Slashdot Mirror
Desktop Linux Share Overtaking Macintosh
prostoalex writes "Business Week magazine is optimistic about desktop Linux's future, telling a story of Capital Cardiology Associates, whose 160 employees migrated to Linux desktops. Furthermore, Business Week expects IDC to announce desktop Linux installations to reach 3.2%, for the first time overtaking Macintosh market share. By 2007, IDC forecasts, Linux will be installed on 6% of the desktops. It's also worth mentioning that desktop Linux market share for 2002 was 2.8% and that year it was behind Apple's operating system."
Those percentages are probably new sales and do not reflect the existing desktops out there.
E
Eric Aitala
www.f1m.com
But shouldn't this be more a story of Linux gaining ground on Windows? I like and use both, but I hate to tell ya, Apple's core market is safe from Linux for the foreseeable future.
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
If Mac OS X ran on x86, it stands to reason the parent, myself and many others might give it a go. If you could run Mac OS X on cheap, available and upgradable hardware it would stand to reason that it would have a greater desktop share. Being that some out there view Apples as cost prohibitive. I feel the parent is on-topic, even if poorly presented/worded.
There strike me to be several problems with this: 1) Many linux users(myself included) download iso images, from which it is hard to get an idea of number of users 2) most linux installs are not traditional desktops, for Joe Schmo. Most are for more technical users. 3) When do they 'expire' a machine? For nubmer 3, I mean this: when is a machine no longer held to be in use? I didn't get Panther(it won't run on my Beige G3), does that mean I don't count? What about the Macintosh SE in the basement, still getting daily use? The other beige G3 here, still on OS 9? 2 or 3 years is fair for Wintel boxen as an average IIRC, but a Mac tends to outlast that. I know of several people using first generation PPC machines, simply because they do everything needed. This isn't as simple as OS sales in a given year, I would say harder for Macs than for other machines because the life of a Mac is so much longer than many other platforms, especially without any trackable upgrades. Without knowing from whence these numbers came, they are pretty meaningless.
You should use AdiumX on your Mac.
To run MacOS requires a PPC. Not just ANY PPC, a Macintosh. That's ONE breed of computer. Just one.
To run Linux, you need a computer and some means of getting linux onto it. Linux runs on Sparcs, Ultras, SGIs, Alphas, x86, m68k, several different PPC variants, pdas, cel phones, the Game Cube, the Dreamcast, digital watches, and the IBM 390 mainframes.
Not only does linux run on practically everything, it handles almost identically across ALL of these architectures. Your debian experience won't be much different on an Ultra III than it will be on a Dell or a Macintosh G3 (aside from hardware support, obviously).
I can install linux on any computer I can find in the dumpster.
Every other OS on the planet (BSDs excepted) are much less portable and available on a vastly narrower variety of hardware.
So. DUH. Of COURSE it's a growth industry. Linux is popular on the x86- and there's got to be at least 10 PCs for every Mac, just in terms of volume of existing hardware. Linux will continue to gain marketshare because it isn't tied to any specific hardware, making the cost of entry incredibly, amazingly cheap.
Can I get a HELL YEAH! ?
Regardless, I don't think this is bad for Apple.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Apple has more to gain from Microsoft losing marketshare to Linux than themeslves losing marketshare to Linux. Apple is a Unix proponent, and friendly to Linux in that regard.
Who knows that the future may bring!
Supposition: Mac users actually buy software, Linux users demand stuff for free. Every platform has its user quirks. I think Linux's is that they all want everything gratis.
Who wants to port to Linux only to have hordes of advocates screaming "it's not Free Software!"
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Since real freedom fans are not out to destroy ms-windows but rather to make for a world in wich ms-windows is just another desktop this is good news. Apple and linux and bsd and beOS (whatever its new names is) SkyOS and tron and etc all have tiny shares. TOGETHER we are now beyond the 5% and closing slowly on the 10%. 1 out of 10 people is a significant number. That is the kind of number businesses have to respect or face loosing customers.
