. Right on the spot.
- dwattttt 3y ago
  If you consider a container to be a limited distro, we turned one into the other
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    I consider a container, shipping the developer's computer into production, or the revenge of microkernels, take your pick.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
      I mean, kind of? But "shipping the developer's computer into production" implies a lot of things that really shouldn't be happening even with containers - the images you ship in prod should always come from git (or such) by way of CI, and shouldn't include ex. compilers. So I'd argue we managed to mostly get the upsides of just shipping the dev's machine but without the downsides.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        There are plenty of blog posts about how containers work in Linux is still dependent on external resources, unless care was taken when creating those images.
danans 3y ago
> Target All The Linux Distributions If you are going through the trouble of targeting all Linux distributions, why not just target all platforms by using a framework like Flutter or React?
- zb3 3y ago
  I hope nobody will take your comment seriously, because the performance of these is horrible compared to "truly" native apps
  - danans 3y ago
    I've seen few apps anymore whose performance is bounded it by the choice of UI framework. If they're slow, it's usually because of design choices, like making common user interactions wait to retrieve data. Yes, games are an exception. But for the majority of software that is concerned with displaying text, it doesn't matter a hill of beans if you use a cross platform framework. We're far past the days of slow Java AWT apps.
- fullspectrumdev 3y ago
  Then you are stuck using basically a browser wrapper for your UI, which frankly sucks for performance and native integration most of the time. The move to making everything a webapp is great for development velocity right until you smash into one of the many, many corner cases where it sucks.
  - danans 3y ago
    > Then you are stuck using basically a browser wrapper for your UI, AFAIK, Flutter compiles to native code, no browser needed.
    - fullspectrumdev 3y ago
      I may have to give Flutter another look, I’ve gotten rather pessimistic about modern UI stuff lately :)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
rafram 3y ago
> Target All The Linux Distributions > Unlike other platforms, Linux is a very diverse target. There are hundreds of Linux distributions, some more popular than others. Once published though, applications can generally work everywhere. > There are well documented software packaging and distribution systems which enable developers to get their applications into the hands of users. > Each developer framework and Linux distribution will have their own recommended route to users. When you’re ready to share your creation, the development documentation will signpost their suggested packaging guides. “Your apps will generally work everywhere” and “there are hundreds of distros and you have to do work to support each one individually” are essentially contradictory, no?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- worksonmine 3y ago
  Most of them work the same way though. In reality there are like 3 big distributions to target, Arch, Debian and Fedora and from there it will trickle down. Linux and the *BSDs generally work the same, put the executable in the $PATH and you're good. Where this is may differ but not by much and these days the FHS is adopted pretty much everywhere I know.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
zb3 3y ago
Why would anyone do this given a) it's harder and b) linux users don't pay for stuff not worth paying for?
- jckahn 3y ago
  Because the world would benefit from more good, free software.
oooyay 3y ago
There's also wails.io that is a much better alternative to Electron, imo, and uses native APIs for OS functionality. Added benefit: Wails is also cross platform.
georgeoliver 3y ago
I'm definitely for more guided resources on making Linux apps from idea -> release, which I wish TFA was more of. I think there's a common misconception that if the developers of ten similar apps would just pool their resources, then one great app would result. Fragmentation certainly can be a problem but I feel like this is some kind of corollary to the mythical man-month.
jay_kyburz 3y ago
Does anybody have much experience with the difference between Electron and NW.js. Electron seems to get all the limelight, but from reading the two websites, nw.js sounds like a better solution to me.
tumdum_ 3y ago
Is this a parody site?
nektro 3y ago
instead of getting more people to make new apps, gnome and kde should be trying to coral developers to improve the existing ones
germandiago 3y ago
Looks nice but in my experience, developing apps only for Linux is not cost-effective. I would choose WxWidgets or Qt and add some extension points where needed via interfaces to keep the codebase portable. Sticking to just native APIs is just locking yourself down into Linux.
