hi nikolaj..
read your self proclaimed rant on porting amarok to windows. it was very clearly written =) i feel there are few important points to be recognized while making the arguments you do:
- the "first we take the apps, then we take the operating system" effect you describe has not been happening with firefox, open office or any other free software on windows. i know reality is a bitch, but someone is going to have to explain why those use cases are different to make your line of reasoning cogent. personally, i think it's because of all the other apps available on the win32 platform (we're catching up, and in some areas, surpassing them there); the support for various bits of consumer desktop hardware including the utility software that comes with them (we're catching up there); and a simple matter of inertia/familiarity.
- you describing the economics of it in terms of "lowering the barrier until it is easy enough". i'm of the opinion that "easy enough" is not the missing incentive at all. it seems that people don't switch because it is easy enough, which implies there is some sort of latent desire that i've really yet to see on a wide scale that is being held back. it seems they switch when there is a positive, motivating reason to switch. it's a matter of inertia and we all know that inertia must be overcome with positive input rather than simply undermined by reinforcing the status quo, which is precisely what delivering apps to win32 does.
- the "relearning apps" thing has been debunked some time ago as a difficulty. there is certainly a fear of the unknown, but if you consider that in the context of windows being that which they know it isn't helping much of anything to make the known more useful, now is it?
i have came to grips with the fact that there are people with various motivations who will port whatever software they can to predatory, proprietary operating systems regardless of implications. i understand the desire for people to be able to give corporate clients software today without them changing their platform, and i'm actually fully supportive of the idea of providing apps that bridge interoperability gaps (kontact, koffice). i boggle at those who enjoy working with the win32 APIs, but hey, it takes all sorts. fact is, the motivation is there and you are right that we can't stop people from doing things. it is freedom software after all.
but what use is there in dreaming up rationals that neither line up with recent history or with the incentives that move users? it may make us feel better now about things, but if it is simply turning a blind eye to the real consequences then we'll get blindsided.
i think we need to just get very comfortable with the fact that on its own the porting, if done well (and i am certainly working with the assumption that within a few releases the kde apps on windows and mac will indeed be good representatives of the kde project), will likely:
- increase our user base
- probably increase our contributor base
- make it more difficult to make Free operating systems attractive
i think we can mitigate the latter by doing a better job of integrating applications and taking full advantage of platform features on Free operating systems so the experience is better when using those apps on a Free o/s. couple that with a concerted communications effort to every user of kde software on windows and macOs and we might have a game plan.
i also think that putting even more emphasis on business, educational and government users will also help as they tend to view things a bit more strategically. this sort of sucks for amarok in the short term since amarok is a consumer software product, but whatever =)
and perhaps that is what bothers me the most and why i keep poking at the issue: i believe that the onus for coming up with that plan does lie with those who are opening this particular flood gate (it is, in a phrase, "taking responsibility"), but i have yet to hear a game plan that meets up with our stated goals which revolve around the concept of free software from the kde/win movement that doesn't seem remarkably flimsy.
well, that's not entirely true. when i first went nuclear about the topic two important points surfaced:
- opening new avenues to contributors
- bridging important interoperability gaps
i am today a proponent of both those goals and reasons for doing kde/win and kde/mac. but they stop a bit short of answering the full question; most i've talked with either shrugging their shoulders or taking the same approach of rationalization you are.
addressing the issue is, imho, much more useful than pasting blinders on and saying "there is no problem! in fact, it's only beneficial to everyone!".
i guess what i'm asking for in my usual long winded way is that instead of arguing with people who say "but it is going to hurt adoption of free operating systems" with the reply of "no it won't!" provide some sort of game plan for how it won't. hoping and wishing works in fairy tales, pop music and movies, but we need strategy.
