Cross-platform apps are becoming dangerous if you ask me.
There's too many linux cross-platform applications. And they are a pain. Always. Annoying. Crap. Ware.
(Excuse my rant, I always get annoyed when applications require incredible setup and command-line use and config file editing, which is typical of linux apps.)
These cross-platform utilities really need to be adapted to each platform, since their userbases are all different.
Originally Posted by Adak
Aww, poor widdle Elyisa, are the big bad Linux apps scaring you?
The term "linux cross-platform applications" is an oxymoron.
The accusation that these applications always require command line use or complicated setup is nonsense. None of the popular cross-platform apps I've ever used - Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice.org, Gimp, Inkscape, Audacity, and many more - have been any more complicated to install than your average Windows-only application.
All the buzzt!
CornedBee
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
GCC, Apache, among others I could mention.
I just can't get them working right.
GCC is a command line tool, period. Just like the MS compiler. And just like Visual Studio can hide the invocation of msc, Dev-C++ and Code::Blocks can hide the invocation of GCC.
GCC has no configuration files.
Apache is not a GUI program. It's a server. But there's this excellent tool for stopping and starting Apache, very gooey thing. Apache is also trivial to install, as it comes with an excellent installer.
Configuration is a different issue. But the complexity of Apache's configuration has nothing to do with the fact that those are files you're editing. But if you really need a GUI, look what Google turned up:
http://www.apache-gui.com/apache-windows.html
All the buzzt!
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
Yeah, unfortunately, you install VS and everything is ready to go.
If I install Code::Blocks + GCC 4.3, I get tons of errors due to missing include paths which I don't know what they are.
It's just... frustrating.
That's the thing - it's too complex to edit.Configuration is a different issue. But the complexity of Apache's configuration has nothing to do with the fact that those are files you're editing. But if you really need a GUI, look what Google turned up:
http://www.apache-gui.com/apache-windows.html
It could do with a good gui to do rules.
I have no idea what you're talking about. When I installed Code::Blocks, it worked out of the box.
All the buzzt!
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
Yeah, unfortunately, newest GCC only comes with GCC 3.4.5. When I tried installing GCC 4.3, all errors.
It has nothing to do with the apparent complexity of installing or using these applications, but instead with our ability to understand and welcome the fact not all systems share or need to share similar environments.
It is my view Elysia that you do neither, and you also have trouble switching over to anything else than a GUI. It's an important limitation of yours that I would advise you to fight against. It's unbecoming of a programmer or anyone else interested in computer science. But, in the name of me and everyone else to whom a non GUI environment is not threatening, I'd advise you to at least drop the expletives and avoid, among other things, call these applications dangerous. I feel somewhat insulted. I'm just asking.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
It may be true that some embrace these things, but at the same time also true that some do not embrace it. Linux is known to be the OS for the typical power user, while Windows is for the more casual user base, which is why I would at least appreciate some cross-platform software to take this into mind and stop making things so complicated.
There are a lot of good, easy, cross-platform software, like Firefox, and I would love to see more cross-platform software like this. Because typically when we talk about non-commerical linux software, it's mostly "do everything yourself" instead of an installer.
This, I think, is something cross-platform developers should keep in mind. Just because they find it easy to configure, use, etc and moreover so, most of the install base for that specific platform, doesn't mean that other platforms are the same.
I have to say you're probably exaggerating your case. I think you're just being lazy to an extent.
Actually, in Windows, you search for the application in the internet, then download it, run it, press "I agree. Next. Next. Next. Next. Choose location. Next. Finish" and then you're done.
In Linux, you open Synaptic, check the packages you need, and install them all with one click.
"The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
Err not quite done, also need to reboot the system, THEN you are done...
How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
Don't forget uninstalling Google Toolbar after the reboot when you realize that it never gave you the option to not install it...
abachler: "A great programmer never stops optimizing a piece of code until it consists of nothing but preprocessor directives and comments"
I'll just say - the most frequent programs that give me a headache because I can't get them working or it takes a lot of time, is cross-platform, linux apps.
I'd rather have to be forced to restart than mess around with apps I can't get working right.
I know some guys who tried to make VC++6 work with the .Net 2003 command line tools (before MS provided the free Express Edition). Replacing the compiler of an IDE is not fun, and Linux has nothing to do with it.Yeah, unfortunately, newest GCC only comes with GCC 3.4.5. When I tried installing GCC 4.3, all errors.
All the buzzt!
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
