Slashdot Mirror
ZDNet: Linux 'Takes The World' While Windows Dominates The Desktop (zdnet.com)
ZDNet editor-in-chief Steve Ranger writes that desktop dominance is less important with today's cloud-based apps running independent of operating system, arguing that the desktop is now "just one computing platform among many." An anonymous reader quotes his report:
Linux on the desktop has about a 2% market share today and is viewed by many as complicated and obscure. Meanwhile, Windows sails on serenely, currently running on 90% of PCs in use... That's probably OK because Linux won the smartphone war and is doing pretty well on the cloud and Internet of Things battlefields too.
There's a four-in-five chance that there's a Linux-powered smartphone in your pocket (Android is based on the Linux kernel) and plenty of IoT devices are Linux-powered too, even if you don't necessarily notice it. Devices like the Raspberry Pi, running a vast array of different flavours of Linux, are creating an enthusiastic community of makers and giving startups a low-cost way to power new types of devices. Much of the public cloud is running on Linux in one form or another, too; even Microsoft has warmed up to open-source software.
There's a four-in-five chance that there's a Linux-powered smartphone in your pocket (Android is based on the Linux kernel) and plenty of IoT devices are Linux-powered too, even if you don't necessarily notice it. Devices like the Raspberry Pi, running a vast array of different flavours of Linux, are creating an enthusiastic community of makers and giving startups a low-cost way to power new types of devices. Much of the public cloud is running on Linux in one form or another, too; even Microsoft has warmed up to open-source software.
When they merge android and chrome os into, fuschia isn't it?
Which is all completely under the tight control of Google. So you can say it is Linux but if it is not free and open what difference does that make again?
Sounds sort of like a consolation prize.
or are you just Linux to see me?
When Android and Linux based IoT devices are so easy to exploit.
Apple takes all the revenue. #winning
As far as I can see, the desktop is the only place to run Windows. Linux for everything else.
Wow. Way to go presenting a calm, clear and coherent argument against the entrenched install base of Windows and showing people that Linux is a viable alternative.
https://chromeunboxed.com/chro...
It's a shame there aren't any other interfaces that one could use instead of Unity.
Fuchsia has absolutely nothing to do with Chrome OS or Android.
Fuchsia is the name of their from scratch OS.
https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/
Andromeda seems to be some kind of new interface experiment.
He only just made his Slashdot account on Monday. He hasn't yet learned the value of calm, objective commentary the way you and I have.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Because if Google's proprietary OSes that are more locked down than Windows ever was (say what you want about Windows but I can grab a windows laptop and inside of 10 minutes be booting into anything from BSD to Zorin OS, just try that on a Chromebook) now counts as "Linux" because it uses the kernel, which even the community acknowledges that "the kernel is not Linux"? Well sheeit, by that metric you could claim Linux "won" half a decade ago since all those cheapo locked down routers used by millions are using the Linux kernel as part of the embedded OS.
It certainly doesn't come anywhere close to being open or supporting the four freedoms so if this is what it takes to "win" I'd say "well what exactly did you "win" other than replacing one corporate master for another?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Yes, it certainly does sound like you are moving the goalposts.
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-104-percent-smartphone-industry-profits-q3-2016-bmo-capital-markets-samsung-2016-11
There are three classes of companies making smartphones: those making no money, those losing money, and Apple.
It is complicated and obscure. But, so is Windows.
People just go with the devil they know. Compatibility and familiarity often trump better technology.
Table-ized A.I.
I thought Android is *not* Linux? At least that's what one of my Android text books says. It uses the Linux kernel, but is not the same operating system that is commonly referred to as "Linux" i.e. GNU-Linux. Android has major differences with Linux. This is not a value judgement but just an observation/fact.
"and is viewed by many as complicated and obscure"
(OP describes Windows by accident.)
Don't step on the baby.
Just wanted to add that maybe an analogue to this is how there can be a version of Debian that uses a BSD kernel but it's not actually BSD.
I wonder how the desktop market share data are obtained. From browser data? This is naive as many linux users change or randomize their user agent. It must be that since counting OS sales does not work. I use linux as my major operating system since 20 years. But there are still things I can only do on a commercial OS like Mac OS X: For example solid video editing, screen recording, Keynote, garage band, and serious gaming. But for most day to day operations, there is very little difference between OS X (when used as a Unix workstation) and linux. My desktops and workflows look almost identical. I guess, also windows could be configured today to behave like a unix workstation. But the loss of control which the the user over the OS (basic things like when and how to upgrade, or the look over the shoulder of the user) which happens today in windows makes it unfit for serious work. What would really be nice if virtualization would exist which allowed to run any OS X software on a linux box. It seems that installing OSX on a virtual box has not yet worked well. The few who have got it to work claim slow graphics, sound failures. I have not heard for example of a successful and solid Final cut run virtualized under linux. Parallels does a good job virtualizing windows on OSX.
Microsoft makes money of Open Source software by shaking down companies that deploy it. I.e. they weaponize their software patent portfolio.
That's how they make money from Android.
Recently, they received good press for their Azure patents protection offer, but it is not what it seems at first glance, their is nothing benign about it. It's just a dressed up protection racket.
And while moving their Quantum Computing software to github, gave them press that they "Open Sourced" it, nothing could be further from the truth.
They will try to get a stranglehold on the future of computing, just as they had it in the PC market. They just switched strategy, but this tiger won't change its stripes.
The linux kernel is linux.
Gnu/linux was the second attempt by Richard Stallman to raise awareness of GNU on the coat-tails of linux after people didn't take his first suggestion of LiGnuX seriously. Linux is not a GNU project. Their OS is called HURD.
So your "fact" does not appear to actually be one despite it coming out of a book.
