alt Hacker News> and its superficial superiority only comes from the ecosystem
So the only superiority is that it runs the apps most people want to run?
And this is why geeks are always the “Less space than Nomad. No Wireless. Lame” types or the HN equivalent when talking about DropBox:
“For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem. From Windows or Mac, this FTP account could be accessed through built-in software.”
Replies
But it still was lame and ultimately made the world a worse place; and mounting remote storage is convenient and often preferable to something like Dropbox for several reasons. The fact that these aren't what matters for gaining wide popularity doesn't make such statements false.
What a horrible take, nothing but a tautology. It only runs the apps most people want to use because it's installed on so many computers, so developers target it. Linux can run anything Windows can. It's the same hardware, and if it was a much more popular desktop you bet your life that banks and streaming companies and AAA game developers would target linux as a supported platform. Has nothing to do with the quality of Windows, only the install base, which was the original point.
People loved the iPod. Users loved Dropbox. Nobody loves windows.
Most people want a web browser.
Even Microsofts esteemed moat (office) is “Web only” on the lowest tier.