Well, I didn’t intend to give the impression I know what is best for any developer. I was reasoning within a limited context and then trying to draw conclusions about the best tactics to use in order to maximize a certain bang for buck. What I said may not apply to you, or even if it might, everyone is free to disagree.

Yeah, what I wrote could sound awfully annoying (a better adjective doesn’t come to mind right now) if you don’t agree. Sometimes I forget other people with different views/goals/experiences might actually be reading what I write. Thanks for reminding me [not sarcastic].

There are Windows users that have been slowing down some projects by asking asking and giving back little. I don’t doubt at least some of these are not exactly what they appear.

But sacrifice long-term large numbers for short-term short-lived gains and higher overall costs? At least that is one of the risks being taken.

I can see how google and some others may stand to gain more by playing along for the time being. They (more or less) have to make quarterly numbers.

Whatever.

As a community that cares about FOSS more than just a bit and wants long term competitive advantages, we should be investing more into Linux and less into Windows than is currently the case. Of course, Microsoft doesn’t think we invest enough into Windows today.

Users will basically live in a Linux world in this case (tendencies are to install and use Linux apps), but without losing Windows locked-in apps.

http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2009-01-16-010-35-OS-DP-0001

So why are we wasting time porting to Windows and helping to keep monopolists securely fighting open platforms?

I think there would be more fundamental reasons, like the lock-in for key apps, services, hardware, etc, found only on Windows.

You can teach people new apps in many ways. People try new things all the time, especially when it seems cool/useful/etc. Also, people will never become fully practiced. Apps always change and there are always new apps popping up.

The best way to counter Windows is to make sure that platform is lacking more every day when compared to what Linux offers. This way you exert pressure for new apps, services, hardware, etc, to be made for Linux and for users to go to the trouble to switch. If Linux offers little that is new, why go through hurdles Microsoft and partners insert in Linux’ path? Also, Linux will grow faster if developers focus on it. Linux (and their apps) will grow better faster if these are made more integrated with open technologies. Code for Linux — that is not a sin and will be necessary in order to produce more high quality apps. On Windows, Microsoft will impede you as necessary over and over and steal your thunder more easily. Think of your apps as open instructions run on a platform much like HTML instructions run on a browser. Don’t contribute to enhancing Windows and helping Microsoft keep up and retain their monopoly levers.

Of course Linux does have some things Windows never will (its “killer apps”): source code safety; no monopolist (yet) running the show through maximal leverage; ability to be customized to suit; ….

If you decide to port to Windows (and risk irrevocable harm to your mind and soul ).. then keep the features down; show videos/explain the new features/benefits you can get if you move to Linux; provide a way for them to try Linux (here developing an ecosystem is very important; also LiveCds and ways to switch to Linux from Windows; etc.); etc.

Better than ports is to have custom distros focused on your application. Users can try these through VMs or liveCDs. This way you build to a single platform and one you control. Remember, if you invest in Microsoft platforms, you invest in Microsoft. You will have something to lose if Microsoft disappears, so you will be more likely to (in)directly support them further. Also, you waste less time debugging for open platforms. And you have the ability to directly impact the open platform in many ways.

There is a multi-pronged strategy, but from the developing pov, the focus should be Linux/FOSS platforms.

The OS is a real part of the application. Don’t invest in closed OS any more than you would be willing to invest in closed source fundamental aspects of your application (but these closed source parts are not even controllable by you and help sustain Microsoft, the biggest threat and impediment to the growth of full FOSS apps).

Do app makers want to reach users at all costs, eg, by running Microsoft’s rat race and helping to prop up Microsoft, or are they willing to use their apps with a main goal to lure people onto open platforms, which is the only place where their apps can always thrive without limits and dirty tricks?