Linux is a kernel, not an OS although we think of it that way. This has been RMS's point for quite some time. The kernel is Linux, most of the rest of a "Linux system" is GNU.
I thought Android is *not* Linux?
That's right. Android is *not* Linux. Linux is for neckbeards, and Android is for girls. Neckbeards and girls don't mix.
In Google's OSs, the kernel is Linux: it's the userland that is something like busybox or some other BSD licensed shell. But I think an argument would be that if you bought a netbook or laptop w/ ChromeOS already on it, then you already have Linux, so why would you want to replace it w/ another distro. Whereas someone who bought a wintel box would likely be someone who received Windows by default, and may prefer to replace it w/ something else, like TrueOS ( or PC-BSD, which I did) to one of the Linuxes.
On the 4 freedoms thing, once something is complicated enough that only tech savvy users can use it, then as these things are made more convenient to use, freedom is one of the potential things that can go out the window. Either that, or money or personal data or a combination of them: if you have all the freedoms on your toy, then it includes the freedom to completely screw it up and make it unusable, which vendors like to avoid, since chances are that the customer will go back to them to get it fixed, rather than accept that they took their own risk
The kernel is linux. Gnome desktop, redhat distro etc etc are all their own thing.
Just because people are lazy and frequently call the entire stack linux doesn't mean that someone who isn't lazy is wrong when they are talking about the linux kernel specifically.
So yes, android is dominating not redhat, debian or whatever, but the article is about the kernel underneath.
File it with people making noise about Mac versus MS Windows when the topic is really about an x86_64 CPU.
Stupid way to put it. More like Windows is crammed up the hershey highway like a suppository of VILE POISON. Have we a choice when going to WorstBuy (TM) and purchasing a desktop computer? They to this day are loaded to the gills with bloatware so bad that you have to put in a clean installation o something else.
Doesn't help that once-a-good-OS Ubuntu was completely DESTROYED with that IDIOTIC "Unity" interface. Kinda like Firesux taking a dump.
But maybe that's just me...
Protip: Using intentionally incorrect pejorative names for things you don't like, ie. Micro$ucks, Hitlery, PatriRots (seriously, fricken Belichick...) is actually counter-productive to what you're most likely trying to accomplish. While it might be emotionally validating to you, to those not yet in your camp it makes you appear shrill and inane, and actually alienates those that you most likely wish to persuade.
To quote a wise man, you're scaring the straights. As someone that probably shares your desired outcome on this issue, please take my advice and try to be more mature in your advocacy.
(on a completely unrelated sidenote, don't think I didn't appreciate that my CAPTCHA for this post was "slimed")
According to some definitions a kernel is an OS. People' do not share the same divisions between the concepts. Dictionaries are descriptive not prescriptive. This loosely relates to a conversation I am currently having that starts about here: https://slashdot.org/comments....
Linux is a kernel, not an OS although we think of it that way.
No, you think of it that way because you do not know what you are talking about. The software that supports a computer's basic functions, such as scheduling tasks, executing applications, and controlling peripherals. Hint: if it doesn't have a scheduler, it's not an operating system. Think please, don't make me barf.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Android is based off Linux, but they are not the same platform by any reasonable interpretation. They should be listed separately. I don't see people combining BSD and OSX into one market share and OSX is much closer to BSD than Android is to Linux.
If Linux was so great for smartphone we'd have real Linux smartphones, but that seems to just fail. Realistically you have to write a whole new OS for a platform as radically different from PC as a Smartphone. There isn't really that much Linux code in Android. It's mostly smartphone specific code that was all written independently of the Linux platform.
Yup. Its sad.
> Because if Google's proprietary OSes that are more locked down than Windows ever was...
Fucking asshole. Learn a thing:
https://www.howtogeek.com/162120/how-to-install-ubuntu-linux-on-your-chromebook-with-crouton/
locking down hardware is a _great_ idea for average computer users. All but the oldest Chromebooks provide a trivially-accessible switch to unlock that lock. (And the oldest Chromebooks just make you move a screw.)
Locked down hardware prevents malware and stops several classes of attacks. Don't pretend that these are Apple devices.
say what you want about Windows but I can grab a windows laptop and inside of 10 minutes be booting into anything from BSD to Zorin OS, just try that on a Chromebook
Challenge accepted. Done.
Also: Fuck You, it took me 5 seconds to Google that.
One of the best things I've ever heard at a conference:
A guy from Microsoft was talking about Azure, and he said that usage was stagnant, but really took off when ...
... wait for it ...
... Microsoft finally allowed Linux to run on Azure.
I laughed, I cried. Would attend presentation again. A+++++++
Linux is great if I need to expose a reasonably secure network service or host one somewhere in the cloud. Windows has all of the productivity tools that allow me to get the other 95% of my job done. Why can't I have both ways?
... as per above.
Brilliant, Android textbook authors! Shun calling it "GNU/Linux" because that's pedantic. Just call it Linux. Then say that the part that's actually called "Linux" is not "Linux" because it's not "GNU/Linux", but still don't call it that. Who cares if you're confusing and make absolutely no sense, as least you're not a pedant!
Hint: if it doesn't have a scheduler, it's not an operating system.
It certainly can be. A single-tasking OS wouldn't need a scheduler.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
What is referred to today as "Linux" is an operating system that has a lot more components than just a kernel. It handles system initialization/state management, hardware resources and events, optional graphical management, etc. When someone says "I installed Linux" or "I use Linux" they mean an operating system, not a kernel. While there are variations among various Linux operating systems, they are still fundamentally similar in many ways and are different than Android in many ways.
on any platform where you don't have to actually interact with it.
say what you want about Windows but I can grab a windows laptop and inside of 10 minutes be booting into anything from BSD to Zorin OS, just try that on a Chromebook
Right. I used to think that Microsoft was completely useless, but now I view them as a source of cheap PCs for running Linux.
the community acknowledges that "the kernel is not Linux"?
