Is Linux's "Overall Market Share" Statistic Meaningful?

ruphus13 writes "Linux recently achieved 1% market share of the overall operating system market. But, does that statistic really mean anything useful? This article makes the case that it doesn't. It states, 'Framed in the "overall market share" terminology, the information (or how it was gathered and calculated) isn't necessarily questionable, it's more that it's meaningless. It's nebulous, even when one looks at several months worth of data. [How] Linux is used in various business settings answers an actual question — and the answer can be used to ask further questions, form opinions — and maybe one day even explain to some degree what 1% of the market share really means. ... Operating systems aren't immortal beings, and by rights, there can't be (there shouldn't be) only one. ... No one system can be everything to everyone, and no one system (however powerful, or stable) can do everything perfectly that just one person might require of it in the course of a day. While observing trends and measuring market share are important, the results (good or bad) shouldn't be any platform's measure of self-worth or validation. It's a data point to build on (we're weak in this area, strong in this area, our platform is being used a lot more this quarter, where did all of our users go?) in order to improve and stay relevant.'"

Comments

Re:Overall Marketshare?

[BitZtream]

Of course its flawed, it doesn't say what you want it to say.

If you start including things like embedded devices that run Linux then you're going to get a whole new set of results, but I hate to break it to you, Linux still won't be the top dog or anywhere close to it. Linuxs' entry into the embedded world is relatively new and it again is probably statistically irrelevant.

You need to face reality, Linux isn't as popular as you think it is. That doesn't make the report flawed.