Linux Desktop Market Share Crosses 3% (netmarketshare.com)

Data for the month of August 2017 from reliable market analytics firm Net Applications is here, and it suggests that Linux has finally surpassed the three percent mark, quite possibly for the first time in recent years. According to Net Applications, the desktop market share of Linux jumped from 2.53 percent in July to 3.37 percent in August. There's no explanation for what accounted for this growth.

Comments

YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Spy Handler]

has arrived!

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Skewray]

Linux Desktop will achieve 100% at exactly that moment when there are no more desktops.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

Desktop is over. Now its all about smartphones.

And well. The year of Linux on smartphones was a couple of years ago.

Linux has already won. Poeple don't really know it yet.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[stooo]

Yeah, except that statistic is broken. The real Linux desktop market share is about double.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what I felt too. Logically it is like this, Linux users are techie types and in order to make their systems more secure from attacks, it would spoof its system to report as a Windows OS and hence it skewed the results from market analytics.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[shaitand]

Not in business. The desktop (or usually laptop now) is still very real and really the only reason windows persists. There is less push on this front because in any organization with separate windows and *nix resources the *nix resources don't have to deal with nonsense related to individual users and most like it that way.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[MBGMorden]

Desktop isn't really over - it's just changed.

Personal users still use smartphones heavily. As a matter of fact I know quite a number of people who no longer own a computer and do all their personal tasks ONLY on a smartphone.

That said, business users are just as much into the desktop as ever, and that isn't likely to change any time soon. Smartphones make for decent media consumption devices, but they're not great and working with lots of plain old data.

Between the business sector and power users, the desktop will likely be around for just as long as mobile devices are - it just will be relegated to a niche product.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[KingMotley]

I would have to say your analysis is wrong.

Smartphones will replace desktops in more and more situations in the business world (this is already happening). I know of a few companies, mostly startups, but there are a few big names as well that issue employees tablets where traditionally it would have been a laptop.

Next phase is dockable (via a physical connector or wireless/bluetooth) phones/tablets with real keyboard, mice, monitor, and network connections. Once phones get software that support this and can instantly switch to a more desktop like environment you will see desktops/laptops disappear from a large portion of businesses. There is very little reason why phones can't present a desktop-like environment and allow the user to compose emails, write documents, update spreadsheets, do powerpoint presentations, or even light photoshopping. Pick the phone up and walk away when you are done.

Re: YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Anonymous Coward]

On linux I routinely have firefox report an IE user agent so webpages load correctly.

If someone is using that to determine how many machines there are then yes its not unreasonable to think there may be a not insignificant number of people doing that.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[MBGMorden]

You're looking at things a bit oddly.

For one, startups often focus on unique business sectors - some fail, some succeed, but they're not representative of "normal business". Not all business workers travel or need to be mobile. Heck some CAN'T be mobile - what we call "counter users" who sit at a counter and are there to interface with the public as needed. They're going to be in a chair in front of a workstation all day. Think of the people over at the DMV for example.

So many people have this glorious image of the office road warrior in their heads that they forget that for a ton of people office work is just boring routine crap where you don't need to go anywhere.

As to the dockable component - that's simply semantics. If you dock your phone and then start using an external keyboard, mouse and monitor, then you're USING A DESKTOP. It doesn't matter that the phone is doing the processing work - the platform is still desktop based.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Bozzio]

Not a humour guy, are you?

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[corando]

I, quite honestly, came here for this comment. :-)

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[michelcolman]

You're the one who's not a math guy, apparently.

100% of 0 is 0. Nothing wrong with that. Just because there are no more desktops doesn't mean that the term "desktop" has become undefined.

100% of all naturally flying pink elephants are capable of telepathy. That's a perfectly correct statement.

(With "naturally flying pink elephants", I mean excluding those painted pink and launched by catapult, obviously. Although those might somehow gain telepathic skills, you never know, it's worth a shot, but I digress)

Re: YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[MBGMorden]

Um, it's been years since IE was the defacto standard. Nowadays I've noticed that IE is the MOST likely browser to misrender a page.

These days everyone seems to be building with Chrome (or at least Webkit) in mind. Afterall, not only is is common on the desktop, but both of the dominant smartphone platforms are generally running Webkit based browsers.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[thegreatbob]

Might actually come very close to reality when the conventional desktop is outmoded and no longer produced..

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Bozzio]

This guy's a humour guy.