You must be talking about some other community, because the one I am in is not confused about whether Linux is Linux, and Android is Linux.
Well sheeit, by that metric you could claim Linux "won" half a decade ago since all those cheapo locked down routers used by millions are using the Linux kernel as part of the embedded OS.
Correct, Linux won about half a decade ago. Actually, further back, but let's not niggle. Some mopping up still to do.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
"When someone says "I installed Linux" or "I use Linux" they mean an operating system"...
The often do, and they are often wrong. Which is why you have people always pointing out that actually it's GNU/Linux that they are running. Technically 'Linux' only refers to the kernel, people should really just state what distro they are running, that would be more accurate.
We don't believe in radical loony monotheistic religions from the middle east -- we're Christians.
Linux is a kernel, not an OS although we think of it that way.
No, you think of it that way because you do not know what you are talking about. The software that supports a computer's basic functions, such as scheduling tasks, executing applications, and controlling peripherals. Hint: if it doesn't have a scheduler, it's not an operating system.
Ahem, someone with mod points has an issue with the truth and lacks a moral compass. Microsofty? Somebody who has a whole bunch invested in trying to spin Linux as not having achieved what it has.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
People usually say "I took an aspirin" and what they mean 99.9% of the time was that they took acetylsalisilic acid not Asprin . Most reasonable people accept that as valid and accept the usage of the term aspirin to mean acetysalicilic acid. I think people who consider the 99.9% of people who do that as wrong are themselves wrong. I also think it would be harmful of Linux if people nit-picked at them and told them that what they were using wasn't Linux. People have more important things to be concerned with in life. I'm glad when people use Linux or want to share knowlege about it or even just discuss it. I'm not going to belabor the issue with every single one of them and think that doing so would be wrong except in very specific situations such as conversations in this thread about defining an operating system or its components.
Technically 'Linux' only refers to the kernel...
I think that many people do not understand just now much the kernel dominates the thing the call "operating system". Some people might not even know that Linux runs a whole separate user space, complete with libraries and root filesystem, just to do bootup initialization, especially installing hardware drivers (initfs). No question whatsoever that that is all Linux, right? Then you have libraries, only a few of which are considered part of the "OS", including graphics and UI support, which are already in that gray area where marketing calls it OS but the computer science prof does not, then the vast majority of what's on the computer... applications... which are very clearly not OS. Really, you only need a very thin library, basically just Libc, in addition the Linux kernel, in order to run some serious machinery, for example, a web server. By the way, initfs does not use Gnu libc, it uses klibc, written by Peter Anvin, a kernel developer.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
That is because people find choice confusing - haven't you noticed the only model of car is Ford?
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Not to mention that Ubuntu was never a good distro... *ducks*
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
In all of my engineering jobs (embedded systems), the kernel, at least linux, is considered the OS and belongs to the OS group and the job title is OS specialist.
Maybe for you, but not necessarily for everyone. I've worked on at least a dozen linux systems, none of which supported graphics of any kind or even a keyboard interface.
"Linux won the smartphone war" ? By what measure? Seems like it lost the smartphone war as nobody makes any money on Android.
The only 'war' Linux won was the "amateur cloud hosting" war with virtualization overwhelmingly using CentOS.
Nah. The term "Linux" is a generication of "I use Unix" or "I don't use Windows" in the same way someone might say "I need a kleenex" when they mean "facial tissue"
If you ask someone what does their computer use, they will only know if it runs Windows, MacOS or Linux (when it could be running anything from Redhat to NetBSD)
How discriminatory! In this day and age you can have girls injecting male hormones and stuff to get neckbeards. They do mix and you should go back to your cave.
Ayup - and preventing confusion and relearning things, is why all versions of Windows all the way back to 1.0, use the exact same interface...
"what distro they are running"
I run with scissors and distribute them. I think that's close enough. Am I considered a using a legit Linux thingy?
BSD is the name of a family of operating systems. The term "BSD kernel" refers to any kernel used in a BSD operating system.
Linux is the name of an operating system kernel. The term "Linux operating system" refers to any operating system that uses Linux for a kernel.
Debian/BSD is neither a BSD nor a Linux operating system. Conversely, Android is as much a Linux operating system as any other.
Nobody makes any money in a commoditized market, nobody makes any money selling windows desktops either...
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
steve the world has no idea what linux is. theres no "start" button for the general public besides, a lot of ibm blue badges better known as ibmers took early retirement a few years ago rather than having to learn a new os.
The definition of an OS is that it controls all resources of a computer and shares them between the applications. A single task system would not be an OS, as in a single task system the running application has full control of all resources of a computer. Thus DOS is actually a program loader, not a computer operating system.
+1 :)
I am okay with Linux or Windows coming out on top, so long as Apple fails. The whole business model of Apple is based on being the 'smaller elite market share' which would be fine, if they didn't also poach and hoard a certain percentage of the IP, making all platforms somewhat lesser and more expensive. Sadly Apple won't ever die soon enough, because they have existed so long. Their current trajectory towards being just a gadget maker for the consumption market is hopeful. Yep, thats where the fat margins are! Go go Apple!
Challenge failed and go fuck yourself, took me all of 2 minutes to Google to find yes Virginia thanks to Google's DRM there are OSes you cannot install on a Chromebook whereas I can install ANY X86 OS on a Windows laptop...sorry but you fail.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Android can be run on many different platforms, including desktop PCs.
That is at best a description of some operating systems.
Some operating systems control some computer resources. Some share the resources that they control.
To quote Hamlet:
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I thought Android is *not* Linux? At least that's what one of my Android text books says.
Just because someone wrote something in a book doesn't automatically make it true. Books are not necessarily authoritative sources and I can provide you lots of examples of books getting "facts" very, very wrong. This evidently is one of them.
