if a moron developer decides to change an API

But that pretty much describes why Windows DLL hell happens, doesn't it? (Note that I'm not blaming Gnome, per se, but it seems to have been the harbinger of this sort of thing.)

And as for having a Linux box at home, they could spend $45 and get Solaris x86 which would likely run on their PC. But a lot of it has to do with a lack of knowledge about portable programming. I understand why, as they haven't had a lot of experience, but that excuse doesn't make it okay. Even if a mechanic can work wonders on your Model T, would you want him working on your BMW 745Li if he hadn't had any experience or, hell, even training? (Or vice versa -- I don't mean to cast aspersions on Linux here.)

Solaris x86. Riiiiiight...

I love Solaris, and use it every day at work. The fact is that Linux, due to everything being open sourced, is attracting new developers. Proprietary UNIX isn't going away, because we all want something backed by a real company, and not subject to the latest fads in open source development.

But if someone wants to write an application right now, the best thing they can do is write it so it will work on Linux AND the various proprietary UNIXes. But if they do take a shortcut, shouldn't they take the shortcut that works on Linux and breaks the UNIXes, and not the other way around?

I'm not advocating taking shortcuts, but sometimes portability isn't worth it for the developer. It's easier to say "sorry, $APP doesn't run on $YOUR_FAVORITE_UNIX" than it is to deal with the bugs that come from porting it. Where does it end? What about poor schmucks who are still on SunOS?

I would agree, if Gnome weren't being supported by Sun and touted as their new GUI. It's currently a nightmare to build on Solaris. This is certainly partly Sun's fault, although CDE is as much of a nightmare as Gnome, for greatly different reasons.

And what's your problem with Solaris x86? It's basically identical to Solaris Sparc as far as application developers are concerned. I'll admit that its hardware support can be a little lacking, but it's a great OS.

I'd say that application developers should be interested in making their application available to as many people as possible. Otherwise, why bother making it public? As to how far in the future to support an OS, I'd say to support it as long as there are a good number of people using it. How many folks are using SunOS<5 or Ultrix or DGUX? Very few. How many people are using Solaris, even Solaris x86? Lots.

Which, of course, avoids my point that Sun is putting money into Gnome and Gnome still seems to have little interest in making it run well on Sun's platforms.

I'll admit that its hardware support can be a little lacking, but it's a great OS.

I think Sun bit off more than they can chew with Solaris x86. Hardware is way too varied on x86 platforms. I agree that the internals of Solaris are great on both platforms, and I have never had problems taking things I've written on SPARC machines at work and getting them working on Solaris x86. But as a viable option, given the wide range of hardware options people have on x86 PC's, I think Solaris x86 doesn't have a chance.

I agree that developers should try to make their software run on everything, but it's all about cost/benefit. Lots of people are using Solaris on SPARC machines, many fewer are using Solaris x86. If I'm writing a brand new desktop application, I'm not really inclined to spend much time making it work on Solaris. Who uses Solaris as a desktop OS?

Who uses Solaris as a desktop OS?

I'm looking at one right now.

The thing about Solaris x86 is that you can have an enterprise class OS running on almost-commodity hardware. As long as you find something that works, it works great -- better than it would under Linux, dare I say. And that's not really an issue for a company, as long as they can find a vendor with reasonable return policies, which, I think, is where Solaris x86 should be directed. Companies who want a supported Unix, but can't quite afford to spend 10 times as much for supported hardware. Plus, the Solaris Hardware Compatilbility Lists won't ever tell you that something works when it doesn't, really, which is more than I can say for my experience with Linux's similar lists.

Solaris x86 is now, I think, going to only be guaranteed to work on Sun's x86 hardware, although it should continue to work on other stuff. Part of the problem with Solaris x86 was Linux developers getting in a snit when Sun used their hardware drivers. I suppose they should have used BSD stuff instead, but I think that was before BSD was as big as it is now, and didn't have much more hardware support than Solaris did (or does).

Note that I'm not totally badmouthing Linux here -- I run it in several places. However, to me, it's the equivalent of the empeg fire sale. It let a lot more people have one, which is good, but it also let a lot more people have one that shouldn't.

It let a lot more people have one, which is good, but it also let a lot more people have one that shouldn't.

Okay I agree with this statement except the second part, which is really elitist. A lot of the newbies that got Empegs in the fire sale have become knowledgable about Linux when they would have never had the chance to otherwise. I think more empegs in more peoples' hands is a good thing, and saying that they shouldn't have them because they somehow lack the technical knowledge to use it doesn't sit right with me.

The only part that bothered me was that I paid $1599 and $699 for my empegs and people were getting them for $200.

But just as in this example, having more people using a non-Microsoft OS is a good thing. Just because they're not grizzled old veterans of another more traditional UNIX flavor doesn't mean they should be denied the opportunity to pick it up and learn it. So yeah, some of them are going to write bad code and release it to the community. But if you have dealt with Sun's support people like I have (especially with iPlanet Web Server issues) you begin to realize that Sun has its own share of unskilled developers. Can't blame Linux for that.

In reply to:

---

It let a lot more people have one, which is good, but it also let a lot more people have one that shouldn't.

---

[outrageous french accent] Alright, but I don't think he'll be very keen. He's already got one.[/outrageous french accent] snicker...

It's not lack of experience that is the reason some people shouldn't have it. It's the lack of ability to learn and the propensity to think that they have.

And I didn't say that there weren't bad software engineers before -- only that the percentage of the whole seems to have gone up. It's not as if they sprang fully formed from Torvalds' head.

I came across this Mac switching parody ad.

Note that I'm not bashing the Mac, just thought it was pretty funny and figured I'd share it.