[Qgis-user] What is the matter with QGis versus MS Windows?

[Alex Mandel]

I just want to point out that there are some major concerns about mono
itself that make it a tricky choice to build or deploy on top of.
(This is not a comment at all on the quality of MapWindow)

1. Mono updates are independent of .Net and not direct from Microsoft so
there is always a lag time in implementation of new features and a
potential for missing features, last time I looked Mono did not cover
100% of .Net
2. There's a question about the potential licensing issues revolving
around the recent settlement between Novell and Microsoft over
intellectual property. Not that it's a known issue but it's an unknown
factor that could really be a problem down the line for Linux and Mac
users trying mono stuff.

Both of these are potentially show stopping issues for truly Free and
Open Source Software. Just something to keep in mind, nothing all that
exciting to this conversation.

Alex

G. Allegri wrote:
> Hi Mats,
> I work both on Linux and Windows platforms, and I have tested many software
> on both the systems: QGis, Grass, SAGA, MapWindow, and many others.
> MapWindow is born under Windows, but works fine under Linux too beeing
> compatible with Mono.
> QGis is born under Linux, but it works fine on Windows thanks to the people
> that mantain its' Windows native builds under osgeo4w.
> 
> I've been attracted a lot by MapWindow (I even have received the hat and the
> t-shirt by mail!), and I think it's a very good software, but there are some
> issues I will write about in the next weeks, when I'll try to make an
> article on my "user-perspective benchmarks" on the mentioned software.
> Anyway, if you use it, we could list various limits, that we hope will be
> solved with the next release (MapWindow 6).
> 
> I think these OS softwares have both strengths and weaknesses, and many
> times they result complementary. So, I wouldn't say one is totally better
> then the other. Let's make single comparisons... and yes, MapWindows is more
> Windows-like in it's setup system. But are you sure this is the most
> important feature?
> 
> Anyway, cross comparisons are very important to improve. I wish all the best
> for every community :)
> 
> giovanni
> 
> 2009/11/29 Giovanni Manghi <giovanni.manghi at gmail.com>
> 
>>> I am a bit afraid of using the osgeo4w-setup.exe program now (of
>>> course it seems to give more flexibility in principle, but here it did
>>> not lead to a viable installation
>>
>> it is true that the osgeo4w installer is not the classical windows
>> installer, but nevertheless it works pretty fine also for not advanced
>> users especially when they do understand (and usually takes a few
>> seconds, it not hard) that is made that way to let people install *many*
>> software and libraries that they may need.
>>
>>
>> In any case, if you don't mind not having GRASS, there is also the
>> standalone installer. A few clicks on the "next" button and you are done
>> (bu the way, also the osgeo4w installer is almost only clicks on
>> "next").
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From september 24:
>>> I understand the problems remain with the OSGeo4w installer: can any
>>> Windows user confirm?
>>
>>
>>
>> That thread was related to a 3rd party plugin, gdal tools, that is being
>> developed under linux environment, so at that stage (it was the
>> beginning) it was asked to windows user to leave feedback. As a matter
>> of fact now it works well on both platforms.
>>
>>
>>
>> cheers
>>