From: jsteele@netcom.com (John Steele) Subject: Re: What would people think of binary-only software on Linux? Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 20:10:39 GMT
In <38752@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> kem@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Kelly E Murray) writes:
>If Linux won't support binary-only, proprietary commercial applications,
>then it will never really become a substitute for DOS, SCO-Unix, SUNs, etc.
>Remember, an operating system is nothing more than a platform for applications.
>If those applications are restricted to GNU-ified, or public-domain
>software, it will dramatically limit the potential user-base.
>With all the no-cost stuff available, A commerical application would have
>to provide significant value to justify its expense and binary-only status.
>With the rapidly growing Linux user-base, you may actually see some
>commercial software ported to Linux. I would think this would be a good thing.
> -Kelly Murray (kem@cis.ufl.edu)
> Systems Programmer, University of Florida
I would have to agree. IMHO, this is *exaclty* what *must* happen, if we are
to see Linux spread far and wide. Some of the first newbie questions I hear
are:
Can I run Lotus 1-2-3?
Will it run MS Word?
etc.
Without commercial vendor support Linux will never reach critcal mass outside
of the student/hacker world. I will not speculate on the much argued
good/bad discussion :>
My .02 you know,
John
-- #include <disclaimer.h> /* route all flames to /dev/null */ /**************************************************************************/ /* Systems Analyst | John Steele email: jsteele@netcom.com */ /* Video Business Systems | */ /* 1-800-255-3088 | Most people spell COBOLSUX incorrectly... */ /**************************************************************************/