(p.s.: i am assuming there is agreement that free software operating systems are important and valuable things that we need to ensure not only exist but thrive; i'm also going to assume that me playing devil's advocate and pushing for the harder but more interesting answer is not overly unexpected. oh, and it's been 'fun' getting to represent the project on this issue publicly; i've had to do a good amount of thought and open-minded listening to others to find the points i could in all honesty be publicly supportive of.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
That was a long reply to my rather short rant... :-)
"- the "first we take the apps, then we take the operating system" effect you describe has not been happening with firefox, open office or any other free software on windows."
I'll stick to my guns here and respectfully disagree. I think it has been happening, albeit slowly, and is happening at an ever accelerating rate.
Taking into account the number of years that Windows has been the all dominating platform, to the extent that most people have come to equate "Computer" and "Windows", and then realizing that all these great free software programs have only really made inroads on the Windows desktop over the last few years, it should be clear that change will happen slowly.
It takes time to educate people to alternatives. But it is happening.
And as the old saying goes, with knowledge comes power (at least I would like to think that there is an old saying that goes like that....), power at least to make an educated choice instead of blindly buying the same software every year. And while I will not claim that THIS is "the year of linux on the desktop", it does seem to me that momentum is building on our side.
I readily accept the role of the free software newbie compared to you, but I still think, based on what I experience in my day to day life, that my observations hold at least some value :-)
Anyway, thanks for replying to my post. I think you and I could have some interesting discussions at aKademy :-)
- Nikolaj
And while I will not claim that THIS is "the year of linux on the desktop", it does seem to me that momentum is building on our side.
I have been believing this since 1999! :-). However less then 1% of the visitors of my homepage use Linux. So I guess Linux is still only for developers and for servers (and of course for me !)
DO NOT EVEN THINK OF PORTING the real gem which is the KDE Desktop GUI.
In my opinion, only a selection of KDE's whole suit of applications should be ported to win32.
Kdevelop, Amarok, etc. to give them a taste of KDE goodness!
When people use these apps on first run:
1. A popup dialog should open saying, that the user is not running the full kde DESKTOP and to get the best experience they should switch to a KDE certified distribution. A hyperlink is in that dialog in the event that they are interested.
They click and they go to the page where:
- the benefits of moving to a open source Operating System (Linux, openSolaris) is mentioned BRIEFLY
- the benefits of using the whole KDE 4 suite applications including the KDE 4 GUI Desktop
- distributions that use KDE 4 are listed. The page has links to directly download the distribution from the relevant distro's mirror.
2. Installer automatically places a shortcut to a webpage in the Start Menu & DESKTOP in the application's Program Menu folder saying 'find out more about KDE 4'
The naive thinking that porting the whole KDE 4 DESKTOP + APPS to Windows will intrigue users to switch to a open & free operating system will get you nowhere.
I think that "lowering the barrier" and providing a "positive, motivating reason" are equally essential. Even if we provide a good reason like better security, compiz fusion and what not, people will still weigh this advantage against what they might lose in the switch, like the applications they were using. Will they move to linux. Probably not, because they depend on windows applications, they want to play their games.
I agree with Nikolaj that it is much easier to switch one application at a time. I think it is great that I can now share my favorite applications with windows users. They can pick applications at their own pace and when they ask me to suggest a good one, I can suggest KDE. But say they use all these great applications, and I have to agree with Aaron, what is to prompt them to move over to linux? They now can use all the great KDE apps and those windows apps that they still need.
An important question that neither Aaron nor Nikolaj asked is whether these people would have switched to Linux had KDE remained Linux only. I think probably not. Have we lost anything by not being able to convert them to Linux? Again, probably not. Instead we can now promote our ideals of freedom and open formats and standards through great applications. Most people will not tackle an OS reinstall lightly and remain with the preinstalled OS. Now Dells Ubuntu offerings are cheaper than their Windows counterparts, so maybe the next PC will have the positive reason simply by being cheaper.
