On 03.11.2013 19:15, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:if success is > > > * to have no centralized updates > * have most applicatons and tools never updated at all > * have the weakest security model even compared to Windows these days > * have a standards violating OS > * have a unstable OS > > and all above points are taken from Apple workstations surrounding me > then indeed i prefer to keep that unsuccesfull > > > You assume that sandboxed apps means we get all the negatives and none > of the benefits. That is unwarranted. We can adopt the good parts and > improve upon it based on the lessons learned from adoption of app stores > across multiple operating systems and mobile devices that serve a much > broader audience. We should be willing to let competent contributors > who are interested in doing that try it and provide useful feedback when > necessary instead of dismissing it on bad assumptions as a knee jerk > reaction on our experiences with proprietary software or bad conduct of > particular companies. > > For a server oriented user those sandboxed apps might not be relevant > and they might be contend to get their apps from the distribution but > sandboxes apps are a fine tradeoff for others who prefer to be not > locked in to a narrow channel for all their needs. > > Lets not pretend that commercial sucess doesn't matter as well. Fedora > might be free for you but it is certainly not free for say Red Hat and > their continued participation is dependent on Fedora being more > successful as well. I for one, consider this a good thing. > Just one question: what exact problem are trying to resolve sandboxed applications? Mateusz Marzantowicz -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