emptysongglass 3y ago
There's a lot of complaints that there isn't much in the way of tooling to create cross-OS compatible apps but I disagree. Just looking at solutions which aren't Electron: - Telegram uses Qt and ships a performant native app across all three OSes - Flutter compiles down to native code across all three (and mobile) - Kirigami is a QtQuick framework that will give you an executable app across all mobile and desktop targets Go and build your app. There's no reason this needs to an excuse to flame on Linux.
- Longhanks 3y ago
  Except Flutter is a subpar experience on every platform because of just how slightly different it behaves and Kirigami / Qt Quick is just not a viable thing, there's barely any community and/or "serious" project on Windows, macOS or mobile. I'm not trying to discredit the KDE folks, but that is reality. Also, Qt Quick licensing is not so easy (or very expensive if you go commercial) for iOS. Whereas electron has a) big major corporations betting on it shipping extremely polished, Production-ready tools and b) a gigantic community and library ecosystem, plus not any obscure programming language (such as Dart). Telegram really goes the extra mile, though. Their client is amazing.
  - xcdzvyn 3y ago
    Yeah, last I fiddled with Flutter on the web, the performance was awful and it felt horrible to interact with. Apparently it's fair on mobile though.
  - emptysongglass 3y ago
    > Except Flutter is a subpar experience on every platform because of just how slightly different it behaves I'm not sure this is true. If you check the pulse of social media, most Flutter devs think Flutter is great for Android, iOS and desktop but needs help on web. Canonical at least rewrote their installer in Flutter and anything new they develop is in Flutter. Devs are hoping that the WASM support currently shipping in `master` [1] will solve for web. [1] https://docs.flutter.dev/platform-integration/web/wasm https://docs.flutter.dev/platform-integration/web/wasm
- 3y ago
al_borland 3y ago
I think Electron has done more for making desktop Linux viable than anything else in recent memory.
Racing0461 3y ago
The year of the linux desktop is upon us.
iJohnDoe 3y ago
What software is used to make the graph on the main page under the Target heading?
zubairq 3y ago
Is anyone working on solving the problem of building it once and distributing to all Linux package managers?
pipeline_peak 3y ago
And make an effort to support multiple different package managers? No thanks! If I’m gonna make an app today and I have the choice, it’s with browser technology.
poulpy123 3y ago
Saying that you should target all Linux distros while showing a picture with 30 different Linux distributions, most of them used by at most few hundreds of people, is so ironic
b33j0r 3y ago
I like it, but I don’t think it speaks to the audience it wants. Why not show a 12-15 line python app using customtkinter, wxwindows, qt, etc? It currently says something like: — To target all platforms, here is the first step! Choose gnome or KDE! You can write apps for all distributions as a beginner if you choose the right cup! Step 2: ??? Step 3: target all platforms by targeting elementary OS or touch! — Alternatively, a true and recent experience I had: — The other night, I thought, “I wonder if I could get a fonzie-like cartoon to popup as a taskbar-buddy, like adware in 2001.” I looked up some examples, then had copilot do a sketch of the relevant pyqt5 api calls. Ayyy… about 30 minutes later I had a PyQT5 app running in XFCE, and had extra time to make `fonz-ai` play “Aiiii.ogg”, and play the jump the shark music, when dismissed. Testimonial: I didn’t think it would be that easy, esp without VB6/warez ;) ^This is the kind of app we need to believe in again^ :P (PS: it worked in plasma and gnome too, because standards. Also archlinux/arcolinux.)
Zen1th 3y ago
This does ignore the fact that there's not one UI toolkit that you can target and that will work on all distros, and you certainly can't target Qt, GTK, ETK, etc. all at the same time. I've been making a cross platform GUI library and it's been a pain point on Linux (even though I use Linux!)
oritsnile 3y ago
I recently tried to create an executable from a Python script, Mac and Windows worked wonderfully, on Linux I had massive problems when I tried to run it in a different system then it was packaged. Linux caused the most problems, in the end I decided it was not worth it, 99% use Windows or Mac anyway.
amadeuspagel 3y ago
Make Web Apps - Work on every operating system. - Easier to monetize, easy to charge a recurrent fee, no worries about piracy. - Easy to distribute. - Great dev tools and frameworks.
armagon 3y ago
I've got an Electron app in the works which I'm planning to sell to Windows and Mac users (probably through the platform's app stores, using in-app purchases). Is such a thing possible with the Linux market? Can I sell my software through stores? Is IAP a thing?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

