Slashdot Mirror
Apple and Windows Will Force Linux Underground
eastbayted writes "Tom Yager at InfoWorld predicts: 'At the end of the decade, we'll find that Apple UNIX has overtaken commercial Linux as the second most popular general client and server computing platform behind Windows.' That's not a gloom-and-doom omen for the ever-popular Linux kernel, though, he stresses. While Apple and Microsoft will grapple for dominance of client and server spaces, Linux will be 'the de facto choice for embedded solutions.' And by 'embedded,' Yager means 'specialized.' With a push of a button and a flip of switch, he predicts, you'll be able to create a configured database and a mated J2EE server — all thanks to Linux."
Have you ever tried to get Oracle running on anything but Red Hat? When are we going to face the fact that Linux distros are different from each other? When I say "I run Linux" I've really said something as vague as (here comes the car analogy) "I drive a car" (as opposed to "I drive an Oldsmobile"). When people pick on "Linux" what are they really picking on?
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Apple? MacOS take any server share at all? To be honest, taking away commercial UNIX desktop share isn't exactly a big effort - most of the Sun guys I know use Apple laptops and most of the HPUX guys I've met use Windows.
No way on the serverside, though. MacOS is unreliable, balky, slow, RAM-hungry and generally inappropriate. It makes a lovely desktop but doesn't make an ideal server by any stretch of the imagination. In addition, their hardware is sub-par (although very pretty) and underpowered compared to what other vendors are putting out there.
Give me Sun opteron boxes running either Solaris or a certified Linux for all the small jobs and give me big, solid, heavy SPARC hardware for the big iron. I work in a *very* large (over 10k servers) environment and Solaris still completely dominates the database server/large app server end with Linux running web servers, the occasional customer firewall and other small jobs. HPUX is still a big force with a lot of appplications only running on HPUX, although migration to Solaris is a happening thing.
There is no way any serious organisation is going to start switching to Xserves. They're just not up to scratch compared to the current Opteron lineup. Maybe when I can get a 16 or 32 core Xserve with 32Gb of RAM they might start having the grunt, but until then they're just pretty looking.
Linux, BSD, Solaris and Windows rule the ISP server market.
I've never touched an OSX box that did anything really important.
Most don't take it seriously, and Apple has not built many 1u rack mounts, but I guess they have a new product now? I just checked..
Vendor lock-in is something I'm willing to live with as long as the alternatives are insufficient - and there is an alternative. I'd like the choice to be between OSX and Linux. I quite like my MacBook. It's easy to use, it looks good, it performs well for its price. While I do Linux development at work, I like to have an enjoyable experience at home.
Slower than Linux or Windows? I'd like to see those numbers, please!
As for serious, by what standard? I'd readily admit I would not recommend running OSX on servers unless OSX adds geniune value (as it might in a Mac-based business).
In my world, Linux is best for backend. OSX is best for front-end. (while Windows is probably best at the standard business desktop)
Stop the brainwash
Bank of America ATMs didn't lock up... they ran out of money or had hardware falures but they never used to lock up.
Now they run on Windows and they do... the touch screen is (seemingly) required for operation and they stop working all the time.
IF my life depended on Windows... really depended on it... I'd be long dead by now.
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain
Well Market share is a poor judge for Linux anyways. Almost everyone uses Linux every day (Google). Just because it is not installed on your Puney little computer doesn't mean people are not using it, as more and more services that were once installed on Computers as application become web services the need for Server based OSs will expand (Like Linux) and PCs will be more and more religated to smarter then average dumb terminal, where the "Application is hosted somewhere else" and the PC handles all the graphics, UI Interface, and calalculations. But all the storage and application versions will be hosted on the server. So Apple or Microsoft can be the domonate Desktop PC. But it really wont matter much in the future because you can do whatever you want on both systems, it will be just a matter if you like your menu bar on your window or on the top of your screen.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Indeed - it's ridiculous. You notice the weasel way they have to qualify things as well:
That could mean that 90% of x86 systems will be bare bones by 2008, as OEMs will choose their own version of linux to install
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
OSX is a potential solution to anyone using Windows who doesn't like it. It's more secure, more stable, and doesn't require the technical retraining (or rehiring) that a migration to Linux would.
