On 27 abr, 09:45, Christian Edward Gruber <[email protected]> wrote: > Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah. That's awesome. What a wonderfully > naive assertion. > If linux was a platform with merit, it would have met some degree of > success on the desktop...
If you mean Linux Desktop Platform (GNOME, KDE and all that including its totally crappy video and sound stacks...), yes it is garbage and even major Linux enthusiasts complain about this all the time. A good kernel makes not a good desktop platform; and Linux is not even one of the best kernels in many respects - let's not digress into an OS-war, but the desktop market leaders are superior to Linux in important aspects even in the core tech (e.g. see Linux's pathetic advanced- filesystem story, it's not yet in the place that Windows was >10 years ago with NTFS.) On the other hand, Linux _does_ have some degree of desktop-type success in new niches like mobile devices, where Linux _is_ clearly superior to the competition (surely beats the pants off WinMob and Symbian). So, thanks for validating my argument. ;-) > These kinds of statements are ridiculous, because they assert > underlying causes of success that are simply not provably so. The guy > could be right, but the assertion of causation is without merit. The simple fact is that great programming languages - at least when combined with good implementation, tooling, libraries and other basics - will always gain SOME respectable market share and have a long-term story with a thriving ecosystem (even if a relatively small one, e.g. Python). Objective-C never managed to have that kind of success, on any platform where it did not benefit from _massive_ protectionism. Ada is another interesting case: it was promoted and imposed for years by the US govt, but failed to gain any traction outside the government contracts that mandated its use or its satellite industries. Yet, Ada was arguably a superior language if compared to Obj-C; you could use that as evidence that quality=>success does not necessarily hold... but life is more complicated that this, when I wrote "merit" I didn't mean only a good formal design or powerful/innovative features, there are other important factors, like some good alignment with the technology and the problems of the developer community at each time, the fitting in a larger ecosystem (e.g. LAMP prompting the 'P' languages), etc. A+ Osvaldo > cheers, > Christian. > > On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:42 AM, opinali wrote: > > > If Obj-C was a language with > > merits, it would have met some degree of success in other platforms. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