The article could do with a few examples. I'm not aware of anyone who is making a distro who should instead be making an application. Maybe LinuxCNC if you squint?? But that has very specific kernel requirements which are arguably best served by a custom distro.

Barrin92 3y ago
any desktop environment is effectively just an application that's trivially to install via one or two clicks or commands. Never made sense to me why there's derivatives of derivatives that just ship a different DE.

colesantiago 3y ago

This has always been an issue for Linux adoption. Somebody I know (not in tech) wanted to switch from Windows to Linux and I said: "Which one?" It's the same as Mastodon. "Which instance?" The answer is usually the biggest / most popular instance or distro, but not many applications the masses use are on Linux, the same as there is not many interesting people on Mastodon for people to switch over to it. Applications are the barrier to mass adoption here for Linux unfortunately, and the paralysis of choice is the double edged sword for the massive amount of Linux distros. Thousands of years of effort spread across many distributions that not many people would use.

righthand 3y ago
It’s because the answer is “just pick one”. Many people have already made the decision before you and unless you have special requirements. You’ll probably be fine.
amne 3y ago
Unfortunately it still takes a lot of effort to actually switch and not just poke around to see what's what. Most things do work these days but inevitably you will have to open the dreaded terminal (or be forced into runlevel 3 because 4 now fails as your new TV doesn't play well with your gpu)
dragontamer 3y ago
Just say Download Ubuntu and sign up at Mastodon.world. If they push back that's not a problem. If they're actually noob, they got the info they wanted out of you, which was where to start.
- berkes 3y ago
  Why would people push back at that? I'd personally say "use mastodon.social", but your advise is just as good. Simply because it is a solid advise, offers a single option and points people at where to start. Ubuntu is good to start¹, and if people say "but it's bad at thingy foo" or "it has default bazoombas! default! on!": no-one said it's where you must now commit yourself to forever. Distro's aren't religions (and even religions can be switched), they are just stuff that sits on your computer. Your next re-install or next machine might be anything else. ¹edit: to be clear: it's also good for experienced people or grumpy bearded linux-veterans like myself (24 years in and counting). I use Ubuntu. It's hardly configured even, just the defaults (well, my shell and vim have some 20+ years of config tweaks).
  - dragontamer 3y ago
    > Why would people push back at that? Because they already have an opinion on which Linux or Fediverse thing to use. Pay it no mind. People are allowed to be wishy-washy with their opinions. Maybe its just a conversation starter, or maybe they enjoy debate / feeling things out through words and discussion.
cardanome 3y ago
The Linux ecosystem isn't as splintered as people think it is. Yes, there are technically lot's of distros but most of them are really just derivatives that don't add much. The vast majority of Desktop users just use Debian or Debian-based distros like Ubuntu, Linux Mint and so on. So in the end, it is just a matter of whatever pre-installed software you get. It used to be that vanilla Debian was a bit hard to use but I don't think that is true anymore. (Though I still recommend Linux Mint for the absolute "just works" experience.) For 90% of users, they are not going wrong using Debian or one of the popular Debian-based distros. After that is is basically just a matter of specialized needs. Want to make administering your system a hobby and part of your personality? Have some Arch. Need professional support? OpenSuse. Need reproducible builds? Nix/Guix. Need a minimalist distro that runts on potatoes? Puppy Linux and whatever else. Wayland vs X11? Systemd? If you know these words, you are already way too deep in the rabbit hole.
- timfsu 3y ago
  This is true for the user, but not good enough for developers, who unfortunately need to stay on top of all of this to build functioning software. If users report bugs you can’t repro, you may have to dive into all of these. And that’s the point of the article really, to try and get more app developers onboard.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    Developers don't need to test in every distro, or even all the most popular distros. All they need to do is test in one distro. It will probably work in most of the rest and linux users expect that if something breaks they'll be the one tweaking things to make it work. Sometimes you'll get bug reports from those users saying "I had to do X on distro Y for reason Z" and you can act on those reports, or not. It doesn't matter. Honestly, linux users don't expect more. There's tons of proprietary software out there supporting linux in this manner and it works out fine. Linux users are easy to please. The hardest people to please are the developers with Windows/Mac backgrounds who mistakenly believe they're expected to test on every distro and rightly balk at that.
zlg_codes 3y ago
What do you think we'll gain by putting every idea into the same cookie jar? This drive to create One True Linux is commercial behavior. People that want One True Linux want to put products on there to sell. These people need to read the GNU Manifesto and realize they are not in the correct social structures to push for centralization.
__MatrixMan__ 3y ago
> Thousands of years of effort spread across many distributions that not many people would use. That's a lot more effort towards improving the commons than we'd have gotten if doing it your own way were discouraged. Effort is not fungible, when you squash somebody's creativity it stays squashed for a while.

