The benefits of Linux becoming popular?

[boiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggg]

It seems like with most open source software that is an alternative to proprietary software, there are three stages: limited to a small number of people, reaching a wider audience because it's mostly a replacement for the proprietary software though there are still quirks that cause people to continue to use proprietary (GIMP/Photoshop), and then completely superior where proprietary no longer has a chance of competing (FF/IE).

Once the last one happens, it's as if Linux has forever secured a victory against proprietary software. Do you think that, as more of those "victories" happen, this will benefit open source software as a whole? (e.g. once GIMP is finally robust enough to replace Photoshop entirely, to name just one example?)

(To save myself from some flames, I realize that there are many people who use GIMP over Photoshop now, my point was that there are still quite a few who don't. :) )

[Depressed Man]

Well there would be greater hardware support. Which would increase the possibilities of software as well as what they could do.

[karellen]

* full hardware support
* commercial application for linux: games, enginnering programs like autocad etc

[Vadi]

I can't even imagine that right now. Not while living in a capitalstic society anyway.

[boiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggg]

I can't even imagine that right now. Not while living in a capitalstic society anyway.

I can. Water is free in most restaurants now, and yet that was definitely not the case some time ago. If IE , for the sake of this example didn't come with Windows and yet still cost money, there would be no reason to use IE when you could use FF. Right now, people use programs like Photoshop only because GIMP hasn't developed to suit their every need, and at one point FF was like that too. After they reach the point where there's little difference in using proprietary compared to open source, why use proprietary?

Plus, many companies benefit from using Linux, OOo, etc because they're free. Imagine how much money the entertainment industry could save if they had perfect alternatives to all of the software that they currently run! :)

Of course, I could be completely wrong about all of this, but I hope I'm not.

[M$LOL]

* commercial application for linux: games, enginnering programs like autocad etc

Why do we want that? One of the incentives to use Linux is because 99% of apps written for it are FOSS.

EDIT: Oh yeah, games yes, I would like to see those, but normal proprietary apps, no.

[scalawag]

It's all been said for the most part - Why pay for perfection if it's free? I was a tincy-wincy part of the Linux community for about a year some five to six years ago. A friend broke me into it when my Winblows crashed. Once I bought my new computer, with Winblows installed of course, I just found it easier to go back to the mainstream. Back then my friend was the only real contact I had, and while he was quite knowlegable about Linux, he couldn't even help me in many cases. I tried IRC, message boards, there just wasn't the support I needed to really learn the system.

For craps and giggles, I downloaded the Ubuntu live-cd - Vista had just ticked me off an inch to far (several miles, actually, but you get the idea,). My primary reason for this change was all the videos I'd seen on Youtube showing off compiz/beryl. I wanted to play. Took a couple days and several trips to the compiz IRC channel (and the ubuntu channel as well,) but eventually got her up and FLYING. Beautiful system. Could never get Wine to work before, had it up in two minutes. The ease of use, and furthermore, the ease of learning the newer Linux distributions whether due to their own new-found simplicity or by the aid of the HUGE Linux population, most eager to help any newb to ask, will soon be the downfall of proprietary software.

I've taken a free download, burned it onto a 13 cent CD-rom, installed it, invested a total of a few hours actual work (downloading, apt-getting, compiling, etc,), couple more hours to document everything to look back on when I need to do the next step, and I have a BEAUTIFUL desktop environment and a SOUND operating system. I couldn't ask for anything more.

Frankly, once mainstream computer distributors follow in...Dell? I believe, Dell's foot-steps and offer Linux as an option to consumers, more will hear, more will see, more will follow, more will develope, and eventually, proprietary software will be no more.

Bye-bye Winblows.

[tvrg]

It seems like with most open source software that is an alternative to proprietary software, there are three stages: limited to a small number of people, reaching a wider audience because it's mostly a replacement for the proprietary software though there are still quirks that cause people to continue to use proprietary (GIMP/Photoshop), and then completely superior where proprietary no longer has a chance of competing (FF/IE).

Once the last one happens, it's as if Linux has forever secured a victory against proprietary software. Do you think that, as more of those "victories" happen, this will benefit open source software as a whole? (e.g. once GIMP is finally robust enough to replace Photoshop entirely, to name just one example?)

(To save myself from some flames, I realize that there are many people who use GIMP over Photoshop now, my point was that there are still quite a few who don't. :) )

I'm having a 2002 flashback :), back then people in the community were saying we were reaching a critical mass, drivers would be released and "this year will be the year of linux on the desktop", we still don't.

we get a good operating system, but 1 or 2% of market share still isn't "popular".