It uses the Linux kernel...
Then it is linux in addition to whatever else it is. The kernel above all else defines which operating system you are using.
but is not the same operating system that is commonly referred to as "Linux" i.e. GNU-Linux.
It's a variant of linux but not the only one. GNU/Linux is really not a single system but rather a marketing attempt by Richard Stallman to use work he and some others did to take credit for work they didn't do. There is no single one-true-linux. Any system that uses the linux kernal as its base is some variant of linux.
Android has major differences with Linux.
Android is linux as long as it uses the linux kernel. Change the kernel and you can call it something else.
Oh, I think the vast majority of 'NIX users know exactly what they are using,
Hell,, the closest I get to 'LINUX' is the Custom Debian based server that runs our Brunswick A2 machines that has paid support. I'm just the keyboard interface. And although I can't tell you the details of the distribution, I know what it's based on and know it is a very 'stripped down' version as the 8 computers it controls have 80486x 32bit 33mhz CPU's with the astounding amount of 4mb SIMM memory!
They do have updated IDE 40GB HDD's but use less than 4 GB as they originally used 100 MB HDD's.
The other two systems I'm responsible for are propitiatory Frameworx scoring I suspect was written in a mental institution, as some brainiac decided that an invisible 9 digit touchpad on a touchscreen that is unusable if it gets slightly out of calibration was a good idea. As you need to enter the code to access the calibration screen.
The other is a Windows system comprised on an isolated xp system that runs our in house advertising behind the bowl desk, (hey, it works perfect, why replace it) an internet connected vista/7 system for our POS (appropriate,no?) and a solitary computer that when I started everyone said don't turn it off! We don't know what it does! (seriously, the new owners had no idea!). It was headless, so I installed a monitor and low and behold, it was awaiting a login. That was all that was on the screen, it had been reset by a power outage or crash years before. It is a Win3.1!
I work with some old shit!
So even I, a lowly Windows user who doesn't code, knows at least the basics of the one LINUX system I come in contact with.
Only a minority of 'NIX users wouldn't know at least the distro.
Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
The term gnu/Linux is just as inaccurate.
I ran quite a few gnu utilities on CP/M, long before Linux, but I didn't call it gnu/CPM.
Most Linux distros come with countless programs, and while many of the core OS utilities are gnu apps, many Linux apps are not gnu apps. The Bluetooth manager isn't gnu, I don't think any of the databases are gnu, and systemd certainly isn't gnu. And on and on and on.
I appreciate the works of Stallman and friends, but I think he claims a bit too much.
The GNU/Linux name only applies to computer systems that fundamentally rely on GNU and Linux as the base OS. Linux/Android systems are not GNU/Linux systems by virtue that Android systems do not rely on GNU at all. Installing some GNU software into a Windows system doesn't imply that Windows system is now relying on GNU; the maintainer of that specific system would have to modify how the Windows system works to fundamentally rely on GNU before anyone can demand the GNU/Windows naming right. As it stands in practice today, if you're running a Linux kernel program inside a computer of yours, then your computer is relying on either the Android OS or the GNU OS by statistical fact.
I think the last sentence should say "Nearly all of the cloud is Linux, public or private, .....".
From my own experience I would say that the Kernel is Linux, or vice versus. The rest is the GUI. Only Windows has the GUI embedded.
And on the subject of embedded, All of my media devices that are less than 6 years old are Linux. That quite surprised me as early versions of a couple were still running Win CE! My TV, DVD player, NAS boxes, MP3 player and media center are all Linux, though for some it took a bit of research to establish this. My old Samsung DVD was Win CE, but the new one which has an almost identical interface is Linux. I suspect there is a lot more than people realize running Linux, even if it is just the kernel with a pared down interface.
Best wishes,
Sid
Water may be wet! (Stay tuned)
Bickering about Linux-related nomenclature goes rampant. (You know better! Add to the argument pile now!)
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
I just read that whole article and it doesn't mention DRM anywhere. It mentions you can't install Windows on ARM Chromebooks because they aren't X86 devices after all. It mentions you can't install Windows directly on an X86 Chromebook because the BIOS isn't compatible and drivers aren't available. Are you calling that incompatibility 'DRM'? That would be wrong.
"There's a four-in-five chance that there's a Linux-powered smartphone in your pocket"
That's just an odd way of saying 'an 80% chance'. Previously, it had only been used to describe dentists and their preferred chewing gum type.
And how many of those Linux devices pay royalties to Microsoft for unnamed or obscure patents? Microsoft didn't give up on the smartphone market, they just found a way to tax the entire market and ensure that Linux is no longer really free.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
The kernel is Linux, most of the rest of a "Linux system" is GNU.
Not necessarily.
On one of the few desktop systems running Linux mentionned in the summary : yes, the rest will be GNU.
On most of the clusters, webservers, etc. : Yes, again, the rest will be GNU
BUT
On smartphone, with a few corner case exception (Sailfish OS, Tizen and other Maemo/Meego/Mer based OSes ; Ubuntu Touch ; in the past also HP/Palm WebOS ; etc.) everything will run a Linux kernel, but coupled with the Android user space (uses Google's own Bionic as a C library, and then runs their own "I can't believe it's not Java(tm)" userspace in place of the usual user-space daemon and tools that you'll find on a regular GNU-Linux platform).
This even required Jolla, the maker of Sailfish OS, to develop "libhybris", so that critical drivers and firmware for smartphone normally designed for the Android userspace could actually be used on a classical GNU-Linux OS stack.
On embed platforms (e.g.: the dozen of wifi routers with which your smartphone has interacted since you woke up this morning), you'll also find a Linux kernel, but it's going to use an alternative user-space, usually something with a much smaller ressource footprint.