zjp 3y ago

Maybe I'm just too ignorant to know the pattern that determines whether I need to specify 'dev' and 'version' on a package or some random trailing '1' or '0', but the first linux distro with a sensible and consistent naming scheme for packages is the one that wins my heart. `libgnutls-dev` `libgtk-3-0` `libwayland-server0` `libxcb1` `libx11-6` `libffi-dev` `libncurses5-dev`

juunpp 3y ago
Separating binaries from sources is a Debian convention. If you're just using a library, non-dev is sufficient. If you're developing with that library, you'll also want -dev, which will install the headers. Nothing special about the trailing 1 or 0; that's just part of the package name/version.
tasn 3y ago
Arch and its derivatives (mostly) don't have any of that. Though -dev means stuff only needed when developing against it. Number means major version number (so compatibility number). This way you can easily install multiple major versions as dependencies for different packages without clashing or breaking.
- sph 3y ago
  Arch Linux packaging is the only one that makes sense. If I install openssl, I want everything that upstream ships, which means command line tools, headers, libraries, man pages. The Debian/Ubuntu convention is terrible, and anachronistic. Disk space is cheap, my time is not.
  - account42 3y ago
    You might but most people don't want OpenSSL headers cluttering up their system just because they installed something that needs to make TLS connections.
o11c 3y ago
If you are building a program, install the -dev package. Numbered -dev packages are usually not relevant; there should be an unnumbered one that forwards if needed. During the build of a program, you record which numbered suffix (= ABI version, should be the same as the .so.N suffix but that's not how you look it up; this allows you to install multiple incompatible copies of the library and they will be used by the appropriate, though distros usually prune these after each major release) is used. This should be automatic. (if there's more than one number, all but the last are part of the library name itself. There might be exceptions for BSD-style libraries?) When installing, you should be automatically using the dependency you recorded during the build.

bluedays 3y ago

[flagged]

deafpolygon 3y ago

This is one of the biggest issues holding the Linux platform as a whole. It's often cited as a strength, but I don't see it as such. Many times, the plethora of choice is pushed forward by devs as an advantage of Linux ("you have so many choices to pick from!") but for many users this presents the paradox of choice - and pushes many people back to the platform they came from. You get less choice on macOS and Windows, but the choices available are much more polished and less fragmented. i.e. How many different tiling window managers do we need? Can't we take the best tiling wm's and start developing better docks and applets for them? How about apps and launchers that integrate with the tiling WM paradigm? Instead we end up with 10 different varieties of tiling wms and half-baked half-assed workarounds and programs for them.

cycomanic 3y ago
I would say there are even more launchers and docks then tiling WMs. Also I don't know what would need to be better about them. Something like ulaucher or Albert is much more powerful than what is available in other platforms and I don't know how one would improve their UI.
- deafpolygon 3y ago
  Maybe the work needs to go into developing better UX, not so much UI or what the various tools can do. Look at PySimpleGUI (of which I was reminded of from a recent post here) for a good example of a nice project for the masses - we need better software for users. We need better applications that have better UX.
Muromec 3y ago
But writing a tiling wm is fun. Writing software collaboratively is the point in itself, not just the means of getting some kind of artifact in the end. Being an open source developer means having agency over your goals and means to get to them, which you often don’t have when doing commercial software development. You sure end up with roughly edges, but the. IKEA-effect kicks in and you like it anyway.
- 3y ago

Kalanos 3y ago

I recently switched from Mac to Linux so that I can use beefy refurbished machines as my daily driver. I've installed Linux on lots of different machines previously, but this time it's not just a hobby. Ubuntu has great support for my hardware and peripherals, but the app store feels unfinished and forced. Pretty much everything works as expected. I'm interested in checking out Mint (also Debian) and Arch, but it feels like there's a lot of software written with Ubuntu in mind, so I'm wary.

