Why Linux Doesn't Spread - the Curse of Being Free

Posted by Soulskill on Sunday February 17, 2008 @03:17PM from the you-get-what-you-may-or-may-not-pay-for dept.

Vlad Dolezal tips us to a philosophical take on why Linux hasn't grown to challenge Windows as the most popular operating system. According to the author, the reason is simple; Linux is free, and humans tend not to equate free things with being valuable. "Here's what Compy McNewb sees. He can get both OS's for free. But one of them is worth over three hundred dollars, while the other one is worth nothing. 'That's not true!' I hear you scream. 'Linux is worth a lot! It's just being offered for free!' I know it's not true that Linux is worth less than Windows. It's far more valuable to the end user in terms of getting things done. But that's not what Average Joe Computer Newbie sees. He sees a free product versus a three-hundred-dollar product he can get free. It's all about the perception!"

2 of 1,243 comments (clear)

Oh Please. by Lally+Singh · 2008-02-17 16:42 · Score: 1, Troll

Linux hasn't spread because it's still a pain in the ass.

--
Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
Re:Or it is not spreading by tsa · 2008-02-17 17:09 · Score: 1, Troll

That is a very Insightful and Informative post. You won't get modded up for it, this being /., but it's one of the most sensible posts I've read here in a long time.

--
-- Cheers!