Wgy isn't there a good RAD Gui tool fo python

Andrew Berg bahamutzero8825 at gmail.com
Tue Jul 12 13:20:36 CEST 2011


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

On 2011.07.12 05:24 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rather than taking advantage of that convenience, commercial vendors
> put barriers in the way and try to carve out little walled gardens.
> Did they not learn anything from AOL?
DRM and activation schemes will /always/ make things harder, but that is
the cost of doing business, at least in the minds of commercial software
vendors.

There are actually a lot of good freeware (proprietary, but zero cost)
apps out there. Some even better than open-source alternatives. I avoid
commercial apps, though, since they tend to be far inferior to the
alternatives (inconvenience aside).

> Where is the Windows equivalent of yum or apt-get? Why isn't there a
> central repository of independent and third party Windows software?
If Microsoft made such a repository, how much of the repository would be
high-quality open-source software, and how much would be commercial
shovelware?

Attempts at independent repos have been made, but they all fail because
there's no effort among developers (especially developers of proprietary
software), to package their software this way. These attempts also fail
because they fail to gain support from users (a catch-22 where users
don't bother because there's not much in the repo and there's not much
in the repo because users don't bother).

> It seems clear to me that it is the major open source communities
> that aim for convenience, at the cost of the opportunity to sell
> licences.
The developers of open-source projects often aim to please the user
rather than make money. You'd think pleasing the user and making money
would go hand-in-hand, but history has shown that the latter can be
achieved with little thought of the former.

> That might have been true, oh, 20 years ago, but today, that's far
> less of a rule. Linux distros make interoperability far simpler. Some
> level of savvy is needed, but it is remarkable how much Linux
> software Just Works.
At first, Linux had to learn how to crawl and then walk. Now it's doing
gymnastics. :)

> In my experience, two categories of Linux software are generally hard
> to deal with: one-man projects (usually stuck on version 0.2b for the
> last seven years), and big, popular projects that have been taken
> over by developers from the Windows world (I'm looking at you,
> Firefox). YMMV.
Firefox (and Thunderbird with it) are falling into the same trap that
many fall into when they become popular. This is more prevalent among
commercial apps, but it's not too surprising considering Firefox's
popularity. The trap is making things shiny. That is, using UI designs
(and to a lesser extent adding neat, but generally useless features)
that appeal to the computer-illiterate masses who cling to something
that looks neat, regardless of how useful it ultimately is. AFAICT,
Mozilla's problem isn't that incompetent Windows-centric devs took over,
but rather that Google and MS were stepping up their game with their
respective browsers and is desperately trying not to lose market share.

- -- 
CPython 3.2 | Windows NT 6.1.7601.17592 | Thunderbird 5.0
PGP/GPG Public Key ID: 0xF88E034060A78FCB
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAwAGBQJOHC4EAAoJEPiOA0Bgp4/Lgm0IAOT+/LQNalPHm5pvt4ilF1yt
RM9fPBSgAF5k9U8jWBuQy/V6QJ/a1Sfkzu8ulZ8TyAYS64quucIqTwMJugdTUmct
KsGbDsyXg0FObMxNiKKFuZblVYOtnULkYtYZOxeE33qy+85X6NMuFUv7ARHaLi/3
1Bdmnsj43hRrzJ1Rwb8x+xbOmiq+fJ7199loPQ+unSu7s37NJoL1e1vFNnsmGz8A
Jg58Q0MbGiwettPdM9ZySYWgTJhiawtEX4SF6YiQqf22e04OyPWyxUfejixnZNoQ
7vbksr9k8PQzuTlG2y3G1pJx6XGrxgOQuEoVjInMGbZW0tx43paJLEWCOcd38FI=
=3FGv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Python-list mailing list