garrisonhh 3y ago
There is almost nothing written for ubuntu that won't work on arch or really most current distros. When I ran arch I did have to get familiar with assumptions people make due to ubuntu, but this would never be more than patching a config file or configuring some environment variable. And those are useful and transferable skills.
- Kalanos 3y ago
  hmm. thanks for sharing. that's the kind of stuff I don't want to do though. i already have my own software to write and use a wide array of tools. i can't afford to lose a morning on that kind of stuff. plus i want to be able to tear down and rebuild without a ton of custom config
cardanome 3y ago
Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu. You can use all Ubuntu packages just fine. It is really just a strictly better Ubuntu. There is a Debian-based Mint version as well but that is more as a security so that they are not deadly dependent on the Ubuntu people. Though these days, even using exotic distros isn't that problematic, as you can always use appimage/flatpack/snap if you native package manager doesn't have the specific app you need.
- Kalanos 3y ago
  Mint looks awesome! It seems like it was designed by people that actually compute. My main gripe w ubuntu was the snap store, but embracing flatpak/hub seems like a highlight of mint

seba_dos1 3y ago

> Stop making Linux distributions, make applications instead. Stop listening to people trying to tell you what you should do or not.

whitepaint 3y ago
Stop listening to people who say to stop listening to people trying to tell you what you should do or not. It is not all relative, there are good and bad choices.
- seba_dos1 3y ago
  Not hacking on a distro because someone thinks there are too many is one of those bad choices. If you actually manage to get a distribution rolling with a viable community around it, it means enough people have decided that there weren't too many.
- SantalBlush 3y ago
  "Gotcha" replies like this aren't helpful. The GP comment is just a pithy retort to the title that uses the same language for effect.
  - whitepaint 3y ago
    Agreed.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
berkes 3y ago
Yea, the tone was off-putting to me too. But the message and information is good though. I'd personally word it something like "Linux users don't want more distributions. They want software". At least, this is the case for me.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

rubymamis 3y ago

The problem is OSS software not even trying to compete with the market. People using OSS software taking it for granted that the UX is going to be subpar, and it really is. Regular propriety software faces the risk of their users not paying, therefore adapting to make end user experience great. OSS usually doesn't have that risk. Open source needs to be exposed to risk from end users. I tried to change that with Notes[1] but I find it hard to live on solely on ads. I tried to incorporate paying for some premium features (like Kanban) but the app is still fully FOSS therefore everyone can compile it from source easily. I think I'll close-source my next app[2] before it launches. I just can't risk not being paid for my hard work. I also believe the Linux community will benefit from that, since getting paid will allow me to invest more in making UX-focused apps on Linux. I might open source some parts of it tho (or maybe all of it in the far future). [1] https://github.com/nuttyartist/notes https://github.com/nuttyartist/notes [2] https://www.get-plume.com https://www.get-plume.com

thebigspacefuck 3y ago
What does this have that Joplin doesn't have?
- 360MustangScope 3y ago
  For one thing, it’s a lot prettier than Joplin
  - thebigspacefuck 3y ago
    Personally I think Joplin looks better and this looks like a poor macOS clone that lacks many of the features like markdown support or synchronizing across devices including mobile. IMO if Joplin’s problem is the UI, or even just something OP is passionate about, why not contribute and open a PR? Why is the pattern “I care about this one thing so I reimplemented it in a new app from scratch”?
    - rubymamis 3y ago
      - Plume supports Markdown (plus additional plaintext syntax). - Plume is a block editor, unlike Joplin. Therefore plume can have advanced views inside the editor itself (like Kanban, image handling, columns, etc) - Plume is faster than Joplin's non-native editor (the one that renders your Markdown) - IMO Plume is way prettier with far more attention to detail.

blt 3y ago

It's not an attractive scene for GUI developers on Linux. Gnome, Qt, and Electron all have some unappealing aspects. Many people who get the itch to make a Linux GUI app will immediately be discouraged by having to choose between them.

360MustangScope 3y ago
Imo, I think that Flutter is one of the best ways to make native Linux applications at the moment. It can look just like a GTK, macOS and Windows app and you have a more enjoyable experience.
- blt 3y ago
  Don't know it, but from the website it looks mobile-first and intended for simple apps like Spotify. Don't get the impression that I could build something like Blender or Kdenlive with it. Maybe my impression is wrong, but I would hesitate to use a framework for a purpose that the developers consider fringe.
  - ben-schaaf 3y ago
    To be fair you can't use any gui toolkit to make something like blender. It's all custom.
alwayslikethis 3y ago
What's wrong with Qt? It works well enough if you want to write C++ or Python. Electron works on Linux the same way it does on Windows. GTK has some more issues on other platforms, but mostly works on Linux too.
- blt 3y ago
  I should have said "Many people" instead of "Anyone" in my original comment -- edited. I would use it myself, but a lot of developers don't want to use C++ (too complicated) or Python (too slow, dynamicness becomes unwieldy for large projects). Languages in between - like Swift and C# - are the sweet spot for desktop GUI apps.

underseacables 3y ago

Segmentation has been tough for a Linux newbie like myself. I hope there can be greater unification some day so that applications have one install type, and come with greater predictability.

seabrookmx 3y ago
It's still annoying even if you're experienced with Linux. Especially if there's multiple install methods for the same app with different levels of support. Flatpak is the closest thing thus far, but certainly hasn't "won" yet.
- michaelmrose 3y ago
  This is actually a solvable problem. You provide a single store interface where you install flatpaks and traditional packages. Linux Mint does a pretty good job of this. With Arch you can basically rely on system packages and the AUR for 99.9% of everything. Either way wrapping an interface around 1 or more method is a fairly trivial matter.
  - seabrookmx 3y ago
    It doesn't solve the multiple install methods issue. Fedora for instance already has this via Gnome Software, but provides a drop-down if multiple sources are available for an application, so it's still fragmented. Even if you removed that and had some sort of heirarchy, one app might have a better experience via Flatpak whilst one might be better via RPM. Until developers consolidate it's really not solved, IMO.

zer0zzz 3y ago

I think the premise is wrong when there still doesn’t exist a core set of frameworks that are abi stable on Linux. On competing platforms there are way more frameworks out of the box (CoreImage, CoreAudio, CodeML, SceneKit, AppKit, etc) and they don’t break as often. I know in Linux they have fun things like snap and flatpak but it is really solving the problem using a bit of infrastructure and package management instead of doing it in the frameworks and programming languages themselves (which are what you are asking people to write apps in).

smoldesu 3y ago
Stuff like Flatpak and Snap exists because the framework side kinda is built-out. Isolation technology had matured, newer desktops emphasized per-window security and needed APIs to portal in and out of each instance. The desktops needed a packaging/infrastructure solution to tie that together and make it presentable to the user.
- zer0zzz 3y ago
  Yet I still can't compile an app on some arbitrary release of some arbitrary distro and just run the darn exe on another and be 100% sure it will work.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    On a large enough timescale I don't think you can reasonably expect this on any of this big 3 OSes. From a less macro perspective, I think tools like Appimage and Flatpak will fill that role.
    - zer0zzz 3y ago
      On a long enough time scale we are all dead, and Linux doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that in the decades that computer software has to be useful to actual people that things have to suck this badly right now.
      - 3y ago

squarefoot 3y ago

More software? Wonderful! I'm all for it, but before starting something from scratch why not contribute to something that already exists, or possibly pick some project that was abandoned or simply needs to be worked on for example to be built with newer compilers, run on newer hardware, etc. Which makes me wonder if there is somewhere a database of dormant/dead projects that would deserve to be resurrected.

nmstoker 3y ago
Yes, I would echo this. In most categories there are loads of subpar efforts when putting all that effort behind the top few would yield a handful of excellent apps. Collaboration can seem daunting and hard work, but it's work that will yield results which is time better spent than that devoted to projects that end up abandoned.
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  Who gets to take the credit? I'm not convinced these efforts to put everyone's ideas in one place and one software are good. Often, design disagreements arise which are incompatible. Under this model of "everybody love everybody" lameshit, if you can't get the group to accept your idea, it doesn't happen. You don't run into this problem when you write alone.
  - tripleo1 3y ago
    The point is alot of that software doesn't work with newer compiler, on newer hardware, or solve anybody else's problem. But if it makes the original author feel good (everybody loves themself?), then it's OK.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
zlg_codes 3y ago
That something that already exists may not be built in the way you are aiming for. That other something might be led by a dickhead that you can't get along with, or a community that's not receptive to your suggestions or patches. Social processes and blockages can lead to losing motivation to contribute. Not everyone is cut out to be this happy-go-lucky team player that has no personality. As for myself, I'd rather start from scratch because 1) I'll control every variable, 2) I don't have to mess around with some existing social and tech infra, 3) I don't have to talk to anyone and convince them my ideas are good, 4) who wants to spend more time arguing or discussing than writing code? The solodev experience is just better. You're not hamstrung by politics and social process. Being a team player has only led to misery for me.

