On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 12:59:18AM -0700, Ryo Furue wrote: > "Steven Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > > Working in a MS, Solaris, Linux, Tru64 shop, I find that for the vast > > majority of our servers the usability of Linux is as good as Unix if not > > better. While Unix might have high end bits Linux lacks for 95% of the > > world's servers that small missing % I suspect is not an issue. > > This is not a Linux-vs-Unix issue, but I've recently been experiencing > a downside of Linux. I think one of the biggest problems for developers > of commercial software for Linux is that there's no such thing as "the" > Linux OS. There are simply too many combinations of the kernel version, > libc version, pthreads version, etc. to support all. The consequence is > usually the vendor supports only the RedHat Linux. > > I'm using the Intel Fortran Compiler (IFC). Its version 7 runs on Debian > without any problem whatsoever, although Intel doesn't support Debian. But, > last year Intel released a total rewrite of the compiler, version 8, with > which my Fortran programs don't work at all (*). Since Debian isn't supported, > even if I paid (which I don't), Intel wouldn't fix my problem. (If paying > would fix it, I would pay.) This is a big headache. Uniformity is sometimes > good.
If your programs work with version 7, why do you feel a need to migrate to version 8? Well maybe because version 7 will become unavailable soon (?). Would migrating to the GNU fortran compiler be more or less work than migrating to intel version 8? (Or migrating to C/C++?) If you were to migrate to GNU, you would be safe from the need to ever migrate again. You just have to keep a safe copy of the source. But this is not the main point of your post. > > I also heard from a programmer that her company develops software only for > Windows because it's so uniform and ubiguitous. Her company, being small, > wouldn't be able to support Linux. If a costomer doesn't have a Windows > machine, the company makes the costomer buy one. (The sofwares so expensive > that the cost of a lowly Windows machine is nothing.) > > Unfortunately, uniformity and community efforts don't come together. > This post and the other responses that it has already triggered all seem to assume that commercial software has a future. But consider: Maybe Steve Balmer is more right than he is given credit for. GNU/Linux is a virus that has infected the software world and is killing software businesses. Maybe its really true. Or look at the situation another way. In the Open/Free software community there are a lot of true believers in a social mission for software. They seem to produce and maintain software for non-monetary reasons. In the business world there are a lot of people committed to paying their suppliers the least possible amount for the supplies that they need to operate their business. Open/Free software costs less than commercial software. Some businesses will move to using Open/Free software. They will reduce their cost structure. They will become more competitive in their respective industries because of their lower cost structure. The customer base of commercial software enterprises will wither and die. (Or maybe not die, just be bought out by a competitor with a lower cost structure.) Alternatively, commercial software houses might retool as suppliers of IT staffing and management for corporations. But they will give up on their licensed software business because they can't make money at it in the face of GNU/Linux competition. Prior to actually getting out of the business, they will give all sorts of self serving arguments as to why they are having trouble, but the truth is that the Open/Free software community doesn't need their services at the prices that they need to charge. More about Intel fortran compiler: In the future, the intel fortran compiler will be release as open source, or not, depending on whether or not Intel views it as part of its core business. I expect that they will release it because their core business it chips. -- Paul E Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
