Re: Dev-C++ compiling problem in Vista

Eligiusz Narutowicz wrote, On 07/05/08 10:57:
> Flash Gordon <spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> 
>> Eligiusz Narutowicz wrote, On 06/05/08 19:04:
>>> Flash Gordon <spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>>>
>>>> jacob navia wrote, On 06/05/08 06:38:
>>>>> Bill Buckels wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> Well Microsoft and C have both fed my family and friends for about
30
>>>>>> years now evn though they may seem mutually exclusive like Military
>>>>>> Intelligence, so I don't exactly get your point. 
>>>>> Selling software under Linux is impossible,
>>>> One of the biggest money spinners in my company currently runs on AIX
>>>> and Linux, with all but one customer on Linux and the code is even
>>>> written mostly in C. Oracle is sold for Linux. Plenty of other SW is
>>>> sold for Linux.
>>> No, not "plenty" at all. Some server stuff is about it.
>> All depends on your definition of "plenty". In any case, Jacob said
>> that "selling software under Linux is impossible" so coming up with
>> even *one* example proves that he is wrong.
> 
> If one wants to being rather stupid and "anal" then yes but it is clear
> anough I think what is meant here.

You mean if one wants to be correct.

>>> There is about
>>> no desktop market is is obvious to anyone with a passing interest in
SW
>>> development and business.
>> The market is big enough that companies invest time, money and effort
on it.
> 
> No it is not.

Why are they spending time, money and effort on it if it is not large 
enough to be worth it? Companies are not charities.

> The market is very small for the desktops.

That does not mean it is not worth the time, money and effort.

>>>>> at least for
>>>>> developers like most of us.
>>>> Maybe like you, but others are different.
>>> A tiny minority perhaps.
>> Ah well, you admit that some do.
> 
> Of course. Why not? I never said "no" but its very small and there is
> not much revenue there.

There is money to be had for both small and large players. That covers 
all the "developers like us" on this group.

>>>>> Nobody will buy anything,
>>>> Wrong. As evidence the number of companies that sell SW to run under
>>>> Linux and the number that buy SW to run under Linux.
>>> i.e hardly any. Sorry. But at least asknowledge there is very, very
>>> small market compared to Mac and Windows.
>> Even *one* person buying proves that Jacob is wrong. I'll acknowledge
>> that the market for desktop SW for Linux is smaller. Now will you and
>> Jacob acknowledge that it exists and that people *will* by things?
> 
> I do not understand why you are being so stupid. It is clear to me what
> Jacob is meaning.

Jacob is being incorrect. If he means small then that is what he should
say.

>>>>> linux distros
>>>>> will make a war on you, etc.
>>>> They don't seem to be making war on a lot of the successful SW sold
to
>>>> run under Linux.
>>> What succesful SW? And please do no say "oracle".
>> What is wrong with Oracle? Companies spend a *lot* of money on Oracle
>> licenses some for Windows and some for Linux (I don't know which is
>> larger).
> 
> because it is the only" big player" and one example is not "lots of
> op****tunity" I think.

Someone else posted on this thread about the SW his company produces and 
was told that it was too big to count. He also pointed out that his 
company does SW for the Linux desktop, not just server applications.

>> Well, there is the SW I have spent a lot of time developing which I
>> won't advertise here.
> 
> Why not?

Because
a) I don't believe in advertising in inappropriate places.
b) It is SW that would not be of interest to people here.

>> Livelink
>> VMWare (all versions)
> 
> Free.

Only one of the three full version of VMWare is free, and that is the 
low end server version. The desktop version costs money, and the high 
end version costs a lot of money and is distributed with its own version 
of Linux.

>> Crossover Office
> 
> never used it and the programs run are all Windows.

It is still SW sold specifically for the Linux desktop market. Therefore 
it is still a company making money selling to the Linux desktop market.

>> MatLab
> 
> ? Open source equivalents.

I was refering to MatLab itself. At least, the company that produces 
MatLab lists Linux as one of the options under the system requirements 
and they do not give it away.

>> Depending on how much you stretch it there is RedHat ES/AS
>>
>> Some of the above are big names in their relevant domains. There is
>> more as well.
> 
> Like what? It is you making big claims. Please try to verify it.

I did, you are the one not verifying things. MatLab is a big player in 
its market and it is *sold* for Linux. I verified it on the companies 
web site. The same for VMWare Workstation and ESX Server. Opentext is a 
global company and their Livelink product is big in its domain and they 
sell it on Linux as well as Windows.

> So far
> you list only oracle and we all know that is not "desktop market" for
> most programmers to try and be making money.

Well, if you discount the others which I did verify by falsely claiming 
that I did not you won't see the evidence. However, the plain fact is 
that I have already demonstrated desktop applications from small and 
large companies which I *have* verified.

>>>>> Software developers should be like
>>>>> the ideal GNU developer: work for free for endless hours, and
>>>>> work as pizza delivery man to feed your family.
>>>> So you still don't understand about selling other services on the
back
>>>> of the SW.
>>> Other services like sys admin possibly. But designing a web for
someone
>>> and that web being put on linux is not really "developing sw for
linux".
>> Consultancy (some of my time is sold on consultancy and we sell a lot
>> of other consultants time)
>> Customisation
>> Sup****t (companies will pay big money for sup****t on the right
>> product)
> 
> You are not the market although I wonder if you are thinking you are.

No, I am not the market, however I am telling you some of the things 
that companies *do* spend significant money on. My company makes far 
more on Professional Services (i.e. the above) than on SW sales. RedHat 
make a lot on sup****t on the back of open source SW. Oracle make a lot 
on sup****t and are releasing products where the only thing they charge 
for is sup****t.
-- 
Flash Gordon