Re: YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[dougdonovan]

good job techies. when we complain about Windows and "write down on a piece of paper then give to the end user the word ""Linux'"". its a step in the right direction. the end user that has a half of brain may mention to their manager.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[thegreatbob]

Only if you're a humorless pedant. This statement applies to each sentence in you post.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Chryana]

I'm sorry to say that I completely disagree.

Most jobs don't require mobility. Thus, using their cellphone to do their work is not a particularly compelling use case. The operating systems running on cell phones are poorly suited to multitasking, and thus do not offer a particularly productive environment to work in when they are connected to a screen with a mouse and keyboard. Android has actually been moving away from larger screens, changing the UI to work better on cellphone screen sizes at the expense of tablet sized screens. In any case, it's already possible to get a desktop-like environment with a cell or tablet through the use of remote desktop, and I've yet to hear of a company that did the switch.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[CanHasDIY]

Might actually come very close to reality when the conventional desktop is outmoded and no longer produced..

Time to file a patent for a time machine, because I apparently, somehow, got transported back to 2005...

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[rahvin112]

You are severely overly optimistic. This is probably because you have no real business experience and/or no ability to see beyond your own circumstance. Want to know how?

Explain how to use CADD design software on a smartphone where the standard use case is TWO 24" or 27" monitors. Or explain how you perform accounting analysis using a spreadsheet with 8000000 rows and 15000 columns on a smartphone. Or how you model or design pretty much anything with a smartphone. Or how you do any graphical design on a smartphone. Or explain how a programmer can reliably program, debug and compile code on a smartphone. Anyone doing any real business outside sales does it on real computers and that's not going to change.

In the real world most people who aren't sales need real computers with big monitors and keyboards and mice. The smartphone docking concept is a bunch of horseshit that people like you raved over but in actual use turned out to be garbage. It's not going to get there for the same reason you can't design a unified smarthphone/ and desktop interface, they have two completely different usage patterns and human interfaces. Hell the surface line is the best tech in this world and of the tasks above I listed you might be able to do one of them with a surface. Maybe in 20 years your average smartphone will have the computing horsepower to tackle a few of these tasks but it isn't even close. Smartphones are barely capable of rendering modern websites let alone trying to run autocadd or compile software. I expect I'll be long dead before that ever happens, particularly given that we've only got a couple more transister shrinks before we hit physical quantum limits thats likely to halt all advancements in silicon processor manufacturing.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[lhowaf]

Good point! We could put the same UI on phones, tablets and desktops - it'll be a huge success!

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[KingMotley]

Startups are interesting to watch because they aren't already entrenched in a particular way of doing something, so often you can spot up coming trends based on what they do differently. Not always of course, but it is one indicator of many.

I didn't say desktops were going away completely. I said they are being replaced in more and more situations. Some including those "counter users". Like, for example, cash registers used to be basically a PC with some specialized peripherals (scanners, tray), where I see more and more of these being replaced by iPads just eating at normal restaurants that I do.

As for the DMV, what would prevent replacing their stupid terminals with say an iPad shoved in a immovable case stuck to a desk? Really nothing. And it could run the exact same software that the guy using an iPad during the driving tests uses. Or the manager who does actually move around (usually just one part of the building to another, but still "mobile").

s to the dockable component - that's simply semantics. If you dock your phone and then start using an external keyboard, mouse and monitor, then you're USING A DESKTOP.

No, I'm using a phone/tablet with alternate input devices and an alternate monitor, but it is doing what I normally would with a desktop. Which is exactly why some desktops will be replaced this way.

Re: YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[link-error]

Our company has moved to "thin" windows clients where you just remote into a virtual desktop. Just like the old X clients back in the day. We are also moving to Office 365 so you can use it from Linux desktop. I think MS pushing Office in the cloud will backfire big time. Since Windows 8 came out I went Linux only on all my personal computers, not even dual boot.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[KingMotley]

Remote desktop isn't the same thing. It's similar, but different. With remote desktop you need a network connection to do any work, and you need a server to actually do the work.

The operating systems running on cell phones are poorly suited to multitasking, and thus do not offer a particularly productive environment to work in when they are connected to a screen with a mouse and keyboard.

Most users don't really need multitasking AT ALL. They need exactly what mobile operating systems offer which is task switching, and they do that quite well. The keyboard/mouse has nothing to do with anything.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[thegarbz]

Linux has already won. Poeple don't really know it yet.

