regarding the evolution of Linux as an OS: isn't is depressing to see that all the market share Windows has lost went to Mac OS X? I mean, since January 2008 to January 2009, Windows went from 91.5 to 88.68 and, in the same period, Mac OS X increased from 7.57 to 9.63. that's a lot, more than 2% during only one year. and considering that, in the meantime, Linux gained a minuscule 0.21%, reaching 0.85%. and all this after 17 years of continuous development. it's a tiny fraction, making Linux as a whole pretty irrelevant on the desktop market not that I care that much, but still not a very optimistic trend... in case someones wonders, I got my data from here: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=108&qpnp=13
a little sad conclusion
Archived thread 1033801 from Recurring Discussions. Markdown source: Recurring_Discussions/thread_1033801_a_little_sad_conclusion.md
Apple advertises. Linux doesn't. Of course Apple is going to be taking most of Microsoft's lost share.
It really doesn't matter, though. Linux is moving forward steadily, and we've got enough of a market share that more and more companies are paying attention to us.
We're in a good spot, no need to be sad :)
yes and all that 17 years is geared towards desktop development. ;)
Simply the fact that the Linux community has done so much with so little funds sorta turns the numbers around, if you ask me.
that's just desktop market share ;)
Ya, who cares how many people use linux. As long as we've got the devs on our side, I'm happy.
(A moment of silence for our devs, and other community builders).
Yes said:
We're in a good spot, no need to be sad :)
How long has Linux been pushed by a major manufacturer like Dell? I know the only reason *I'm* here is that when my wife was buying her new laptop, they offered a nice discount on a Mini9.
The week before I'd met up with a friend and he brought his Eee PC he'd just bought (first time Linux user as well) and it didn't look too bad so I said f-it.
Zeroberry said: Simply the fact that the Linux community has done so much with so little funds sorta turns the numbers around, if you ask me.
I agree with you, but, as a whole, that <1% doesn't seem to encouraging on a long term to me (comparatively speaking)
karellen said: regarding the evolution of Linux as an OS: isn't is depressing to see that all the market share Windows has lost went to Mac OS X? I mean, since January 2008 to January 2009, Windows went from 91.5 to 88.68 and, in the same period, Mac OS X increased from 7.57 to 9.63. that's a lot, more than 2% during only one year. and considering that, in the meantime, Linux gained a minuscule 0.21%, reaching 0.85%. and all this after 17 years of continuous development. it's a tiny fraction, making Linux as a whole pretty irrelevant on the desktop market
not that I care that much, but still not a very optimistic trend... in case someones wonders, I got my data from here: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=108&qpnp=13
There is no reliable way to measure Linux market share, as there is no single company providing sales information, people rolling their own custom versions, downloading little known distributions etc.
Market share is notoriously difficult to work out for Linux.
if it makes you feel any better apple has been around for 32 years and Microsoft for 33.
going from .64 to .85 is a 32.8% increase in market share in a year. if we can keep that pace for 17 more years linux will have 105% of the desktop market share:lolflag:
Marketing is key to customer base growth, period.
The only problem with that is the philosophy. Linux isn't a commercial product produced by a company, so by definition it can't have any customers.
I'm not arguing in the least for Linux to become a commercial product. But what I am saying is that, without it being a commercial enterprise, such things as marketing have to be looked at from a different perspective.
At the rate things are going, I really don't care too much. I keep bumping into a surprising number of people who use Linux, and that's all based on really nothing more than a sort of "grass-roots"-type word-of-mouth. I mean, today at college, first day, I'm sitting on a bench outside a classroom waiting for the earlier period to end and mine to start, and a guy sitting there with an iPhone and I get into a discussion -- which he started -- about Linux and free software. This guy is probably 21 or 22, ex-military (don't know which branch), dyslexic, and using an iPhone, and *he's* talking about Linux. And talking to me about Linux after us both discussing how nice and cool Mac OS X is. He evidently uses both.
I dunno if my experiences are typical, but I have to say I'm always floored by the number of people who already are aware of -- or even knowledgeable in -- Linux.
Microsoft should be, by all rights, scared s-less about this.
MikeTheC said:
Microsoft should be, by all rights, scared s-less about this.
Why? Their marketshare is still huge, and even if OS X got a huge marketshare guess how many people are still using Microsoft Office? I'd reckon that 90% of all people who use Mac OS X use Microsoft Office.
imo, there's nothing sad about the fact that linux use is increasing, no matter how fast, it is still increasing. market share isn't the main point to consider, it is the fact that almost all major oems are now offering linux installed equipment now, and most well known chain stores have linux powered netbooks on display, and they are selling well. who would have thought this a year or two ago. the rise of netbooks are introducing millions of new users to linux, it is only a matter of time before a good proportion of them want linux offered on other computer equipment they will want to buy.
And look on the bright side, once enough people get fed up with Vista (with Windows 7 not looking too much better) they have to go somewhere, right?
It doesn't bother me. It really isn't my business what other people use. I am content with my Linux desktop, and market share really doesn't matter to me.
karellen said: Linux gained a minuscule 0.21%, reaching 0.85%. and all this after 17 years of continuous development. it's a tiny fraction, making Linux as a whole pretty irrelevant on the desktop market
What do you mean with "irrelevant" here ?
Adobe has been providing their closed source flash player for many years for Linux (Just an example about being relevant or not).
I'm very very happy that MacOSX is getting more successful. This is a victory for the Open Source world imho. And, again, we're talking about desktop machines. I wonder how usable the Internet would be the moment all Linux machines would stop working. Why is noone ever publishing numbers about that in the mass media ?
:)
karellen said: regarding the evolution of Linux as an OS: isn't is depressing to see that all the market share Windows has lost went to Mac OS X? I mean, since January 2008 to January 2009, Windows went from 91.5 to 88.68 and, in the same period, Mac OS X increased from 7.57 to 9.63. that's a lot, more than 2% during only one year. and considering that, in the meantime, Linux gained a minuscule 0.21%, reaching 0.85%. and all this after 17 years of continuous development. it's a tiny fraction, making Linux as a whole pretty irrelevant on the desktop market
not that I care that much, but still not a very optimistic trend... in case someones wonders, I got my data from here: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=108&qpnp=13
Actually I predicted this happening in this forum and others before Vista went Live. Its because OS X not only comes preinstalled it has some good commerical software available for it plus all the open source you want.
Plus its easy to reinstall. I see Mac continuing to grow on the desktop until it reaches twenty five percent or so. Linux I am sorry to say may finally break its 2% mostly due to the sales of preinstalled UMPC's. Linux still is lacking in the areas where non technical conumers can use it.
Wireless ethernet, mice, sound cards, camera's all remain problems and the forking makes it impossible for companies to develop commercial software for it. Along with interface and other usability issues.
And the more often you all deny this and try to argue about it like you have the last two years the longer Linux will not break 1% even of the desktops. When the Linux users find out what the other non technical users need besides trying to look up and fix things its just to have a stable working computer that plays DVD and other codecs, does their photo and video editing. Has good commercial software or free software that does as good a job. And is easy to use.