Popup on first run? "Find out more" in the start menu? For me this would create an image of an attention hungry, ad driven project. I would prefer to emphasise a stronger "Part of KDE" branding of individual applications, e.g. in splash screens, KDE is the first hit on google, so just by the name it is easy to find. The about KDE dialog could be a bit more spiffy.
If you really want to notify users, I think a installer message like "Thank you for installing Amarok. Amarok is part of KDE (learn more)" after install
I disagree that KDE in and of itself(including other apps using KDE Technology[tm]) will ever be enough incentive to switch to a Free OS/platform be it Linux or *BSD. I don't see KDE driving Solaris adoption anytime soon. The reason people will switch to a free OS/platform is the stability, driver support and all the parts that lie underneath KDE. I agree that we'll get more exposure to new users on Mac && Windows, but the key for our long term future is getting developers and having much of KDE and other Free/OSS software as many platforms as possible is unlikely to hurt. I'd like to anecdotally mention that my mother was much more comfortable with the move from windows to Linux/KDE in large because all of the apps she was using were the same on both platforms. I think people tend to think of linux vs. windows but it's really more like linux vs. windows AND KDE vs. windows, Simply because both are competing but at different layers of the software stack.
Hugs.
i see one person in the talkbacks here proposing some course of action to ensure the viability of kde and free software as we move to predatory proprietary platforms.
i don't think bugging people with dialogs is a great way to go about it, but at least it's a start towards thinking about it.
the rest of the comments where people keep digging their heads deeper into the sand, well ... that's not going to help much.
I switched to linux the day i realized that almost every software app i was using in winxp, i could keep using on Linux (Firefox, OOo, Thunderbird, NVU,Gimp,...). So the "first we take the apps, then we take the operation system" effect worked very well for me.
When i made the switch, i was affraid i was gonna miss Itunes and Picassa. I did (and still do) miss picassa, but Amarok made me forget about itunes.
However, if you want people to switch to Linux because of Amarok, you have to make sure they know the program. And if there is no Amarok-port for windows, Amarok will not be a reason to switch to linux, simpley because win users will be unaware of the existence of this beautiful musicplayer.
I believe that apps like OpenOffice.org, Firefox, and GAIM, which are cross-platform, are excellent ways to introduce Windows users to Free and Open Source Software. From there, it's only a matter of time till they discover that there's a wonderful world out there besides Windows.
But I have a (probably ignorant) question: Aren't we actually giving users more reason to stay in Windows than to use a free OS, which KDE was originally designed for? I mean, it's true that users are less concerned about operating systems/desktop environments and more about individual apps, then by providing these wonderful apps so easily on Windows takes away one important source of motivation to switch. "Why should I switch? I already have my favorite apps here." This is less important for OpenOffice.org or Firefox, since running on a free OS has never been their primary concern in the first place. They are also not formally part of a desktop environment. But KDE apps are.
Don't get me wrong. There are certain KDE apps that I would love to be able to use on Windows: KOffice, Kontact, Kate (yes!), and Amarok. But that's a Linux user wanting to use KDE apps on Windows. So what can we do?
I'm not sure how the win32-KDE apps will be technically different from the original Linux/BSD versions. But I'm sure that there will be some extremely useful and wonderful features that can't be available on Windows. So how about we mention that those features are only available on *nix platforms? We can probably put those in any of Amarok's marketing materials (web page, first run wizard, tutorials, handbooks, etc.). It may look like that the win32 versions are gimped versions, but I think that's a fair tradeoff. At least it's not a 30-day trial app. :)
No one in this room says "Porting to windows has NO bad "potential" effect on FLOSS adaption.
What everyone is saying is that "the bad effect of Windows-porting on pure FLOSS adaption" is insignificant in comparison to the benefits.
This is not "You are with us or against us," but a great learing exercise of playing in the big league.
Amarok really, really needs to be on Windows at least for one reason. In our tide pool it's the IT of music managers.
In the big league it's a mess of convoluted UI and appendages.