With Office on Apple uncertain this could mean that 1 out of 10 people need to get their documents in a more open format.
So this article shouldn't be about linux overtaking apple, wich is hardly a suprise considering it is happening on the office desktop and the gigantic price difference, but the share of non-ms-windows installations increasing.
No MS is not going to go bankrupt over this. But with these kind of statistics IE only websites are becoming just a little bit less good business sense. That can surely only be a good thing.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I highly doubt that it will be a nice linear function, for a number of reasons -
It will most likely be exponential at the tipping point, then going more logarithmic as the market sorts itself out.
Honestly, I don't care if microsoft keeps a healthy market presence, if linux gets a good 30% share I'm happy, since that's big enough that it can't be ignored, and microsoft can't get away with the old monopoly games any more.
God Dammit, how many times does it need to be said? As far as the hardware debate, yes, Macs are more expensive. Yes, the retail cost of a new Mac is more than your average clone, or build-it-yourself project, and this is not where Apple is positioned.
I purchased a Mac because I was sick and tired of "tinkering" with my computer, constantly tweaking settings, ensuring everything worked properly. I set my PowerBook up 4 months ago, and guess what... It just works. Apple can NOT provide that same advantage using cobbled-together x86 components thrown together and hope the end user experience "just works" for the average consumer.
You really do get what you pay for.
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Lycoris, Lindows, Xandros
Fedora, SuSE
Slackware, Debian, FreeBSD
Gentoo, NetBSD
OpenBSD, Debian
Gentoo
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Well, I just spent the better part of my day building a new mail server.
It's a Power Mac G3 B&W running Mac OS X 10.2.8 (6R73), with Sendmail 8.12.11, Cyrus SASL 2.1.15, Cyrus IMAPD 2.2.3, GNU Mailman 2.1.4, SquirrelMail 1.4.2, Berkeley DB 4.2.52, etc, etc--all downloaded and compiled from scratch with GNU GCC 3.3 (except Sendmail, which doesn't work with 3.3, so I used 3.1 for that).
*And* all of this works with SMTP AUTH through SASL linked through PAM to the NetInfo database. I've done this on Mac OS X 10.3 as well.
I could do this on Linux, too, I suppose, but then I wouldn't also get all the really cool features of Mac OS X or Apple's really cool hardware.
BTW, just saying "Linux" is kind of misleading. Even if you only looked at the major distro's, you're still talking about several different types of systems that have significant compatibility problem between them. So, if you're going to lump all of these into one big "market share", I'd say why not lump all the commercial *NIXes together? I'm sure AIX, IRIX, Solaris, etc could add a percentage point or two to Apple's share, at the least. Hell, you could even toss in all the *BSD's, for that matter.
The bottom line is, no matter what flavor you feel like using, it's all basically a (nearly) POSIX compliant system under the hood.
Just so long as it's not more Windows...
I was listening to NPR briefly today with some silly girl from Wired talking about the MS source code leak. Doesn't it amaze you how much people are talking about hackers taking advantage of the source code to attack Windows?
Don't these people have any memories at all? I would venture to guess that *none* of the writers of the very well publicized virus attacks of the past few years needed access to the MS source code to effectively attack a large portion of the world's Windows systems. Can you say MyDoom? Melissa?
Bah! Windows is a plague on humanity. Hopefully, the combined power of Linux, UNIX, and BSD, especially with the help of Apple, will wipe this incontinent excuse for security off the face of the world once and for all.
Unfortunately, I think you are being a bit too optimistic, if not outright mistaken in jumping to this conclusion. Overall shifts in desktop installations for Linux compared to OS X do not translate to equivalent shifts in the interest, need, or profitability for a given application native to either platform.
Let's use PhotoShop as an example.
Those who are increasingly adopting Linux may not be a solid target market for (in this case) PhotoShop. Now, if one could demonstrate that all those graphic designers et al. who currently use Macs or Windows are jumping the fence for Linux, that may be the case, but greater or growing numbers overall don't mean greater or growing numbers of users who want to or are willing to purchase (in this case) PhotoShop.
