Hmmm still trying to figure out how Open Source relates to pirated????

--Mitch

Free, as in you don't have to pay for it. No cash required.

Ok free is free... but Open Source does not have to be completely free.. and free does not mean pirated... There are many business models built around Open Source support model and modified open source code.

Pirated is one thing... Open Source is a totally different animal... And free is as well...

--Mitch

In the minds of the those who prefer not to pay for software, it's all free. But thanks for playing.

I think that is the problem. The "perception" of the Open Source / Linux market is that this user base is used to getting things for free. Most business are a bit apprehensive about spending a lot of money in product development for a group of people that may or may not even purchase software.

Your spot on Mitch, people have the wrong ideas of free and Open Source.

How is open source not free?

http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd

Glad to see this old thread open again. In the time since it was posted there have been a number of interesting changes, not the least of which is the success of Android-driven devices in the consumer electronics marketplace.

Whether people are aware of it or not, much of what's driving the market these days is an Apple vs. Linux contest involving applications created for specific niche requirements. I use an Android phone and have found myself checking the Market several times daily looking for apps that expand the usability of my phone. I am not reluctant to purchase apps that are professionally designed and I have spent quite a bit of money on apps that form suite-like qualities. Unless I'm wrong, most of the apps available in the Android Market are designed as Open Source applications using Google's App Inventor and other such development tools. Essentially they are small builds of full blown Linux cousins created for the desktop.

I look at Coffee Cup's line of niche utilities and see it as a natural fit for small electronics apps. I also believe that sooner or later people are going to come around to the fact that they've been using Linux more than they've known. Might this be a reason for them to give another OS (such as Ubuntu) a try on their desktops given the familiar interface? And, if they're accustomed to paying for apps on their phones, why would they balk at paying a reasonable amount for quality products such as Coffee Cup HTML Editor for a Linux environment?

I know that my reasoning is based on wishful thinking. I can tell you, though, that if Coffee Cup ported their software to Linux I would be willing to wave goodbye to Windows once and for all.

Many messages in this thread say something like "I vote for Linux versions of CC software." It's not a democracy; we customers don't get "votes." CC can run their business any way they prefer. It's up to us customers to give Scott S. & company insight into why we'd like one product idea or another executed, and for them to figure out how to make money meeting those needs and wants. Few things so focus the mind like making next week's payroll, and that depends upon having made good business decisions months before. Been there, survived that.

I'm currently dual-booting Win XP Pro-64 and Ubuntu 10.10. Another LAN node runs Win 7 Pro-64. I did this to straddle past and future, since it allows me to test across multiple browsers, variations in default font sets etc. In the process, I was shocked to discover how easy it was to install Ubuntu with XAMPP as a local Web server. I was also shocked to discover that I could make Ubuntu mount my Windows NTFS volumes automatically, which in turn opened the door to using the same Firefox and Thunderbird settings and databases on either side of the dual boot. Furthermore, I can refer to the same Web code and resources from either boot; no need to copy or sync file versions.

In the process, I noticed the obvious: Web work is easier on Linux. Even the little things matter enough to push me in that direction, like conventions for line termination and file path delimiting. So, without intention, I find myself in happy transition away from Windows. Of course that also takes me away from CC's software.

The Web's idioms split into two major camps, open systems (Unix / Linux, Java, PHP, Zend, Perl, Python, ECMA Script, Apache, MySQL etc.) and proprietary. If one works on the proprietary side, he uses tools and platforms by Microsoft, Oracle, IBM etc. (which I cannot enumerate, since I am unfamiliar with them). So I doubt that many in the proprietary camp use CC's tools. Therefore, CC lives in the open systems world whether they prefer to or not.

This is a world in upheaval, as smart mobile 'phones and tablet PCs bust up the Microsoft / Intel hegemony that has ruled computing since MS-DOS and the 8086.

If that is so, and if CC hopes to grow and prosper, then they must make their tools play well with the open systems camp. Impending MacOS support is a major step along the path for a company in CC's position. I'm hoping that CC promptly takes other steps, too. They are inevitable.

Perhaps these need not be giant steps. Several have mentioned the Wine compatibility layer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_%28software%29 ) in this thread. I would be delighted with CC's porting & supporting via Wine if that were possible.

LOL, you said Ubuntu.