(busybox, instead of GNU tools ; dropbear instead of SSH, etc.)
though those userspace tools are designed to be as close to and as compatible with the usual "GNU" as possible within the resource limitations of the embed platform.
So yes, there's a difference between the Linux kernel and a whole Linux machine :
- GNU Linux
- Android/Linux
- Busybox/Linux
3 different popular combo of userspace and linux kernel.
(And also since recently, Microsoft has gifted us with a sort of GNU/WindowsNT with their "WSL")
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Separate kernel from UI? Not in this universe or in any possible universe: experience is unified. Can't separate a pedofyle rapist dick from his foot or nose. But, neck-beards will try! Such mental purity from a byte-drooling weiner-dude is to human beings ... vomitus.
Ever since the Gnome/KDE split over a licensing issue (Thanks, Icaza) the Linux desktop has been a ongoing mess of unstable APIs that is pushing away third parties.
And yet the DE people are convinced that if they can put a more polished mask on all those flowing APIs they can get people to use it, and thus pull in the third party devs.
This while over at the Windows camp, API stability is king. And the same is the case for the Linux kernel's userspace facing APIs. And thus the kernel itself, but not the DE layers, get used again and again and again inside all manner of products.
I am increasingly worries about closed-source software. Windows 10 is nothing short of spyware. Yes, yes, don't use it, I know... I don't use it personally, but I'm forced to use it at work. Now... I'm blessed in that I also run whatever I want on my other work computer as long as I can get my job done. I have chosen and run OpenBSD 6.0 for my second machine. We also have to run macOS Sierra, which is not terribly to my liking because, as a *nix fan, I feel limited by Apple, and indeed, they do have the OS locked down compared to things like Debian or OpenBSD.
As time marches on, even HW vendors are getting in on the spying game with bogus BIOS spying, talking with the "mothership" for no reason other than to spy and gain info on the end user.
Are we well and truly screwed? Will there ever be open-source HW or at the very least good guys like Ralink who publish their specs so non-binary blob drivers can be written.
And what with Lord Cheeto firmly (at least for now) ensconced in the White House, I fear the spying will get ugly fairly quickly. There is no love lost between the current administration and the recent whistle blowers. I fear a radical agenda is about to take shape with regards to the internet at large, spying, and requirements to spy. The people that just took power are power hungry, far more so than any administration in history. And the people leading it are by far likewise the least qualified to lead. It's all about the money, kids. Sadly.
GNU X11, GNU Wayland, GNU GDM, GNU Gnome, GNU Systemd, GNU vim, GNU apt, GNU python, GNU perl, GNU Network-Manager, GNU udev, GNU lvm2-utils...
GNU has apparently written a hell of a lot of software.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Right? I mean, I'm running a proprietary nvidia driver. That touches the kernel, am I suddenly nvidia/GNU/Linux? What about all the free software I use that has no ties to GNU? Doesn't it get a shoutout in front of everything else?
I get that Stallman needs to advertise or else no one will know how important GNU is. I get that he has to advertise with dogma because that's kinda his thing. But the whole GNU/Linux thing is pretty ridiculous. Everyone calls the OS Linux. No one assumes that the kernel is the OS.
> Thus DOS is actually a program loader, not a computer operating system.
No dumbass, it's a Disk Operating System. It's right in the fucking name. "Resources of the computer" only includes timesharing if you need it to do so. With that said, DOS absolutely allowed for and supported background processing. DOS had a terminate but stay resident function you could use instead of standard program termination, which was intended and used for this purpose.
I personally find it hard to believe Windows is losing. Are people not aware of cool new features like reporting everything you visit and type back to Microsoft for warrantless search by the government?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Linux certainly did NOT win the smartphone war. Firstly, Android is built to use the Linux kernel because hooking deep into the kernel is easier than it should be (hence bugs like stagefright) and because Google doesn't have to pay for Linux. The Linux / GNU stack is vaguely available but mostly unusable on Android. Android could be ported to any other kernel that is similarly hackable / easy to kneecap security and kernel / HAL / userspace partitioning as Linux. As for iOS, it co-opts the BSD Mach kernel in a similar manner.
Y'know we could just say "that's cool" and call it a day. The only reason the Linux community gets excited about news like this is that they want to beat Microsoft. I don't know why they feel like they need to beat them personally, it's like a "my hammer beats your screwdriver!" argument.
Then everyone comes in here and starts discussing what Linux "is". What is it and why did it succeed in the cloud?
1) It's free, and there are lots of computers in the cloud. License fees matter.
2) We have the source code. We can verify and change it, and it potentially works on everything.
Otherwise it's no different, but these are major bulletpoints. Linux is an impoverished operating system that lacks any real leadership outside the kernel space so they never could agree what the desktop looks like. They still fight over Window managers which is a problem that hasn't existed in Windows for over 30 years. It just so happens in the cloud that Window managers are moot and you don't need a desktop interface, so Linux shines when you run it on a router or a smart TV. People want Windows because they don't want to be hurled into the middle of a hot debate on what a window is and why it shouldn't be rounded or where the X button goes or what color it needs to be or if it should be rendered by CPU or OGL or Vulkan or if the audio should be pulse or alsa or both or neither or a fork or a hybrid or Joe's hobby LOLSOWNDZ project. I want the shortest path from concept to product. I want these decisions made for me not because I'm lazy but because they have crap all to do with what I'm trying to do.
We need to stop trying to win over Windows. Windows is built for users to use and Linux is built for hackers to engineer, these are not football teams. The paying public actually really want screwdrivers so we need to stop forcefeeding them hammers and claiming screws are evil. You can only end up with a lot of stripped threads and red faces.