In the firm for which I work, everyone uses either OS X or Linux on the desktop. The Linux users outnumber the OS X users by a ratio of about 2:1 (and yes, there are more than 3 people in the firm). However, the number of Linux users interested in acquiring PhotoShop is zero. Anecdotal, I know, but my gut feeling is that something about my personal experience with Linux v. OS X on the desktop captures (at least a bit of) the reality in the bigger picture when it comes to this particular app.
It's not the size of the install base, but its characteristics of that base which are most important. Mac users may have a fractional hold on the desktop market, but it's where that fraction of the whole pie has been installed and put to use (DTP, etc.) that attracts the interest of companies like Adobe at present.
"It's not even as popular as Mac!" means a whole lot more when you ask: "Among whom?"
I remember running Rhapsody DR2 on Intel - but that was back when they were working on slapping the OS9 UI onto NextStep. It never went any further than that.
Darwin can run on x86, but, uh... =)
In any case, it's never going to happen - Apple is first and foremost a hardware company. The make their money selling Macs, not the OS, the same way iTunes fuels iPod sales...
Owning an Apple is like driving a BMW ... sure every car gets from point a to b .. but some do it in style. My Powerbook wows people ... and OSX is like the icing on the cake.
I don't think BMW has ever complained about their 2% marketshare. Neither has Apple.
Please remember that "market share" refers to the percentage of units sold in a given amount of time. (In this case, the idea of "sold" has to be a little fuzzy.) IDC is saying that the market share of Linux per quarter is approaching that of the Mac OS.
But the Mac has a 20-year headstart.
By most estimates, there are something close to 40 million Macs in use today. (About half of these run Mac OS X, and the other half the classic Mac OS in one version or other. Many of them, of course, are older machines that are not capable of running OS X. Apple's market research says that of the users who can run OS X on their machines, something like 75% do.) There are about 400 million desktop computers in the world, total, so Apple has about 10% of the total installed base.
It'll be a long, LONG time before Linux starts approaching those numbers.
What IDC is saying here is that they think the rate of new installs of Linux is approaching that of the Mac. Which only makes sense, if you think about it. Linux is the hot new thing, while the Mac's growth has been pretty steady for the past six or seven years.
What'll be illuminating is what happens to the rate of adoption of Linux after it surpasses the Mac's new adoption numbers. Will it keep going, or will it peak out and then drop off?
(Honestly, based on past trends, it will almost certainly peak out and drop off. But time will tell for sure.)
I'm curious --- who were these people that you surveyed? Were they in the US, or worldwide? Does the fact that you conduct online surveys make the user pool somewhat self-selecting? What makes your research methods better than IDC's, anyway?
I definitely think your research should have made Slashdot, but at the same time, I see no compelling reason to believe that your results are more accurate than those of other companies.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I've been using Linux since '96. I've tried most of the major distros out there. I really like Linux.
However, yesterday I got my first G4 PowerBook. I wanted to actually do some multi-media type things with my computer without having to spend hours (days) trying to get things to work. I wanted to do things like burn DVDs, edit video, play Quicktime movies. Sure, you can do these things with Linux, but I've got other things to do than spend hours/days/months trying to get everything sort-of-kind-of-working.
So, I got a Mac. Seems like the best of both worlds.
Am I going to dump Linux now? No way. Linux is great for lots of other things. I have to say that I actually prefer KDE or GNOME to the Mac's Aqua. The Mac doesn't have virtual desktops, it doesn't have enough mouse buttons and what's with the toolbar having to be at the top of the screen instead of on the actual application window?! (seems to harken back to the pre-OSX days when MacOS wasn't a true multitasking OS). On the otherhand, I can stick a DVD-RW in the Mac and copy a movie to it that will play on my DVD player, no muss, no fuss. I can hook up a digital camera to my Mac via the usb, download the images from it and edit the pics without having to spend hours trying to get it to work - I really like that. Now I can get on with getting some work done instead of being a sys-admin.