Back then you could even find a boxed mandrake set in compuworld (i still have one laying around, I thought if they sell some maybe the shop will continue selling it). No boxed sets in stores atm :)

I seem to feel that people in the community think that linux is really becoming popular because the community is so active, but in real life it still isn't

[Kingsley]

Why do we want that? One of the incentives to use Linux is because 99% of apps written for it are FOSS.

EDIT: Oh yeah, games yes, I would like to see those, but normal proprietary apps, no.
I don't see the difference between paying for games and paying for professional apps.

[igknighted]

I see a few looming on the horizon:

Amarok. With qt4, KDE apps are going cross platform. I think this will become a huge hit on the windows and perhaps even appl platforms.

Krita. Many think of the GIMP as the linux photoshop challenger... but Krita has come along and blown past the stagnant GIMP development. The application is laid out much more intelligently, it has better features like true CMYK support, and is just a pleasure to use (more than photoshop itself, IMO).

Sticking with the KDE theme, KOffice. They are coming up with a tabbed-toolbar design, similar in theory to the ribbon. I think it will become the top challenger to MS Office soon (it is so much more responsive than OO.o). KOffice 2 is going to rock people's worlds.

Finally, and the only one I've got thats not part of the KDE platform, is Pidgin. It is rapidly growing in popularity, but I think people are very frustrated with AIM6 and there is an opportunity for alternate choices. For those who don't want to pay for the upcoming Trillian Astra (which i am a beta tester... damn it is sweet), pidgin is by far the best choice.

[buzzmandt]

if linux became popular enough for it to have 50% of desktop.....would mean that games for windows would also be made for linux, as would most everything else, that's the market, if there is market and they make it, we will come......

What would happen at this point?
1. Microsoft would have to make a much better product in order to compete selling vs. free OS.
2. most people would still go with the free OS if everything worked out of the box AND the new games would work on it.
3. Microsoft would have to start making windows free and hope they could make money in other areas (i.e. games and apps for pc, xbox series, etc) to make up the difference.

LInux has come a long way in recent years, but it has much farther to go than it has come.

[tvrg]

Why do we want that? One of the incentives to use Linux is because 99% of apps written for it are FOSS.

EDIT: Oh yeah, games yes, I would like to see those, but normal proprietary apps, no.

I'd rather pay for a professional app that's useful to my job than a game, but maybe that's just me

[rsambuca]

Why do we want that? One of the incentives to use Linux is because 99% of apps written for it are FOSS.

EDIT: Oh yeah, games yes, I would like to see those, but normal proprietary apps, no.

Why is it that so many Open Source advocates say no to proprietary applications, but then turn around and say game are OK though. What do you think all of those games are?

[rsambuca]

Krita. Many think of the GIMP as the linux photoshop challenger... but Krita has come along and blown past the stagnant GIMP development. The application is laid out much more intelligently, ...

But, Oh, forget it. I'll save it for a more appropriate thread!

[Depressed Man]

Maybe because the "normal" applications are usually used in everyday life. For example Office suites. Nearly everything in Industralized societies require writing in Word. But paying for the application (as well as being just locked into a license to use that application) is a pain. But you have no choice. It's either use it or fail school, work, and life. Of course we have open source equivilants (OpenOffice, and others). So we're not paying for something that seems so fundamental in society nowadays and we're not locked into a license for it. Or rather we are but the license isn't as restricting.

Games on the other hand are not necessary. They are for entertainment.

But yeah I do agree that it's a strange paradox.

[boiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggg]

Why is it that so many Open Source advocates say no to proprietary applications, but then turn around and say game are OK though. What do you think all of those games are?

I would guess they say that because the games that most gamers like playing (Gears of War, Halo 3, Final Fantasy) require massive amounts of contribution, comparable to that of Hollywood films. You don't hear many people asking for "open source movies". :)

Plus, imagine how story-based RPGs would turn out if they were open source. :lol:

[rsambuca]

I would guess they say that because the games that most gamers like playing (Gears of War, Halo 3, Final Fantasy) require massive amounts of contribution, comparable to that of Hollywood films. You don't hear many people asking for "open source movies". :)

Plus, imagine how story-based RPGs would turn out if they were open source. :lol:
You think OpenOffice did NOT require massive amounts of contribution? I suppose it wrote itself? I just think it is hypocritical, is all.