I don't think this is true at all. OSX is different enough from windows that your usual run-of-the-mill Windows admin would go crazy trying to admin it. Even the usually desktop admin stuff is so different than windows, not even getting into the differences in server administration. Notice i'm saying it's different, and not that it's difficult. I believe that Mac OS, and Linux, are no harder to operate than Windows, but that they are different, and do require different training. Also, if you admin is capable of admining Mac OS, then they could probably do a pretty good job with a modern Linux distro. With modern Linux distros, it's no harder to operate than Mac OS. If you think it is, then you haven't familiarized yourself enough with Linux.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Why would you buy an expensive computer that comes with an OS just to buy (or pirate) another OS when you could have bought a cheaper computer with your OS of choice? Is it 'cuz Macs are sooo pretty? How dumb are people with their money?
Pretty dumb.
That said some mac configurations are pretty hard to get in that ff from another vendor. It's the 13" that people seem to be getting - and purely for the weight.
If it was me buying, I'd probably go for the equivilant Asustek model. Smaller, lighter, made in the same factory, cheaper.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
It sounds as if the author is trying to invent a reason why free software won't be free. If Linux is relegated to the embedded market, it's not really free anymore. Oh sure, you can download the open source part, but if you don't have the hardware or the bundled commercial app, it won't do much for you. He doesbn't like the idea of free software, probably feels too damn commie to him, so he invents a fantasy in which it is relegated to a role where it isn't free, and the fat happy capitalists get to make money off of it, as God intended the fat happy capitalists make money off of everything.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Really though who cares?
I, have my freedom.
I, have access to everything I need with Linux.
If the rest of the Software world chooses to go down the same old roads, I say let them. It will be the 1980s all over again, with Apple, Google, Sony, Yahoo and Oracle making inroads into Microsoft's monopoly.
Again, the difference between the tides of the fortunes of the major software vendors is that people have the freedom now to simply switch off and run a full and complete Open Source OS.
Let the fools destruct themselves in Apple/Windows land, those who jump ship and come to Linux country have made the smart move.
If you think the Apple and Dell laptop battery issues were bad, eMachines and their ilk have been plagued by such things as well as POWER ADAPTERS THAT CATCH ON FIRE. Sure, you can get lucky buying a cheap PC, but from my experience said PCs are usually more of a headache than they're worth. Such is the risk of business, what makes it so bad for them is that since they ship SO MANY units they now have to make a major recall.
Now, that's not to say that apple uses higher quality components than everyone else. I'm sure Lenovo and Dell use very similar components in their high (or mid-high) range models. But they are similarly more expensive than lower-end machines with subpar quality. The only other main difference is how the cases are engineered (both outside and in). It's been my experience that the end-product of an Apple laptop is very solid and durable.
Remember, like Toyota, Apple tries to rely on their "just works" image: their machines are pretty solid. Toyota doesn't import their parts from another planet, they use similar (or the same) parts as other car companies. They just try to make sure they pick good parts and put them together well. However, like Toyota they can easily slip if they stop paying attention, as demonstrated by Toyota's current problems.
I attended a marketing class this past spring taught by an entrepeneur. He was just back from a trip to Bulgaria and said that the vast majority of businesses in Bulgaria use only Linux and OpenOffice.org. They can't afford Microsoft licenses and can't afford the fines if the Bulgarian version of the BSA comes in to ask to see license documentation. Most just run Linux and forget about the headaches of licensing.
On the other hand, the Bulgarians I've spoke to in person say that almost everyone in Bulgaria uses Windows and Office at home as it's freely available from about a bzillion warez sites.
You're far more likely to be taken seriously when you don't write off an entire operating system as "for people unwilling or unable to understand the guts of a microcomputer." Mac OS X is a powerful, stable platform, and you'll find that quite a few people who know and understand the guts of a computer (myself included) are using it to do far more than just surf for porn. It may not be the server operating system you're looking for, but it is far more than a "20 year old desktop-for-nubes."
http://www.ubuntulinux.com/
http://www.mandriva.com/
http://www.novell.com/products/suselinux/
I look at the usability and overall experience comparison between Ubuntu Dapper Drake and Warty Warthog, and I'm amazed.
Interestingly, even smaller, specialized distros have taken up the charge to be more friendly and accessible. For example, look up the DreamLinux distro sometime.
And if you don't think the masses will ever "smarten" up and use Linux, take a closer look at your Tivo.
http://www.tivo.com/linux/linux.asp (fair enough, it's not a desktop, but then Linux is only the kernel anyway...)
Embedded windows is ugly. I used to work a cashier job, and when I started, all of the registers had some variation of embedded linux. Eventually the touch screens started to die, so the registers were replaced with new, "better" ones. These ran XP embedded, and were nothing but trouble. Wouldn't print reciepts right, wouldn't take credit cards half the time, and just froze at least a few times a day.