Re: Query to the Linux community....Follow up...

From: Ranando King (rk_at_magictouchcorp.com)
Date: 01/04/05 

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:14:57 -0600

"Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gKSdnTU8RfSKmUfcRVn-vA@comcast.com...
<snipped>
> Several people took issue with the idea that too many choices was a
problem
> for some users. There were analogies to cars and PC hardware. I don't
> think that cars are a valid analogy because people are fairly comfortable
> with the technology involved and everyone has friends that offer opinions,
> etc.

Ok... It's obvious you missed something critical in human behavior here. The
analogy between cars and PCs is perfectly valid for this case. At some point
in their past, both were new technology. Cars have been around longer and
people are more used to them than they were say 50 years ago. Computers
haven't yet reached the same level of comfort people have with their cars,
mostly because, unlike cars, computer technology is advancing at a
ridiculous pace. Yet and still, people are adjusting.

> People generally don't worry about incompatability between cars either.

People don't generally worry about incompatibility between operating systems
either. That doesn't happen until their put in a situation where something
from one OS has to be moved onto another system with a different OS. That
doesn't happen too often for the general public.

> People that are not comfortable with PC technology very often are
reluctant
> to choose hardware.

People that are not comfortable with automobile technology very often are
reluctant to choose a brand of transmission fluid, oil, brake fluid, etc...
There will always be these who for one reason or another cannot bring
themselves to come to a better understanding of the technology they use in
day to day life. That cannot be helped, but that does not describe the
majority of the general populous.

> How many parents, friends, or relatives call each of
> you asking for recommendations when buying a PC or software?

I would wager that it's about the same as the amount of people who go to
their mechanic friends and/or family when wanting advice about buying or
changing some of the more "internal" car parts. When was the last time you
inspected your car's solenoid. Do you even know what that is?

> Even if I put aside the specific analogies, I do not discount the
validity
> of your points. I think among people comfortable with PCs, multiple
> distributions of Linux may not be much of an issue. I think that it may
be
> much more of an issue with people that would be prone to buying the "PCs
for
> Dummies" books for example. There is also a large group of people that
> don't want to know about the PC...or the OS...they just want to turn on
> their PC and run the app. I heard a guy at a store the other day that
> thought MS Office was the Operating system.

I know. And it is those people for whom the choice of distro is least
relevant after the choice has been made. Counter-intuitive, I know. But
think about it for a second. These people just want to use an application.
If the OS doesn't break on them, they'll only care what the app is doing. So
when they go to someone for help, they won't be asking how to fix Mandrake
or Suse, they'll be asking how to get application X to do Y. As you stated,
this type gets the app and the OS confused, often thinking the app IS the
OS.

> My comments about being "forced" (a bad choice of words) to give away
their
> software were based on the perception that many people seem to have.
>
> Are there restrictions on how you distribute software if you use gcc? How
> good is gcc?

Nope. Not unless your software includes parts of gcc. Your software is a
separate work, not derived from the compiler which created it and therefore
not subject to the license of the compiler... unless your work is an
extension of the compiler that is linked to the compiler.

> How many other good c++ compilers are available?

I would imagine there are a few, but I've never bothered. gcc works well
enough for my needs.

> What c++ app frameworks are available and popular? (wxWidgets?)

App frameworks for what? Depending on your meaning, there's lots of them.

> Are the IDEs any good (I know that's very subjective)? VI and EMACS are
not
> acceptable.

If you mean IDE's like the one in MS Visual Studio, then you need to look at
KDevelop & KDE Studio Gold. There's a lot more than those though. Just
search for them, they're all over/

> It was suggested to me that it's the fault of us clueless, ignorant people
> that there are these misconceptions about Linux. I would simply say that
if
> the intent is to get more people to use Linux, then it is not the problem
of
> the ignorant...it is a problem for those that want Linux to grow and
thrive
> to find a way to overcome these misconceptions. If you leave people not
> knowing any better, they will stay with Microsoft.

...or, when you get sick of MS, you can do what you're doing and ask
questions about alternatives. That's how many of us educate you "clueless,
ignorant people" ;) It doesn't do us any good to waste our energy (and
often limited time and finances) to tell you about something you're not
prepared to hear about. Does it do any good to tell someone about Linux when
they're perfectly happy using their MS OS?

> As to my own personal ignorance of Linux...I stated my ignorance at the
very
> beginning and made it clear that it is the reason I'm here in the first
> place.

Good. Now be prepared to be told to RTFM a lot. And don't be afraid to come
back with questions after you do. Most of the time, the FM's that we told
you to R gives you a cursory understanding. We usually don't mind giving
straight answers when you at least have the basics.

> My comments about software and business models....
>
> Oracle doesn't count. A database is not an application.

A database is not an application.... um.... ok.
Strictly speaking, you're correct. A database is merely a file (or set of
files). But then again, strictly speaking, Oracle doesn't sell databases.
Oracle sells the software used to create, use, and maintain databases.
Oracle sells database server software. So Oracle counts.

> *Of course* there
> are a lot of "Bread-and butter" types of apps, etc.: word processors,
email
> clients, news readers, WinAmp clones (no offense, I just don't know their
> names) etc. What about apps that (for instance):
>
> Run a day care business?
> Run a veterenary office?
> Run a DVD rental store?
> Run a karate Dojo, including sales of equipment, tournament
scheduling,
> etc?
> Get real-time quotes and history for professional commodity traders?

Point of sale software? That exists too. Teleflora produces a software
package called Daisy that runs on Linux. I helped port it from MDOS back
when I worked for them. Daisy was their mid-range product. Their enterprise
level product was being ported to Linux as well.

> These are examples of the types of apps I was wondering about. There may
be
> be thousands of these. Is there a real business opportunity in writing
them
> or are they available free?

Likely yes and yes, relatively. People get software for free when they don't
care about support. People buy software when they want to have someone to
call when things go wrong. Businesses are almost invariantly the latter.

> I've heard the argument that people will pay
> more for a program of value over a free one, but that goes against the
> arguments of all of the companies that sued MS because the free versions
of
> their apps were perceived to be killing other vendor's businesses (and I
> doubt many people would argue the MS product was better).

Using that example shows you don't really understand what was going on
there. You need a better understanding of AntiTrust laws and monopolization
tactics before trying to apply that argument to anything, let alone this
discussion. Examining MS's past behavior would reveal that giving away their
software like that was a temporary tactic aimed at eliminating their
competition.

> As to my business model inquiry, I found it interesting that the people
that
> are making money are some of the Linux distributors, IBM, Sun, and Oracle.
> Much of that seems to be through consulting, and although I have been a
> consultant in the past, I didn't care for it and that's not a business
model
> I wish to pursue. No one (that I recall) gave me an example of a company
> writing a successful commercial app. There may very well be some, but
they
> *appear* to be few and far between. Is it simply because Linux hasn't hit
a
> certain "critical mass" yet?

No. It's because you misunderstood several concepts comming in to this
discussion. Someone mentioned Oracle (see above). I mentioned Borland (the
product is Kylix). There's also:

CodeWeavers: CrossOver Office
Metrowerks: CodeWarrior
Alias: Maya
Xi Graphics: Accelerated X
VariCAD: VariCAD for Linux
Opera Software: Opera for Linux
4Front: OSS
etc...

Beginning to get the picture? There's money to be made, just as in any other
industry. You just have to find your niche.

Quantcast