Looking for Beta Testers for Training Log Software - Page 2 - Triathlon Week

11-10-2004, 01:31 PM

Francesco Devittori wrote:

> You would be surprised to know how many people are using training logs
> under linux or other various non-windows os! And you would be yet more
> surprised to know how many of these people actually wrote their own
> software. If you are a developer and your software is really that great,
> then people will pay for it -even linux users.

I'd guess that Linux users are *much* less likely to pay for great software
than Windows users. A large number of people running Linux do so because
they support open source and free software, and even those who care less
about this are still used to having lots of good free software readily
available to them. Windows users are more used to having to pay for their
software, assuming they don't steal it, and so will do so more readily.

All of my Windows software (OS + some games) is paid for.
None of my Linux software (everything else) is.

Of course, I would have bought Linux versions of those games if they'd been
available, so that partly destroys my point...

--
Benjamin Lewis

Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.

11-10-2004, 05:01 PM

Andrew Martin wrote:

> Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message
> news:<4191eed6$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ch>...
>>
>> Still writing software for Windows? No Linux version?
>> bad thing...
>
> I can only assume you're not serious. Consumer marketshare is still
> vastly Windows focused. You'd have to be an idiot to go into business
> for a niche market (bicycle training) supporting a platform with as
> small a reach as Linux.

I'd say you'd be an idiot to ignore all those body-nazi yuppie triathletes with
Macs. Write the thing in Java, or some other cross platform tookit, so you
don't have to exclude anyone. Of course, if all you know how to do is program
for Windows...

Matt O.

11-10-2004, 08:21 PM

Leafing through rec.sport.triathlon, I read Mark's message of 10 Nov 2004:

> At least, any good system administrator will tell you that.
> Microsoft products are crap.

I must suck then. ;-)

Phil M., MCSE

11-15-2004, 01:48 PM

I tend to agree with you. Ignoring Macs and Linux user is a mistake
even because it seems that the next step that MS is going to take is
to develop his own unix based program. As coach in the past I didn't
buy a lot of software just because it wasn't made for my MAC. This is
the main reason why I don't buy a perfect rower (who the heck is still
using DOS?)
It is not that hard and it might be a very good market move.
Marco

Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message news:<4192769e$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ch>...
> Andrew Martin wrote:
> > Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message news:<4191eed6$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ch>...
> >
> >>Still writing software for Windows? No Linux version?
> >>bad thing...
> >
> >
> > I can only assume you're not serious. Consumer marketshare is still
> > vastly Windows focused. You'd have to be an idiot to go into business
> > for a niche market (bicycle training) supporting a platform with as
> > small a reach as Linux.
>
> You would be surprised to know how many people are using training logs
> under linux or other various non-windows os!
> And you would be yet more surprised to know how many of these people
> actually wrote their own software.
> If you are a developer and your software is really that great, then
> people will pay for it -even linux users.
>
> (btw, greatest software is usually cross-platform -and mostly free)

11-15-2004, 02:27 PM

"marco" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:edc72e1c.0411151248.485cfc58@posting.google.c om...
> I tend to agree with you. Ignoring Macs and Linux user is a mistake
> even because it seems that the next step that MS is going to take is
> to develop his own unix based program. As coach in the past I didn't
> buy a lot of software just because it wasn't made for my MAC. This is
> the main reason why I don't buy a perfect rower (who the heck is still
> using DOS?)
> It is not that hard and it might be a very good market move.
> Marco

Well, as a software developer, I think I can comment on this. Although I
would like to develop for the Mac and Linux, I don't. There are several
reasons, both technical and financial (in no particular order):

1) Porting my applications to Mac/Linux (i.e., Java) would be an enormous
undertaking, for a very small market potential.

2) Applications built on Java have (until recently) tended to be slow.

3) It's my understanding that Java applications are very difficult to secure
against crackers (i.e., software thieves), because it is an "interpreted"
language (this same problem applies to .Net).

4) Linux users tend to expect software for free.

5) Applications written for a cross-platform language are unable to take
advantage of many of the built-in features of the operating system. This
means that the program will have a "lowest common denominator" look and
feel, or I'll have to spend a bunch of time and effort emulating those
features by writing my own code in Java.

Actually, I'd like to stand this question on it's head - why is it that
Windows programs are not able to run on Linux or Mac? Windows is the most
popular OS, by a wide, wide margin...one would think that the folks creating
Linux/Mac OS'es would include an emulator to allow the wide range of Windows
programs to run under their OS'es. There are emulators available, but
they're not built into those OS'es - I suspect this has more to do with
religion than technology, however.

