Anonymous
Here one reality fragment for easier understanding:
Chapter I
PERSON A talks to PERSON B over the Skype. Both aged 75+.
PERSON A:
“Let me show you what have I done …”
PERSON B:
“Oh nice! How did you make it?”
PERSON A:
“That’s pretty easy. You could try to do it yourself. I’ll send you a program …”
Little bit later, the PROGRAM A.EXE arrived.
PERSON B, who’s using a Linux, wants to install uninstallable.
PERSON B:
“Could you install me this (thinking on his .EXE)?” (talking to me)
“PERSON A will explain me how can I …”
ME:
“Hmmm … that’ll not work. .EXE can’t be installed in Linux BUT, there’s a “PROGRAM C.deb” which will do that and it can also …”
WHO CARES?
PERSON B just wants PROGRAM A that it knows from the PERSON A.
What PROGRAM C can or can’t do, is it ‘better’ or ‘worse’, that’s completely irrelevant.
PERSON A uses the PROGRAM A, PERSON B wants PROGRAM A and the PERSON A will explain the PROGRAM A to PERSON B.
That easy.
People want what other people know/use.
The same thing in Enterprise.
You have to deliver something.ai and that’s it. Illustrator.
NOBODY cares if it could have been done with Corel Draw, Inkscape or Xara.
Chapter II
Yes, the fragmentation of Linux is a problem too but:
A) The sole discussion on Linux fragmentation as a problem comes to a much later point — at that time, the Linux is already long time ‘no alternative’.
B) The Linux community / users are also a ‘poison’ for the further Linux development with their rejection of anything unified or sane.
Unity (DE) was partially rejected because it had deep Amazon integration but, same time, that was its greatest feature.
One could have made it a real commercial alternative to the commercial competitors.
Now it’ll start raining the protests and ‘freedoms’ and such and …
If you think a little on that ‘rain’, you’ll understand the second reason why there’s no such thing as ‘Linux as alternative’.