Description
okay, I suppose, the concept is something like: most used OSs (Win and Mac) are on top of the list because most people use it :)
but if it was that, it'd make no logical sense....
It'd only be logical if one user wanted to download the Windows-version most of the times -- in this case, it'd be a help for the users, cause their most used version would be there...
but this is not the case, obviously...
everybody wants one version (at a time, at least)
and most people will download a given version only like a few times during a whole year...
so putting the “most used” OS first does not help anyone...
and even if users were downloading node.js frequently, like on a daily basis...
what problem would WIN users have if the had to look for "W" to find Win -- and it wouldn't be #1 on the list ? :)
my guess: it'd be no problem for a Win user ... :)
So, all in all, what exactly does this listing "convention" serve?
besides unawares promoting the hegemony of Microsoft and Apple by unawares accepting the order of OSs the way it is propagated everywhere...
Sure, I understand the commercial companies – but free software developers.. no
okay, just one last argument:
imagine someone who's new to linux... or is thinking about switching to Linux..
she or he goes to websites and sees listing of OSs in this “order” -- the more powerful ones first...
what will be the impression of this person?
what perception will she or he have of Linux – my guess: “it's not that much supported" ?
:: suggestion:
Browsers compete, OSs compete, databases compete – and the BIG ONES have huge advantages – including taking profit even as we speak... Why not to give some advantage to the open source, non-corporate projects, like treating them as equal in rank with the BIG ONES ? :)
All I'm suggesting is the rethinking of this policy of putting the BIG ones first...
the BIG OSs first and Linux only after them...
Let Linux be found at “L” and Mac at “M” and so on...
Linux deserves this fair treatment – doesn't it? :)