GG

>
> Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message
news:<4192769e$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ch>...
> > Andrew Martin wrote:
> > > Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message
news:<4191eed6$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ch>...
> > >
> > >>Still writing software for Windows? No Linux version?
> > >>bad thing...
> > >
> > >
> > > I can only assume you're not serious. Consumer marketshare is still
> > > vastly Windows focused. You'd have to be an idiot to go into business
> > > for a niche market (bicycle training) supporting a platform with as
> > > small a reach as Linux.
> >
> > You would be surprised to know how many people are using training logs
> > under linux or other various non-windows os!
> > And you would be yet more surprised to know how many of these people
> > actually wrote their own software.
> > If you are a developer and your software is really that great, then
> > people will pay for it -even linux users.
> >
> > (btw, greatest software is usually cross-platform -and mostly free)

11-15-2004, 03:30 PM

GaryG [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] opined the following...
> Well, as a software developer, I think I can comment on this. Although I
> would like to develop for the Mac and Linux, I don't. There are several
> reasons, both technical and financial (in no particular order):
>
> 1) Porting my applications to Mac/Linux (i.e., Java) would be an enormous
> undertaking, for a very small market potential.

So why use Java? There are some free toolkits that operate on at least
two of those platforms that would allow you to develop in C++ (Assuming
that this is your language of choice).

> 2) Applications built on Java have (until recently) tended to be slow.

This has been steadily improving for many years now. JIT compilers and
well-designed core libraries mean that a colleague and I have managed to
release a program built 100% in Java that behaves with the response
times of a "conventional" application.

> 3) It's my understanding that Java applications are very difficult to secure
> against crackers (i.e., software thieves), because it is an "interpreted"
> language (this same problem applies to .Net).

If your product has a market above a certain size, it will be cracked.
It is simply not possible to prevent this as the code (In some form) has
to be available to the user in order to execute it. Spend less time
building security into your application and you can reduce your
development costs, and thus the end cost. If the product seems good
value for money, the incentive to crack and copy is lowered.

> 4) Linux users tend to expect software for free.

True.

> 5) Applications written for a cross-platform language are unable to take
> advantage of many of the built-in features of the operating system. This
> means that the program will have a "lowest common denominator" look and
> feel, or I'll have to spend a bunch of time and effort emulating those
> features by writing my own code in Java.

This depends on what you are developing. 3d Acceleration systems are now
reasonably standardised and OpenGL is a universal library for
development in that area. Beyond that, my experience is that most
windowing systems are drifting towards a similarity of widgets, so it
would be possible (And recommended) to separate the data from the
interface and thus only have to recode a small proportion for each port.

> Actually, I'd like to stand this question on it's head - why is it that
> Windows programs are not able to run on Linux or Mac? Windows is the most
> popular OS, by a wide, wide margin...one would think that the folks creating
> Linux/Mac OS'es would include an emulator to allow the wide range of Windows
> programs to run under their OS'es. There are emulators available, but
> they're not built into those OS'es - I suspect this has more to do with
> religion than technology, however.

It has to do with the fact that no right-thinking person would choose a
less stable platform over a more stable one. That and the small issue of
licencing and openness which meant that producing a windows clone was a
near impossible task. Despite this, Macs have for some time come with
(Possibly as an optional extra) a windows emulator and the Wine project
and VMWare cater nicely for the Linux market.

Given the vast number of "undocumented features" in windows, it is a
miracle that most windows programs are able to run on windows (even this
is not always the case!), let alone have other systems run them.

Jon

11-15-2004, 11:14 PM

marco wrote:
> I tend to agree with you. Ignoring Macs and Linux user is a mistake
> even because it seems that the next step that MS is going to take is
> to develop his own unix based program. As coach in the past I didn't
> buy a lot of software just because it wasn't made for my MAC. This is
> the main reason why I don't buy a perfect rower (who the heck is still
> using DOS?)
> It is not that hard and it might be a very good market move.
> Marco
>
> Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message news:<4192769e$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ch>...
>
>>Andrew Martin wrote:
>>
>>>Francesco Devittori <frenkatfrenkdtcm> wrote in message news:<4191eed6$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ch>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Still writing software for Windows? No Linux version?
>>>>bad thing...
>>>
>>>
>>>I can only assume you're not serious. Consumer marketshare is still
>>>vastly Windows focused. You'd have to be an idiot to go into business
>>>for a niche market (bicycle training) supporting a platform with as
>>>small a reach as Linux.
>>
>>You would be surprised to know how many people are using training logs
>>under linux or other various non-windows os!
>>And you would be yet more surprised to know how many of these people
>>actually wrote their own software.
>>If you are a developer and your software is really that great, then
>>people will pay for it -even linux users.
>>
>>(btw, greatest software is usually cross-platform -and mostly free)

I'd like to find some sort of training log software. As for the linux
thing, people are seeing the light. My whole family runs it, including
my Mom. :)

--
Mark Wolfe Lakeside, ca [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
gpg fingerprint = 42B6 EFEB 5414 AA18 01B7 64AC EF46 F7E6 82F6 8C71
How do I type "for i in *.dvi do xdvi i done" in a GUI?
(Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of interfaces.)