GNU is important. But a lot of its importance comes in providing Unix utility programs and functions to non-Linux OS's, which is only slightly above Peter Norton's taking a mess of Ward Christensen utilities and calling them "Norton Utilities". It's a valuable service, but let's remember that everyone deserves credit.
Would I keep quiet over an "Oracle/Emacs"?
To continue, CUPS is from Apple. Shall we call it Apple/gnu/Linux?
I love articles like this. Such bias! Such subtle snark!
Linux on the desktop has about a 2% market share today and is viewed by many as complicated and obscure
Right out of the gate we get a "fact" (because the author used the word "about") and it says that Linux only has a 2% "market share". As defined by who? Of what "market"? Wow, that is some sloppy reporting there.
Next we get an opinion. What is this, Fox & Friends? Apparently Linux is views by "many" (no numbers) as "complicated and obscure". What does that mean? Depending on what you want to do Windows and Mac are both VERY complicated. Obscure depends on who you talk to, but no one ever has any trouble finding a Linux install.
Meanwhile, Windows sails on serenely, currently running on 90% of PCs in use... That's probably OK because Linux won the smartphone war and is doing pretty well on the cloud and Internet of Things battlefields too.
Windows sails on serenely. Really? So MS hasn't engaged in decades-long battles to defeat Linux installs at every turn? There isn't an ongoing campaign of FUD against what MS considers their number one threat in the marketplace? Oh, and that 90% quote -- what's a PC? Do you include servers in there? Is this the per-seat terminal server count? What are your metrics? What does 90% mean? Sheesh! Just do a little research here.
This is a FUD piece. Stop publishing these. This is worse than fake news.
> I can grab a windows laptop and inside of 10 minutes be booting into anything from BSD to Zorin OS,
That has nothing to do with 'Windows', and everything to do with 'commodity PC hardware'. Of course some Microsoft devices can't boot any other OS by design: XBox, Surface RT. The ability to turn off 'secure boot' is now optional for Windows 10 devices so one may not be able to 'boot any OS' on a Windows laptop in the future.
> just try that on a Chromebook)
Many Chromebooks are ARM based. Most will run Ubuntu using Crouton. Whether there are BSD or Zorin versions for those ARM SOCs is up to the developers.
Is better than anything out there, IHMO. CLean lines, robust affordances, tasteful palette, seamless responsiveness. Now if the OS underneath it wasn't complete shit. Apple's UI is antiquated by comparison. Source: I develop on OSX, Win*, Linux, Android and iOS.
> I can grab a windows laptop and inside of 10 minutes be booting into anything from BSD to Zorin OS,
You can't boot into RISCOS, I can do that on a Raspberry Pi (as well as BSD and several others).
To naively ASSUME it would be SUPER EASY to PORT Android to another KERNEL stack is just STUPID. IT would take YEARS to be able to support the HUNDREDS of different HARDWARE PLATFORMS .
Linux still isn't even there all the way with vendor hardware support, you think vendors are just going to jump and support your new OS kernel, I think not.
Google's Fuchsia OS is heading for failure for this exact reason, just because it is microkernel is not a good enough reason to switch from Linux.
So Yes, Linux is WINNING smartphone battle right now and for a long time in the future.
There are few to none Linux desktops out there, forcing us to install Linux on a formerly windows machine. Sometimes the results are not pretty. I had good luck with Lenovo (in my case M93p, NVIDIA graphics, Small Form Factor -not tiny although that one works too). Still would be good if you could find in your Super
Duper computer store the rig you want, and choose Windows and/or Linux, AND PAY ACCORDINGLY.
I'd be curious as to what those "major differences" are. In my book, both Android and Chrome OS quality as Linux. They are both open source and both are built on the Linux Kernel.
OK, somebody has a lot of skin in this "Android is not Linux" game. Sucks to be you.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
If you want to call your system GNU/Linux/Nvidia/Oracle, that's up to you. The fact doesn't change that GNU is far more fundamental than the Nvidia drivers or CUPS. GNU is the OS that is fundamental to the rest of the system i.e. GNU is the Unix system that everything needs to run; in the case of drivers and systemd, they directly rely upon Linux. The fact that it is common to teach one another the misnomer of "Linux OS" does not change GNU's fundamental role of a GNU/Linux system. GNU and Linux's use in practice today is to form the fundamental system for everything else. This is the reason why they both demand such critical naming rights why other software titles demand a lesser naming right.
What projects would we lose without a decent Linux desktop market share? Sure, you can count everything using the kernel as a 'win' for Linux (seems a bit juvenile, but OK), but installs on phone, routers, IoT, etc are not going to encourage teams of people to work on projects like LibreOffice and Inkscape and Audacity and [[insert productivity software here]]. Linux on the desktop is crucial for the ecosystem.
The often do, and they are often wrong.
Which is just being pedantic. Saying "I'm running Linux" is analogous to "I'm running a Linux-based operating system" and this is completely acceptable given you never just run the kernel.
GNU isn't fundamental at all. You could just as easily run a Linux-based OS with BusyBox instead.
Have we a choice when going to WorstBuy (TM) and purchasing a desktop computer?
For quite a while they were selling Linux desktops, nobody wanted them. Dell sells their Precision, Latitude, XPS and Inspiron laptops with the option for Linux preinstalled as well. HP offers it on a number of their systems and there are companies like System76 that offer it as well. Not only that it is trivial to install Linux on any machine, even Microsoft's own Surface computers. If people want Linux on their desktop or laptop then it is readily available.
> I thought Android is *not* Linux? At least that's what one of my Android text books says.
Your text book is wrong.
> It uses the Linux kernel, but is not the same operating system that is commonly referred to as "Linux" i.e. GNU-Linux.
The same can be said about GNU-Linux: it uses the Linux kernel but is not Android.
Android has its own parts around Linux. GNU has got parts of their own, too. You can say both are kinds of Linuces, or you can say both GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd are kinds of GNU.
