What kept me from switchin all this time was the lack of major software such as Photoshop, Flash and others.
The wine project is a trully a gem becouse of it, I haven't look further into the project, but I really admire the developers behind it. However I would rather use the soft nativelly rather than to use a compatibility layer.
but I understand the
risk since Linux users typically aren't used to paying for software,
especially IDEs.
I disagree. I don't think you could generalize this way. I'm a Linux user (even though still a novice one) and I would be happy to spend my hard-earned money on a linux version of the Flash IDE if it was available. I'm sure even more "fanatic" linux enthusiasts would be willing to pay for quality software.
Cheers,
Marcelo.
On 11/9/06, Keith Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yeah, my explanation was pretty simplified. I'm running Ubuntu on one
box and would be happy to switch if I had a good Flash/Flex development
environment.
I think Adobe actually is making some nice strides in that direction.
Flash 9 player for Linux, the Flex 2 SDK works on Linux.
I think you are right that Flex Builder 2 would be an easier and safer
next step for them, as it's not only probably less development required,
but probably there is a bigger audience that would immediately use FB2
on Linux than would the Flash IDE.
Darron J. Schall wrote:
> Keith Peters wrote:
>
>> Pretty simple economics actually. Most people use Windows. Fact of life.
>> That's where you concentrate your development. How many Linux IDEs would
>> Adobe sell right now? Enough to justify the engineering efforts? Maybe
>> someday, but not quite yet.
>>
> I think it's a little trickier than that, sort of like the chicken and
> the egg problem. How many people would switch from Windows to Linux if
> the software was available? How many people buy the Windows version
> only because there is no Linux version?
>
> Do you need software on the platform first, or developers on the
> platform first? I think a better question would be, can Adobe justify
> the risk in building software for Linux? There's little risk in
> building for Windows because you know you have a developer audience.
> But, with Linux, the risk is higher. The developer base doesn't exist
> yet because software doesn't exist yet... or is it the other way around?
>
> Although for a program like FlexBuilder, already built on top of Eclipse
> to help ease platform dependencies, my hope is that we'll at least see
> FlexBuilder for Linux at some point. I understand the Linux port
> wouldn't be trivial, but one can only hope.. that's the main thing
> holding me back from switching at the moment (a good Flex 2 IDE). I'd
> like to see Adobe test the waters there at least... but I understand the
> risk since Linux users typically aren't used to paying for software,
> especially IDEs.
>
> -d
>
> _______________________________________________
> osflash mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