pjmlp 3y ago

> Too often they fall into the trap of creating more Linux distributions. We don’t need more Linux distributions. Stop making Linux distributions, make applications instead. Right on the spot.

dwattttt 3y ago
If you consider a container to be a limited distro, we turned one into the other
- pjmlp 3y ago
  I consider a container, shipping the developer's computer into production, or the revenge of microkernels, take your pick.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
    I mean, kind of? But "shipping the developer's computer into production" implies a lot of things that really shouldn't be happening even with containers - the images you ship in prod should always come from git (or such) by way of CI, and shouldn't include ex. compilers. So I'd argue we managed to mostly get the upsides of just shipping the dev's machine but without the downsides.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      There are plenty of blog posts about how containers work in Linux is still dependent on external resources, unless care was taken when creating those images.

danans 3y ago

> Target All The Linux Distributions If you are going through the trouble of targeting all Linux distributions, why not just target all platforms by using a framework like Flutter or React?

zb3 3y ago
I hope nobody will take your comment seriously, because the performance of these is horrible compared to "truly" native apps
- danans 3y ago
  I've seen few apps anymore whose performance is bounded it by the choice of UI framework. If they're slow, it's usually because of design choices, like making common user interactions wait to retrieve data. Yes, games are an exception. But for the majority of software that is concerned with displaying text, it doesn't matter a hill of beans if you use a cross platform framework. We're far past the days of slow Java AWT apps.
fullspectrumdev 3y ago
Then you are stuck using basically a browser wrapper for your UI, which frankly sucks for performance and native integration most of the time. The move to making everything a webapp is great for development velocity right until you smash into one of the many, many corner cases where it sucks.
- danans 3y ago
  > Then you are stuck using basically a browser wrapper for your UI, AFAIK, Flutter compiles to native code, no browser needed.
  - fullspectrumdev 3y ago
    I may have to give Flutter another look, I’ve gotten rather pessimistic about modern UI stuff lately :)

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

rafram 3y ago

> Target All The Linux Distributions > Unlike other platforms, Linux is a very diverse target. There are hundreds of Linux distributions, some more popular than others. Once published though, applications can generally work everywhere. > There are well documented software packaging and distribution systems which enable developers to get their applications into the hands of users. > Each developer framework and Linux distribution will have their own recommended route to users. When you’re ready to share your creation, the development documentation will signpost their suggested packaging guides. “Your apps will generally work everywhere” and “there are hundreds of distros and you have to do work to support each one individually” are essentially contradictory, no?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
worksonmine 3y ago
Most of them work the same way though. In reality there are like 3 big distributions to target, Arch, Debian and Fedora and from there it will trickle down. Linux and the *BSDs generally work the same, put the executable in the $PATH and you're good. Where this is may differ but not by much and these days the FHS is adopted pretty much everywhere I know.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

zb3 3y ago

Why would anyone do this given a) it's harder and b) linux users don't pay for stuff not worth paying for?

jckahn 3y ago
Because the world would benefit from more good, free software.

oooyay 3y ago

There's also wails.io that is a much better alternative to Electron, imo, and uses native APIs for OS functionality. Added benefit: Wails is also cross platform.

georgeoliver 3y ago

I'm definitely for more guided resources on making Linux apps from idea -> release, which I wish TFA was more of. I think there's a common misconception that if the developers of ten similar apps would just pool their resources, then one great app would result. Fragmentation certainly can be a problem but I feel like this is some kind of corollary to the mythical man-month.

jay_kyburz 3y ago

Does anybody have much experience with the difference between Electron and NW.js. Electron seems to get all the limelight, but from reading the two websites, nw.js sounds like a better solution to me.

tumdum_ 3y ago

Is this a parody site?

nektro 3y ago

instead of getting more people to make new apps, gnome and kde should be trying to coral developers to improve the existing ones

germandiago 3y ago

Looks nice but in my experience, developing apps only for Linux is not cost-effective. I would choose WxWidgets or Qt and add some extension points where needed via interfaces to keep the codebase portable. Sticking to just native APIs is just locking yourself down into Linux.

emptysongglass 3y ago

There's a lot of complaints that there isn't much in the way of tooling to create cross-OS compatible apps but I disagree. Just looking at solutions which aren't Electron: - Telegram uses Qt and ships a performant native app across all three OSes - Flutter compiles down to native code across all three (and mobile) - Kirigami is a QtQuick framework that will give you an executable app across all mobile and desktop targets Go and build your app. There's no reason this needs to an excuse to flame on Linux.