11-16-2004, 12:10 PM

Mark Wolfe wrote:

> I'd like to find some sort of training log software. As for the
> linux thing, people are seeing the light. My whole family runs it,
> including my Mom. :)

Actually, Gary's program (Cyclistats) is very nice. But for $45, I'll continue
to use a spreadsheet. It may be worth it to you, though. I encourage you to
give it a try -- I think he still offers a free 30-day demo.

Matt O.

11-16-2004, 12:28 PM

"Matt O'Toole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> Mark Wolfe wrote:
>
> > I'd like to find some sort of training log software. As for the
> > linux thing, people are seeing the light. My whole family runs it,
> > including my Mom. :)
>
> Actually, Gary's program (Cyclistats) is very nice. But for $45, I'll
continue
> to use a spreadsheet. It may be worth it to you, though. I encourage you
to
> give it a try -- I think he still offers a free 30-day demo.
>
> Matt O.
>
>

Thanks, but you've got the price wrong. It's $34.95 (US).

If you've not tried the current version (4.2), you should take a look. The
new "Goals" feature (
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ), plus the "balloon
tips" and "icons" in the Calendar view (
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ) have been very
well received.

--
~_-*
....G/ \G
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
CycliStats - Software for Cyclists

11-18-2004, 06:09 PM

Jon Senior <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote:

>> 1) Porting my applications to Mac/Linux (i.e., Java) would be an enormous
>> undertaking, for a very small market potential.
>
> So why use Java? There are some free toolkits that operate on at least
> two of those platforms

Or all three;

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

It's what I'd use, I'm writing this in Knode on Fedora Core 2 (Linux) of
course.

Cheers,
Brad

11-20-2004, 04:22 AM

"Jon Senior" <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>I have managed to
> release a program built 100% in Java that behaves with the response
> times of a "conventional" application.
>

I applaud you. I'm an IT professional, though not a developer, and the Java
apps I see (from major software companies pitched at enterprise customers)
are way short of that standard. I follow all the arguments about short time
to market. My gripes are the memory and CPU hit from the Java middleware,
the pickiness about Java versions and the take on platform neutrality that
seems to revel in GUIs far clunkier than those enjoyed by native apps.

--

Richard

--------------------

Individual replies to [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

less the Misdirections (and note the underscore after r246)

11-20-2004, 09:57 AM

Gippledocks [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] opined
the following...
>
> "Jon Senior" <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >I have managed to
> > release a program built 100% in Java that behaves with the response
> > times of a "conventional" application.
> >
>
> I applaud you. I'm an IT professional, though not a developer, and the Java
> apps I see (from major software companies pitched at enterprise customers)
> are way short of that standard. I follow all the arguments about short time
> to market. My gripes are the memory and CPU hit from the Java middleware,
> the pickiness about Java versions and the take on platform neutrality that
> seems to revel in GUIs far clunkier than those enjoyed by native apps.

The memory and CPU hits have been lessening over time and are no longer
as significant as they were. The pickiness about Java versions is also
much less than it was although keeping the JRE up-to-date is a very good
idea (AFAIK, its very rare for a new version of the JRE to break code
from the previous version).

We managed to build a MWI program with a dynamically generated
background (Using transparancy) which runs in more than acceptable time
on every machine we've tested it on. This is despite a lack of rewriting
for efficiency.

I use (As a part of my real job) a piece of software which is written in
Delphi (Allegedly). It has the worst interface I've seen and is
painfully slow. Until recently it was unable to deal with maximised
windows and used to say "f...." on the startup screen instead of
"Welcome to..." [Name withheld to protect the guilty]. Despite being
designed for large scale deployment it seems to die a death if it is not
lovingly looked after and if it used with any regularity.

Take care not to confuse the abilities of the language with the
abilities of the programmer. To paraphrase Paul's sig "A tosser is a
tosser, no matter which language they use"! ;-)

Jon