LGJ
|
| Posted: 02/15/2002, 1:38 AM |
|
Seems like a fairly good application. I just don't understand why there is only a windows port. I am used to hand coding, but anything that may help spediong up development... I run linux and so do tons of otthers that would surely appriciate a linux port.
|
|
|
 |
Jack
|
| Posted: 02/15/2002, 5:15 AM |
|
Hello,
you may put it as wish to CodeCharge Wish List.
|
|
|
|
Brent
|
| Posted: 02/15/2002, 8:27 AM |
|
Because software firms make more money writing Windows applications than
Linux applications. Sure they could come out with a Linux version but they'd
make around 10% of their Windows sales with Linux and they still have to spend
a lot of time supporting the Linux version. Financially speaking, it
won't be worth the extra effort and would otherwise tax a small group of
programmers. I'd rather seem them enhance their Windows version with their
long awaited "professional studio" version than create a Linux clone.
The output generated from CC (PHP) runs on Linux and I think that's good enough.
|
|
|
|
michael weaver
|
| Posted: 02/15/2002, 4:27 PM |
|
I would like a linux port, too, but I would rather have the Codecharge team work on improving the overall product. I believe it would take time to create a separate product for linux because of how the current product is built. There's so many windows features built in that they would probably have to start over from scratch. The XML would be the same but that's about it. But I'm just guessing. I have no idea how they do the wondeful things they do.
As for support I don't believe the normal support issues would be as prevalent because linux users are _generally_ more advanced in their knowledge. The requests for changes/alterations/additional functionality would increase greatly, though.
Perhaps someone could convince the CC team and Yes Software to go open-source for linux only or create a copyleft or GPL license.
m
|
|
|
|
Duncan Mac-Vicar P.
|
| Posted: 03/01/2002, 9:00 AM |
|
Use QT toolkit. Write once, compile in Windows, Linux, Mac, etc
CC seems to be coded in VB or VC++.
|
|
|
|
z
|
| Posted: 03/01/2002, 11:07 AM |
|
My feeling on linux is that it has very few redeeming qualities from a web design and programming standpoint. It's not just codecharge that's not available on linux, it's nearly every other development app on the market. Have you noticed that the closest thing to a dev tool that you can find on linux is pico? But then again, if you're using linux in the first place, you're probably a purest who shuns off the need for features, and lives in a cave talking about how your 486 was the last trully pure computer ever made.
It's really not that expensive to get hooked up with a recent incarnation of windows. And there are thousands of great programs for the platform. It's not really about which operating system is better. It's about dev time. I've found that I spend more time keeping linux running smoothly that actually getting any work done. Why bother?
|
|
|
|
vujke
|
| Posted: 10/23/2002, 5:59 AM |
|
I just can't beleive.
Do you work in Micro$oft?
If you need much time to keep Linux working smoothly you need to consider
yours knowledge. Linux is user friendly, but he carefuly choosing friends.
If you know enough you can done yours work quick on Linux also.
And finaly, isn't everyhing about money.
|
|
|
|
Greg
|
| Posted: 11/20/2002, 6:18 AM |
|
I agree LGJ.
I run a server administration team/joint venture run out of New York and Sydney and we have reaped vast benefits changing over our server arrays in Sydney, New York and Adelaide from MS to linux 7.x
The up-time and hardware load makes my reluctance to move from known ground (Microsoft) seem rediculous now that I look back. The figures don't lie and that is what sold me on the OS.
Now that Linux has a firm position in the server market over Microsoft, to 'not' develop a linux port is tantamount to losing the possibility of more than half the market.
One point that is very true from on of the replies above is that support costs are generally lower due to the quality of the knowledge base required just by being a Linux Server Admin (I know they keep reminding me how clever they are every payday)
A GPL may be a way to go, but as a commercial product they could be giving source code to a future competitor...
Perhaps a partnership with a linux development team would be the way to go, effectively selling a Linux franchise? Just my 2 bob's worth ;)
|
|
|
|
Greg
|
| Posted: 11/20/2002, 6:34 AM |
|
Learning about Linux as a server based system is like learning anything.
Some people don't realize they are on a train track until the train hits them as they are standing still.
[the moral is don't stand still ;)]
I used to associate Linux with the first "Linux person" I met - he was a HUGE MS hater that couldn't see anything good about Windows. It took years for me to see that the holy grail of server OS's isn't in the "Gates" camp ;)
Fortunately I got out of the way of the train. Perhaps you can get some Linux tips from some of the posters on this fine forum? One thing about Linux gurus is they can be very generous if asked nicely... MS based programmers tend to have a cash drawer at the ready ;)
|
|
|
|
xbill
|
| Posted: 11/20/2002, 7:30 AM |
|
Just FYI-
For running CCS under linux- CCS will run under
the Netraverse Win4lin product. The emulator
is available at http://www.netraverse.com.
The plus side- is that you can easily manage
backups of your environment. The downside is
that win4lin is limited to win 95/98/me for
now.
Note- win4lin is not free- but is cheap compared
to other emulators (for example vmware)
I also want to test the bochs emulator (free)
with CCS- but it will probably run a lot slower.