[tvrg]

You think OpenOffice did NOT require massive amounts of contribution? I suppose it wrote itself? I just think it is hypocritical, is all.

totally agree. Things like Autocad (with the team & versioning etc stuff), SAP etc are HUGE! I don't see any oss equivalent coming up soon.
And games all license from a select few engines, so the contributions are actually not that extreme now that Quake has been opensources.

[igknighted]

Why is it that so many Open Source advocates say no to proprietary applications, but then turn around and say game are OK though. What do you think all of those games are?

I don't mind proprietary applications, just the makers need to be aware that I will compare the quality of their product, the level of interest the company takes in supporting the linux platform, and the cost of their product versus competitors (especially the FOSS alternatives). If they deliver a product that is worth my money and will support my platform, then I have no problem buying a proprietary piece of software.

Games have no reason to be proprietary. Since people will just pirate the game anyways, companies like Steam and Blizzard have developed the perfect business model... online services. This is perfectly fair and can be implemented with proprietary or OSS software. Simply distribute the software for free, and provide the online gameplay for those with a license. Seems to be working, and is much more enforcable than trying to stop people from burning disks.

[Nano Geek]

You don't hear many people asking for "open source movies". :)ehmmm...

peach.blender.org (http://peach.blender.org)
www.elephantsdream.org (http://www.elephantsdream.org)
:)

[boiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggg]

OK, ok.

To be fair, I said "many people." ;)

Still, games depend on creative agreement. Even with OpenOffice.org you can argue logically about why a certain feature should or shouldn't be added. With games, there's no way to prove why [character] is awesome specifically because he has spiked shoulderpads, you can only drill it into the person you disagree with.

Plus, I don't know how massive the OOo team is, but is it really as huge as, say, Bungie or Square-enix?

I'd like to see games go open source if it's possible, of course. I just don't know how you would see games like GTA IV and Final Fantasy XIII with open source.


companies like Steam and Blizzard have developed the perfect business model... online services. This is perfectly fair and can be implemented with proprietary or OSS software. Simply distribute the software for free, and provide the online gameplay for those with a license. Seems to be working, and is much more enforcable than trying to stop people from burning disks.

That's really interesting and an excellent point. A question, though: are only online PC games included in your model, and, if not, how are offline games or console games dealt with?

[igknighted]

OK, ok.

To be fair, I said "many people." ;)

Still, games depend on creative agreement. Even with OpenOffice.org you can argue logically about why a certain feature should or shouldn't be added. With games, there's no way to prove why [character] is awesome specifically because he has spiked shoulderpads, you can only drill it into the person you disagree with.

Plus, I don't know how massive the OOo team is, but is it really as huge as, say, Bungie or Square-enix?

I'd like to see games go open source if it's possible, of course. I just don't know how you would see games like GTA IV and Final Fantasy XIII with open source.



That's really interesting and an excellent point. A question, though: are only online PC games included in your model, and, if not, how are offline games or console games dealt with?

What major game recently isn't primarily online?

[BOBSONATOR]

game support on linux with a more developed hardware support just makes me drool

[M$LOL]

I don't see the difference between paying for games and paying for professional apps.


I'd rather pay for a professional app that's useful to my job than a game, but maybe that's just me


Why is it that so many Open Source advocates say no to proprietary applications, but then turn around and say game are OK though. What do you think all of those games are?

I see where you three are coming from. The difference in my mind is that we have alternatives for proprietary Win32 apps, but no alternatives for DirectX games. For example, if you want an alternative for M$ Word, you have OOo, but if you want one for Halo you're looking at Wine/Cedega.

The single biggest advantage Windows has over Linux is gaming, Windows is further ahead there than any other aspect. And a lot of Windows games are actually good ;)

[tvrg]

I see where you three are coming from. The difference in my mind is that we have alternatives for proprietary Win32 apps, but no alternatives for DirectX games. For example, if you want an alternative for M$ Word, you have OOo, but if you want one for Halo you're looking at Wine/Cedega.

The single biggest advantage Windows has over Linux is gaming, Windows is further ahead there than any other aspect. And a lot of Windows games are actually good ;)

Please give me a "serious" alternative then for SAP, Autocad (with team server etc) and the kine app my dad needs for his patients :)

[hessiess]

The single biggest advantage Windows has over Linux is gaming, Windows is further ahead there than any other aspect. And a lot of Windows games are actually good

but 99.9% of them are total rubbish!

[forrestcupp]

Krita. Many think of the GIMP as the linux photoshop challenger... but Krita has come along and blown past the stagnant GIMP development. The application is laid out much more intelligently, it has better features like true CMYK support, and is just a pleasure to use (more than photoshop itself, IMO).
I tried Krita out and wasn't really impressed. As for CMYK, you can get a plugin for GIMP.