Our software is driven by need and "one-up's-manship" In kde, the basic needs are pretty well covered and we (I) do not see well behind the fence to get the "one-up" spirit going. Competing on the enemy territory will only make Amarok better for all of us.
I'd like to know where there's a stated goal of the KDE project to advocate one kernel over another.
seems to me there are some pretty good points on both sides of this.
I set my mum up with thunderbird years ago precisely because it was cross-platform. she hates learning new things so much that I even have to read her cellphone manual for her :P
now I have to support that darn thunderbird still, even though the rest of her system is KDE.
I think we really need competitors to FF, thunderbird, etc. or the users who do switch to linux are likely to go to gnome, following the familiarity of those apps. I'd love to be able to show off amarok to my friends too - a lot of them have little control over the family computer, so linux is out of the question while they're living there.
if I'm ever forced to use windows again myself, it'd be a lot less painful to have some of my favourite apps there, even if they aren't as cool without all of kde.
on the other hand, this convenience also makes it easier for people who could potentially switch to stay on windows. people put up with an *amazing* amount of viruses and crapware and instability to stay on their familiar ground.
I think we need to get some apps out there, to show off how lovely kde can be, but some things (probably the ones that would be hard or impossible to port) should be kept to open source OS's. gently reminding windows users about the benefits of switching wouldn't hurt - so long as it's not nagging. nothing worse than nagware, especially when you have no choice about using it.
also, I trust that kde can stay true to its linux roots while doing this - every time I use firefox it seems to act more like a windows app and less like a linux one :P
I believe there is no stated goal that KDE should advocate one kernel over another. However, the KDE website says that KDE's goal was to provide a contemporary desktop environment for UNIX and compatible systems, which include Linux and the BSD family.
I do believe that KDE has a commitment, implicit or explicity, to Free and Open Source Software. Being a *desktop environment*, I think that commitment is best served on a Free and Open Source Operating System, whether it be GNU/Linux, BSD, OpenSolaris, etc.
But since KDE is a FOSS project, I think developers should be free to exercise that freedom to port their apps over to other platforms. This cross-platform-ability (what's the proper term for that?) is a side effect of Qt 4. I don't think it should be a goal of KDE (4) as a whole though.
By the way, this topic just reminded me that quite a number of our unsuspecting KDE users are led to belief (perhaps incorrectly) that KDE 4 (all of it) will run (automagically, it seems) on all platforms.
I fear there will always be one last windows-only app on which the "user" rely.
So if all those wonderful linux apps move to cross-platform, there will be no reason to switch to a floss operating system but one reason to stay on windows. :-(
Being against porting on closed platform serve no purpose because if someone wants to do it then he'll do it.
Back to Amarok2 on windows : Amarok is often seen on linux as the best music manager, but beware that under win32 it's not the only one of its kind; it'll have to compete with itunes, winamp, mediamonkey, helium music manager, foobar2000 etc which are established since a long time and have their loyal user base. So the port would better kick ass and be polished.
Can really all of KDE be ported to Windows or Mac. To my mind it would seem incredibly complicated and pointless to port kwin and plasma. What I think nobody mentioned is that there is still a bit of scepticism about Open Source working for a particular individual. I think that the applications ported to windows are great to show to individuals, that KDE apps can meet their demands. Of course the full greatness of KDE is only available if you can chose to use it as your Desktop Environment and not just use a few applications from it. In a way it leads back to the question of what KDE is really, the apps, the desktop, something else...
RE: Chani
Wouldn't it be easier to make a KDE integrated version of firefox than try to go head to head with it. Firefox is in an incredibly strong position among OS browsers today.
How could we lose what KDE's Web browser is famous for? Having the fastest rendering backend. To go and dump KHTML in favour of Firefox's Gecko is just ridiculous. It's one of many KDE's one-ups on the rest.
