Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellmark
As a developer, I've never experienced any issues legally speaking with porting code to Linux. Also, when it comes to statically linked code, there isn't too much of any issue with it no longer being able to be run. I still have and can run apps with static links from 10+ years back.
The reason it isn't done often, is because if there is a bug fix for any of the libraries used, you'll have to recompile the whole app to take advantage of them, and it can create binaries that are much bigger than dynamically linked ones.
|
WHile I too have been a developer, for, well, a while.
But I have never done any development for Linux, some QNX and Solaris stuff but that was, cripes back in '90-'93 and even then it was mostly dBase III compatible code save for some comm stuff to move data from our branch offices from the -ix systems to the DOS/Win boxes in the branches. So for Linux I only speak as a user and what I've seen with the apps I used on my Nokia N800 and their Linux branch OS200x (seems to be called Maemo now even though that was just the dev environment originally). But it was quite often they, Nokia back when I was using the thing, broke compatibility for a wide swath of apps as OS updates and even versions were released. And as I recall it was really only on the UI part of the system not generally the core code for an app. But if the thing can't render then it is still bork'd. hehehe
Thanks for the claifications btw. It is sort of how I remembered and assumed things still worked, an OS is an OS after all, right? But my questioning about the statically linked libs was what is the code which is statically linked is rendered obsolete/nonfunctional with an OS update. Or even more fun, the self-induced break via user made "improvements" to a given lib. Even developers, well the less expereinced sorts, use the "I didn't do annnnyyyything" excuse.
So there is the support overhead there.
Oh, I want add I am not trying to say it's not possible but that it, from an overhead POV, is likely not financially viable or justified to add Linux and all it's variations for a reader app.
About licensing, what about the whole limitations, and I am discussing handheld/portable OS devices here not the desktop, but the limitations concerning DRM content. Remember there are limitations to what software is allowed on a device to read other ebooks and exclusions for other DRM content. So this is part of what I am thinking. Of course I right now see a hole there given that there is a Android app. If it runs there in a mixed DRM environment then no reason it can't also port to Linux.
Hmmm, so maybe it's just a market forces sort of thing. In this case Amazon assumes that given the really affordable price of entry of $139 today, it's more in their interests to let users buy some sort of supported handheld device over porting the app.
And anyway, doesn't the Kindle OS actually run on top pf Linux? So yeah, I see it as odd but there must be a reason. Hmmm, oh well back to work for me burnt enough of the day already!
thanks for the info.