And games all license from a select few engines, so the contributions are actually not that extreme now that Quake has been opensources.
Well, first of all, ID only releases their last-generation engines as open source. So you won't get any cutting edge stuff like that (although World of Padman is a cool game).

Secondly, the game engine is only a very small part of game development. If you are going to make a quality game, content creation is probably the biggest part: writing the story, graphic art, level design, object modeling and painting, animation, lighting and shading, GUI creation, sound effects, background music, voice acting. Then after all of that, an engine won't just put it all together for you. You have your programmers modify the code of the engine to best suit your game. Then when they get the engine customized, they can get on with putting all of these various parts together in code. All along you have people testing and looking for bugs. Then when everything is finished, you have to have promoters, web designers, public relations, etc. The engine is a very small part, and companies like ID have to create the engine on top of everything else.

The reason there aren't very many mind blowing FOSS games is because FOSS people are good at programming apps, and the people who are talented at content creation want to be paid for their work. I get paid for my job, so I don't really see anything wrong with that.

[karellen]

but 99.9% of them are total rubbish!

it's just a point of view. some may agree, others may not

[M$LOL]

Please give me a "serious" alternative then for SAP, Autocad (with team server etc) and the kine app my dad needs for his patients :)

There are some apps which don't have alternatives for everyone, but that doesn't take away from the validity of my point.

[tvrg]

There are some apps which don't have alternatives for everyone, but that doesn't take away from the validity of my point.

sure, but those are the apps people pay big bucks for, and those are the apps I would shell out my money for, because those are worth much more than a game. those (should) provide some ROI, while a game is wasted money

[dynamicv]

The biggest advantage will be that all the communication protocols and file formats used will be based on open standards, meaning that if one application doesn't suit the way you work, you'll be able to easily jump over to another one that does without losing compatibility. That will also include the OS you're using, since the data and provided services will work on any platform.

And once there is a real choice companies such as Microsoft will have to try a lot harder to maintain a reason why their customers should continue to use them rather than the current arrangement of having their customers locked in with proprietary tech, meaning we'll see some real innovation for a change. You can see some changes of this type happening already. Firefox gets up to 40% of browser usage at weekends, therefore any website offering services to the home considers other browser users in its plans Therefore it no longer matters whether you're on Windows, Linux, Mac, BSD, or even browsing from your mobile you can access their services. This means commercial web developers are both having to learn open standards and realising what a POS IE is to code for. It can't be long before the business world goes browser agnostic entirely.

A similar thing will happen with software as Linux itself continues to pick up steam (and there can be no doubt that since the release of Vista that is definitely happening). I think if Windows can be taken down below 80% market share OS agnosticism will take hold. Linux is climbing, and thanks to Apple UNIX is also climbing. If this trend continues the tipping point will be reached sooner than we realise.

[forrestcupp]

sure, but those are the apps people pay big bucks for, and those are the apps I would shell out my money for, because those are worth much more than a game. those (should) provide some ROI, while a game is wasted money

Well, that's one opinion. Not everyone thinks that way. If the world only catered to one personality type, it wouldn't be a very great world to live in.

[M$LOL]

sure, but those are the apps people pay big bucks for, and those are the apps I would shell out my money for, because those are worth much more than a game. those (should) provide some ROI, while a game is wasted money

That's opinion though. ;)

I do agree that some normal apps don't have replacements, but that's true for both Windows and Linux.

[suupaabaka]

The thing about gaming is that most of the really good mainstream games out there are made by people who are paid for their work. Most people capable of contributing to such software development are already employed in their respective fields and would only have the time/inclination to participate in open source game development in their free time. Conceivably, there are a couple of ways to overcome this - and a churn out good games in a timely manner - that immediately come to mind.

1) Have a huge development team. This would allow people to spread the work around, but it would be more difficult to coordinate, would require impeccable communication and there may be problems with retaining a consistent feel to the artwork.

2) Ubuntu Game Development! A company like Canonical devoted to providing quality open source software, but with a focus on gaming. I imagine Ubuntu will only become more successful if Canonical keeps up the good work, and it might make a dedicated game development team more feasible. In fact, the addition of high quality singleplayer and multiplayer games to Linux's software repertoire could only prove beneficial to the OSS movement. But I'm not about to dictate to Mark Shuttleworth what he should/shouldn't do with his company, I'm already in love with it :P