[snips]
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:46:23 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> A proper case study is that where the customer buys a machine (and
> peripherals, even applications) for /Linux/. Leading yourself from an
> eventual consequence (the present state) to a beginning -- a factor/choice
> -- is not very sensible. It's about the /routes/ one chooses.
While this is true, Draggy does have a point. If my training is in, say,
high-end video production, and the major apps in the field stop supporting
Linux, I basically have three choices:
1) Switch careers
2) Use less-functional apps in Linux
3) Switch OSen
If one has built a reputation and a resume in a field, changing field may
well involve a major hit in income; this is also true if one is forced to
use less-functional apps, ones which increase effort to complete the task,
thus reducing one's ability to perform competitively.
If one's in such a position, using Linux would, in fact, cause significant
damage, despite being perfectly capable in principle of doing the job.
Draggy seems to be in just that boat - the apps he needs to do his job,
the job he's built his skills and reputation in, don't support Linux. So
he gets to choose: switch careers, use less-functional tools (and reduce
his competitive edge and profits), or switch OSen.
He could, of course, develop such an app, or hire someone to, himself,
thus using Linux _and_ keeping the edge, but that involves significant
outlay and doesn't solve the problem he needs solved _now_.
That doesn't make Linux useless, or him stupid, just means that for _his_
needs, Linux isn't an option, because the apps, the tools, simply aren't
there.
Now, that said, if he's complaining that his machines only work with App
X, under Windows, but - at the time he bought 'em - he could have chosen
App Y, under Linux, which would have done the job equivalently well...
then his point about Linux causing him to starve would be completely
absurd - it was his choices, not Linux, that lead him to where he is.
|
|
