Slashdot Mirror
(When) Will Linux Pass Apple On The Desktop?
EisPick writes "A column posted today on Slate ponders projections that Linux PCs will pass Apple in desktop market share next year. Will Linux do to OS X what it already has done to Tru64, Irix, HP/UX, AIX and Solaris and emerge as the only viable competitor to Windows on the desktop?"
That Steve Jobs will give up? I mean come on. He is the leader of a company whose brand loyality is through the roof. They are making money. And are pushing the boundries... all the time.
As long as Jobs continues to raise up religious zealots to the cause, Apple will never really be dead.
Also of note, who says that Jobs can't encorporate all the advantages Linux has into his OS.
Fantasy remains a human right; we make in our measure and in our derivative mode... -- JRR Tolkien
Not to mention the fact that the experience of OS X on the desktop kicks ass on KDE or GNOME. I love Linux as a server OS, but I moved to Mac for the desktop. In my mind, there's not much incentive to go the other way.
Would anyone mind telling me exactly what Linux "already has done" to the above OS?
Tru64 and HP/UX were both doomed as soon as the Compaq/HP merger happened, and I don't think things would be much different even if Linux wasn't around.
How about SGI? It doesn't seem to be an example of where Linux beat Irix, it seems to be an example of where ia32 systems beat out propritary systems in price/performance.
As for AIX, IBM may be doing a lot of talking about how Linux will eventually replace AIX, but it isn't happening now (nor do I suspect it will ever happen) so I don't think that's much of an example.
I'm not sure why Solaris is on this list... Sun is still going strong, and Solaris is doing just fine.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
"$1999 for an entry level G5?"
there is nothing entry level about any of the G5's. If there was, they'd be in a new iMac, not Power Mac.
Well, maybe I'm just a twisted, freakish excuse for a human being, but that's exactly what I did. And I know a couple of other people who did, too. (Before the Switch campaign started.)
Sure, it didn't hurt that Apple makes good-quality hardware, but "OS X niftiness" was the deciding factor.
Linux is more likely to be a positive than a negative for Apple. Without Linux, would KDE be where it is today? Would KDE even exist? But without KDE, Apple wouldn't have been able to take KHTML and make Safari. But it's not one-sided as the KHTML group benefited by getting a great many feature and stability improvements to their library contributed back to their project from Apple.
Linux is for when you're young, poor, and in need of serious computing horsepower. OS X is for when you've got money in the bank and you don't want to have to deal with the Linux hassle.
Will Linux eventually get its usability act together and challenged OS X on its own turf? Maybe, but on its way there, Linux would much more quickly gut Windows dominance and that's a result I can live with.
Apple hardware is pretty pricey so I'm sure they are maying a nice profit from it. I imagine most /.ers are bargain hunters like me. The only real advantage of Windows is Games. Both OS X and Linux lack the support of game developers. The two OS's are stuck in a viscous cycle of developers not wanting to produce games for them because of low market shares, and the OS's not being able to gain enough user base to demand games on the platforms.
I dual boot not because I want to, but because I am addicted to games. Give me games and I'll toss my Windows Disk out of the window.
-----
One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
Google Zeitgeist is a great way to take a look at those figures over time at a pretty universal location.
For may '03 google lists linux at 1% and mac at 3%. Linux zealots may look at that and say well 2% is miniscule with the rate of growth that won't take long, etc. But go back and look at june 2001 zeitgeist and you'll see similar numbers. Linux with 1% and Mac with 4%
The conclusion i draw from those numbers is that linux desktop use isnt growing at any significant rate at all, and the only danger Apple has in getting passed on the desktop is if they lose a dramatic amount of market share to windows.
Let's see, my OS upgrades on this Machine:
OS X 10.0.4 came with machine.
OS X 10.1.0 payed $20
10.1.1-10.1.5 or so: free
10.2 payed $129
10.2.1-10.2.6 free
10.3 will pay $129
10.3.1-10.3.x probably free.
As for the Win32 price, you're comparing OS X to Win Home. OS X is more comparable to Win Pro, at a $199 pricetag. And the fact is that the difference between 10.2 and 10.3 is going to be as significant as that between 2K and XP.
And then there's the family license for OS X: $199. Comparable license cost for Windows XP Pro: $994 or so.