That's like saying I won because I'm the fastest person ... in my house.
Linux hasn't won in the market that we're talking about, and that many people care about. No one gives a crap what runs on their phones, and calling it a win for Linux is a perversion of everything Linux and Open Source stands for.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[citylivin]

"Next phase is dockable (via a physical connector or wireless/bluetooth) phones/tablets with real keyboard, mice, monitor, and network connections." ..." you will see desktops/laptops disappear from a large portion of businesses. "

What do you call a phone with peripherals and monitors attached, perhaps on the top of someones desk?

A desktop.

You have basically just said that desktops are evolving. What a futurist you are! Everyone knows that already. Take a look at what used to be called small form factor PCs. Dells for instance get a few cm smaller with every revision. The 7050 is mad tiny compared to even a 6 year old 780.

Smaller and smaller PC's, such as intel NUC's, will replace towers, if they have't already. Having the power supply inside the case is what is changing. You can get away with 12v @3.4amps now to do what you would have needed 120v 350watts to do 10 years ago. Those are basically laptops repackaged without a screen. Not to mention laptops with docking stations that have been around forever.

What will happen is that upgrade-able "workstations" will disappear for all but specialized uses where they need additional add on cards. And thats already happened. I deploy more and more intel NUC's where i can, every year. So no need to use phones for this. The industry already has options that work far better and are less prone to being dropped and smashed or lost in the toilet. These options are being deployed right now.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Anonymous Coward]

> I'm not trying to claim we're going to get 50% of the market anytime soon

And your machines are probably not included in that 3%.

The statistics for these sort of numbers are usually gathered by Javascript running in browsers that sends data to the stats gatherers. This requires you to visit sites that download the Javascript to your browser, run it, and upload to the gatherer. Most of those sites are of more interest to Windows users than others, more Linux users will run NoScript and other blockers.

The result is that Linux is under-reported and has been for years.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Chryana]

The people who can accomplish their work with a cell phone indeed do not need multitasking, and have probably already switched over. A lot of jobs, however, require being able to see your email and interacting with some other application at the same (often the browser running some web app, I guess). Nearly all the staff in the company I work for is in that situation. If this is not multi tasking, I don't know what is.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[KingMotley]

This is probably because you have no real business experience and/or no ability to see beyond your own circumstance.

You'd be very very wrong. Perhaps you need to look in the mirror.

Explain how to use CADD design software on a smartphone where the standard use case is TWO 24" or 27" monitors. Or explain how you perform accounting analysis using a spreadsheet with 8000000 rows and 15000 columns on a smartphone. Or how you model or design pretty much anything with a smartphone. Or how you do any graphical design on a smartphone. Or explain how a programmer can reliably program, debug and compile code on a smartphone. Anyone doing any real business outside sales does it on real computers and that's not going to change.

I'm not even going to argue with your examples. Many of these could easily be replaced (and some have already been replaced!), but these aren't representative of the most use cases of desktop today. They represent a very small fraction of them, and since I didn't say desktops were going extinct, just that many are being replaced with phones and tablets, there is no point in discussing it further.

In the real world most people who aren't sales need real computers with big monitors and keyboards and mice.

No they don't. Not by a very very very long shot. Most people don't really need big monitors, and most don't need a dedicated keyboard or even a mouse if they have a touchscreen for input. But, a phone with a docking station would work just as well for 98% of all computer users given the right software.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[KingMotley]

Reading comprehension really isn't your thing. "and can instantly switch" should have been pretty clear.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[jwhyche]

And it only took 26 years!

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[KingMotley]

If this is not multi tasking, I don't know what is

Well, it's good you realize you don't know what multitasking is I suppose. That exact scenario in most cases could be done via task switching. Although, to be fair, phones today actually do real multitasking instead of task switching so the point is mostly moot.

At a rudimentary level (please, I'm not trying to describe the difference between real multitasking and pseudo multitasking here), multitasking is the ability for multiple programs to run at the same time, where task switching is when you switch from one program to another the prior one freezes until you switch back to it. Whether you can see both at the same time or not (side by side, or windowed) doesn't describe multitasking vs task switching. It's very possible to be using task switching, and see a window in the background that isn't updating/computing/working. For example, if you have a browser window and it is displaying a real time clock and you switch windows to edit email and the clock stops until you switch back, then that is task switching, and good enough for the vast majority of people. They aren't switching away from excel that takes 20 minutes to calculate to go do something else. By the time they switch away, it is already done doing what it needs to do, and could be frozen. Now this would cause a problem if it was playing music or a video in the background, which yes, there are some cases in which that would be nice or even necessary but that is pretty rare, and as I said, phones already do that today, so it doesn't really matter.

iPhones are multitasking, but you can switch them to be more like task switching by going into the control panel->General->Background App Refresh and turn it off. That will "freeze" most applications when you switch away from it instead of letting it continue to run in the background. While not true task switching, it has a similar effect, and increases battery life. Most applications, and most people don't notice the difference usually. iPhones also auto-enable this globally when in "Low power mode" (last 20% of your battery life I believe).

