On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:05:37 -0600, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2008-11-25, Sandeep Kumar <deep8391720122@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:28:36 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Sandeep Kumar belched out
>>> this bit o' wisdom:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:38:14 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I apologize for not being clear.By target I meant that Linux should target
>>>> Windows instead of firefox not that websites should code for Windows.Using
>>>> firefox as an example of oss programming being successful is flawed because
>>>> the vast majority are using it as a Windows browser not a Linux version.
>>>
>>> Since when does running on Windows alter Firefox's status as OSS?
>>
>> It doesn't but pretending that Linux has something to do with it is
>
> Free Software != Linux.
Of course.
> Free Software existed for quite a while before Linux did.
Yes it did.
See PKzip or Winamp for details.
Or jed,Bison etc.
> This is what allowed Linux to be nearly immediately useful as an OS.
Depends upon what the user needs.
> Free Software isn't any less Free Software just because people choose
> to use it on SunOS or for writting games for dedicated games consoles.
True.
>> lame.Notice that the top tier Linux applications are the ones which have
>> Windows versions as well although in my experience the Linux versions seem
>> to work better such as openoffice for example.
>
> Free Software can percolate into anywhere even including VMS and Atari.
Sure.
> It's pretty obvious that good Free Software is going to be available
> pretty much universally since anyone interested in it can port it.
Agreed.
My objection is to the poorly veiled attempts at associating free software
like firefox, and it's success with Linux when in fact the success of
firefox is directy related to not only it's superiority to IE but in fact
the Windows platform.IOW without Windows firefox would be no place.
|
|