> Android has major differences with Linux. This is not a value judgement but just an observation/fact.
Android/Linux has major differences with GNU/Linux. Linux being not one of these differences.
AFAIK you could have both with the same kernel! As for the discussion that Linux is a kernel and not the OS, we're past that point and those saying that Linux is just a kernel just managed to show they don't know English.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche
Linux is too popular and destroying openess. Let me tell you about the virtues of FreeBSD the free as in beer OS. Yes you heard Free Beer! We got that. It's time to free yourselves to an OS that respects beer. Linux was great growing up in your youth of mountain dew at college after using your Windows training wheels. Now it's time to graduate to free beer Freebsd like a real middle aged man.
Plus no one uses it so you can impress chicks too on being Uber hip. No Google, SystemD, or any other interests other than DARPA giving you TCP/IP which that and ipf make BSD the still defacto network operating system
http://saveie6.com/
The community where it's so called pronounced GNU/Linux. That one is quite sizable
http://saveie6.com/
Realistically you have to write a whole new OS for a platform as radically different from PC as a Smartphone.
WHAT AN IDIOT
"realistically" as in IN THIS REALITY, EVERY phone OS has a kernel that was originally written for a SERVER
Yes, yes, and the "computer" is the thing that sits on your desk that displays stuff while the "hard drive" is the beige box on the floor.
Don't mistake a technical term for lazy incorrect usage by people who do not know what they are talking about.
"Linux" is the kernel. "RedHat Linux" is a distro that uses the linux kernel. Lazy people call the entire stack linux. Android is a very different approach that also uses the linux kernel.
Your textbook is pretty dumb. it's just as much linux as your wireless router is probably linux - no, it's even more so linux than that. just because you're not using X doesnt make it non-linux - or then me and my brothers first linux installations weren't linux too(they were).
Android most definitely is Linux. you cannot separate the two. even if you're not using ndk and using only dalvik/art, you're still using linux threads and a bunch of other linux things almost directly.
you COULD maybe run "android apps" inside another operating system, but Android as in lets say android 5.0 or whatever is definitely linux and a lot of how the apps and systems on it work bind directly to the linux kernel all the way to the way process security works. furthermore you can just run linux binaries too, provided that the linux installation of course on the phone has everything that binary needs in order to run.
anyways, if your android textbook says it's not linux, then people who learn by it will probably never even think that it is linux and thus can just wonder with amazement at what some apps do while they can never make their apps do the same.
did the textbook also tell you that asynctasks are somehow magical without showing you the source to them, disproving them as magical and making them look like a dumb waste of space?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
What happens if someone turns on your developer mode Chromebook, presses Space as prompted, then presses Enter as prompted?
Incidentally, the distro I've been using for a decade and a half is called Debian GNU/Linux.
I and most people call it Debian for short, but never Debian Linux.
Language is a funny thing, and it's always changing. One of the biggest ways it changes is when people generally accept a term to mean something other than its intent. The most common of these is when a brand name becomes the name of the product or service in the industry.
Laundromat, for instance, was a Westinghouse trademarked brand for an automatic clothes washer; but now it means any coin-operated, cash or credit self-laundry shop.
So, the name Laundromat was a brand name for a line of washers, then a name for a place where those washers were available to the public, and then just a generic term for any place that lets the public do their own laundry by the load for a fee. (IE the whole building and service, not just the washers... even if the washers weren't of the Laundromat brand!) It's not much of a leap for the general public to agree that Linux is now the name of an operating system instead of just the kernel. It's not "wrong" of them to think or say so. Language is about conveying information -- everyone knows what's understood by it. Many of the biggest Linux sites offer "Linux Distros" and talk about the many "flavors of Linux." Nearly every article written for the general public describes Linux as an OS, and IT workers refer to it as an OS when asked which OSes they run/support. Linux may be the name of the kernel, but if the majority of the population agrees that it's also the name of the OS, then it quite literally becomes correct to say so as it's the accepted common usage in the language.
Many things that once meant only one specific thing came to mean everything of a type or even anything that works with that specific thing. That's just how language evolves. It's also how companies lose trademarks -- which is why they defend them vigorously as they go into common usage. I didn't even know Dumpster and Crock-Pot were trademarked, but I'm familiar with Kleenex, Q-Tip, Walkman, Formica, and dozens of others that have since passed into common usage yet still retain their trademark... for now -- many after repeated attempts to dissolve the trademark due to common usage.
What is a "PC".
It has two meanings, the modern one is "Personal Computer".
The old one is "IBM PC" that was "IBM Personal Computer" and it was a standard of x86 CPU, MS-DOS, ISA slots etc etc.
What is a "Personal Computer"?
A tablet on TV table that is shared by family? No.... That is "Shared Computer" or "Family Computer". Not a personal one.
A laptop or workstation that is shared by family / friends? No... Again just a "Shared Computer".
A workstation at school? At Office? No... Again not "PERSONAL" computers.
What is a personal computer? It is the smartphone. While "Computer" would touch as well everything from a printer to smartwatch to network router etc, that alone doesn't mean it is "Personal" if it is processing data that ain't personal.
A "Personal Computer" is a computer that is found to be personal, that has personal data in it, it is used to handle personal data and it ain't shared with others.
So it can be said that Linux conquered 80% of the PC markets....
This is written on workstation, that is personal computer. Yet it has a Linux copy in this as well. Even when this is written on Windows 10 side.
I am just about to go pick up my first Surface 3 Pro, going to install Linux on it.
Got a new smartphone week ago, Android in it, so it has Linux OS and is my most personal computer I have.
It has all my contacts informations, it has emails, it has music and my web browsing history etc.
Photos and videos I keep on NAS (run by Linux) that I have access only via LAN. It has all my work (photographs) as well backups from all devices.