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[jwhyche]

Good point! We could put the same UI on phones, tablets and desktops - it'll be a huge success!

Wait! Wait! I know this. $200 for the win. Is it .... windows 8?

I read your post and just can't help but think of the Northrop M2-F2 lifting body crash in 1967.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[reboot246]

I would really hate using a spreadsheet or Photoshop on a phone or tablet. Even reading a simple pdf on my phone makes me want to pull my hair out.

I can see using a phone that's docked so that you can have a real keyboard and monitor, but do phones have the graphics horsepower to, say, edit a movie or even a large digital photo?

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[jwhyche]

Yeah, except that statistic is broken. The real Linux desktop market share is about double.

I think its broken too. I think its more a long the lines of half that, if that much. I have yet to see a linux desktop in the wild that wasn't installed by a local penguin head for his own use.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Bert64]

Business users are however moving more to web based applications... Once enough of their applications are delivered this way, the lock-in keeping windows desktops around is broken and you can use anything you like to access the web based applications.
Given the requirement of "running a browser", very few people are going to choose windows above any of the other options out there, and linux becomes an obvious choice for business even if only based on cost.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Bert64]

Most users don't do much multitasking... They tend to have one application running full screen at any one time and switch between them occasionally. The multitasking abilities of mobile platforms may not be suited to geeks who run many things at once, but they are well suited to the average use case.

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Bert64]

Those are all niche use cases...
How do you cut someone's hair, construct a building or plough a field using a desktop? You don't...

For the vast majority of office workers who make use of a computer for their day to day tasks, a mobile platform is more than adequate to their needs, possibly with a bluetooth keyboard if they want to input lots of data (although speech to text is actually better for a lot of people who aren't fast typists).

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Bert64]

People were editing movies and digital photos 10 years ago on desktops less powerful than today's smartphones, so yes...

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[nasch]

The sale of that phone wouldn't count in desktop sales numbers though. And if surveyed, not everyone who used a phone in that way would report using a "desktop computer" or "PC" - maybe hardly anyone would.

Re: YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[Mr.CRC]

What if she's really hot?

Re:YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP

[stooo]

you've not been to Europe lately.

Desktop System?

[Archangel Michael]

You mean "traditional desktop computers". My Smart Phone (Android, but iPhones count too) is as powerful as any desktop was 10 years ago, and runs Linux (kernel). I would suggest that WebBrowser is the real "new" OS. Best example is Chromebooks, Linux kernel with enough specs to get you to a web browser.

The Desktop has moved to my pocket.

Re:Desktop System?

[Junta]

I've dealt with a couple of chromebooks... It's a terrible experience with exceedingly flaky drivers. It feels like every participant in that ecosystem is phoning it in.

I don't like to think *that* is what people perceive as 'a linux desktop', since a real distro is so much nicer.

Re:Desktop System?

[FrankHaynes]

It feels like every participant in that ecosystem is phoning it in.

ICWYDT.

Re:Desktop System?

[Bing Tsher E]

You can install real Linux on a Chromebook. You just have to make sure you press and hold F5 or whatever during that five second time window every time you boot it up so that it doesn't reinstall ChromeOS.

Re:Desktop System?

[Hognoxious]

Things like this are why we all love UX designers.

Re:Desktop System?

[stooo]

>> You just have to make sure you press and hold F5 .... so that it doesn't reinstall ChromeOS.

Or get a real laptop which doesn't destroy your data on boot.
Perhaps an application of that would be if you ever enter the US with a laptop. A data destroying laptop is then useful.

Re:Desktop System?

[shaitand]

Not at work and for gaming it hasn't. A full keyboard, mouse, and multiple good sized monitors isn't going away. It isn't only the interface, larger components will always have more speed and capacity than smaller components and there will always be those who need that difference. Developers tend to blow the gains from advances to gain easier, lazier, and more rapid development rather than letting them float down to the users in the form of increased performance.

Re:Desktop System?

[Dutch Gun]

It's not the computer's power that makes a computer a desktop. It's the form factor and OS capabilities. Mobile smartphones have plenty of power, but aren't optimally designed for use with a large screen, mouse, and keyboard. Desktop OSes, on the other hand, offer exactly the correct paradigm for this form factor.

We've seen several prominent examples of how it's rather impractical to try to bridge these two very different use cases, and the companies that have attempted to do so are backing away from that attempt now.

The only people who think that a smartphone can replace a desktop are the people who simply don't do the type of work that still requires a desktop computer. It's like saying "Hey, now that we've invented a motorcycle, there's no need for anyone to buy a pickup truck!"

Re:Desktop System?

[LinuxIsGarbage]

We've seen several prominent examples of how it's rather impractical to try to bridge these two very different use cases, and the companies that have attempted to do so are backing away from that attempt now.

Windows 8 was a half-assed attempt at making their desktop OS a touchscreen tablet OS by making half their control panel items oversized touch sensitive tablet menus, the other half are desktop windows, and they replaced the start menu with a shitty start screen.

Windows 10 still has half the control panel items designed for tablets, the other half are still desktop Windows. They replaced the shitty start screen with a scaled down model of a shitty start screen, that still doesn't display the start menu tree, and tries to push useless active flashing tiles, wants you to let Cortina listen to everything you say, and generally wants you to give up all control and privacy you have to MS, much like Android and iOS.

It took Windows 10 to make Windows 8.1 look good. 8.1 still has shitty start screen, still has shitty "half the control panels are designed for tablets the other half aren't", but it doesn't force updates, not as much of your privacy is leaked, and there are some under the hood improvements over Windows 7.

Re:Desktop System?

[jedidiah]

There's no good real that one OS can't run both.

The problems happen when you try to FORCE one mode or the other on users when it is entirely inappropriate.

An obvious related example is the text terminal versus the graphics terminal. Both of these coexist fine inside of all of the modern desktop operating systems. In MacOS and Windows they are largely invisible unless you go hunting for them. Yet they are still there and can be used just as if you were pecking on a real VT-100.

The tablet is just another terminal type. Computers are flexible enough by their very nature to allow a different terminal type be used. "UX designers" just have to get out of their own way.

Margin of error?

[Junta]

This seems likely to be in the margin of error for the wider data...

Nowadays it's more viable than ever to get by, what with things like Valve throwing some weight behind it, but it's still unavoidable to need Windows in too many places. But when I can get away with not using Windows, it is a pleasure.

It was me

[rtkluttz]

I reinstalled 3715 times trying to get a thermal issue solved with the 4.10 kernel.

Re:It was me

[Bing Tsher E]

I recompiled my kernel to get both my Sound Blaster 16 and my Trident 8900cl video card to work at the same time. In 1997!

Re:It was me

[corando]

Did you check the spacebar?

Re: It was me

[michelcolman]

Maybe you're holding down the space bar too long.

Re:It was me

[jedidiah]

If I am expecting to be in that performance domain I will actually do a little product research first. It's amazing what you can do with this thing called "Google". I might also even employ a speciality vendor to save myself the trouble. They go by names like "Apple" and "Atari".
 

Re:It was me

[cheesybagel]

Remember xf86config? Then you had to manually edit whatever configuration file that crap generated to *really* get X to work.

Well, I can only speak for myself, but...

[QuietLagoon]

... two notebooks here that used to run Windows are now running a Debian distribution of Linux.

Re:Well, I can only speak for myself, but...

[thegarbz]

... two notebooks here that used to run Windows are now running a Debian distribution of Linux.

That explains that almost 100% increase in Linux usage.

Re:Well, I can only speak for myself, but...

[thegreatbob]

Or just uninstall systemd + reinstall sysvinit. It's not miserably complicated, though there are some additional steps (and things with hard systemd requirements won't work, but I feel like that's less of an issue):

http://without-systemd.org/wik...

That being said, I'm all for Devuan as a source of attrition for Debian, until they pull their heads back out of their butts. Shame there aren't enough takers to really raise enough concern from them.

Re:Well, I can only speak for myself, but...

[QuietLagoon]

...You should use Devuan in order to avoid systemd....

Well, I have to say, systemd has got to be one of the worst pieces of system infrastructure software that I've ever seen or had to work with. The overly complex and unnecessarily intertwined architectural structure looks more as if it had "occurred" rather than having been "designed." Systemd makes me think that I'm still in Windows.

Re: Linux Desktop Market Share Crosses 3%

[rtkluttz]

Must be because of greatest desktop Gnome 3!

The gnome 3 developer located. That shit is horrible yo.

Reliable market analytics firm Net Applications

[93 Escort Wagon]

I don't know this company - on what basis is the qualifier "reliable" added? Are they somehow better than any other analytics firm?