Porting is going to happen without a doubt, so we can dismiss thinking about or anticipating the consequences of porting and move to the real issue which is how to get to the ideal scenario that we want which is to move as much people using the few KDE apps ported on windows to using the whole suite on a free and open source platform as possible.
I think that making customised splashes to raise awareness in the windows versions is a good idea BUT it is not enough. When I made my earlier suggestions of a first-run dialog and the startmenu\desktop shortcut, I do not believe it is aggressive. If anything it is friendly. The first-run dialog would never ever appear again, it's just to make clear that this application is not just _another_ dreaded windows apps, it's a multiplatform app, that is part of a bigger package of other applications that are obtainable. The user needs to know this; it is important!
Notice how certain apps have the 'upgrade to gold' shortcut, we're not doing this, we're not restricting the apps or crippling them when it is ported, we're simply presenting more of the quality apps from the suite they are experiencing can be obtained.
Hence 'Find out more about KDE 4' is an essential link and will not carry bad connotations for the whole KDE 4 with it. If it was aggressive it would say 'upgrade to the whole KDE 4 desktop' but it doesn't.
Chances are the probability of them ever reading into KDE 4 will increase when you stick the shortcut link in the startmenu or desktop where 99% of people look at then when they launch their applications.
Having this kind of thing *JUST* buried in the about dialog is not going to work. Users rarely look at the about dialog. Also having this *JUST* in the installer might not work, I know that many people just click their way through the installer without reading any of it, so it is a hit and miss tactic and is not enough. A better proposition is when the installer has checkboxes right at the end of the installation saying 'view Readme' we can have 'find out about KDE 4' as well. That way something actively pops up at the end of the installer; they're more likely to look at as a result.
Maybe not having to relearn things makes switching to a new OS more easy for some people. But Amarok is no application suit shipping dozens of tools and countless features scattered throughout a complex menu maze.
It's exactly what we love about Amarok - you don't have to *learn it* to use it, you simply add some music and play. Looking up artists on Wikipedia and fetching lyrics is right there where you just can't miss it. To use your portable device you simply connect it and click OK. Same goes for all the other cool features in Amarok which make it the great player it is.
So I think if there's a high learning curve keeping people from adopting a free desktop, it isn't Amarok's or KDE's fault. KDE's design is clever enough so people get the hang of it pretty quickly. What's really troubling new users are things like having to edit configuration files or running "cryptic" commands on a terminal to get their wireless to work.
Amarok seems to be THE exclusive killer app for the free desktop right now. 3D eyecandy isn't quite there yet and isn't nearly as useful as Amarok is. So I suppose loosing the exclusivity would kinda hurt, and it's pretty obvious: people use Windows because of the exclusive apps, and not because of the multiplatform ones.
Sure, we could tell people that when they switch to a completely free desktop they get more stability, security, freedom, etc.. But that's exactly what we've always been doing. Why would it have more impact than before when Amarok has been ported?
Just doing it better isn't enough. We need to have things they don't to win the game.
I'm going to be extremely selfish with this comment, so beware :)
I really don't care wether KDE apps are ported to windows or not. It will happen, without a doubt, but I won't use it. I use a Free platform (linux).
However, if all this porting effort bring only one single developer on the KDE project, and this developer only bring one significant improvement to my favorite KDE apps, then it's a big win for me and all the other users of KDE on Free platforms...
There's another way to look at the kde+windows issue, you all talk about end users, what about developers? You are not only losing "lazy windows users" by being Free-unix/X11-centric, you are also losing a big developer base - many (if not most) of us are not in the position to dictate OS platforms.
I avoid using closed source components in my apps, if it is possible, and I am happy to submit bug reports/test cases/patches back to open source projects that I use in my apps.
I would be glad to use KDE libraries, since they have many unique features like integrated, efficient and clean web browser engine, network independent fs API, etc. All I can say is that I hope that core KDE developers will be open to the idea of cross-platform KDE as a development platform.