After reading your "note on methodology" it is pretty clear to me why your survey showed less desktop usage than a survey like IDC -- you claim to have measured "internet using" adults. You are welcome to provide more of the specifics on how your data was normalized, but I'm going to make some educated guesses about factors that are specifically relevant to linux and mac demographics that may not be so relevant for other topics.
1) Mostly American - seems your entire website is in English only and despite the FAQ stating that you have thousands of worldwide members, I bet the number of Americans is an order of magnitude larger than non-Americans.
2) Mostly Home (or non-workplace) Internet Users -- not many companies are going to be ok with people taking for-pay surveys on company time or equipment.
These biases help to explain some of the numbers in your survey related to Mac usage. First, you showed 6% regular or semi-regular mac usage, which is twice what surveys like IDC's show. Unless you happened to get an unexpected spike of people who use Mac's at work (like a bunch of marketing droids were pulled to make this survey pool), it is reasonable to expect that these Mac users are are either home or public-terminal (think public and school libaries)- they may only use windows, or think they do, at work (as indicated by the 98% number) but it suggests their access to your survey is through a Mac that is not at work.
Similarly, your "puzzling" result of high Mac usage and intent to use among employed minorities also suggests free public and school access systems. I am equating minority to "less better off" than the average white guy, but I also expect that employed minorities (versus unemployed minorities) are more likely to understand the value of a buck and make use of public-access systems like that at a school (continuing education, night classes, etc) or library.
Meanwhile, consider the kind of desktop usage that we see reported in the pro-linux press - point-of-sale and other task-specific uses sure seems to get mentioned most. These users may not even know they are using Linux. The more general use deployments, where Linux and apps are displacing both MS-Windows AND MS-Office seem to be in foreign, non-English speaking countries (Germany, China, Peru to name a couple off the top of my head). These users are probably under-represented in your survey population. If you had compensated for higher than "normal" foregin usage, I don't think your reported margin of error would be as small. Based on my assumption that your foreign pollees are significantly less than your domestic ones.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Everyone here seems to be foaming at hte mouth, "Mac vs. Linux". No. You've got it all wrong.
That market share increase for Linux came out of MS's market share, not Apple's. This is progress.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
You don't even need to do a survey - just look at the Google Zeitgeist for evidence.
Only 1% of Google users are using Linux, it's languishing down there with Windows 95. Macintosh has three times the usage.
I am a Linux fanboy. I'm using my Linux system now, and my primary desktop system has been Linux for quite a while. However, facts are facts, and the Mac is doing much better on the desktop. Linux is ready for the desktop, but only certain desktops (corporate desktops, where competent sysadmins run the systems, developer's desktops, like my own, desktops installed on other people's behalf, like my Dad's). However, it's not ready for the mainstream home user. Macintosh has been ready for all desktops since the 1980s.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Apple hardware might not be cheap, but it is certainly upgradable and available.
I'm sure if OS X was available on x86 you'd give it a go, but I fear it would go the way of BeOS.
Apple couldn't survive in the x86 OS market, even with an immeasurabley superior OS than the current dug-in tick, sucking life and innovation out of the industry like the current status quo.
OS X wouls achieve greater market share, but I fear it would be unsustainable.
I think as Apple develops further and keeps working on their current model (like it or not, their method works for them) then Apple hardware will become cheaper.
There's never been a better value for money range of Apple computers as there is today - from the budget laptop to the SUV 17" model that most don't need, but is there for the small niche.
Their range of desktops is starting to look like something worth considering - from eMacs and iMacs, through MDD G4s (they do still sell them) and the mighty G5.
I can pick up a pretty good compact laptop - the iBook for just under $1100 that is pretty perfectly specced for the market. Good battery life, reasonable power, great OS, CD burner/DVD etc. I'd certainly go with that over the same laptop I could get in the x86 world for $1100, but it's just my choice at the end of the day.
I'd love to see Linux marketshare growing - and it is (although I've always been partial to FreeBSD myself). I hope that Apple and Linux can co-exist happily in the marketplace.