It is very personal too, but it is more like a data storage. I could give that NAS to anyone, but it is encrypted and drives are such that they wipe themselves if attached to any other computer without passcode before unmounting from NAS.
I could just throw that NAS to lake and it wouldn't matter as I have remote backup with weekly process (physical drive move).
But then again I could just throw the smartphone to lake, get a new and get data copied back.
But I would care far more about the smartphone than the NAS. As I would be blocked from contacts and other personal computing for at least few hours when I buy a new and perform data rolling.
Linux won.... And no one really noticed it. Everyone was defending Windows on main gate, looking to horizon and waiting that tiny army would come and attack through the gate. While the backdoors were wide open, unlocked and millions of visitors walked through them, conquering the whole castle.
Stallman isn't taking credit for work he didn't do. Stallman is taking credit for work he did do; Stallman is taking credit for the GNU OS.
There is no GNU OS. Stallman didn't write the kernel. The kernel defines what OS it is. Ergo Stallman is trying to take credit for work he didn't do by pointing out that other work he didn't do (GNU - others wrote those tools too under the FSF aegis) was used to enable linux to be a useful product in some cases. It's not GNU/Linux as he claims. If linux didn't use any GNU tools it would still be linux.
if we're only judging by which corporation makes the most money then Apple isn't running away with the game. Google doesn't make their money off of the hardware. They make money from advertising and services.
I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.
Both companies are doing well, but if you look at the fraction of Apple's income comes from smartphones vs. Google's total income from smartphones (HW/SW/advertising) then Apple is winning. But, it's a big world and there's plenty of room for both.
Linux-on-the-desktop fans love to give lists of apps that will do what you need, but until people can run the same app their coworkers are using, Linux is never going to be significant on the desktop. Businesses use MS Office, Adobe CC, AutoCAD, etc. Try to use anything else and work in a collaborative environment with a team, round-tripping content, asking for help with software from coworkers, etc., and you are going to choose to conform pretty quickly. It just isn't worth the trouble just so you can say you run Linux.
I hate the Microsoft hegemony as much as the next guy but it's been snowballing along this way since IBM chose MS-DOS over CP/M in 1980 and is probably not going to change until we find a truly disruptive alternative to desktop PCs.
When they merge android and chrome os into, fuschia isn't it?
Linux for the desktop is dying. Gnome is click crazy, KDE is menu driven, xfce is menu driven and not too heavy on mouse click demands.
Want Linux to succeed on the desktop, let me use my webcam as a siri or similar application function. I want a truly graphical interface, where by using my finger(s) on the screen, I can drag and drop, open, close an application and do more.
WHEN???
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
ported to any other kernel that is similarly hackable / easy to kneecap security and kernel / HAL / userspace partitioning as Linux.
Like the Windows kernel? The Windows kernel is far far easier to hack than Linux.
Really, you are an astoundingly stupid individual, at one and the same time naïve and arrogant. How do you even tie your shoes in the morning?
"The desktop is a dying market except for power users, hobbyists, scientist."
Um, no?! Anyone who has to create content tends to gravitate towards the desktop; the tools, human factor inputs, screen sizes, everything is orders of magnitude better than on any other platform. So no, it's not just those three types of users you named. It's everyone who creates content.
" Business is making the shift to smart terminals..."
No. Flatly no. First of all, WTF is a "smart terminal"?? That's an internal contradiction, like saying "jumbo shrimp" or "military intelligence" or "postal service". Just because you can put the words into that sequence grammatically, doesn't mean it's a real thing.
Second of all, real terminals (3270s, 5250s, VT-anythings) died because they weren't flexible and had no intelligence. An attempted revival at terminals (SunRays, Wyse, etc.) failed because they had too little flexibility and too little intelligence, not to mention no local storage ability at all.
Even application virtualization (Citrix is perhaps the biggest name in this space) has a big problem. Citrix desktops are frequently stripped of functionality, richness, and services that real users would find useful. Why? Because they are optimized for cost, not features.
All these efforts fail because the cost of the devices keeps going down while the cost of the people keeps going up. Therefore optimizing any system around device costs misses the big cost drivers in the system. You get more return (ROI, the whole underlying principle that most of these allegedly 'smart' initiatives fail at) by making people more productive.
Ah, but you say, we aren't targeting device costs, it's device management costs! Again, no. I repeat, you get more ROI by making people more productive.
Have been using Linux as my main desktop OS for around 8 years now, and someone mentioned that my admiration of Linux was somewhat religious. It made me wonder if I'm being blind, and that maybe Win10 and MacOSX are, in fact, better. Of course, we can't spend our lives constantly reviewing everything out there to make sure we're still using the best, but after a bit of thinking (and some recent tinkering with Win10) I can conclude that my admiration of Linux is fairly objective.
Most people who are religious were born into it, and in fact, I used Windows before I'd ever used Linux. I've also tried several different OSs - Windows (3.1 onwards), RiscOS, Workbench 3.1, EPOC, symbian, MacOS9, X, Haiku OS etc. - and I can say that Linux has the best combination of features, reliability and autonomy that I've come across.
I suppose you could say I'm a religious convert, and maybe there'd be more truth to that. But then you'd need to show me an OS more reliable, as fast, autonomous, with a rock-solid package-management system.
Well, when I smoke ganja I smoke ganja. What the banana with all these analogies...
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
When was the last time you tried using Linux? 1997? You're complaining about drag&drop, I mean. That's just a normal function every OS has.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
Linux runs lots of devices, it's just their OS that isn't doing well.
technically the kernel is the operation system. GNU are just applications. You can run the operating system with booting just your own program using init=/myprogram. No need for GNU or any other userland tools.
Android is an interface written in Google's Java & runs on Linux...