Longhanks 3y ago
Except Flutter is a subpar experience on every platform because of just how slightly different it behaves and Kirigami / Qt Quick is just not a viable thing, there's barely any community and/or "serious" project on Windows, macOS or mobile. I'm not trying to discredit the KDE folks, but that is reality. Also, Qt Quick licensing is not so easy (or very expensive if you go commercial) for iOS. Whereas electron has a) big major corporations betting on it shipping extremely polished, Production-ready tools and b) a gigantic community and library ecosystem, plus not any obscure programming language (such as Dart). Telegram really goes the extra mile, though. Their client is amazing.
- xcdzvyn 3y ago
  Yeah, last I fiddled with Flutter on the web, the performance was awful and it felt horrible to interact with. Apparently it's fair on mobile though.
- emptysongglass 3y ago
  > Except Flutter is a subpar experience on every platform because of just how slightly different it behaves I'm not sure this is true. If you check the pulse of social media, most Flutter devs think Flutter is great for Android, iOS and desktop but needs help on web. Canonical at least rewrote their installer in Flutter and anything new they develop is in Flutter. Devs are hoping that the WASM support currently shipping in `master` [1] will solve for web. [1] https://docs.flutter.dev/platform-integration/web/wasm https://docs.flutter.dev/platform-integration/web/wasm
3y ago

al_borland 3y ago

I think Electron has done more for making desktop Linux viable than anything else in recent memory.

Racing0461 3y ago

The year of the linux desktop is upon us.

iJohnDoe 3y ago

What software is used to make the graph on the main page under the Target heading?

zubairq 3y ago

Is anyone working on solving the problem of building it once and distributing to all Linux package managers?

pipeline_peak 3y ago

And make an effort to support multiple different package managers? No thanks! If I’m gonna make an app today and I have the choice, it’s with browser technology.

poulpy123 3y ago

Saying that you should target all Linux distros while showing a picture with 30 different Linux distributions, most of them used by at most few hundreds of people, is so ironic

b33j0r 3y ago

I like it, but I don’t think it speaks to the audience it wants. Why not show a 12-15 line python app using customtkinter, wxwindows, qt, etc? It currently says something like: — To target all platforms, here is the first step! Choose gnome or KDE! You can write apps for all distributions as a beginner if you choose the right cup! Step 2: ??? Step 3: target all platforms by targeting elementary OS or touch! — Alternatively, a true and recent experience I had: — The other night, I thought, “I wonder if I could get a fonzie-like cartoon to popup as a taskbar-buddy, like adware in 2001.” I looked up some examples, then had copilot do a sketch of the relevant pyqt5 api calls. Ayyy… about 30 minutes later I had a PyQT5 app running in XFCE, and had extra time to make `fonz-ai` play “Aiiii.ogg”, and play the jump the shark music, when dismissed. Testimonial: I didn’t think it would be that easy, esp without VB6/warez ;) ^This is the kind of app we need to believe in again^ :P (PS: it worked in plasma and gnome too, because standards. Also archlinux/arcolinux.)

Zen1th 3y ago

This does ignore the fact that there's not one UI toolkit that you can target and that will work on all distros, and you certainly can't target Qt, GTK, ETK, etc. all at the same time. I've been making a cross platform GUI library and it's been a pain point on Linux (even though I use Linux!)

oritsnile 3y ago

I recently tried to create an executable from a Python script, Mac and Windows worked wonderfully, on Linux I had massive problems when I tried to run it in a different system then it was packaged. Linux caused the most problems, in the end I decided it was not worth it, 99% use Windows or Mac anyway.

amadeuspagel 3y ago

Make Web Apps - Work on every operating system. - Easier to monetize, easy to charge a recurrent fee, no worries about piracy. - Easy to distribute. - Great dev tools and frameworks.

armagon 3y ago

I've got an Electron app in the works which I'm planning to sell to Windows and Mac users (probably through the platform's app stores, using in-app purchases). Is such a thing possible with the Linux market? Can I sell my software through stores? Is IAP a thing?