OK. Let me just try and simplify this into some low-level, common denominator and blunt way. Let me understand that I have this right.
A lot of you lot think that porting an application like Amarok to Windows, for the benefit of a certain group of users, is going to magically make those same users (and their IT support people) have the motivation to wipe Windows off their hard drive and install a free and open source operating system just so they can run exactly the same application that you have already given them?!
Forgive me for being a tad sceptical, and getting a slightly splitting headache, at that kind of logic.
I never understood why FOSS developers have not more solidarity with each other. Would it be such a problem to have an entry in help menu (or in about box) like "Learn more about other free software"? If user would click on that, he could read about some other FOSS programs that are favoured by the developers or are related, maybe even compete with the program at hand. I think it would be great way to leverage share of some applications, and maybe even Linux distributions.
The idea that having more people aware of, and using free software on a daily basis will somehow hurt the free software movement is absolutely, positively, utterly ridiculous.
I cant stress this enough.
RE segedunum:
What you put in bold is exactly the coin of both sides.
On the one side are those that say it can help adoption since people can continue to use the applications they are familiar with. Moving to Linux hence is a smaller step than it used to be and you need to provide a less strong incentive for people to actually switch. On the other side people argue that because you can use all the great applications on windows, it is harder to in fact provide an incentive for switching to Linux, like you stated in bold.
By having this port we might be giving up a lot of "killer apps" and whatever momentum they had to drive adoption. We now need to find something that Windows inherently cannot do! Maybe this is plasma, kwin, or the integration of KDE applications. Either way, once we identified it, we need to market it as the advantage Linux has over Windows.
Is it good that KDE gets ported to Windows, certainly from a developer and user point of view. At the same time it is difficult for everybody that promotes linux because they have to find a new approach/incentive to "sell".
As a KOffice developer I think this whole discussions totally misses the point. Or, rather, makes the mistake of making the promotion of a full free software stack the primary goal, screw the rest.
If I look at KOffice then it is a great way to promote OpenDocument, which as an open format is a great way to make a long term change and free the world of the lockin of MSOffice.
I submit to you that the promotion of open formats is a better long term strategy to promote the idea of Free and Open.
Anyway; my goal as a KOffice coder is to make sure that KOffice is used by as many people as possible so we can get a nice niche next to the other popular office suites. Where possible we promote a full free software stack, for sure. I just don't see any reason to stop pushing great free software and open document formats when there is doubt that we can't push the perfect ideal fully free stack.
Thomas
Also...
Who the hell would go to the trouble of changing their OS just for a better jukebox to organise their mp3s?
Aside the wider debate here about how best to promote open source software looking at this specific case only... I think you lot are crazy to think that the average joe who has used windows his or her entire life is gunna suddenly switch to a new OS just because of better mp3 playing. That idea is absolutely ridiculous to me.
It seems to me that when people say this app is a "killer app" what they really mean is its the first comsumer app that is exclusive to Linux that is the best in its field. People should go look up the definition of a killer app, because its a lot more than simply being the best in its field. It needs to be something that is so useful, so great that it makes the competition look bad regardless how many other best in fields they might have... better mp3 management just aint that!
Are real killer apps even possible at this point? Ok, you make a great product for Linux only. The personal desktop computer field is now so saturated, that some competitor will sooner or later replicate your idea in the much greater Windows market, before even most Windows users notice your Linux app!
One reason I'm excited about seeing porting of KDE applications to closed systems is that I use a variety of OSes in my day-to-day activities.
If it wasn't for the cursed summer heat (and a CPU heatsink problem), my home box is an Arch64 system running KDE.
My laptop is a MacBook Pro running OS X - because the tools I need from SSH to gcc are all available on the BSD core.
My work machine is a Windows box, as IT won't support anything else (not even backups).
My work development machines are Solaris boxen.
What I'm really hoping is that with KDE 4 I can do things like:
#1 Have Amarok on both my MacBook and my home system, pulling files over the network off my server, while sharing metadata.