Some of the OS X software is pretty darn good like iVideo and garage band and Linux has nothing as easy to use and as stable as those two apps. Combine that with Firefox 3 and you have a pretty good system.
Even my next system will probably be the new Macbook and I never thought I would buy a Mac.
shadylookin said: if it makes you feel any better apple has been around for 32 years and Microsoft for 33.
going from .64 to .85 is a 32.8% increase in market share in a year. if we can keep that pace for 17 more years linux will have 105% of the desktop market share:lolflag:
Sorry but I started using Linux in 96 or so and by 1999 we were beyond 1% of the desktop only to fall back to being under. I had seen figures during this period that we had more on the desktop then Apple at that time around 2000 I saw estimates that by 2004 we would have 6% of the desktops,and what did we do? Nothing but focus on servers. During this time even large companies would predict Linux on the desktop to surpass Apple but they did not count on OS X being so good and Linux not going anywhere.
I'd like to add that it is nearly impossible to find a US govmt/military installation that is not running linux on their servers/workstations/wristwatches. I'm sure many other countries use it too.
I'd also like to add that it's hard to nail down a market share percentage for something that is free. I wouldn't be surprised if that >1% market share only applies to "for sale" linux like suse and red hat enterprise editions. And so far as exactly who does these figures, well, anyone can be bought.
jrusso2 said: Sorry but I started using Linux in 96 or so and by 1999 we were beyond 1% of the desktop only to fall back to being under. I had seen figures during this period that we had more on the desktop then Apple at that time around 2000 I saw estimates that by 2004 we would have 6% of the desktops,and what did we do? Nothing but focus on servers.
Yesterday I was talking to a Linux sysadmin friend of mine. She started to talk about the same subject and the problems that Linux has on the desktop and that so many people (Linux beginners) have problems with Linux. I told her that I read that some asteroid was named after Linus Torvalds, and that shows exactly a group of people who are extremely happy with Linux, namely : scientists.
Is that a bad thing ?
Imagine that the internet-alikes from Microsoft MSN and AOL had become more popular than the Internet itself. Then we might have regretted that Linux hadn't focused so much on servers :)
Why do we want Linux to be so wide-spread on the desktop right now ? Why focus so much on the home user ?
You might as well focus on the national and local governments and start pushing more for Open Standards within those structures.
The OLPC project had problems, and perhaps still has, but I find it a beautiful project. A friend of mine showed me one, I think it's a great tool for children, with Linux on it.
albinootje said: What do you mean with "irrelevant" here ?
Adobe has been providing their closed source flash player for many years for Linux (Just an example about being relevant or not). ...and it's always been such a good quality player.
/sarcasm
albinootje said:
I'm very very happy that MacOSX is getting more successful. This is a victory for the Open Source world imho.
*bursts into hysterical laughter*
albinootje said:
I wonder how usable the Internet would be the moment all Linux machines would stop working. Why is noone ever publishing numbers about that in the mass media ?
Because rock-solid server systems aren't as flashy as mindless bling. Actually, that's one reason I'd run NetBSD on a server.
shadylookin said: if it makes you feel any better apple has been around for 32 years and Microsoft for 33.
going from .64 to .85 is a 32.8% increase in market share in a year. if we can keep that pace for 17 more years linux will have 105% of the desktop market share:lolflag:
good point. but where do these figures come from? i think you can take them with a (huge) grain of salt. numbers really don't matter. linux is steadily growing everyday.
does linux have to overtake microsoft to be validated? not to me. to me, it is already #1.
|{urse said: I'd like to add that it is nearly impossible to find a US govmt/military installation that is not running linux on their servers/workstations/wristwatches.
Vehicles.
*The BFT system, and the FBCB2 system of which it is a variant, have won numerous awards and accolades, including: recognition in 2001 as one of the five best-managed software programs in the entire U.S. Government[[2]), the 2003 Institute for Defense and Government Advancement’s award for most innovative U.S. Government program[3], the 2003 Federal Computer Week Monticello Award (given in recognition of an information system that has a direct, meaningful impact on human lives), and the Battlespace Information 2005 “Best Program in Support of Coalition Operations"[4].*
jrusso2 said:
Even my next system will probably be the new Macbook and I never thought I would buy a Mac.
Feed the machine! i can hear the gears grinding now....
albinootje said: Yesterday I was talking to a Linux sysadmin friend of mine. She started to talk about the same subject and the problems that Linux has on the desktop and that so many people (Linux beginners) have problems with Linux.
I told her that I read that some asteroid was named after Linus Torvalds, and that shows exactly a group of people who are extremely happy with Linux, namely : scientists.
Is that a bad thing ?
Imagine that the internet-alikes from Microsoft MSN and AOL had become more popular than the Internet itself. Then we might have regretted that Linux hadn't focused so much on servers :)
Why do we want Linux to be so wide-spread on the desktop right now ? Why focus so much on the home user ?
You might as well focus on the national and local governments and start pushing more for Open Standards within those structures.
The OLPC project had problems, and perhaps still has, but I find it a beautiful project. A friend of mine showed me one, I think it's a great tool for children, with Linux on it.
I think what makes the Linux OLPC so great for kids is that its incomplete and the kids can even learn to program on it and develop for it. Something I don't think would be good for an adult version.
wolfen69 said: Feed the machine! i can hear the gears grinding now....
Oh behave. Its troubling enough.
I think microsoft and apple are competing only amongst themselves on the desktop market, so the market share flow was kind of predictable. Desktop linux practically does not compete at all, it's just there. Not to say that they ignore linux, but the difference is qualitative, not in numbers of users. Both windows and macOS are proprietary, depend on their respective companies and enforce a certain amount of lock-in. I think linux on the desktop doesn't have to have a big market share, even if that would make things nicer for most of us. It just has to be there.
Also, potentially all windows and mac users can run linux on ther hardware (with some minor hardware incompatibilities) at any time, and for free, many possibly already are. The opposite isn't as true. Total % could add up to more than 100% with linux included. That's bound to mess up the percentages.
in the end, does it really matter? if you like/love linux you will use it til the day you die no matter how many people use it. market share does not matter to me. let windows be #1 for the next 100 yrs. i don't care. market share should not matter to all of you linux users out there either. what matters is that we believe in what we do and enjoy it. the cream always rises to the top. eventually.
i use linux because i truly enjoy it. it's something i've never felt using a windows machine. i now feel like i'm a part of it instead of a number. i can give back.
It's not important how many people use linux. We use linux because it suits us. And even when linux has a tiny market share, it probably has more developers that OSX or Windows, because more people can see the source code :D
Linux marketshare is growing proportionally pretty fast (about the same rate as Mac OS X). You have to look at the rate of growth. Really if the rate of growth is maintained Linux will have something like a 5% marketshare in 5 years and a 20-25% marketshare in 10 years. The only problem is if Linux rates of growth start to decline.
phrostbyte said: Linux marketshare is growing proportionally pretty fast (about the same rate as Mac OS X). You have to look at the rate of growth. Really if the rate of growth is maintained Linux will have something like a 5% marketshare in 5 years and a 20-25% marketshare in 10 years. The only problem is if Linux rates of growth start to decline.
Come back in two years and let me know how much its grown. In the two years I have been at this forum it does not seem to have grown on the desktop but it sure has embedded devices.
This year Linux broke through to the EeePC and the Dell mini9's. From being pre-installed on 0 computers to 2 types is a mighty improvement. Also Linux doesn't get the allowance Mac or Windows get. And finally Linux is on 2-3% of desktops: "it is very hard to gather facts about how many desktops run Linux but estimations would assume over 2%" - Can't remember where I heard it but I did, The reason is, Like Ubuntu many Distro's are distributed in unrecordable ways:
A cd is ordered like mine and is passed on to 3 more people who install it on 4 computers Ubuntu thinks: YAY there's another Ubuntu user, Reality: WOW 5 more computers using Ubuntu.
What about all the burnt DVD's no one knows about all them, how many times have they been used? or burnt?
How many times have the torrents been downloaded?
Some of these questions are answered by internet connections but what about the computers (and servers) not connected to the internet, I have 3
Which brings my Linux computer total to: 6 And operating system total to (multi-boots): 10
Anyway the point is, No one knows how many people use Linux.
Also...
Aren't many phone OS's UNIX based?
If (as I suspect) they are, and your counting phones, we must be over 20%
joshmuffin said:
Anyway the point is, No one knows how many people use Linux. ...and no one should care.
Even if the data for Windows drops, I think there's more left. There are still millions and millions of people using Windows. . .
cardinals_fan said: ...and no one should care.
Bwavo!
Linux is playing an entirely different game and is not subject to the same rules. M$ and apple's growth is measured in market shares whereas linux's growth can only be measured in "constantly improved open digital collaboration" (just made that up ^^) which M$ has >1% of (constantly improved open digital collaboration percentage points lol)
Bear in mind that it is tremendously difficult to accurately measure OS usage, so take all statistics with a grain of salt.> joshmuffin said:
Also...
Aren't many phone OS's UNIX based?
If (as I suspect) they are, and your counting phones, we must be over 20%I think the iPhone is a slimmed down version of OS X, which is Unix. Although I'm not entirely sure you meant Unix, as Unix can be proprietary (as it is with the iPhone).
I'd imagine that Android's market share will grow a fair amount once the project matures a bit and vendors warm up to it.
karellen said: I got my data from here: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=108&qpnp=13
Remember that these statistics sites are rough guides, the data is very inaccurate due to the way it's collected.
For example, another well known statistics resource, W3C, reports Linux as having nearly 4% of the market.
That's not to say W3C are any more accurate than Hitslink, but these figures are such a shot in the dark that you're better off interpreting them as "Linux has the third highest market share, and it is increasing steadily."
Is anyone actually able to tell me how they calculate those percentages??
I'm always suspicious of statistics. From experience statistics are usually created to prove a certain argument, not always show the fact. Depends how you manipulate the figures I guess. Eg; in my direct family there are 11 computers. 4 are running Linux, the rest Windows. So by my calculations Linux has a 36% market share LOL.
I don't see how low market share can be bad for gnu/linux? It has it's advantages ie less malware for it. Back then in '90 gnu/linux had even smaller market share so what? Did it 'cause went down? It wasn't. It's better to have a small market share and people who at least know some basic things about this OS and using it than to have a large market share and have a bounch of people who doesn't have a clue and using it. Gnu/linux is by my opinion very powerfull OS much better than a windows today and probably than a windows will ever be. In a newbie hands who wants its free windows it can easier become a very dangerous OS for other 'cause someone who knows something about it could take his weaknesses in his own advantage and do with it what he pelase.
Solicitous said: Is anyone actually able to tell me how they calculate those percentages??
I'm always suspicious of statistics. From experience statistics are usually created to prove a certain argument, not always show the fact. Depends how you manipulate the figures I guess. Eg; in my direct family there are 11 computers. 4 are running Linux, the rest Windows. So by my calculations Linux has a 36% market share LOL.
The websites mentioned above provide details on how they retrieve their data. Usually it involves querying a set of Web servers, which log the browsers/operating systems that visiting browsers provide in their user agent string.
You can make up statistics to mean anything. 63% of all people know that!
SeanHodges said: The websites mentioned above provide details on how they retrieve their data. Usually it involves querying a set of Web servers, which log the browsers/operating systems that visiting browsers
And it's impossible on gnu/linux to fake that information or simply block such passive OS fingerprint. :-D
wolfen69 said: in the end, does it really matter? cardinals_fan said: ...and no one should care. dadozgb said: I don't see how low market share can be bad for gnu/linux?
Two words: hardware support.
Other two words: gaming support.
For hardware makers and the gaming industry, market share matters. A lot.
Now go to Google and count how many entries like "if only Linux supported my card X....", "if only Linux supported game X..." you find.
Less market share because of less hardware support and games. Less games and hardware support because of less market share.
It's a freakin' chicken and egg problem.
Also, it's not entirely bad that Apple is gaining market share, because at least makes the world more aware that there is life beyond Windows. The OSX interface, for example, is *different* from Windows (global menu bar, no right click, etc.) but not *worse*. This kind of thing can do wonders in increasing open-mindness to different things. It's better than the average user not even knowing that alternatives *exist*.
Keyper7 said: Two words: hardware support.
Other two words: gaming support.
For hardware makers and the gaming industry, market share matters. A lot.
Now go to Google and count how many entries like "if only Linux supported my card X....", "if only Linux supported game X..." you find.
Less market share because of less hardware support and games. Less games and hardware support because of less market share.
It's a freakin' chicken and egg problem.
Also, it's not entirely bad that Apple is gaining market share, because at least makes the world more aware that there is life beyond Windows. The OSX interface, for example, is *different* from Windows (global menu bar, no right click, etc.) but not *worse*. This kind of thing can do wonders in increasing open-mindness to different things. It's better than the average user not even knowing that alternatives *exist*.
Why do you think that gnu/linux or pc should be a gaming platform? There are a better solutions than that. Simply buy ps. I don't play games and I'm not interested in it. About this threads oh god my card isn't working.. I never had such a problem on gnu/linux. It's often caused by newbies whome their card doesn't work on linux from the box and they doesn't know what's the problem and how to fix it. From my point of view I'm pleased with driver support on linux.
I keep my eye on the number of users of the Ubuntu forums & over the last 3 years the number of users of these forums has grown dramatically. Some of the Ubuntu forums users would be converts, though I think that most new Linux users start off with Ubuntu.
As China, Russia & hopefully also India, bring Linux into the mainstream (education & government use) they could be the forces that really cause the percentages of Linux desktop use to noticeably & dramatically, accelerate.
dadozgb said: Why do you think that gnu/linux or pc should be a gaming platform? There are a better solutions than that. Simply buy ps. I don't play games and I'm not interested in it. About this threads oh god my card isn't working.. I never had such a problem on gnu/linux. It's often caused by newbies whome their card doesn't work on linux from the box and they doesn't know what's the problem and how to fix it. From my point of view I'm pleased with driver support on linux.
Ah yes, the classic "as long as I'm happy, **** everyone else" response. From where should I start?
1) Regardless if the computer *should* or *should not* be a gaming platform in your opinion, it *is* for a lot of people. It's a difference of opinions and you have no right to enforce your "better solutions" on everyone. People might have many different reasons to prefer gaming on the computer.
2) You never had any problem? Good for you, neither did I. But lots of people had, and not because of their fault. Not because of Linux developers either. It's because of lack of support from vendors. I always research about Linux support before buying new hardware, but it's also true that very often my options are restricted because of that. I'm not free to buy any webcam, for example. Or any sound card. Some time ago it wasn't possible to use Lightscribe in Linux, today it is because the makers released drivers for it. Nvidia drivers are only now closer to being feature-complete (Purevideo is a recent addition, for example).
3) Ignoring the hardware support problem is also insulting to the Linux developers, because it implies that you want to keep them working their asses off and reverse-engineering things all by themselves. Their job would be much easier if the vendors released drivers or specifications.
Bottom line: you are not the center of the universe. Live with it. Posts like yours only contribute to spread the "arrogant Linux fanboy" stereotype.
Keyper7 said:
3) Ignoring the hardware support problem is also insulting to the Linux developers, because it implies that you want to keep them working their asses off and reverse-engineering things all by themselves. Their job would be much easier if the vendors released drivers or specifications.
+1 Totally agree.
The reason Linux didn't gain as much market share as Mac is the same reason that Ralph Nader didn't win the presidency. ;)
dadozgb said: Why do you think that gnu/linux or pc should be a gaming platform? There are a better solutions than that. Simply buy ps.
Well, I highlighted the key word that is the biggest reason that some people want Linux to be a viable option for gaming. Some people either don't want to, or they don't have the money to just "buy a ps". I don't have any money. I already have Linux, which was free. I would like to be able to play good games with what I have because I don't have the money to go out and "buy" a $400 console. But maybe sometime I might be able to spring $30 or $40 for a good game that I wish would work with what I already have.
Apple advertises, that's one part.
The other part is that Apple produces something. You can buy an Apple Computer, an Apple Laptop, an Apple iPod and Apple Software.
Except in the few (growing) cases of Linux installed on computers the user has to get a computer and THEN install the OS and etc and etc. Most people don't want this (no matter how out of the box compatible it is) so Linux is already a stretch to this segment of the market.
Another aspect that has helped Apple gain market share is that their advertisements go across a couple categories.. computers and laptops, cell phones, music players, etc. Each one of those grabs a different segment of the market and helps to pull people in from the "I want a computer.." to "I like my iPhone and want it to work well with my computer.." or "I LOOOVE my iPod, bet their other stuff is good too!".
Linux comes from people interested in computers. For the music players the idea of "how does this work with my computer" is going to be daunting to the not-so-computer-literate. Or "can my computer connect to my cell phone?".
Linux needs to produce complete solutions from soup-to-nuts. Like hardware that runs Mythbuntu and makes it easy to rip your DVDs and CDs for in-home entertainment. Tivo is a good example.
That's partially whey Linux is strong in the Server Market; you don't even know it's running Linux unless you are doing the back-end work. For most employees they don't even know what their servers are running in an enterprise.
So in summary:
- Apple pulls in people from the consumer electronics market segment as well as the computer market
- Apple advertisements reach more people than just computer-users and pulls them into their computer products
- Except where Linux comes installed on a system, for somebody to get Linux you have to go and DO something (decide/download/burn/install) which will turn off non computer-interested people
- Linux has more questions of "will my music player work with my computer" and "can my computer connect" which most people just want it to work. It's easy to find out if it will work with a Mac, but not Linux (*how many things are listed as cross-compatible but do not list Linux?*)
- Linux needs soup-to-nuts solutions (such as Tivo) to get people to use it, and then if it can integrate smoother/better with Linux there can be some pull-through
- Linux still requires computer interest, though the general shift, aided by Ubuntu and Canonical, has been remedying this :)
Sorry.. started typing this and didn't realize how big it was getting!
For a simple reason
Windows and Mac OS's are simple...compared to Linux
Hardware manufacturers want to get as many systems out in the market place as possible. 99.9999% of users are computer dummies including myself and I've been in the business since the late 70's.
I'm to old to start learning new, I just want a system to run, simply, out the box, doesn't matter what the Ops system, that doesn't concern me. I want to type a letter, read email, whatever. a.s.a.p.
Take me for example, I installed 8.10 last week, beautiful, easy, no problem till I tried to connect using dial up. (I'm in the boonies.. no dsl). Nothing. So what do I do, go back to Windows. Now, unlike most users, I don't like to give up so what do I do, start searching the forums, sites on Linux, anything to find a supported modem. I'll go out and buy one, if I can find whats supported. But, and its a big but, most users don't have the patience, they will go back to Win or Mac and stick.
Linux will never get substantial market share until it becomes out of the "box simple". It's a sad fact that users don't want to think about what they do, they just wanna do it!!!! Mysealf included
I just finished reading through this thread (and boy are my arms tired - wtf?).
Anyway, many have pointed out how difficult it is to determine % of desktop Linux use. This is absolutely true. How many people dual boot?
It seems to me that most (if not all) of these statistics are skewed toward *what people buy* for an OS.
I run a website and have a forum (non-technical related for both). I check the visitor statistics about twice a month. Each month I find about 10 - 30% of visitors are using some form of Linux (Ubuntu has about 60% of this stat). Is it because of where I live that a higher % of 'technologically savvy' people are here (Calgary AB)? No, I do not believe so. So where do these numbers come from?
I think that, for all intents and purposes, market share numbers are misleading at best. If this is the only benchmark, why are more and more companies writing software, drivers, etc for Linux?
[/tangent]
handy said:
As China, Russia & hopefully also India, bring Linux into the mainstream (education & government use) they could be the forces that really cause the percentages of Linux desktop use to noticeably & dramatically, accelerate.
germany is also switching to linux in every university in the country. millions more people right there.
Keyper7 said: Ah yes, the classic "as long as I'm happy, **** everyone else" response. From where should I start?
1) Regardless if the computer *should* or *should not* be a gaming platform in your opinion, it *is* for a lot of people. It's a difference of opinions and you have no right to enforce your "better solutions" on everyone. People might have many different reasons to prefer gaming on the computer.
2) You never had any problem? Good for you, neither did I. But lots of people had, and not because of their fault. Not because of Linux developers either. It's because of lack of support from vendors. I always research about Linux support before buying new hardware, but it's also true that very often my options are restricted because of that. I'm not free to buy any webcam, for example. Or any sound card. Some time ago it wasn't possible to use Lightscribe in Linux, today it is because the makers released drivers for it. Nvidia drivers are only now closer to being feature-complete (Purevideo is a recent addition, for example).
3) Ignoring the hardware support problem is also insulting to the Linux developers, because it implies that you want to keep them working their asses off and reverse-engineering things all by themselves. Their job would be much easier if the vendors released drivers or specifications.
Bottom line: you are not the center of the universe. Live with it. Posts like yours only contribute to spread the "arrogant Linux fanboy" stereotype.
You misunderstand me. I simply do think that there is much better gaming solutions nowdays. It's cheaper to buy a console than pc wich can run all modern games. But if you think otherwise feel free to do so. I never said that I never had any problem with gnu/linux 'caused I had but I always manage somehow to find a solution for it.I don't care about web cam drivers although my build in laptop web cam is working and I don't use it. Simply as that.Linux developers have come this far and this is not insulting anybody than you 'cause you have a different opinion so you feel yourshelf insulted. Nvidia is producing gnu/linux drivers for the past 8-10 years. So what are you talking about? I'm just saying that gnu/linux is not OS for everyone. You look at it as alternative to windows whille I look windows as alternative to gnu/linux.Bottom line is everybody are welcome to gnu/linux world, but if you have a free OS, free programs, free support it doesn't mean that you have a free lunch. Gnu/linux is a powerfull OS but it will give you as much as you know. As you know more the more will you benefit from it. This is a great educational OS but this is not a free windows or macosx replacment. I don't care in which stereotype you put me in. I'm using gnu/linux workstations for the past 13-14 years and I don't simply care about stereotypes. If I do I'll be still runing windows and be very happy about it.
Keyper7 said: Ah yes, the classic "as long as I'm happy, **** everyone else" response. From where should I start?
1) Regardless if the computer *should* or *should not* be a gaming platform in your opinion, it *is* for a lot of people. It's a difference of opinions and you have no right to enforce your "better solutions" on everyone. People might have many different reasons to prefer gaming on the computer.
2) You never had any problem? Good for you, neither did I. But lots of people had, and not because of their fault. Not because of Linux developers either. It's because of lack of support from vendors. I always research about Linux support before buying new hardware, but it's also true that very often my options are restricted because of that. I'm not free to buy any webcam, for example. Or any sound card. Some time ago it wasn't possible to use Lightscribe in Linux, today it is because the makers released drivers for it. Nvidia drivers are only now closer to being feature-complete (Purevideo is a recent addition, for example).
3) Ignoring the hardware support problem is also insulting to the Linux developers, because it implies that you want to keep them working their asses off and reverse-engineering things all by themselves. Their job would be much easier if the vendors released drivers or specifications.
Bottom line: you are not the center of the universe. Live with it. Posts like yours only contribute to spread the "arrogant Linux fanboy" stereotype.
You misunderstand me. I simply do think that there is much better gaming solutions nowdays. It cheaper to buy a console than pc wich can run all modern games. But if you think otherwise feel free to do so. I never said that I never had any problem with gnu/linux 'caused I had but I always manage somehow to find a solution for it.I don't care about web cam drivers although my build in laptop web cam is working and I don't use it. Simply as that.Linux developers have come this far and this is not insulting anybody than you 'cause you have a diferent opinion so you feel yourshelf insulted. Nvidia is producing gnu/linux drivers for the past 8-10 years. So what are you talking about? I'm just saying that gnu/linux is not OS for everyone. You look at it as alternative to windows whille I look windows as alternative to gnu/linux.Bottom line is everybody are welcome to gnu/linux world, but if you have a free OS, free programs, free support it doesn't mean that you have a free lunch. Gnu/linux is a powerfull OS but it will give you as much as you know. As you know more the more will you benefit from it. This is a great educational OS but this is not a free windows or macosx replacment. I don't care in which stereotype you put me in. I'm using gnu/linux workstations for the past 13-14 years and I don't simply care about stereotypes. If I do I'll be still runing windows and be very happy about it.
Keyper7 said: Two words: hardware support.
Other two words: gaming support.
For hardware makers and the gaming industry, market share matters. A lot.
Now go to Google and count how many entries like "if only Linux supported my card X....", "if only Linux supported game X..." you find.
Less market share because of less hardware support and games. Less games and hardware support because of less market share.
It's a freakin' chicken and egg problem.
Also, it's not entirely bad that Apple is gaining market share, because at least makes the world more aware that there is life beyond Windows. The OSX interface, for example, is *different* from Windows (global menu bar, no right click, etc.) but not *worse*. This kind of thing can do wonders in increasing open-mindness to different things. It's better than the average user not even knowing that alternatives *exist*. Linux supports my hardware and all the games I want. I don't care about other people's desktops. That may sound harsh, but it really isn't my business what they choose to run. That´s up to them. I don't have an investment in any operating system. I use Linux right now because it does what I want right now.
n1581j said: For a simple reason
Windows and Mac OS's are simple...compared to Linux
Hardware manufacturers want to get as many systems out in the market place as possible. 99.9999% of users are computer dummies including myself and I've been in the business since the late 70's.
I'm to old to start learning new, I just want a system to run, simply, out the box, doesn't matter what the Ops system, that doesn't concern me. I want to type a letter, read email, whatever. a.s.a.p.
Take me for example, I installed 8.10 last week, beautiful, easy, no problem till I tried to connect using dial up. (I'm in the boonies.. no dsl). Nothing. So what do I do, go back to Windows. Now, unlike most users, I don't like to give up so what do I do, start searching the forums, sites on Linux, anything to find a supported modem. I'll go out and buy one, if I can find whats supported. But, and its a big but, most users don't have the patience, they will go back to Win or Mac and stick.
Linux will never get substantial market share until it becomes out of the "box simple". It's a sad fact that users don't want to think about what they do, they just wanna do it!!!! Mysealf included Nothing will be "simple" if you have to install it.
Keyper7 said: Ah yes, the classic "as long as I'm happy, **** everyone else" response. From where should I start?
1) Regardless if the computer *should* or *should not* be a gaming platform in your opinion, it *is* for a lot of people. It's a difference of opinions and you have no right to enforce your "better solutions" on everyone. People might have many different reasons to prefer gaming on the computer.
2) You never had any problem? Good for you, neither did I. But lots of people had, and not because of their fault. Not because of Linux developers either. It's because of lack of support from vendors. I always research about Linux support before buying new hardware, but it's also true that very often my options are restricted because of that. I'm not free to buy any webcam, for example. Or any sound card. Some time ago it wasn't possible to use Lightscribe in Linux, today it is because the makers released drivers for it. Nvidia drivers are only now closer to being feature-complete (Purevideo is a recent addition, for example).
3) Ignoring the hardware support problem is also insulting to the Linux developers, because it implies that you want to keep them working their asses off and reverse-engineering things all by themselves. Their job would be much easier if the vendors released drivers or specifications.
Bottom line: you are not the center of the universe. Live with it. Posts like yours only contribute to spread the "arrogant Linux fanboy" stereotype. I don't think that I have the right to judge what other people want or say what they should use. If they use Windows, that really isn't any of my business. I use Linux because it does what I want right now. If it doesn't work for them, I'm sorry. I encourage them to speak out and try to make the improvements they want a reality. However, I'm not going to worry about their desktop.
EDIT: Some of this is double posted; the forum was acting up.
n1581j said: For a simple reason
Windows and Mac OS's are simple...compared to Linux
I really can't say Windows is simple, A fresh install is a pain if you don't have the right drivers, Windows is nowhere near to 'Out Of The Box'. People don't realize that because most times you but a Computer and it already has Windows up and running.
OSX is out of the box because the box is designed for the OS. :lolflag:
And if you consider Ubuntu as being the whole linux world. That's not true, there are other distros which I find to be more "User friendly", like OPENsuse or PClinux OS. I use Ubuntu (in my desktop) and Arch (in my laptop), and they are pretty cool and straight forward to me. In Ubuntu I just installed the official nvidia modules, and in arch the only hardware I had to tweak with was my wireless. So as I said... pretty straight forward
Linux is Simple... Really Really Simple
keyper7 said: also, it's not entirely bad that apple is gaining market share, because at least makes the world more aware that there is life beyond windows.
+1
Keyper7 said: Ah yes, the classic "as long as I'm happy, **** everyone else" response. From where should I start?
1) Regardless if the computer *should* or *should not* be a gaming platform in your opinion, it *is* for a lot of people. It's a difference of opinions and you have no right to enforce your "better solutions" on everyone. People might have many different reasons to prefer gaming on the computer.
2) You never had any problem? Good for you, neither did I. But lots of people had, and not because of their fault. Not because of Linux developers either. It's because of lack of support from vendors. I always research about Linux support before buying new hardware, but it's also true that very often my options are restricted because of that. I'm not free to buy any webcam, for example. Or any sound card. Some time ago it wasn't possible to use Lightscribe in Linux, today it is because the makers released drivers for it. Nvidia drivers are only now closer to being feature-complete (Purevideo is a recent addition, for example).
3) Ignoring the hardware support problem is also insulting to the Linux developers, because it implies that you want to keep them working their asses off and reverse-engineering things all by themselves. Their job would be much easier if the vendors released drivers or specifications.
Bottom line: you are not the center of the universe. Live with it. Posts like yours only contribute to spread the "arrogant Linux fanboy" stereotype.
+1
Totally agree with your post.
The Linux community desperately needs to grow up and stop this "I only care about me" attitude. Linux in general, and Ubuntu in specific, are supposed to be about community development and community use. You can't have a community nor can you have a commons if everyone is only in it for themselves and, as you so brilliantly put it, "**** everyone else".
MikeTheC said: The Linux community desperately needs to grow up and stop this "I only care about me" attitude. Linux in general, and Ubuntu in specific, are supposed to be about community development and community use. You can't have a community nor can you have a commons if everyone is only in it for themselves and, as you so brilliantly put it, "**** everyone else".
Nobody knows what somebody else wants better than they do. I see it as rude and condescending to speak for others and try to judge what their needs are without ever having met them.
Dragonbite said: [*]Except where Linux comes installed on a system, for somebody to get Linux you have to go and DO something (decide/download/burn/install) which will turn off non computer-interested people
n1581j said: It's a sad fact that users don't want to think about what they do, they just wanna do it!!!! Mysealf included
These are two sticking points for me with your respective worldviews.
I want Linux to be successful, and I want it to be successful on it's own merits, but I don't want that to be at the cost of appealing to the Lowest Common Denominator aspect of human nature.
Frankly, no matter how much I would love to see Linux's so-called "market share" grow, I'm not in the least bit interested in having "I don't want to know anything, just hand it to me on a silver platter" idiots as neighbors in this community. I'm not "sorry" that I feel that way; I don't feel it's wrong to feel and think that way, and while anyone is certainly entitled to disagree with me on that point, I'm equally free not to be a part of herd mentality.
Sorry, don't mean to be rude or gruff or denigrating, but that's just how it is.
karellen said: regarding the evolution of Linux as an OS: isn't is depressing to see that all the market share Windows has lost went to Mac OS X?
do you know why you're dissapointed? its because you have such high expectations.
cmmon, this isn't about market share.. its your grudge on linux desktop and why it hadn't met your expecatations after a couple of years of using it.
n1581j said: Take me for example, I installed 8.10 last week, beautiful, easy, no problem till I tried to connect using dial up. (I'm in the boonies.. no dsl). Nothing. So what do I do, go back to Windows. Now, unlike most users, I don't like to give up so what do I do, start searching the forums, sites on Linux, anything to find a supported modem.
The ISP gives their customers cdroms with Windows software on it to make dial-up, DSL or cable-modem as easy as possible.
Same for buying a modem, comes with cdroms for Windows.
Sometimes there's some software or drivers for MacOSX included, and even "less sometimes" you will find "Linux drivers" on those cdroms. At a closer look it appears to be source code with a readme.txt how to try to compile it, or some closed source kernel modules which only work for certain kernels for certain Linux distributions. ... Right.
dadozgb said: You misunderstand me. I simply do think that there is much better gaming solutions nowdays. It's cheaper to buy a console than pc wich can run all modern games. But if you think otherwise feel free to do so.
I don't think otherwise. I just pointed out that there are people who do and that there's no "correct" way on this subject.
dadozgb said: I never said that I never had any problem with gnu/linux 'caused I had
Your exact quote was "I never had such a problem on gnu/linux".
dadozgb said: but I always manage somehow to find a solution for it.
Such solution does not always exist.
dadozgb said: I don't care about web cam drivers although my build in laptop web cam is working and I don't use it. Simply as that.
Geez, the webcam part was simply listed as an example. You're totally missing the point.
dadozgb said: Linux developers have come this far and this is not insulting anybody than you 'cause you have a different opinion so you feel yourshelf insulted.
Er, what? I'm not a Ubuntu developer, I'm not a gamer and I'm not someone having problems with hardware. Thus, I have no reason whatsoever to be insulted by what you wrote. Let's stay focused on the main subject instead of making assumptions about each other, shall we?
dadozgb said: Nvidia is producing gnu/linux drivers for the past 8-10 years. So what are you talking about?
About feature-complete drivers. Please pay attention to what I write.
dadozgb said: I'm just saying that gnu/linux is not OS for everyone. You look at it as alternative to windows whille I look windows as alternative to gnu/linux.
You like making assumptions about me, don't you? I never said that and I have absolutely no idea from where you implied that from.
dadozgb said: Bottom line is everybody are welcome to gnu/linux world, but if you have a free OS, free programs, free support it doesn't mean that you have a free lunch. Gnu/linux is a powerfull OS but it will give you as much as you know. As you know more the more will you benefit from it. This is a great educational OS but this is not a free windows or macosx replacment.
I agree with pretty much everything, but what does this have to do with the current discussion?
dadozgb said: I don't care in which stereotype you put me in. I'm using gnu/linux workstations for the past 13-14 years and I don't simply care about stereotypes. If I do I'll be still runing windows and be very happy about it.
I'm not putting you in any stereotype. I'm said you're helping spread one. There's a difference. This is not about just you.
To expand on my views:
To think that I understand *what type* of functionality someone else wants is pointless and presumptuous. It is fairly safe to assume that they want to minimize software errors and also rather safe to guess that they need their hardware to be supported. That's why I'm happy to hear about better drivers or bug fixes, even if they don't directly affect me. However, trying to assume what operating system would work best for someone else strikes me as overbearing and rude.
cardinals_fan said: Linux supports my hardware and all the games I want. I don't care about other people's desktops. That may sound harsh, but it really isn't my business what they choose to run. That´s up to them. I don't have an investment in any operating system. I use Linux right now because it does what I want right now.
cardinals_fan said: I don't think that I have the right to judge what other people want or say what they should use. If they use Windows, that really isn't any of my business. I use Linux because it does what I want right now. If it doesn't work for them, I'm sorry. I encourage them to speak out and try to make the improvements they want a reality. However, I'm not going to worry about their desktop.
I understand your point, but in my opinion it's too short-termed. Just to make clear: I didn't say what I said because I'm altruistic or anything like that. I'm thinking about myself too, because many things can happen in the future. The best webcam for my needs might be one without Linux drivers, I might find an excellent laptop deal but find out it has an unsupported ATI card and so on. The better the overall situation is, the safer is the future.
Keyper7 said: I understand your point, but in my opinion it's too short-termed. Just to make clear: I didn't say what I said because I'm altruistic or anything like that. I'm thinking about myself too, because many things can happen in the future. The best webcam for my needs might be one without Linux drivers, I might find an excellent laptop deal but find out it has an unsupported ATI card and so on.
Well said. Still, I prefer a more hands-off approach.
MikeTheC said:
Frankly, no matter how much I would love to see Linux's so-called "market share" grow, I'm not in the least bit interested in having "I don't want to know anything, just hand it to me on a silver platter" idiots as neighbors in this community. I'm not "sorry" that I feel that way; I don't feel it's wrong to feel and think that way, and while anyone is certainly entitled to disagree with me on that point, I'm equally free not to be a part of herd mentality.
Why?
I mean what's wrong if 'dumb' people use Linux? What skin is if off your back? I could understand if they were literally your neighbors, but it's not like you can smell them.
Seriously, this is the Elitist attitude that turns people off.
Ancalagon82 said: Why?
I mean what's wrong if 'dumb' people use Linux?
there's nothing wrong even if special people use linux, but there are certain type of people who plays dumby-dumby and becomes expert in market share.
who doesn't know how free software works and what linux desktop is really made of.
Ancalagon82 said: Why?
I mean what's wrong if 'dumb' people use Linux? What skin is if off your back? I could understand if they were literally your neighbors, but it's not like you can smell them.
Seriously, this is the Elitist attitude that turns people off.
So I'm elitist for belonging to the group who takes pride in myself and my knowledge and understanding of how things work? Or am I an elitist for having enough self-respect to want to be self-sufficient?
Either way, if that's the new definition of elitism, then I'm all about that.
I have nothing in the world whatsoever against people who are mentally handicapped; in fact I would go so far as to say they often take a greater pride in themselves than us "normals" do of ourselves.
So, please don't equate lazy with retardation. Thank you.
MikeTheC said: So I'm elitist for belonging to the group who takes pride in myself and my knowledge and understanding of how things work? Or am I an elitist for having enough self-respect to want to be self-sufficient?
Either way, if that's the new definition of elitism, then I'm all about that.
I have nothing in the world whatsoever against people who are mentally handicapped; in fact I would go so far as to say they often take a greater pride in themselves than us "normals" do of ourselves.
So, please don't equate lazy with retardation. Thank you.
Nice dodge. In case you forgot, you said:
I'm not in the least bit interested in having "I don't want to know anything, just hand it to me on a silver platter" idiots as neighbors in this community.
B/c they don't meet your measurement of computer literacy, and don't care to, you don't want them to use your system. Why not? What effect does it have on your life if those people use Linux?
Ancalagon82 said: Why?
I mean what's wrong if 'dumb' people use Linux? What skin is if off your back? I could understand if they were literally your neighbors, but it's not like you can smell them.
Seriously, this is the Elitist attitude that turns people off.
You're mixing up a few things here I think.
Years ago I wanted everyone to try Linux, but now I'm looking at the person to find out whether the person is : 1) Really interested in Linux 2) Has time for it when things go wrong, or knows some people who can give support when problems occur. 3) The ability to work well with computers and technical things.
If the person is interested in Linux but doesn't know people who can support that person with Linux, and isn't very good with computers either, then I do not recommend that person to use Linux.
This is not about how "dumb" people are concerning computers, this is about priorities and efficiency, and not wasting time for a possible lost cause.
I'd rather support 1 interested and enthusiastic Linux user, then 10 computer users who are not really interested, and need a lot of support for every little thing they don't understand.
albinootje said: You're mixing up a few things here I think.
Years ago I wanted everyone to try Linux, but now I'm looking at the person to find out whether the person is : 1) Really interested in Linux 2) Has time for it when things go wrong, or knows some people who can give support when problems occur. 3) The ability to work well with computers and technical things.
If the person is interested in Linux but doesn't know people who can support that person with Linux, and isn't very good with computers either, then I do not recommend that person to use Linux.
This is not about how "dumb" people are concerning computers, this is about priorities and efficiency, and not wasting time for a possible lost cause.
I'd rather support 1 interested and enthusiastic Linux user, then 10 computer users who are not really interested, and need a lot of support for every little thing they don't understand. There's a difference between not recommending Linux to "dumb" computer users and not wanting them to use the same system as you.
All I care about is the quality of the system. If it does what I want, I don't care whether the users are smart, stupid, or murderers (hence my liking for ReiserFS). The users do not a system make.
Ancalagon82 said: Nice dodge.
Don't put words in my mouth, *ever*.
I was responding to another post which was overbroad in it's interpretation of whom I was referring to as "dumb people". And for the record, I do see dumb people. All. The. Time.
In case you forgot, you said:
<snip> B/c they don't meet your measurement of computer literacy, and don't care to, you don't want them to use your system. Why not? What effect does it have on your life if those people use Linux? You really don't know how to comprehend things, do you? Does your mother still dress you, too?
I don't *desire* to be part of a community which lowers its standards to include people who are too lazy to learn and be self-sufficient.
Why not? And what effect does it have on my life? Well, let's see. You know, I think I can answer both questions in one shot. Try this: It creates a drag on the community, which in turn makes my interaction with it unenjoyable.
cardinals_fan said: If it does what I want, I don't care whether the users are smart, stupid, or murderers (hence my liking for ReiserFS).
Dude, I don't really agree with the rest of what you said, but that made me almost spit my drink out, I was laughing so hard!
