3 ms·

So he's saying that if your core audience is in Windows, and your product works best in Windows, you should ignore the Linux people clamouring for a port? It g

• ph0rque 18y ago
  The only difference is, you can get Linux for free (in money) and lately, for only a slightly higher investment of time.
  • Zev 18y ago
    That's only if you want an OS that's not windows but acts like windows in most manners of using. If you want something different, it still takes more then an hour or two to set up.
• sethg 18y ago
  Note that the author of the original "800-pound gorilla" posting was talking about an open-source product he maintains. He said he was happy to accept patches from Windows developers who had figured out ways to make the product work on Windows. I certainly wouldn't criticize any maintainer of an open-source Windows application for saying the same thing in the other direction.
• unalone 18y ago
  You know, by that logic anybody developing an application for a single operating system is being a fool. And yet: most of the applications I use on OS X are developed exclusively for my operating system. See: anything Panic has ever made. See: Delicious Library. And they're obviously made by developers that love my system, and they're making their developers a ton of money, so why should they bother porting it over? Considering Hacker News talks a lot about appealing to a niche rather than trying to appeal to everybody, I find this comment a little irritating.