On Sat, Oct 09, 2010, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
...
>I don't believe that profit is the reason why Adobe and others don't offer a
>Linux version of their products. I would rather say it is incompetence to
>maintain the code that is portable across OS's. And that says something about
>the quality of their products and skill level of their programmers, IMNSHO. I
>think Linux community is actually better off not using any of that crap
>software, if possible (I wonder why flash player comes to my mind right
>now...).
I really came to doubt the competence of Adobe's programmers when I tried
installing Photoshop Elements on a Mac, but it wouldn't even try to install
because I OS X installed on a case-sensitive file system. When I see this,
it leads me to believe that they can't even bother for consistency in
file/directory names, much less more important things.
>If their software had been designed and implemented in a way one would expect
>from a high-class professional commercial company, they would certainly have
>next to zero problems porting it to Linux and gaining additional market (no
>matter how slightly bigger, it's bigger nevertheless, and every buck counts).
>The fact they don't do it shows that they find it hard to maintain their code
>for a Linux platform. And that is a consequence of bad design and/or
>implementation of their software, not lack of market.
See above.
Bill
--
INTERNET: bill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
Voice: (206) 236-1676 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820
Fax: (206) 232-9186 Skype: jwccsllc (206) 855-5792
Virtually everything is under federal control nowadays except the
federal budget. -- Herman E. Talmadge, 1975
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