Ideally a native linux CCS port would be best- and I
would pay money for the tool + support....
Unfortunately, it seems like Codecharge relies heavily on many
Microsoft DLLs - so it probably will not be cost
effective to port it.
On the Mac side- you are just plain out of luck.
There is a commerical windows emulator for Mac OS9 + OSX-
Connectix Virtial PC- but it does not run CCS.
Neither the connectix or codecharge commercial
support could get CCS to work. The core of the problem
is some unusual DLL registration calls that
CCS performs during installation.
-bill
|
|
|
|
RonB
|
| Posted: 11/21/2002, 7:34 AM |
|
JBuilder, Kylix from Borland run fine on Linux. And there are developer apps for QT, python etc etc. I dont think linux has any problems developing wise. There are a lot of people programming for linux, probably more then windows since linux is developed by a large group of people that contribute their code for free.
my pc crashed severly a few days a go and gues what. Linux is the only thing still running on it. Lost all my data on the win2k part of the pc but could rescue a fair bit by accessing the partition from wihtin linux and copying it to my other windows machines. I've had constant troubles with win98 and (all though less) win2k. I've seen win XP and wouldn't touch it with a stick.
Have you seen the price tag on visual studio .net Please tell me how nice it is to have such a choice on your windows machine developing wise. Only if your wallet allows it and you'd need a big one at that.
It's not just the price tag that's looking good on linux. It's also the great open-source community that always helped me when I struck a problem. Generaly people on MS app newsgroups would like to charge you for just saying hello.
I think linux is looking better and better. In a few years it will be a great product even for spoiled windows users. And let's be fair..., when's the last time you've seen something inovative from MS? WinXP is nothing but a nice looking win2K clone yet they have you paying thrue the nose for it.
Ron
|
|
|
|
jmoss
|
| Posted: 11/21/2002, 8:17 PM |
|
Few if any would pay for a linux port.
|
|
|
|
NoName
|
| Posted: 11/25/2002, 10:46 PM |
|
"I think linux is looking better and better. In a few years it will be a great product even for spoiled windows users. And let's be fair..., when's the last time you've seen something inovative from MS? WinXP is nothing but a nice looking win2K clone yet they have you paying thrue the nose for it. -- Ron "
=============================================================================
You are right, Linux is looking better and better, but give it those few years you are talking about - then you might get CCS for Linux.
=============================================================================
For software to be viable for use by large corporations and government agencies, that's where the money is, it needs to be supported by its distributor.
Case in point is Linux' RedHat Ditribution that became successfull only because RedHat provides customer support.
MS Windows is entranched in these corporations and nothing is going to dislodge it anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
RonB
|
| Posted: 11/26/2002, 5:21 AM |
|
" MS Windows is entranched in these corporations and nothing is going to dislodge it anytime soon."
Have you seen the new license sceme from MS. Signs are that even large corporations are considering alternatives to MS because they are now asked to pay ridiculous amounts of money to be able to use MS products. Our company., medium sized(400+ employees) is paying over a hundred thousand dollars in licenses.
Linux could be used in a lot of areas in our company. Most workers just use the email client and the office software. Our clientregistration software is holding us back because it doesn't run on linux...yet. The supplier is under great pressure from his clients to make a linux version and is in the proces of doing so.
A proposed law in our government is trying to make it mandatory for government agencies to use open source software where possible. This could signal a great incentive to look at open source possibilities. MS shot itself in the foot abusing it's monopoly position and has alienated a lot of people, even people at important positions, by driving up their prices.
Ron
|
|
|
|
Aaron
|
| Posted: 06/17/2003, 10:17 AM |
|
Having written my fair share of apps... I would always look to write something cross-platform FIRST. After all, it not JUST linux users that CodeCharge forgets here.. it's MAC and others also. I would also argue that although Windows users are greater in number, the target audience of programmers has a much larger percentage of Linux users than the general populace.
BTW - Sadly - I have been experimentating with trying to get CCS2 to run on my RH9 with Crossover Office installation. It installs fine, but dies at the licensing screen. But hey - I have MS Office and IE6 running in Linux, that's halfway there. Now I maintain a windows box and use VNC to connect to it, specifically to run CodeCharge. One of these days the value of CodeCharge will be lost to the value of freedom of choice....
|
|
|
|
Bruce
|
| Posted: 08/29/2003, 10:33 AM |
|
Utter hogwash!
Linux is no harder to support than anything else, if you create the application using non o/s dependant tools then recompling to run under Linux or OS X is a fairly trivial matter.
The real truth is that applications tend to be Micro$oft dependant because they are made with Micro$oft dependant tools.
Developers need to wake up and realise that Micro$oft non dependant tools are no more difficult, no more awkward and that as long as they are supported they will continue to be as good if not better. This then adds and extra dimension to sales as the product will be cross platform.
Indeed one of the great joys of developing applications to run in web browsers (which is what we are doing) is that they are very cross platform, they can be used by any operating system with a browser even a mobile phone!
A lot of people have already found out to thier cost that ASP does not work under severe pressure as well as PHP, the Micro$oft tools are just not as good.
|
|
|
|
