Linux deployment . . .

[Richard Gaskin]

Bob Sneidar wrote:

 > BSD Unix is no longer BSD, although the first renditions were.
 > I don't believe there are any more bits and pieces of BSD in
 > Apple's most recent offerings.

True, but how far do you think NeXT would have gotten if they had to 
write it from scratch?

Which do we Mac folks use now: a NeXT variant, or 
Taligent/Copeland/Gershin? ;)

 > ...I know enough to see (I think) that the differences between
 > the now UNIX OS X and Linux are CONSIDERABLY less than the
 > differences between OS X and Windows.

I think that's a very key point.  The world is now pretty much in just 
two camps:  UNIX-based OSes, and Microsoft.


 > So the question really is how MUCH more difficult is it for Runrev
 > to develop for Linux? None of us really know, do we?

Certainly not me, but I know this much:  Rev already has a Linux engine. 
  Heck, the Rev engine was born on UNIX, and for the first half-decade 
lived there exclusively (my first exposure to MC was on Sun).

And don't forget the other half of the world, the server:  there Linux 
dominates, and Rev's there too.

So it's not really a question of whether Rev has to port to Linux.  It 
already did; indeed, it was the other way around.

The only question now is when they'll be in a position to tighten up the 
GTX implementation to take care of some performance and cosmetic issues. 
  Sure, there are a few crashers, but if you've been reading the RQCC as 
often as I have you know that's not an OS-specific feature. ;)

Feature-parity would be nice, but the engine differs on the other two 
platforms anyway so for me that's less of an issue.  One of the few 
things I'd like to see is RevBrowser for Linux, but since that's an 
external I'll bet we could find funding for it if we really needed it, 
so it wouldn't slow RunRev down on anything else they're pursuing.

In a related thread you wrote:

 > My point is that unless LINUX has something UNIQUE to offer the
 > mass of users in the computing world (aside from the fact that
 > it makes a great server OS for some things), it's never going to
 > really get into the client computing game.

Some would say it's already in the client computing game, with an 
estimated market share similar to what Apple had back when people used 
to say it would go out of business. ;)  But like Apple, Linux only 
continues to grow, and currently at a pace faster than any other.

Sure, feature-wise modern OSes are becoming increasingly similar, ever 
more commoditized.  That's the point:  it's an OS, it shouldn't be 
something you have to think about, it should simply do its job of 
getting you to your apps and your documents and not require much of your 
conscious attention at all so you can focus instead on the tasks you 
turned on your computer to do (IMNSHO Apple understands that far better 
than MS).

Being the world's only free and open alternative means a lot to several 
tens of millions of people.

Free and open represent a truly UNIQUE value among OSes.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World
  Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
  Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com
  revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv