Slashdot Mirror
Debunking Linux-Windows Market Share Myths
bc90021 writes "Nicholas Petreley has a great article over at LinuxWorld explaining why it seems that Windows has such a high market share when 40% of developers are focusing on Linux. From the summary: "There are dozens of reasons why people have underestimated how quickly Linux has been grabbing Windows' market share. Windows starts out with a false boost and maintains its illusory market share even as it gets replaced by Linux. In 2004, don't be surprised when Linux overtakes Windows to become the main focus for developers.""
You may recall that lately he wrote yet-another-gnome-sucks editorial (completely disregarding the notion of "user preference," which generally disregards technical aspects of a situation in the first place).
I hope he's right about this, but I look at it with cautios optimism. One can never really know for sure whether what you are getting is a factual account ot the way things are, or the way he thinks they oughtta be.
90% of the end users wonder "what is Linux ?". To them - Windows is the computer.
But I prefer to use the Google Zeitgeist, and it still says that only 1% of the people accessing Google are using Linux.
Trying to be totally unbiased here, but all these stats are making me confused about the "truth".
Dave
I am ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas. I sure didn't elect that cowboy!
Now _this_ would make an interesting topic!
BTW. You did vote, did't you?
the key word is "developers". I'm a win2k/Mandrake dual boot guy. You know when I reboot? When I have to CODE something. Developing in a windows environment, even with something like cygwin or Visual Studio.NET just plain sucks compared to actually being in linux. Linux is a developers OS and a server OS. It is still not a desktop OS. It could be made to be, but it just isn't happening anytime soon. Look at MS desktop market share, the only one chewing on that is Mac.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
Apple has a quarterly SALES pentration/market share of 3% to 4% but has an installed base somewhere around 11%.
Of course we all know what "Mac People" like to point out about the RISC processor being 40% faster than an x86 and in most cases 75-90% than a Celeron. Who knows about the Centrino. (What a poor name to choose - "trino" anything sounds miniscule)
It's the same way in the Linux community. Most versions of Linux run faster than Windows on the same hardware. (true in some cases on Mac hardware than OS X/OS 9 as well) There is a significantly higher number of 'nix users than M$ would like us to believe. I don't know the member numbers at Sourceforge & Slashdot. Not all are 'nix users but it is significantly high. That alone is large enough base. M$ wants everyone to belive that only mainstream/mass advertising companies (like themselves) have market share. They like to take advantage of the public psyche.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
Truth can stand naked... lies need good clothing. Linux does not need props from the Gartners and the Aberdeens for it's success. It is non-proletycizing (is my spelling OK?) like Hinduism, say. It is tough as hell to understand Linux through the narrow prism of the Windows experience.
Once the principles of Linux (GNU and GPL rather) are truly understood and assimilated, the computer becomes an object of enjoyment, not a distrurtful, supercillous tool. This feeling of freedom and power is propogated to fellow enthusiasts and thus pervades the minds of developers and users alike.
Windows is just a faith.
Linux is the actual Experience.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
For a website that I manage, the numbers with this methodology are: 89% visitors running MSIE, and 93.91% visitors running Windows (and 3% running Macs, and 0.5% using Linux).
YMMV.
I agree that Linux is taking over Windows shares, however an article like this proves nothing. There is no statistical information, what is the population size? What type of companies were part of this "study". How were the companies included, by picking them, by them asking, or just a random sampling.
Sure it's great to think Linux will eventual kill windows, I just don't see any proof of that yet.
So the margin of error is at least in the 5-10% area? That sounds quite large, for a survey that purports to take in a wide range of developers. Methinks the author is taking an overly optimistic view of the subject matter - but that's not really surprising...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Its articles like these that just annoy me. Numbers get played with to come out the way they want it to, so they can stand on their pedestal and ramble off things that in the end most people will ignore. Of those who don't ignore it, most will not believe a word of it and hold it up as an example that the linux community is out for world-domination or something silly like that (not that everyone in the linux community isn't out for that...), and a few people will actually believe the words, hold them as true and walk around spouting off these numbers until someone slams it in their face.
I'm all for linux in the enterprise and (for me) the home use, but I don't think the way to get linux into those places in the mainstream is to go around saying "Windows is better than Linux" and then stopping. The only way I see linux making strides further into to the server market is to just show people how it compares to other platforms on levels of cost, performance, and maintenance. It won't happen overnight, and it won't happen just because someone spouts off numbers that don't really mean anything - it will take time. But with the people doing the development on linux and linux apps, it will happen.
Just my $0.02....
--Joe
His..uh...'sources'...yah I dunno about those.
Blar.
That carried them to a point where the leverage point was effectively "if you control the desktop you can win the servers (killing off novell, banyan ...). This in turn led to "if you control the desktop and departmental servers, you can muscle into the enterprise" -- fortunately (imo) they've had less luck - despite considerable effort - in killing off Unix/Linux/BSD.
So far at least. I don't think this games very predictable, (and the LW article is *very* thin on data, but there certainly is a deep groundswell of good things happening in OSS, and virtually all big-iron oriented code now targets Linux along with Unix).
However it's perfectly reasonable that as developers move (back) to *nix, eventually the market will follow.
(Remembering Grace Slick of the Starship singing about 'egg-snatchers' -- dunno the Borg's a big target, and elephants are best eaten a bite at a time)
Linux is Linux, if One need clarify their dist: <Dist>/GNU Linux
bsds are of course just BSD
Windows is still king when it comes to desktops. Not only due to a huge market share but also FUD (not all unfair) towards Linux from common users.
If we define the market as computers as in CPUs, I'd say that neither Linux nor Windows wins or comes even close. There must be far more 8051 controllers out there running a hand coded snippet of control code than there are 8086 derivates.
The GNU/Linux movement shouldn't say that we have beaten Windows, let's relax. Rather we should say we can beat Windows, let's work as much as possible producing quality software.
Actually, I don't know anyone of my friends besides me who uses Linux at home. No one.
I used to work in the telcom-business at a company with 120 employed (50 developers: C++/Unix/SUN), where four(!) used Linux at home. The reason for the others to have windows? Games - games - games- games - games...
Id Software and a few others have tried, but... And, Microsoft is working very hard to redirect any proto-Linux-users to MS; and when it comes to games, they still have a magnificent lead thanks to their DirectX efforts. That lead may even be reinforced by the XBox.
If 40% of developers are developing for Linux, where are the commercial apps? The big ones seem to be a handful. Freshmeat is great but doesn't represent the huge crashing wave of developer support. We all have our short list of apps we wish were ported.
I have a very hard time with this article - (1) no methodology is given, so the results are as suspect as Microsoft funded surveys; and (2) if 40% of all developers of all sizes are focusing on Windows, wouldn't driver support be 1000% better?
Nick appears to be dressing up wishes in the emporer's clothing of misleading "facts". Again. Anyone else remember his weekly diatribes of the vast superiority and impending market conversion to OS/2 in Infoworld?
I have to take this article with a pinch of salt - I know it's hardly empirical evidence, but almost every developer I know is not installing Linux over Windows, rather they're dual-booting their systems to run both Linux and Windows. Maybe this will change in the long run, but I doubt the swing will have been made by 2004.
I'd love to believe what he says, but it doesn't quite ring true from my own personal experience.
Life is like a sewer; what you get out of it depends on what you put into it...
If you told me that there was a massive shift in developers at Intuit or Adobe that would raise my eyebrows.
There's only one solution to this problem. Linus should add a service to the kernel, so that he's contacted each time a Linux machine boots up. It should provide some info on the hardware...uhhh...maybe some info what kinda music the user likes to listen to...uhhh...what software is installed on the machine...uhhh...well, you know what I mean. I guess noone has ever did this before? ;-)
As much as I'd like for Nicholas Peterely to be right, I find that linuxworld in general to be a slightly less than reliable source of information.
These are the same guys that hired Joe Barr to write for them. This guy is about as un-professional as they come.
Take a look at this article on UT2003 for linux. The article itself was pretty bad, but look at the name calling tirade he goes on when people give negative feedback in the comments section.
Proxies. Again, more linux users could be behind a proxy (a few hundred linux users at my univ go through a single proxy) than windows users
Third, some factors similar to those described in the article could be at work (linux more efficient ==> less linux servers for same job). Maybe linux users are more efficient googlers? I think this is unlikely, but still a possibiility.
Fourth, it doesn't agree with my webserver stats (i.e, counting the hits I get from google searches). Of course, my data set is quite small, but it can not cause a threefold difference (I get 3% linux, 5-6% Mac). Maybe its because the content I have is biased towards linux users, but on the whole it makes me think that some combination of the factors above may be at work in decreasing the perceived share of linux.
I can imagine a future when although a vast majority of people are using Linux, Windows still shows up in the "statistics" as the most popular OS, just because it is shipped by default with most PCs. As long as the Microsoft spin doctors could keep the myth going, manufacturers would still ship PCs with Windows pre-installed by default, thus reinforcing the "statistics". In effect, Microsoft could still claim the "Microsoft tax" even if nobody was using their product.
If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
I think the games and the gaming communit, especially with the overwhelming mass of MMORPG's and the ilk, make up a fairly significant portion of software development budgets globally. For me at least, this has been a major valley in me switching to 'nix 100%. There isn't one single game I play (yes, I'm a gamer ;P) that's available in any flavor of 'nix. A server dedicated server-side products, yes. Clients (ie: actual game), no.
So a magazine called 'LinuxWorld' has an article on how Linux is going to overtake the most popular OS on the market! Wow! That's really impressive...*sarcasm*
No offense to Linux, but 'MacWorld' and 'PCWorld' magazines probably could write the same article about their systems. Can't trust a media produced to promote things.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
Aren't we missing something very important here - client vs. server breakdown? The article seems to assume that it's all about clients, but I just can't believe 40% of developers are doing linux client work. Servers, of course, are another thing altogether.
And of course we all know 1 server box (or 1 cluster) can keep several developers happily employed for years, maintaining & enhancing some line of business app/web application/etc.
So it seems the relationship between the number of developers and number of installs is a pretty weak one.
Read reviews of shopping cart software
My local discount book shop already has large numbers of heavily discounted .NET related books for sale. When I look at the shelves of my local tech book store .NET books are now almost totally absent. Microsoft TV ads that used to promote .NET have been re-edited and no longer mention .NET.
.NET is a dud yet I'm sure that MS could show statistics indicating that .NET is taking over the world.
All this tends to indicate to me that
Just like to remind evreybody that this is from LinuxWorld. Not exactally a bastion of unbiased reporting when it comes to operating systems.
Mod point free since 2001
nicholas petreley is a moron. Let me prove my case.
He said:
1. Evans Data Corporation hired me to help out with a research report focused on Linux developers.
2. Of the developers surveyed, more than 50 percent who now develop primarily for Linux used to develop primarily for Windows. Only 30 percent used to develop for some other Unix or Unix derivative. In case you missed it, the operative phrase is "used to." In other words, this is not a prediction of an emerging trend. It is cold, hard information about what has already transpired, and it withstands the scrutiny of a jeweler's eyepiece.
Now put one and two together and what do you get?
A statistics that is just plain wrong. By only focusing on linux developers, you cannot get accurate statistics.
For example, assume we have.
Microsoft developers 1000 people
Linux developers 10 people
of which
5 used to develop primary for windows
3 used to develop for other unixes
2 otherwise.
How can you prove anything by only doing a survey on linux developers? To get accurate info, you need to either include all developers or take a random sample of all developers.
I'm amazed while reading articles on these two topics at Slashdot. Articles on Linux (and other Free/ Open Source products as well) seem to generate limited comment. This is despite the fact that readers stand to gain a lot from them.
On the contrary, pro-Microsoft articles typically get published around this time, and generate flame-wars in the community. Even 16-hour old-news (an oxymoron right?) on Microsoft is 'delayed' to fit into the Slashdot-MS schedule. (case in point: the SQL-database-patent-case).
Every pro-Linux comment these days is hair-split by the MS apologists - I doubt new readers can ever get to experience the Slashdot of 2000. Mod points seem to be heavily stacked in favor of the MS lobby as well.
I also suspect the Linux-geek crowd waste a lot of their otherwise productive time, defending their views. Time for some spirited defence I'd say.
Truth can stand naked. Lies need good clothing.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Rolling out 1,000 desktops requires virtually no developer input. Rolling out a unified health and social care workflow system (which is what I'm working on now) takes a lot of developer man hours - but when it's finished it will sit on one (Linux) server (and be accessed by hundreds of desktops, most of which will almost certainly run Windows).
This does not matter
We are not playing a numbers game. We don't need to take over the world. The fact that most users still prefer to use something else on their desktops doesn't make Linux a bad operating system, or a failure, or anything like that. Linux is very successful in a lot of niches. If it ultimately becomes more widely used than Windows, well, that will be interesting; but it won't make Linux any better (or Windows any worse).
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
"40 percent of developers"? How should I understand this figure? Do you count as one each person who just happens to develop ANYTHING, even some obscure freeware of no importance? "40 percent of developers" sounds like a shampoo commercial to me ("your hair will be 50 percent more healthy").
But maybe that don't matter
The answer is a resounding NO.
The irony here is that Windows gets an unfair market-share boost because it is inferior to Linux and requires more installations to do the same work.
While I wholly agree with Nicholas on most of the article, this line doesn't seem to help the community. One of the stereotypes of linux users is that we think it is better than everything else in every application. This is simply not the case.
I recently helped my grandmother purchase a computer. Her budget was large enough to get an iMac, so I suggested it, and she purchased it. I made sure she got the extended warranty from Apple because it includes phone support. She would not dial the number no matter how much I suggested it.
She liked to get face to face help, and everyone she knows uses Windows. They couldn't help her with her Mac, even though it's the simplest thing to use. In this situation, I bought the iMac from her and replaced it with a Windows PC, and she is now satisfied.
Every system has its place, and ignoring this fact will reflect badly on the Linux community until we realize it.
In the long run, we're all dead.
So 40 % of developers "focus" on Linux. Even if we accept that statistic at face value (which is itself ironic in an article which seems to be at least partly about dubious statistics), it doesn't mean what I think the author intends it to mean.
There are a disproportionate number of developers who work on Sun boxes relative to the number of Sun boxes in the whole computing market, for instance. That just means Sun machines are being used in situations where there is more custom development work going on, and in situations where companies need and can afford to pay for more people to maintain code. The proportion of Sun developers doesn't speak at all to the broader market share of Sun machines vis a vis Windows machines.
I always get a laugh when I see an article about the misuse and misinterpration of statistics, which trots out its own to-be-misused-and-interpreted statistics. What's that old saw about lies and damn lies ?
The data gathered doesn't answer this question, but I have to wonder.
MS has a well known habit destroying any successful developer of Windows software, either through theft in the guise of a buyout or making a knock off product then welding it into the OS.
While the Free Software community is known for making Free versions of proprietary software (also a potential liability from a proprietary developer's standpoint), it is at least not a total wipeout. They at least know that the OS won't be changed to lock their app out.
The more MS expands, the clearer it will become to developers that Windows development is a good way to get stomped on.
Not how the linux developers don't support the cause:
1. They usually download it for free rather than buy a distro.
2. They wiped the hard drive free of windows, meaning they didn't buy from a white box Linux vendor.
With friends like this who needs enemies.
If you re-read the article carefully, you see that he is talking about a survey of LINUX developers, not of developers. It's nice that lots of these developers used to be windows developers, but discussions about what percentage of them do what are irrelevant to the point he's trying to make --- he's got his probability conditioned wrong.
Interesting number that he's trying to argue about: "What's the probability that you do or will develop for linux, given that you're a developer."
Number he's got: "What's the probability that you do or will develop primarily for linux, given that you're ALREADY a linux developer."
Since we have no info about the other numbers involved (percentage of developers developing for linux, for example), we can't compute from his article what these stats mean about the population at large.
His numbers don't even mean that linux is hurting windows more than unix! Think about it for a minute. This is a classic blunder made all the time by people who don't understand how conditional probability works, yet are willing to babble about it anyway.
It's sad when people write easily debunked cheerleading like this. It's too easy a target for the other side.
So far the only Linux machine that has accessed my site is my own - the site has been up for months and is quiet - about 20 - 30 visitors a day, but the results are still very disappointing.
The server world is very different - I am hacking away at perl for apache on Linux right now.
This is just some linux zealot's pipe dream telling you people what you want to hear. If 40% of developers are focusing on linux, that's because there are so many gazillion different garage jobs calling themselves "linux developers". 99%+ of the real development $$$ is going towards Windows.
Repeal the DMCA!
I do consulting, my goal is to line my pockets with the most amount of money possible.
:-)
I give the customers two options.
1. A windows system with a box delegated for each task and the required MS licenses.
2. A single custom Linux box.
I then explain Linux has no fees associated with it, but it's more expensive to setup. If they go the MS route they will need to pay a few thousand in license costs, it will cost less to initially setup, but more over it's lifetime to maintain, and to reach the same performance levels I will need multiple Windows Machines (don't even talk to me about running exchange with anything else).
My client wins by spending less, and I win by making more.
These are server instances though, I have only ever done a single Linux desktop at a company, and that was for a limited use workstation in a remote part of the country, it can not break unexpectedly.
This is only me, I know the legions of cloned MCSEs outnumber me, so for every Client I flip to Linux they retain many more on the MS side.
Run Linux and profit
24 hours ago OSNews posted this. Now I'm not bitching; perhaps seeing articles like this is a subscriber's perk but if you're waiting on news of new releases of your favorite distro like I am, you're better off reading OSNews and saving your arguments for Slashdot.
This guy is way out there
Any company which wants to stay in business knows that it's the Customers who drive the business. Why do you think Motorola is such a crappy company? It's run by engineers! All they do is create, create, create, but never bother to ask "does anyone want this crap?" I have Linux at home, but that doesn't mean I'm blind ... customers drive the market, not developers. Convence John Q. that Linux is superior, and then everyone will use it.
Everybody here is like "I'll take that article with a grain of salt", or "Statistics don't mean anything".
It seems a lot of people missed the point. That article focused less of stats and more on ways they can be interpreted.
The author is trying to present some alternative ways of interpreting the usual old Win vs. Linux stats that we hear so much. He isn't trying to carve anything in stone. So many of you engineering folks see things in black or white, but this article says there is a grey area. You can look at the grey aread two different ways and it can seem black or white depending on how you look at it. He's not trying to tell us that it's all black or that it's all white.
He makes a great point that there are key ideas in those stats that are often overlooked and are seldom addressed by the Linux community, and never addressed by the Win community(Win preinstalled, Lin more efficient requiring less installs, unsold copies of Win at Best Buy, etc). This is a very insightful article, and while it may be mostly speculation and interpretation, the one fact that we do know is that the Linux developer/user base is growing and will continue to grow(so let's not get hung up on how fast, etc).
Servers are invisible. Linux could run on every server in the world and remain essentially unknown to desktop users.
No matter how good Linux is from a technical pespective, it won't threaten Microsoft on the desktop until Linux developers offer consumers a non-ideological incentive to go to all the hassle and risk of abandoning Windows. I think it will take something along these lines:
1) Create Linux applications that do compelling and unique things that Microsoft apps don't (being "as good as" Office won't cut it for most people, any more than Texturized Soy Protein outsells real beef);
2) Slap a $39.95 price sticker on those apps, write good documentation, stuff 'em in cute shrinkwrapped boxes and get them onto store shelves;
3) Create a "wedge" of non-geek, non-techie "real" people using Linux and exploit their existence to the hilt. Convince ordinary people that Linux is for them. (See Apple's "Switch" campaign.)
4. Build Linux installation software that allows a new user to stick a CD in the slot, click "Go", walk away, and come back 15 minutes later to find Windows gone, Linux up and running, and all his Windows-created data and files preserved and migrated to the right Linux apps.
Good luck, and have fun.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Since I do not know one "Professional" developer that develops exclusively for the the Linux platform, Linux will be dead by 2004.
I know people that develop for Linux, but everyone of them also has to develop multiple platforms (Solaris, BSD, Windows, etc..). Yet almost all the MS developers I know develop exclusively for the Microsoft Platform.
And to be completely honest, in my 6 years as a "Professional" Developer and 20 odd years as a hobby developer, I have not met a "Linux Developer" that actually makes money developing software for Linux. They are usually JAVA or MS developers supporting there Linux Hobby. They contribute to the communnity, but that's what Linux is a Hobby OS that has gotten out of hand.
You claim a lot of things, name percentages etc, but where did YOU get those figures and how did YOU test the products you mention to back up YOUR claims?
I don't see any link in your article. (like the one about linux versions running faster (running WHAT faster? An endless loop?) on the same hardware than windows).
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
You don't need to 'subtract one' every time someone upgrades because an upgrade copy on Windows isn't counted as a newly installed user - that's why it's called an upgrade.
Although he may be right about OEM machines - that said, if he's having this many problems with a shrink-wrap product like Windows, how does he get his figures for Linux distros?
I'm sorry, but I don't believe these numbers for an instant. Maybe 40% of the people who read Petreley, but most big companies are still solidly MS, despite the occasional win in the server room. I just did a website for my high school reunion (no, I'm not saying WHICH) and I was painfully reminded of how few people know how to do more than use email. They were trying to upload 24M picture scans of the kids fer pete's sake... Think that's a viable Linux market? BZZZZT. Linux has a much better shot at embedded and appliance-type applications.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
This article is pure garbage, which is a pity because I'm sure the underlying data would show some interesting trends.
I was reading this article and thinking to myself two seperate thoughts: "Well, that's odd...", and "Uh huh... who cares?".
I work for a non-IT consulting company. Me and the team of ~20 developers here write software for engineers to use in petroleum engineering consulting. All of the software, 100% of it, it developed for Windows. I look around and see 0% Linux developers, and 100% Windows developers. But, alright, obviously my survey is baised. However, I only know one single developer here who has ever used Linux, or any operating system other than Windows. The two of us both have our shiny Powerbooks sitting next to our desktop computers while we work, for e-mail and web browsing and the occasional graphics work. I think the statistic that only 50% of developers use Windows is rather odd... since 95% of users are using Windows. Are there huge fields of programmers who develop cross-platform software and trust that it will work in Windows without testing it? Or develop server-side software only, which never sees a user?
Secondly, who cares. I look at a project like Mozilla, and I can see that a lot of the developers are on non-Windows OSes. But I think the majority of even Mozilla users are Windows users. I advocate Mozilla to my friends and family, installing it on computers and replacing IE/OutlookE, and everyone is happy. They're using Mozilla and Windows, and I think this is highly common. FTL even replaced the 'INTERNET' icon on his grandmother's computer with Mozilla, and I believe the only comment she ever had was about the cute dragon. Developers may be using non-MS platforms, but they're still developing for users who are in Windows. Right? Or is half the world using Linux on their desktop, and I'm in some la-la land?
I'm sure that this has already been mentioned but:
developer focus != market share
Nice try, but I work for a company which is having a hard time making much of a profit with its Linux products. Its Windows products sell quite well.
As much as I would like to believe the opinions of the LinuxWorld folks, I have to raise the bullsh-t alert.
Sorry for this slightly tangent to the article. Most replies I have seen for this type of article all speak to the difficulties of developing for Linux and how easy Microsoft development is. I am not claiming to be some Linux-Guru ( or GNUru for that matter ), but I am learning. Having spent the last few years working as an administrator of both Windows and Linux machines, I have seen some of this shifting taking place. Having also been taking the last few courses for my degree in Computer Science, I have also seen the trend of the next generation programmers and I am not impressed. The majority want easy, simple, "something that does the thinking for them" type of software either to administer or develop with. Too many people jumped on the IT bandwagon when it was a quick path to wealth and stability. A small percentage of students in Computer Science today, of which I would be proud to be considered a part of, tend more towards the "old-school Hacker mentality" that is so missing today. Fully understanding the basics so that you can build up to the more advanced areas is once again becoming more important. Linux development is a prime example of where for many people the bar is too high, because they have never been challenged either in school or in their personal endeavors to learn their craft. I know my limitations, which I why I am more critical of myself and my limited skills than anyone. But, I am learning, and will always be learning so as to improve myself and my skills. Somebody will be able to develop the next generation applications. The question now, is will that be you? Simple answer, only if you prepare. Simple to say, much harder to do. The best things in life are not easy. And experience takes time, not a cram-session and a single exam.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
More and more people are getting computers every day, and even though developers aren't working on the software people are going to move to Windows. Because no matter how much I like Linux I would never give it to my grandparents because the User Interface and the ease of use just isn't there. Because no matter how much is automated you still have to use the command line for certain things. I think if Linux is to ever catch on the developers need to take a hard look at the processes the end user actually have to go through in order to use the software. I live by the statement "Powerfull but Simple". Which mean give the users a simple interface upfront to customize the software and let the power users dig into the menu system and turn on and off the controls that they want.
I have to say one thing about the developer issue. With more and more of the developers moving twords Linux doesn't this just leave a strangle hold for Microsoft to continue to flood the market with thier software. Because maybe all the developers are moving over to Linux but I garontee the Lay Person isn't. Microsoft still holds about 90% of the desktop users and that hasn't changed much since the introduction of Linux to the mass market in 1998.
Just my 2 cents.
Nick
Actually, I hate war too. I think killing someone is never to be taken lightly and should not be done without trying to reason with them first.
In my opinion, the last 12 years and 12+ UN resolutions represent that effort to reason with Sadam. As painful as it is, there is a time for war.
BTW, I find it sad that someone who (rightly) hates war would be so... violent and hateful in their words.
that other patriot again
But if they would be just as happy then how come all the white boxes in the world that you can buy, the user will still pay out the ass to get windows over linux. Market share is not inflated, 90% of users, use windows, that's marketshare. The problem with Linux is that, it's not as pretty as windows. And mose users just want something that's really pretty when they turn it on. And quite honestly if your computer already comes with XP on it, there is no point to downgrade to a Linux distro.
Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
k-12 I used Macs in school, and I still use a XP box at home. The computers you use in school seem to have little affect as to what you use outside of school. Otherwise I would suspect that Mac would have a much larger market share.
Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
I do Tech support for an ISP, I see all kinds of stuff happen to windows boxes.
Where is spybot, Adaware, Mcafee, Norton, and all those other programs Linux versions?....
I get calls from people who can't browse because of NewDotNet spyware breaking thier DNS at least a few times a day. Folks who boot up and get thier homepage hijacked and see 10 popup windows before they even launch thier browser. It costs the ISP about 1$ a minute to offer telephone technical support, and none of these issues are ones that we've caused, none of these issues are Linux issues.
I also get to talk to customers whose connections we cut off from Spam reports, people who have no idea their machine has been hacked and has smtp running along with http-proxies, ftp servers and all kinds of stuff "I just play games at pogo and use email, I don't have anything bad on here...do I?"
My ISP doesn't support Linux. I have a small army of peguins at my desk waiting for they day when we'll have to tell folks, "Sorry, you'll have to call your OEM we don't support Windows." For now, at least when customers ask me "what antivirus software do you reccomend?" I can say "I don't know because I don't use Windows so I don't really need to worry about it" and I can tell them to go read about Linux and let them know that even though we don't support it, you'll find lots of other places that will help you out.
For websurfing and email, Linux is already a much easier system to use, just because there is less that can compromise your machine.
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
Interesting Quotes:-
Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq's chemical and biological weapons production.
And to today that would basically say we have no idea what weopons of mass desruction Iraq has.
As does this one
As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.
And this one is very interesting, as of course this is not a war about oil
It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world's supply of oil will all be put at hazard.
But since it is not about oil, why is terrorism not even mentioned, and yet this letter is basically quoted word for word by Bush as the reasons to go to war?
1) Create Linux applications that do compelling and unique things that Microsoft apps don't (being "as good as" Office won't cut it for most people, any more than Texturized Soy Protein outsells real beef);
Such as? This is a frequent complaint, but nobody seems to have any real suggestions for improvements over Windows apps. When improvements do come along, often Windows users complain about too many confusing features. And even when truly effective improvements come along, e.g. tabbed browsing, they do not do much to spurr the switch from IE/Windows.
2) Slap a $39.95 price sticker on those apps, write good documentation, stuff 'em in cute shrinkwrapped boxes and get them onto store shelves;
If people wanted to pay for software, Kazaa would not exist. I personally hate the idea of going out to a store to buy a string of ones and zeroes, and I couldn't if I wanted to because they don't have software stores in my part of the world. Freeness and downloadability of programs does not decrease their appeal, just look at AOL instant messenger and ICQ.
3) Create a "wedge" of non-geek, non-techie "real" people using Linux and exploit their existence to the hilt. Convince ordinary people that Linux is for them. (See Apple's "Switch" campaign.)
Apple, despite the switch campaign, still has less than 5% marketshare. At any rate, before you convince ordinary people that Linux is for them, you have to educate them to some extent about computers. And you still haven't addressed how to create this "wedge" to begin with. Many would also argue that we don't want "stupid", "ordinary" people messing with Linux, as they won't contribute anything to the community anyway.
4. Build Linux installation software that allows a new user to stick a CD in the slot, click "Go", walk away, and come back 15 minutes later to find Windows gone, Linux up and running, and all his Windows-created data and files preserved and migrated to the right Linux apps.
And what about IP address or dialup login info? And what about username and password? And what about every Windows patch breaking the formats just enough that they wouldn't import anymore? And what about keeping a backup in case, despite all these impossible improvements, he doesn't like Linux after all? And what about the users who want to know whats going on and feel like they are taking part in it, even if they don't participate? Windows setup asks more questions than most Linux setups these days, and that hasn't really hindered Windows upgrades.
Why is it that we feel it is so important for Linux to win the desktop? You can run Linux on your desktop, and I can run Linux on mine. Application support for Linux is on par with Windows as far as 'just as good' apps are concerned in all areas except games. Wintendo systems are entrenched in that role, and if you don't like it, buy a console.
There is no sig.
I remember a game company executive say that %3 of the games own %95 of the market. The reason why was because of distribution. Id software only made it out of the tiny home grown game companies because it had a supperior product. Only after that did activision place their products on store shelves.
The same is true with software. In the Windows world Microsoft has crippled innovation. The other markets microsoft does now control are specialized products like cad( autocad), accounting (great plains, quick books), and audio/video products( photoshop), as well as highly specialized products sold to companies.
The %40 of linux developers make specialized server products or are opensource developers. Many opensource developers write windows software for a living and linux software as a hobby. Besides Linux distro's you will not see these on store shelves.
This is why Linux is going nowhere. Until Microsoft's choke on MS office and VB written apps ever leaves the Windows platform people will stay with Windows.
http://saveie6.com/
Or is the developers writing portable code that can run on Solaris/AIX/BSD/GNU-Linux and just saying the word "Linux" because its faster than pointing out we've only written code that works on a 686 RedHat based system.
"Servers naturally don't access google, but depending on the app that you're developing, a server install of Linux may or may not matter to you."
They could however access the Google API. Think front end.
It's a matter of philosophy. UNIX traditionally had a "do one thing very well" approach. So a compiler should compile, an editor should be used for editing and so on.
This led to the development of a lot of excellent tools, e.g. emacs, the GCC, CVS and hundreds of little helpers like grep or diff. grep actually is good example for a very specialized software.
So, with Linux, you usually have an excellent tool for every task. As most of this tools are free software, no one is trying to lock you in, and you can configure (or simply change) every tool until it matches your need.
The typical Windows-IDE follows a totally different philosophy: "Do all with one software". Normally it's configurable to some extend, and normally it tries to lock you in and to force you to buy further software from the same company (e.g. for version management).
So developing on Windows usually drives UNIX/Linux-Developers mad and the other way round.
While a Linux-developer will miss many tools on a Windows system and, of course, the possibility to change everything (even in the source code, if necessary), a Windows user with a Linux box will miss integration.
Check out this pie chart of client accesses to google for Jan 2003:
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/jan03_pie
It's from this page:
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
What more really needs to be said.
http://tinyurl.com/3t236
You don't need good documentation - you just need "professional" looking documentation, because everyone just buys the Dummies book, or YourApp in 24 hours or whatever.
I think what Petreley says about developers programming for the server might be close to being correct-- Linux is taking market share from Microsoft, and I think it could extend to Windows server installations as well as Unix. I don't think that Linux is really having an impact on the desktop yet. The other thing he doesn't mention is whether this developer survey is just the USA or whether it's international-- it seems quite probable that Linux has more mind/market share in Europe in particular, than it does in the USA.
My question is, why would someone go to Circuit City or Best Buy to purchase a machine that has Windows pre-installed, then take it home and install Linux? Yes, yes, you can create a dual boot system (not easily), but it would seem to be easier to buy a "naked" PC from an online builder and save yourself the Microsoft "tax", then install Linux. I realize that MS is trying to clamp down on OEMs, but naked machines are still available out there. I bought one just to assure that I could reinstall Windows 2000 (which I got elsewhere) if I had to.
Petreley has a reputation as cheerleading for Java, too. I am surprised he didn't tell us how many of those Linux developers are using Java. I think there's a trend toward Linux, but it is developing less dramatically than Petreley would have us believe.
Always look on the briight side of life! (whistle, whistle)
I think the author of this article has his head up his A$$. Linux will NEVER overtake Windows. I know most of the people on this board are *nix users and have slight delusions of grandeur, but the fact of the matter is... *nix is not (and most likely never will be) an average consumer-friendly OS. Everyone one of us on this board had to spend some time when starting out with *nix to learn the OS... and I'm sure most of us had to struggle to get the damn sound drivers working properly. And... it didn't bother us one bit... because we WANT to learn about the OS and want to be fluent *nix users. But like one of the other replies said... the average user doesn't want to learn the OS. They don't even want to KNOW about the OS. They just want to boot their machine and start their word processor. You have to remember that we are not your average computer users. Most of us on this board work directly with computers, and most do development as well. Think truly of the average user (think about your mother or your grandmother... these are the average users), can you imagine them trying to learn/master the intricacies of *nix? Because of this the BestBuy's, CompUSAs, HPs, Dells, etc. who want to continue to make money will offer Windows because that is what the average user wants/needs. If my grandmother brought home a Linux box... she would get frustrated and return it immediately... this is exactly what these companies DON'T want! Any developer that decides to focus purely on Linux will quickly realize that it is a niche market, and if they want to make any money they will need to expand to support windows. Then, when they realize that 90% of their revenue comes from the windows products, they will quickly drop support for Linux because the stock holders want the company to have higher revenue.
So over half of the Linux developers used to be Windoze developers. Big deal. A better question is: What percent of Windoze developers have switched to Linux development? I'm sure this number is much smaller, but growing.
What a dumb article. Some geek trying to make himself feel good even though his software sucks.
Thanks. I needed a good laugh this morning.
Nicholas Petreley worked with Evans Data Corporation on a survey which asked Linux developers about there preferences, and he learned that 50% of them were no longer developing Windows software.
Somehow from these figures, Petreley concluded that Windows has signifigantly less developer mindshare than Linux.
In other news...
99.9%(with a margin of error of 5%) of respondents at a KKK rally were against affirmative action programs, from this we can clearly conclude that tea in China is selling at 50 cent per pound.
To help debunk the number of MS vs. Linux users:
Maybe if more people registered With Linux Counter we could have a more accurate count of the number of Linux users.
I agree totally. I have witnessed a lot of people asume that since something is free and not sold in the store it's inferior.
Plus most people (especially those on dial-up) don't want to be hunting down packages and libraries on the net. I think a lot more people (mythical average users) would feel comfortable switching if they knew they could pick up software at any computer store.
...40% of developers are now out of work and have nothing better to do. When they go back to work theyll go back to using Windows. Doesnt matter wether you or I like it, its reality. This survey is just a pulling o' the numbers (it is St Patricks day) out of ones arse.
Read the GNU Emacs FAQ for Windows.
Heck, if they can make Emacs run on VMS, they sure can make it run on Windows.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Example: google is running (by their own admission) on the order of 50,000 linux rackmounts. How many times do you think they downloaded the disto?
Sorry, couldnt resist ;)
I know this may sound astounding to M$ trolls but our compnay of 200 users has coverted to linux desktop. We also have converted our home desktops too. Guess what no more blue screen.
Frankly, I don't care if Linux wins the desktop. I dropped Linux when OS X became viable. that said...
...nobody seems to have any real suggestions for improvements over Windows apps...
...before you convince ordinary people that Linux is for them, you have to educate them to some extent about computers. And you still haven't addressed how to create this "wedge" to begin with. Many would also argue that we don't want "stupid", "ordinary" people messing with Linux, as they won't contribute anything to the community anyway..
>>
Good ideas are hard to come by. I certainly don't have any. But this argument leads in the direction of asserting that no more software applications remain to be invented and that incremental evolution of existing code is all that's left. I don't really believe that.
>> If people wanted to pay for software, Kazaa would not exist.
Kazaa exists because some people don't want to pay for pop music that exists only because other people continue to pay for it through legitimate channels. Your preferences don't reflect how most people will continue to acquire software -- buying it via the same kinds of distribution channels where they buy everything else.
>>
This statement is an example of unwarranted Linux elitism, as indicated by your equation of "ordinary" with "stupid". You're implying that the only people "worthy" of using Linux are people with the time and interest to learn technical minutiae. That's absurd. An interest in computers is no more a marker of "intelligence" than is an interest in driving a car or watching television. Should automobiles be so complex and unwieldy that effective use requires a study of mechanical engineering? Should watching television require knowledge of electronics? Computers are appliances and need to be as simple to use as possible. Follow your suggested path and Linux will be a cult relegated to a snobbish and self-congratulatory decreasing few. (In any case, I don't believe in all that "community" nonsense.)
>> And what about IP address or dialup login info? And what about username and password? And what about every Windows patch breaking the formats just enough that they wouldn't import anymore?
The point is that easy installation routines are not enough. What good does it do for someone to install Linux and lose all their data in the process? If I have a working Internet connection, why should I want to hassle with setting it up again in a new and unfamiliar OS? Sure, in theory people might backup data elsewhere and roll it over onto their new Linux machine. But, that assumes they have another machine. It also assumes that they see the benefits of Linux as being greater than the pain and hassle of making that effort. Truth is, if your an Office/Outlook/Explorer user, why bother? As for Microsoft tweaking file formats...well, that's life in the Big Leagues.
>> Application support for Linux is on par with Windows as far as 'just as good' apps are concerned in all areas except games...
Dunno know about games...they bore me. Your assertion that Linux apps are "just as good" as Windows apps may or may not be true, but in the end, it is irrelevant. The perception one develops visiting most Linux websites or examining most of the few shrinkwrapped products available on shelves (as opposed to RedHat and SuSe) is that Linux is enthusiastically supported by amateurs, boffins and afficianados for whom the sense of "belonging" to that alleged "community" you mentioned is more important that mainstream acceptance.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
when I read the forum threads, I was surprised by the variety of reasons why people switched. Maybe, oneday I'll make a list. But in the meantime, I have to say the Linux train cannot be stopped. The momentum is there and more and more people are finding out what this is all about.
Perhaps there are so many Linux developers because it takes several Linux develops to equal the productivity of a single Windows developer. This is likely given the disparity in development tool productivity between the two platforms.
By contrast, during my stint at Microsoft I found that enormous amounts of critical information are available only as internal folklore e.g. "if you want to understand how that call works, go over to building 43 and ask Fred, he got it to work."
This, not "ease of use" or the politics are why I would rather pull espresso than be an MS dev, either inside or outside the Redmond campus. I will never have the understanding of the underlying software architecture of NT/Win2k/XP that I do now of Linux. No one does. It's just not structured that way. And if I can't be really good (by my standards) at my trade than I'll get a new trade. I'll be a really great barrista.
Our company of 500% users and developers all run on linux .
:)
Does this count anything. And by the way we donot reboot our servers or desktops everyday
So, Windows has 50, Linux 40, presumably Mac and other Unices have the other 10... right?
What happened to all the people who develop without a platform in mind, using Java or whatnot? Does a Java developer using a Linux box to write programs that will be run primarily on Windows boxes get counted as a Linux developer, or a Windows one?
As big as Java is I've got to believe it covers more than the 10% not explicitly named by itself, and that's not including the developers who are undoubtedly working on Macs or Solaris or even DOS.
40% of developers aren't focused on Linux (unless you're talking about Open Source development, lol)... that's pure delusion and wishful thinking. Saying it won't make it so. It's around 2% to 3% today. However, almost 30% are planning Linux development before 2005. That's huge growth and shouldn't be overlooked. That will make Linux a strong #2. Today it's like 8th or 9th.
I don't think the way to get linux into those places in the mainstream is to go around saying "Windows is better than Linux"
I don't think that's a good way either. I'm glad we agree.
"It's a very tangled subsystem." --Windows kernel guru
Thank you, Kruschev, you can put your shoe back on now.
1) Create Linux applications that do compelling and unique things that Microsoft apps don't (being "as good as" Office won't cut it for most people, any more than Texturized Soy Protein outsells real beef);
Done. Try Redhat 8.0.
2) Slap a $39.95 price sticker on those apps, write good documentation, stuff 'em in cute shrinkwrapped boxes and get them onto store shelves;
Again, done. Redhat 8.0, Applixware, StarOffice. Also, I've just discovered GnuCash - it must work like Quicken and MS Money, but it's very clear about what it's doing. I never figured out Quicken or MS Money.
3) Create a "wedge" of non-geek, non-techie "real" people using Linux and exploit their existence to the hilt. Convince ordinary people that Linux is for them. (See Apple's "Switch" campaign.)
Not done, but a good idea.
4. Build Linux installation software that allows a new user to stick a CD in the slot, click "Go", walk away, and come back 15 minutes later to find Windows gone, Linux up and running, and all his Windows-created data and files preserved and migrated to the right Linux apps.
Again, done in Redhat 8.0. People have been complaining about Linux installers for years and distro folks have listened. For me, Linux became easier to install than Windows at the Redhat 7.3 stage, and the installers have become even better since.
Granted that there are other distributions (like Debian) require you know what you're doing - but if you're a Linux newbie, you'll probably go witht he flow and choose Redhat anyway.
/. is the biggest FUD factory (Or at least gathering point) on the net. This is yet another article with no basis in fact and bald faced lies with bad math.
/. losing 95% of it's readership?
It's time we got just a little more serious here, or would that result in
The useless part of your nick is very appropriate, as is your pulling stuff out of ones arse comment. both fit you very well.
amen to that.
"In 2004, don't be surprised when Linux overtakes Windows to become the main focus for developers"
are there people on THIS planet who ACTUALLY BELIEVE THIS? Christ, and I thought Amigans were deluded...
That was classic intercourse!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My experience is that Windows XP does not crash, but it does become unusable if you load so many programs that you begin using virtual memory. See Windows XP Shows the Direction Microsoft is Going..
Of the developers surveyed, more than 50 percent who now develop primarily for Linux used to develop primarily for Windows. Only 30 percent used to develop for some other Unix or Unix derivative.
But since Linux is a posix-compliant UNIX variant, many apps developed for it can be ported straight to Unix flavors by simply recompiling. Windows is a whole different ballgame (unless you develop with the Wine libraries for portability).
Drivers need a bit of porting, but are still 'way closer to Unix than Windows, and apps that use Lunix-specific features will need some tuning (or just not go if the whole POINT is to interact with the Linux feature).
But when a developer switches from Unix to Windows his work is likely still available in the Unix world. (Perhaps moreso, if he's GPLing it now.) Those that switch from Windows to Linux are pretty much GONE on the Windows side of the world.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Well, you must realize that there is more than the desktop computer, PC. While Linux is not really ready for the desktop per se(it's getting there fast), it is widely used on servers. Therefore, if you are just counting the number of computers total a certain software is on, then of course the software for Windows will have much higher numbers due to the fact that there are many more desktop computers than servers.
The importance of the server in this internet-centered society has been neglected by most casual users, and although their numbers are few, their actual importance is much higher than that of the desktop computer. Thus, solely judging by numbers of machines that the software is used on is simply misusing statistics.
All your base are belong to us.
Since this is about statistics, I thought I'd add some more.... from http://counter.li.org/
Interesting pieces:
- Of Linux users, 47% use it at work; a whooping 90% use it at home.
Lesson: All the developers use it at home, too.
- 99.5%!!! of Linux boxes have Ethernet. This is likely to mean that just about all the home Linux boxes are in multi-machine homes (or DSL).
- Red Hat leads the pack, but has only 30% of the market - there are 5 other distributions above the 10% mark
- All statistics are biased.
The Linux Counter count has gone down by 7.000 (from 140.000 to 133.000) since Jan 1, 2003 - this is mostly Slashdot users who registered in November 2001, and whose emails have gone bad since then. You're welcome back!
Log in and check if you're registered!
Any business owner will tell you that word of mouth is the best advertising you can get at any price - if you can get enough of it. That's why I think Windows is doomed to a slow painful death as more people adopt linux. As linux grows, as it improves, more people will use it, recommend it, and sometimes contribute back to it. This process will accelerate exponentially unless MS (or someone else) can find a way to stop it or slow it down.
You can't stop a train by standing in front of it, not even if your name is Bill Gates.
(Score: -1, Stupid)
Sorry, but this is not how market research is done. You call 100 people and find out who they are developing for. Linux has done well but has taken nearly 100% of its share from Unix. Sorry, but this is the way it is to date.
How about all you motherfuckers that think war is a good idea post your home addresses. You're all a bunch of badasses, right? You should be proud of your all mighty righteous selves. Stand up and be counted. Make a difference.
M-/ does autocompletion via searching backwards through your buffers, it's very nice.
interesting how the only people surveyed were linux developers
"I think killing someone is never to be taken lightly and should not be done without trying to reason with them first."
You fucking piece of shit, you have no idea what's coming out of your mouth, do you? If there was any justice in this world, pieces of shit like you would get reincarnated as iraqi citizens; forced to fight to protect their countries from fuckers who think like you.
Surely you're talking about French citizens rather than Iraqi?
The Coward part of your nick is very appropriate.
Even if 70% of developers suddenly switched to Linux, MS windows would still have the most developers working on any single desktop. Why? Because Linux doesn't even have a standardized GUI toolkit. Of the 70%, 20% would go off and do KDE, 20% would do gnome, 15% would use one of the three competing Java toolkits, 15% would use Mozilla's XUL, 10% would use motiff/lesstif, and 10% would just write their own from scratch. Thus the single biggest hunk of GUI developers (30%) would still be coding for WinAPI!
(Oops I forgot Tcl...and probably more)
I can't believe I didn't see anyone post this yet.
When you run Windows, you must purchase a copy for each machine you plan to install it on. With Linux, you usually buy/download one copy and install it on all the machines, don't you?
Our small IT company has about 50 computers in the office. About half of them are workstations with Win2K, and the other half are servers running Red Hat. I'm pretty confident we bought 25 copies of Win2K and maybe 3-4 copies of pre-loaded Linux + a download or two. That's 1:1 usage, but 5:1 purchases.
I've built up so much character I have an alter-ego
Actually, Microsoft is already aware of this possibility. Just check out this /. story for further details.
Rest assured that the mighty MS will not fall over something this stupid. PCs are not going anywhere, thanks to Microsoft, Apple, Compaq, Dell, et al. I, for one, am glad for that. If PCs do ever disappear then a major component of the decentralized freedom of information we all enjoy today would disappear. That's a far more important benefit to the PC+Internet combination than many people care to admit. It's also a freedom that could be easily throttled on a completely DRM controlled platform like could be provided on any console.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
this reminds me alot of how record companies used to make #1 albums. They would simply ship loads and loads of vinyl. Yet most of it remained unsold. I wonder if they can impose a system similar to the SoundScan system where sales, rather than shipped units are reported.
-Cnik
Well, I stopped using Redhat at 7.3 and hadn't yet noticed that an installation automatically migrated data and files created with Windows programs. I don't mean keeping a Windows partition and telling the user to point his Linux apps at it. I mean automatically migrating that data to a Linux partition, configuring the Linux apps so the user doesn't need to go hunting around for it in unfamiliar territory, and making the old Windows partition unnecessary. Maybe 8.0 does that, but I can't find a mention of it on the Redhat site.
I'm curious what apps in 8.0, or anywhere else in Linux-land, provide new capabilities that aren't available in proprietary, commercial software. Linux needs new compelling and unique applications if it hopes to draw mainstream users. Not better word processors, or spreadsheets, or image manipulation programs, (why switch from Office on Windows to Applixware on Linux if you're happy with Office?) but something that mainstream customers want to use and is only available on Linux.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
ROFLMAO!!!!! good one! I deliberately changed my password several times so as to forget it and thus somewhat unattach myself from slashcrap, and the slashturds like yourself that inhabit it.
After reading through the posts, I think that many of you believe that the article is saying that Linux is overtaking windows on the desktop.
From the article:
"It replaces the cubic zirconia otherwise known as the axiom that Linux is taking more market share from Unix than from Windows. I had long suspected this was a fallacy, and Evans' data confirms my suspicions."
He is obviously not talking about the desktop although I believe that Linux will start taking market share in that area also.
What the article is talking about is that Linux is clobbering Windows in the server area.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
4. Build Linux installation software that allows a new user to stick a CD in the slot, click "Go", walk away, and come back 15 minutes later to find Windows gone, Linux up and running, and all his Windows-created data and files preserved and migrated to the right Linux apps.
And while we're at it, would you like a satelite that can scratch your ass with a laser-beam from space?
It only takes your average person to try to map a damn printer in Linux to make them get out their Dell-issued restore disc and promptly put Windows back on their computer.
Linux not ready for primetime desktop.
... because I would love it to be true, but it is impossible to tell from his bizarre logic.
... windows XP is not a server platform. He ignores people who install windows over linux (lots, actually), and most of his article is pure speculation.
It is about as definitive and factual as the average conspiracy theory.
Ummm
It's also impossible to tell what he is talking about. Are the developers he mentions developing enterprise apps (seems likely), or desktop apps?
Petrely seems confused as to what he is going on about. If he is saying that linux on servers is big, and, surprise, surprise, developers are planning to support it, then why is this remotely interesting? Everyone knows this.
The desktop is the next battleground, and it is far from clear how that is going to pan out.
There's one...
We've always been at war with Eurasia.
First, I read the article. I'm curious to where the survey was taken... looks/sounds like it was at LinuxWorld. Now, here are some claims made that I'd like to see the numbers on.
/.ers typically accuse Microsoft of doing.
"Even on Intel, Linux outperforms Windows."
and
"Let's say one company installs two Linux servers, but the company next door chooses five Windows servers to handle the same load."
and
"The irony here is that Windows gets an unfair market-share boost because it is inferior to Linux and requires more installations to do the same work. "
I've never seen anything supporting these claims. Post proof or simply fall into the "fanboi" bin.
From another poster:
"What's more, a lot of the UNIX/Linux UI work that is going on today *is* innovating, just not by throwing out 30 years of history. There are elements that have been absorbed from Windows, some from MacOS, some from Motif/CDE, some from NeXT, even some from mostly non-graphical "environments" like EMACS, which in turn both influenced and drew from the LISP Machines."
Hmmm.... seems your definition of "innovation" is different from mine and is more in the line of what
Yes I am saying your an idiot if you bought an HP computer with a preloaded OS and expected it to operate on the same level as boxes you set up to be servers. I thought this was common knowledge that the prebuilds are shit that add loads of crap that run in your task bar, and clutter your programs list. But even this isn't the problem, it's ussually their proprietary drivers, for their proprietary built in hardware. And I think your an idiot for buying an E-machine, because, I garantee that for what you spend on a new E-machine I can build a machine twice as good. So your dumb for paying money for a piece of crap, even if it was a really cheap piece of crap.
Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
50% of all people in internet chat rooms are woman. Strangely they all seem to be attractive and single also. The government can rest easy now that equality has been achieved!
Funny how you always claim Linux is overtaking Windows on the desktop. I've yet to see one non-developer/sysadmin who runs linux.
It's called reality my friends.
Stupid Dell people wouldnt let me buy a laptop without a Microshaft operating system.
Not only that, but when the machine boots it tells you that you must read all of the license agreements before you hit the return key to continue.
So I changed the boot list and never accepted the agreements and installed RedHat instead.
Who can blame me if I harbor secret dreams of hurling this XP cd at Gates fat head. I'd print copies of the cd and give to people, but I wouldnt do that to my worst enemy.
So I have a 100 freaking dollar coaster on my desk. I would rather have GIVEN that money to Dell. ARE YOU LISTENING DELL?
I buy white boxes whenever possible so I am not FORCED to buy an operating system I neither need nor want.
Applications must not crash the OS.
http://www.winex.com/
You're stupid and you're wrong. You should feel ashamed for spreading such nonsense.
Face it: if the development tools were reversed, you'd be laughing at Windows and praising VS.NET for being vastly superior to everything out there.
From the article:
Almost 40 percent of developers say they get their Linux by downloading it over the Internet.
Where does it say they're _focusing_ on Linux? I like to develop something on linux, but I use XP for most of the time. And yes, I do develop on windows too. But I still fall in their 40%. So how many "developers" use _exclusively_ Linux?
1) Create Linux applications that do compelling and unique things that Microsoft apps don't.
Unless the manner in which it is better is the user interface. People assume any deviation from the Windows interface is a deficit, which makes it impossible to compete on those grounds. Either your program feels exactly identical, or the sheep think it's a flaw that it is different. The notion that it might be different in a BETTER way never enters their minds.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
is that people will go about quoting the numbers that please them until there is solid evidence to the contrary (and even then some won't stop).
:
I am an avid Linux supporter. Right now my guess is that Windows does outnumber Linux. Why? Because we're talking home user and
FACT : Majority of home users are near computer ignorant
FACT : Linux is not an OS for the computer ignorant
FACT : Put those two together and it makes sense that most home users have windows.
Now I dont have a doubt that most servers run some flavor of Linux, but that's not the point! Why? Because the largest number of machines (the largest potential market) is for home users.
So what do we have now? The question : Is Linux suitable for the home? My personal answer is "not for someone who is comp ignorant"
This boils down to the question of Linux user friendliness and I must say it has been improving a LOT in the last months - KDE 3.1 and mozilla are great examples.
I think it will take about 2 to 3 years and then you won't need numbers to tell you more people are using Linux because you'll see the fact for your own eyes. I personally think this will hinge on Linux game support and I do see a lot more support for games on Linux if OpenGL 2.0 kicks off.
To be honest though, we do need an opensource equivalent to DirectX.
Until then, I'll say there are more windows machines in the homes and rightly so.
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
I think the only part that's needed is the seamless transition. Ship with Mozilla (perhaps spoofing as IE/Windows) and OpenOffice. Both of these apps do essentially everything IE/Office does, and have extra features too... Anyone willing to tolerate any change (going from Win2k/Office2k -> KDE3.0/OpenOffice is about as different as going to WinXP/OfficeXP) can adjust easily.
The reason people will switch is that businesses will save up to $1k per employee in site licenses. The employees won't get a say.
Nope. Not just better versions of word processors, spreadsheets, or whatever. That's been done. Something entirely new and available only on Linux that meets a compelling need users did not know they had. Think VisiCalc.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
I think a lot of posts here miss the point. Microsoft has never claimed that Linux hasn't gained ground; but, they *do* claim Linux gains ground at the expense of other Unixes, and not at the expense of MS-Windows.
I believe the most important point of the article is this: Linux is *not* just canniballizing Unix. It is actively gaining ground against the entrenched "market share leader," Ms. Windows.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
So, you think that killing someone should be taken lightly and done without reason?! What kind of person are _you_?
I actually have thought about this issue for a long time (since the last war with Iraq at least). I've read the news over the years and tried to think of solutions to the problems in Iraq. My conclusion is simple enough:
No matter what action the US does or does not do, people will die in Iraq and we are partially responsible for those deaths since we had a hand in helping Saddam stay in power.
For example, we ignored Iraq and let the country exist with Saddam in charge. Historical result: thousands and thousands of people dead via biological weapons and a neighboring country sacked, raped and looted.
As another example, we contained Iraq through diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions. Historical result: thousands and thousands of people dead via starvation and the impovrishment of a country.
As final example, we could try to forcefully remove Sadam from power and rebuild Iraq with billions of dollars. The result (I hope): thousands and thousands of people dead from warfare and MAYBE a better Iraq with a democratically elected government.
Please note that all three of the above examples have caused or will cause the deaths of thousands. If I (as a US cit.) am to bear the responsibility for those deaths, I should at least strive for as good an outcome as possible for those that live.
I'm really sorry that you think I'm a piece of shit and I know that this war will cause much pain. It's just (as President Bush says) the only reasonable option at this point.
the other patriot again
Please don't disregard this as a troll. Its not.
The Problem; the key, fundamental problem, afaic, with 'developers' in the sense listed here.
People develop for Windows because the userbase are willing to pay for software.
There is a perception (which seems to be justified for the most part) that software available for Linux should be free (as in beer), with source supplied.
Want evidence? Look at the reaction to Mozilla, OpenOffice, and any of the other OSS 'success stories'. "Open Source really is better than commercial software! We don't need companies, the community has made something so much better!"
I know a few professional independant software developers. There is no way they could ever hope to do what they do in a market that wouldn't pay for their software. Their software wouldn't exist if they didn't get paid, so it exists for Windows.
Those of use who have earned a living making sense out of web server log files have know for almost a decade that around 1/3 of our hits come from a few "megaproxies".
AOL is by far the biggest.
There are a bunch of methods to diambiguate the log files -- session tracking is your friend.
It's that one phrase in the middle that's the problem, the part that says "only on Linux". Most volunteer programmers absolutely hate the notion of artificial scarcity designed to make people need to use a platform they otherwise would never need to. Linux users have been on the recieving end of that tactic quite a bit ("I would use Linux on my desktop at work, but a lot of the company's operation requires an Exchange client.") So it's unlikely to find a group where people would go out of their way to avoid having their program ported to other systems. (They might not do the work themselves, but they'd be perfectly okay with letting someone else do the port.) Consider: today you can run Perl on Windows. You can run Apache on Windows. You can run gcc on Windows. This is the sort of thing that always naturally happens when a good product exists on an open platform first - eventually it shows up on the lesser platforms later.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
It's time to stick my neck out for the chopping ....
... their distros will soon suck so much ass that they'll bomb in a hurry.
Lack of serious competition was the boat that floated Microsoft, and no Linux company can get such a ticket.
... perhaps even more reliable.
The diverse base of users can plug all kind of apps into it.
Since apps need developers, perhaps even some Linux developers will come back to the Windows fold.
Why should I care about Linux's market share? It has market presence, not share, and that's as it should be.
Concentration on market share is the thing that crippled Microsoft Windows. System reliability became a distant 2nd priority to new features. If there are Linux companies out there that are harping on market share to that degree, then I wish them luck
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: we shouldn't be out to ruin Microsoft, especially their flagship product MS-Windows. Even though Microsoft has abused we users, technicians and engineers, their OS is useful. It just needs to be fixed. Microsoft clearly hasn't felt the need to really fix it for some years, so perhaps the presence of Linux will start to compel them.
* One good attempt to fix MS-Windows is to make a minmum Windows version (called "Mindows" or "Portholes") . That way, the smaller codebase can be made more optimized
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
Yes, but if the goal is to attract users to Linux, and Linux only, then porting an app to other platforms works against that goal. And, yes, Perl, Apache and gcc all run on Windows, but, by definition, none of them are end-user applications.
/. and other fora.
Whether the goal is actually to attract users to Linux or to keep it a plaything of geeks and afficianados is hard to judge, going by comments on
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
I've been using windows for a number of years. experimented in beo's + owned a few Amiga's back in the day. Now i want to play round with Linux. The box i want to install it on is a p233, 64mb ram with a tnt32. Anyone got some suggestions on what distrabution of linux i should begin with.. Appretiate the help
I've got to disagree here.. the fact that the software is gratis is a good thing for users. Money is tight these days and that could be a big selling point for linux. In fact, that's the main advantage of linux for the average user. Microsoft products are high enough quality for the average user who doesn't care about 500 day uptimes for servers. The only real reason to switch, for the average user, is to save a few hundred bucks by getting a product (linux) that does the same thing that Windows does for them (browse the web and write letters). Switch campaigns aren't gonna do it for linux anymore than they will for Apple (which is not going to replace Windows anytime soon).
Don't drop the soap, Tommy!
No, Apple isn;t going to replace Windows, but that's not the point. Here's the point: You can't get a product into mainstream commercial distribution channels unless you charge something for it. That's what stores do: they sell things. A focus on the no-cost aspect of Linux will doom it to remain a tool for geeks and admins.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
moral of this story ... another bogus claim by the stallman drones bites the dust.
;)
OSS will never beat windows until OSS developers stop trying to beat windows - don't conflagrate baby ! - inseminate
PC vendors who used linux would still be selling something, and paying nothing to Redmond would give them a competitive advantage if linux becomes well enough accepted that it doesn't scare customers away. Some companies are already doing this (I'm sure you've heard of the $200 Walmart Lindows boxes), but it hasn't really become a big thing yet.
Think of it like this - if free RAM suddenly became available, don't you think PC manufacturers would be all over it? An OS is more like that - just one component of the product that people are actually buy - than, say, a game that you would actually go to Best Buy and purchase by itself.
Final point - the PC market is saturated, and I would think that the only real untapped markets would be people without a lot of money - people in third world countries and the poor in Western countries - for whom the Windows tax is a significant amount of money. And in the present economy, money is tight for everyone. So price is becoming a more important point to compete on.
Don't drop the soap, Tommy!
Agree that people are very unlikely to dump the OS that came with their PC and replace it with another OS. That's why I think Linux won't make desktop inroads until it offers something that users feel they must have and cannot get in any other OS.
If PC vendors put Linux on machines, yes, they'd have a theoretical cost advantage, but -- because people will know that Linux cost them nothing -- they'll need to drop the sales price accordingly. Also, Microsoft can't be expected to remain idle if Linux machines begin to cut into its markets. They an drop prices, too. Or, do something dramatic, like release a $200 Windows box.
The important thing to remember is that Linux doesn't need to "conquer" Windows to be a commercial success. It just needs to carve out a segment of the desktop market that's big enough to support and sustain a core of vendors, but not big enough to draw Microsoft's wrath.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
OK, however you look at it, in whatever market, I just can't find a figure on the order of 40% even remotely credible. How many people out there have switched jobs in the last, say, three years? How many have moved to places that focus primarily on Linux? (I work at a place that develops for Linux, but also more than a dozen other platforms, so we're hardly a Linux shop.)
If 40% of developers were working primarily on Linux projects today, then well over 40% of recruitment over the past few years would have been for Linux-based positions. (I say "well over" because Linux dev has only really been big news for a short time compared to well over a decade of Windows being the dominant platform, and not many places train their people internally to move over to the other OS.)
I'm sorry, but that 40% figure just isn't credible on that basis. I work in a very tech-based city, I'm a developer, many of my friends work in software companies, and yet I don't know a single place here that I'd say does primarily Linux development. Quite a few do some Linux work, but also Windows and many other OSes, but that's not what the article said.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Wow! That's probably the best switcher story yet, I'm gonna send the link to so many friends of mine
- Voice of Ambience -
- Voice of Ambience -
'Linux the product', the new addition to the marketing buzz and hype. Linux will never be the "product" you want it to be unless you are willing to participate its goals. The main point in the whole Linux movement was and still is "World Domination" as Linus quite so humbly told us in his interviews. It has and never will have anything to do with TCO, profits, market share or whatever _you'd_ want it to, because it never was meant to.
To make Linux more appealing is to take part in its success, not to undervalue what it has to offer, Freedom.
- Voice of Ambience -
- Voice of Ambience -
I know when the server statistics are based on sales and when they are based on using survay.
Using survays like "The Internet Os Counter" will tell you upfront they are inaccurate.
But they are more accurate than sales.
When you use server stats you will get false reads any denys but the rule of stats is that at a sifficiantly larg sample the random static evens out and you have a relitively accurate idea of what's out there.
Sales however is lopsided. We know that for nearly every Linux unit there is one less Windows unit. Every bulk Windows liccens dubbles due to the bundled Windows liccens.
So Windows is counted once when not used twice when used.
Also not all systems go into production.
However with Linux the majority of units are not sold but downloaded.
More over for a given job you'll be looking at 4 Solarus boxen, 8 Linux boxen or 16 Win 2K boxen.
So a single job may account for as many as 16 Win 2K sales but only 8 Linux sales and 4 Solarus sales.
On low end jobs you may see only 1 Linux boxen but need redundency for Windows.
Thats why sales numbers are helpful.
Some day... not 2004... maybe 2010.. Linux may surpass Windows and on that day Microsofts sales numbers will continue to reflect a majority of desktops.
Microsofts server sales stats show Microsoft in a majority of servers but using statis show a radicly diffrent picture.
Both show Linux is eating Solarus alive. Not Microsoft...
But the using statics show Microsoft has no where to go but up and sales have nowewere to go but down...
Even dubble sales don't explain how Windows can go from nearly 75% to 90% in sales and 1% to 25% in using stats.
Numbers just don't match up...
Or maybe Microsoft has taken Enron accounting practaces to figuring unit sales.
I don't actually exist.
Whether the goal is actually to attract users to Linux or to keep it a plaything of geeks and afficianados is hard to judge, going by comments on
Attracting end-users to Linux is a fine idea. Doing it by adopting the same evil strategies as Microsoft is not.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Dunno know about games...they bore me. Your assertion that Linux apps are "just as good" as Windows apps may or may not be true, but in the end, it is irrelevant.
That doesn't make any sense. The only argument I've heard for why Linux users would care whether anyone else uses Linux is that a critical mass of users is needed to attract development of a wide range of software. If Linux apps are in fact just as good then how is that irrelevant? It sounds a lot more important than increasing the user base just for the sake of it.
The perception one develops visiting most Linux websites or examining most of the few shrinkwrapped products available on shelves (as opposed to RedHat and SuSe) is that Linux is enthusiastically supported by amateurs, boffins and afficianados for whom the sense of "belonging" to that alleged "community" you mentioned is more important that mainstream acceptance.
Right so assuming that perception is an accurate reflection of reality, what's the problem? The person you were responding to asked why it should be important for Linux to "win the desktop". Your saying that Linux users don't seem to be interested in mainstream acceptance just reiterates his point, why should they be interested in it? What's the problem?
Whether the goal is actually to attract users to Linux or to keep it a plaything of geeks and afficianados is hard to judge, going by comments on /. and other fora.
The reason for that is that there is no such thing as "the" goal. Different people have different goals. Some people actively want Linux use to grow, some actively want it to stay "exclusive" others don't care or have a different kind of agenda completely.
Your goals aren't automatically the same as mine just because we've both made posts to Slashdot. Neither are anyone elses.
The important thing to remember is that Linux doesn't need to "conquer" Windows to be a commercial success.
IBM seem to think that it already is a commercial success for them. That might be all smoke and mirrors of course, but it'd be interesting to hear why you think so if you do.
It just needs to carve out a segment of the desktop market that's big enough to support and sustain a core of vendors, but not big enough to draw Microsoft's wrath.
It doesn't even need to do that as far as I can see. It's making money for IBM right now as far as I can tell, and for makers of innumerable embeddd devices. Is it particularly important to you for Linux to be a commercial success in respect of the desktop market? Is this to achieve further development of the OS or to get some sort of status / recognition from others users or what? I don't really understand where you're heading.
As in Protestant Europe, by contrast, where sects divided endlessly into
smaller competing sects and no church dominated any other, all is different
in the fragmented world of IBM. That realm is now a chaos of conflicting
norms and standards that not even IBM can hope to control. You can buy a
computer that works like an IBM machine but contains nothing made or sold by
IBM itself. Renegades from IBM constantly set up rival firms and establish
standards of their own. When IBM recently abandoned some of its original
standards and decreed new ones, many of its rivals declared a puritan
allegiance to IBM's original faith, and denounced the company as a divisive
innovator. Still, the IBM world is united by its distrust of icons and
imagery. IBM's screens are designed for language, not pictures. Graven
images may be tolerated by the luxurious cults, but the true IBM faith relies
on the austerity of the word.
-- Edward Mendelson, "The New Republic", February 22, 1988
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...