4 ms·

I'm not sure I completely follow you. I would calculate on the basis of developers building software that runs on top of Linux, so that would include a large pr

by jiggy2011 13y ago

I'm not sure I completely follow you. I would calculate on the basis of developers building software that runs on top of Linux, so that would include a large proportion of all web applications as well as various embedded applications. You could probably include android in there also. Now it's true that this isn't quite apples to apples since Linux is more fungible than iOS in most regards, mostly thanks to it's open source nature. For example moving your web application from Linux to FreeBSD is likely to make less of a revenue difference than say moving from iOS to Windows Phone 8. The biggest point is probably that the existence of an Open Source/Free operating system has probably enabled more profitable businesses to exist than iOS.

maxharris 13y ago
The biggest point is probably that the existence of an Open Source/Free operating system has probably enabled more profitable businesses to exist than iOS. Maybe. On the one hand, I know exactly how great it is to have development tools that are a free download away (I remember shelling out hundreds on a C++ compiler in the mid-90s). Open source definitely rocks in this respect. On the other hand, I know that without the iPhone, iOS, and all of the associated things that came with it (including the industry's massive pivot to compete in its wake), things might look very different for an app developer today. (Or at the very least they'd be slower in getting to this point.) I think it's important to realize that there were no independent app developers in 2007 - writing, buying and using software for the Palm handhelds or Windows CE was radically different on nearly every level.
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  It's quite difficult to retroactively unpick cause and effect though it could certainly be argued that the existence of Linux (and free UNIX in general) contributed greatly to the rise of the web. I would still wager that more paid developer hours go towards stuff that ends up being executed on top of Linux than iOS though.
- ninetenel 13y ago
  He's just trolling ...
mynameisvlad 13y ago
Why would you include Web Applications as part of that? Web applications are almost completely OS-agnostic. I can run my PHP application on Linux, on OSX, or on Windows. It shouldn't count for any of the three operating systems because it wasn't built for any of them. It was built to run on a software stack which runs on all three.
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  But people do in fact choose to run them on Linux which is unlikely to be a purely arbitrary choice though by nature open source stacks will be more portable, but it seems perverse to use that as a negative argument.
  - mynameisvlad 13y ago
    Sure, but people also choose to run them on Windows, and OSX. If it was Linux-only, then I could see why you'd include it as being "written for Linux" but web applications are, for the most part, OS-agnostic. People can choose to run it on a variety of platforms. Just because one is used more than the others does not mean it is the exclusive platform for web applications as a whole. You're not writing a PHP application for Linux, you're just writing a PHP application, which can run on one of Linux, Windows, OSX, etc. Just because you choose to run in on Linux does not mean you wrote it specifically to be run on Linux, nor should it be included in the metric for Linux apps.
    - jiggy2011 13y ago
      Some web applications are more platform specific than others. Since Linux is the most popular OS for running web applications it seems reasonable to assume it was chosen for a reason and therefor web developers would be worse off if it were not available.
      - mynameisvlad 13y ago
        > Some web applications are more platform specific than others. Rarely. As I said before, you're not developing for Linux when you make a web application. You're developing for Rails/PHP/whathaveyou. These are all OS-agnostic and can be run on any OS. I can run my PHP app on my Macbook, my Linux server, or my friend's Windows desktop. They all work. Because it's not meant to be built for a particular OS. I don't understand how you can be this stubborn about it. If the language can be run on any number of platforms, then, by definition, it's not an application for one specific platform.

maxharris 13y ago

The biggest point is probably that the existence of an Open Source/Free operating system has probably enabled more profitable businesses to exist than iOS. Maybe. On the one hand, I know exactly how great it is to have development tools that are a free download away (I remember shelling out hundreds on a C++ compiler in the mid-90s). Open source definitely rocks in this respect. On the other hand, I know that without the iPhone, iOS, and all of the associated things that came with it (including the industry's massive pivot to compete in its wake), things might look very different for an app developer today. (Or at the very least they'd be slower in getting to this point.) I think it's important to realize that there were no independent app developers in 2007 - writing, buying and using software for the Palm handhelds or Windows CE was radically different on nearly every level.

jiggy2011 13y ago
It's quite difficult to retroactively unpick cause and effect though it could certainly be argued that the existence of Linux (and free UNIX in general) contributed greatly to the rise of the web. I would still wager that more paid developer hours go towards stuff that ends up being executed on top of Linux than iOS though.
ninetenel 13y ago
He's just trolling ...

mynameisvlad 13y ago

Why would you include Web Applications as part of that? Web applications are almost completely OS-agnostic. I can run my PHP application on Linux, on OSX, or on Windows. It shouldn't count for any of the three operating systems because it wasn't built for any of them. It was built to run on a software stack which runs on all three.

jiggy2011 13y ago
But people do in fact choose to run them on Linux which is unlikely to be a purely arbitrary choice though by nature open source stacks will be more portable, but it seems perverse to use that as a negative argument.
- mynameisvlad 13y ago
  Sure, but people also choose to run them on Windows, and OSX. If it was Linux-only, then I could see why you'd include it as being "written for Linux" but web applications are, for the most part, OS-agnostic. People can choose to run it on a variety of platforms. Just because one is used more than the others does not mean it is the exclusive platform for web applications as a whole. You're not writing a PHP application for Linux, you're just writing a PHP application, which can run on one of Linux, Windows, OSX, etc. Just because you choose to run in on Linux does not mean you wrote it specifically to be run on Linux, nor should it be included in the metric for Linux apps.
  - jiggy2011 13y ago
    Some web applications are more platform specific than others. Since Linux is the most popular OS for running web applications it seems reasonable to assume it was chosen for a reason and therefor web developers would be worse off if it were not available.
    - mynameisvlad 13y ago
      > Some web applications are more platform specific than others. Rarely. As I said before, you're not developing for Linux when you make a web application. You're developing for Rails/PHP/whathaveyou. These are all OS-agnostic and can be run on any OS. I can run my PHP app on my Macbook, my Linux server, or my friend's Windows desktop. They all work. Because it's not meant to be built for a particular OS. I don't understand how you can be this stubborn about it. If the language can be run on any number of platforms, then, by definition, it's not an application for one specific platform.