#2 Replace the windows shell at work with KDE (or most of it), and use it along with cygwin to make work feel more like home.
And ... well that's my list actually, it's a bit short. To put it simply, KDE is what clicks for me the most in terms of Woogie interacting with a desktop. However, some other concerns (like battery life on my laptop and work environment) mean I can't have Linux wherever I go. So at the least, I'd like to have KDE come with me wherever I travel.
You don't take into account the fact that people are afraid of change. I have slowly helped replace the applications that friends use on win32 with OS apps. Eventually the pain in switching becomes much smaller because 90% of the change is painless.
I will tell you why people don't switch to linux, or at least some people, well at least me (its about as anecdotal as it can get).
I used linux (red hat until fedora, then SuSE, then Mepis) for about 5 years as my primary operating system but I've recently switched back to Windows. Why? Five reasons:
1) Lack of support anywhere, in any distro for excellent suspend to disk/memory for laptops.
2) Lack of support for flat panels when connected to my Dell docking station.
3) Lack of clean support for my Treo.
4) A general level of tiredness futzing with things that sort of worked (mostly the above).
5) Cool, cutting edge devices are not supported under linux (can you say sling box).
I'd rather pay for linux than windows but even on a paid basis the above don't work.
I'm even considering replacing my home server (currently running CenOS 4.5) with MS home server when it releases because it promises to be one less thing to mess with.
The bottom line is that I want the computer and its software to do the work, not me.
Signed, Lazy and Grumpy
By the way, even though I've moved back to windows I use open office, firefox and the gimp. I must admit that I use Outlook 2007 for email (its that treo sync thing again). I hate the ribbon in Office 2007 and can't even begin to think about using IE.
I use KDE as my main desktop (I spend more than 95% of my time on it), but many of the apps I use are based on the GTK toolkit. Abiword, Gaim, Gimp, Lazarus, Firefox.. because those apps also run under windows, which I'm sometimes required to use. I like the look and feel of QT/KDE, but FreePascal can't link to QT or KDE in any sensible manor, and I need to use Windows from time to time (as a developer, or for a Buggy game loader) and it's easier to deal with one app to do a specific task rather than two. I am looking forward to the next version of KOffice because of the crossplatformness. (and the snazzy interface from the screenshots, but that's neither here nor there.) Linux makes it easier for me to juggle hard drives, move things around, the system is less naggy and I feel more secure in my ability to lock it down, so I won't be leaving it any time soon. Still, I need cross platform apps and when it comes down to it, that will likely be a selling point for me until Wine is better than Microsoft Buggy Game Loader(tm).
there's some really good discussion going on here; great!
some general thoughts after reading the comments thus far:
it isn't about one app (e.g. amarok), it's about the whole platform of which amarok has in this episode been the fulcrum for discussion.
interoperability as well as additional developers has been agreed on as a great reason for doing this, but it doesn't obviate the need for contemplating the rest of the issue. it is completely possible to succeed in one metric but miss others or even undermine an entire effort in the process. so let's think about all aspects rather than simply be myopic in our optimism for particular favourable aspects.
some people switching to a free OS due to familiarity with free software on proprietary OSes does not negate the fact that most people do not and that the reverse trend is also able to point out (as some in this discussion have done so, noting that they have switched back to a proprietary OS); so consider large scale trends rather than trying to find point cases that support whatever your bias is.
the question isn't and really never has been "if" it will happen but how to manage it. so stating it as if that is the issue does not make a case for ignoring things.
and finally, for those who apparently missed it: kde is about free software and it is about creating a full desktop environment. that should make it very clear why supporting non-free platforms and other full desktop environments creates both cognitive friction as well as a necessary adjustment in the project's processes ...
i have full faith that we can do great things with what is occurring if we engage in discussing this in a positive and thoughtful manner.
Post a Comment