MikeTheC said: Don't put words in my mouth, *ever*.
:lol:
I love Internet Warriors.
:lol:
You really don't know how to comprehend things, do you? Does your mother still dress you, too?
Of course not!
I have my wife pick out what she wants me to wear.
I don't *desire* to be part of a community which lowers its standards to include people who are too lazy to learn and be self-sufficient.
Why not? And what effect does it have on my life? Well, let's see. You know, I think I can answer both questions in one shot. Try this: It creates a drag on the community, which in turn makes my interaction with it unenjoyable.
Only if you make the false assumption that something can't be user friendly AND do everything you want it to do. The fact that you don't want to even try b/c that would allow the unwashed masses into your little sanctuary speaks volumes about you.
You do realize that whenever there is an argument on ubuntu forums no-one really reads your responses. They look at both of your beans vs thanked count and decide whether your avatar is cooler than the other guys. This decides the winner. :lolflag:
I have to agree with cardinal_fans in that Linux works for me, as long as that stays that way it's fine.
Linux isn't gaining marketshare cause it doesn't have a face, cept for Ubuntu I guess, and cause it doesn't have any form of advertising.
Product lives if enough people care about it, simple as that.
yeah well. it is tough to gage linux market share. I mean it's not like there is any real way to see how many people are running the system. where as with Mac or MS they have real sales numbers to go on. It is probably more then they can report on. for instance my girlfriend uses it but it's not like she flaunts it a lot. the same thing with me MOM. so you can't be sure.
|{urse said: You do realize that whenever there is an argument on ubuntu forums no-one really reads your responses. They look at both of your beans vs thanked count and decide whether your avatar is cooler than the other guys. This decides the winner. :lolflag:
Ha ha ha! So true.
Here's your perspective: how are people changing?
What's happening isn't that people are uninstalling Windows and putting OSX on their machines. They're buying Macbooks and G5's or whatever. Right now the only way to get a Linux machine is to install it yourself, get a netbook, or dig around for the small handful of places you can get Ubuntu preloaded which still costs MORE than the same with Windows.
Once Dell or HP or whoever else makes a push and we start seeing Linux-based PCs getting full-fledged advertising, things will move in the right direction. Right now it's the difference between a band's street team and MySpace page, and a corporate sponsored band with daily radio play.
SomeGuyDude said: Once Dell or HP or whoever else makes a push and we start seeing Linux-based PCs getting full-fledged advertising, things will move in the right direction. Right now it's the difference between a band's street team and MySpace page, and a corporate sponsored band with daily radio play.
Keyper7 said: Ah yes, the classic "as long as I'm happy, **** everyone else" response. From where should I start?
1) Regardless if the computer *should* or *should not* be a gaming platform in your opinion, it *is* for a lot of people. It's a difference of opinions and you have no right to enforce your "better solutions" on everyone. People might have many different reasons to prefer gaming on the computer.
2) You never had any problem? Good for you, neither did I. But lots of people had, and not because of their fault. Not because of Linux developers either. It's because of lack of support from vendors. I always research about Linux support before buying new hardware, but it's also true that very often my options are restricted because of that. I'm not free to buy any webcam, for example. Or any sound card. Some time ago it wasn't possible to use Lightscribe in Linux, today it is because the makers released drivers for it. Nvidia drivers are only now closer to being feature-complete (Purevideo is a recent addition, for example).
3) Ignoring the hardware support problem is also insulting to the Linux developers, because it implies that you want to keep them working their asses off and reverse-engineering things all by themselves. Their job would be much easier if the vendors released drivers or specifications.
Bottom line: you are not the center of the universe. Live with it. Posts like yours only contribute to spread the "arrogant Linux fanboy" stereotype.
Word.
I might echo what others have already alluded to and said, marketshare matters because it fosters interest in Linux from industries that matter to a lot of other people, gaming being one example.
But also, there is (as previously mentioned) more motivation to develop for hardware. This can be useful to many for various reasons, for one example my brother bought an MSI Wind, and put Ubuntu 8.10 on it, unfortunately the touchpad driver is shoddy. He doesn't use his netbook for gaming, but having the touchpad not touch click every time your hand is remotely near the blasted thing is not asking for much.
I think that the project forking is a bane and boon of Linux. It's a boon in that we're empowered to customize as much as we want. It's a bane in that it makes development for a one size fits all software solution for Linux mission impossible.
Also, as previously stated, if hardware developers were developing for their own hardware, instead of passing the burden onto the consumer, then that would free up considerable manpower to develop for other interests. Obviously, it doesn't mean that the consumer developer base will develop in other arenas, but at least then they won't have to waste precious manpower on something that should have been supported by its manufacturer in the first place.
Lastly, so what if people want to game on Linux. Gamers shouldn't have to be chained to an OS that strips them of control, that is inherently insecure, and that attempts to suck a dollar out of them at every chance it gets. What Linux offers the world is a new model of user interfacing with technology. Linux shouldn't have to be limited to the ambitious tech savvy few, or the system administrators and servers of the world. It should be an OS that is able to offer the world an alternative experience in information and entertainment technology.
I don't want people to be forced into using Linux, but I'd love to see the average user, the user who doesn't know much about security, using an OS that is inherently more secure than what they're using now, especially when considering that most likely the main reason that they're not using Linux is miseducation and smear campaigns from the competitor. Granted, back in the day Linux was more difficult to use, but now, users can use Linux without even noticing it isn't Windows.
shadylookin said: if it makes you feel any better apple has been around for 32 years and Microsoft for 33.
going from .64 to .85 is a 32.8% increase in market share in a year. if we can keep that pace for 17 more years linux will have 105% of the desktop market share:lolflag:
:lolflag: problem solved then :D
am relishing already with this prospect
the way I see things, a consistent market share means more OEM support (drivers), more professional software available for Linux and so on. not the second-class citizen treatment that Linux receives these days, powering the cheap netbooks or being hidden somewhere on Dell's site. but that's another story ...and only if we think that Linux powers world's supercomputers...:o
MikeTheC said: Dude, I don't really agree with the rest of what you said, but that made me almost spit my drink out, I was laughing so hard!
Happy to oblige.
Rokurosv said: I have to agree with cardinal_fans in that Linux works for me, as long as that stays that way it's fine.
A lot of people have agreed with me today. It's kind of creepy.
wolfen69 said: germany is also switching to linux in every university in the country. millions more people right there.
I think I read it elsewhere in this forum that Vietnam is also switching to Linux, & FOSS, in a hurry.
Which adds to the good news of Germany's Universities adopting Linux. :-)
*[Edit:] Here is the post with the Vietnam news in it:*
cardinals_fan said: Happy to oblige.
A lot of people have agreed with me today. It's kind of creepy.
nuh-uh
havnt read past first post...
if we gained .21 and are now at .85 then didnt we get ~ a fourth of our current fan base in a year?
jimi_hendrix said: if we gained .21 and are now at .85 then didnt we get ~ a fourth of our current fan base in a year?
Yeah, and they're both sitting next to me right now...