Binary incompatibility of Linux distributions

[Odd]

Rashkae wrote:
> Odd wrote:
>> Rashkae wrote:
>>> Odd wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's easier, but as you say, it makes makes windows unstable and insecure.
>>>> I agree with what you're saying for the most part. I just wish for a better
>>>> interface for Synaptic, and a better way to install software not in repos.
>>>> Personally I have no problems compiling software or using other means,
>>>> but I do know how most people find it. They don't understand, and they
>>>> don't want to. So for these people, who are a huge majority of computer
>>>> usres, there should be better ways.
>>> You're asking for an easier way to install software that hasn't been
>>> packaged for the OS of the user, but that's a double standard.  For
>>> illustration purposes, please install an SVN branch of Mplayer on
>>> windows that hasn't been prepackaged for Windows, then come back and
>>> tell much how we have to make installation of software in Linux easier.
>> I think your reaching here.
>> No ordinary user would ever install an SVN branch of Mplayer.
>> They would install the latest stable binary.
>>
> 
> There is no such thing in this case (why I chose the example), but
> that's exactly my point.  If the software developer, or even a third
> party, makes a binary for a system, be it Ubuntu, Red Hat, Windows or
> Mac, then installing between them is relatively a snap, and you can
> debate the merits between them until your blue in the face.  However,
> what I've seen here is complaints that installing software in Linux
> where there is no packaged binary is too hard and therefore Linux needs
> an easier way to install software.  I call rubbish on that train of
> thought.  The difference here is that Linux actually makes installing
> from source so easy, relatively speaking, it becomes a visible option to
> the masses,

I'm sorry, but you grossly overestimate ordinary users' skills and 
willingness
to learn. It's a sad fact, but while it's easy to install from source in 
Linux,
it's still way too complicated for the unwashed masses. I did my time
on end-user support, and I have no illusions about their abilities on this
subject. It may be a 'visible' option, but users are blind.

> whereas in Windows word, that kind of procedure would be way
> too daunting to even be considered among non-developers.

It's way too daunting in Linux too, even if it might be easier than
in Windows.

-- 
Odd