First thing I thought of when I read that was how Trump will add stuff like this when he's about to make something up - like how his "friend Jim, who is a very, very substantial person" stopped going to Paris.

Amounted for?

[nine-times]

There's no explanation for what amounted for this growth.

Is that supposed to be "what accounted for this growth"? Maybe my brain is broken. Is my brain broken?

Re:Looking at the trend

[93 Escort Wagon]

It seems clear that the losses in MacOS have appeared over in Linux.

July 2017
Mac: 6.02%
Linux: 2.53%

August 2017
Mac: 5.94%
Linux: 3.37%

Unless it takes 10 Linux desktops to replace each Mac, the math doesn't seem to work...

Re:Looking at the trend

[Anonymous Coward]

Actual likely answer... (for part of the increase at least)

In the past a lot of web pages wouldn't render correctly unless your useragent was Windows or MacOS. I've had to have mine pretend to be Windows for years. These people check OS usage by user agent. We may have finally stopped making websites that assume there are only 2 OSs out there.

Re: Linux Desktop Market Share Crosses 3%

[Hognoxious]

Oh come on, praise where it's due.

All hail PulseAudio! All hail systemd!

"reliable"

[JohnFen]

from reliable market analytics firm Net Applications

I have no reason to doubt the stats, but when someone feels the need to insert the qualifier "reliable" like this for their own source, it immediately makes me question the reliability of the source.

I guess it's a variation of the rule of thumb that you should never trust anyone who says "trust me".

Re:"reliable"

[JohnFen]

Sometime I am, sometimes I'm not -- and if I could tell the difference in advance, I'd always be right!

I will never say people should believe anything I say just because I say it.

Re:A 75% increase in ONE MONTH.

[stooo]

Perhaps, but it's only the beginning.

I would like to apologize.

[Gravis Zero]

I was getting my fortune read by a old gypsy woman and she said, "2017 can be the year of the Linux desktop... but there's a price." I accepted but honestly, I didn't think she could actually make people vote for Trump! ;)

Re:I would like to apologize.

[Anonymous Coward]

I accepted but honestly, I didn't think she could actually make people vote for Trump! ;)

She didn't. She just convinced a few hundred thousand people to stay home and watch Game of Thrones instead.

Just how bad

[bobstreo]

Does windows have to become before people start avoiding it?

Other than gaming (less and less over time), or business applications (more are web enabled) requiring windows apps, are there any reasons at all to use windows?

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

I'm about to blow away an old Thinkpad I set up as a media center. Why? Poor video performance. Works great on Windows. On Linux... shearing, lag, etc. I spent a few days trying to fix it and it seems like everything is 100% correct and up-to-date. The video is just slow on Linux. So it's either throw it in the trash or find its old Windows disk.

Back in February, after one of my recent crashes, I replaced Linux on my primary workstation (Thinkpad again...), because NOTHING I was doing on Linux couldn't be done on Windows, and Linux power management was unstable, I was doing important work and got sick of my machine crashing when I swapped a few video cables. The 12 hours of updates I had to put into Windows was nothing compared to the time I was wasting troubleshooting my stability issues on Linux.

A few weeks ago I just removed a VM from service and put the services back on bare metal because KVM shat on my bridged networking when I ran a utility to change some network settings. KVM virtio FS passthru doesn't work in my distro anyway, so no point in troubleshooting, the IO performance on Linux was horrendous with NFS. I'll rebuild the host ESXi. The box is headless and Linux doesn't recognize the video, sound or anything, so no loss.

I've been using Linux for 22 years and honestly, it's a total waste of time to troubleshoot every distro's Rube Goldberg machine of a solution for the problem of the week. I have decided to stop trying. If it's broken, throw it in the trash, maybe it'll be better in 5 years, but I need to stick to my specialty and not waste my time on these issues.

I'll stick to Linux on servers in Devops fashion. When the distro goes hairy, wipe and rebuild. Linux on the desktop? I'm having fantastic luck with Virtualbox these past few years. I can move images from Linux to Windows to MacOS hosts no problem. KVM has some nice properties, but it's Linux-only so who cares? VMWare is your enterprise virtualization anyway. If your company can't afford VMWare, you're probably not being paid well anyway.

Given the trivial nature of virtualizing Linux, unless you're doing kernel development, why run Linux on bare metal? You can't even argue privacy, security or FOSS ideals if you're using those web apps for your office apps. If you're not using those, then what are you using for a calendar which syncs with your cellphone? Dont' say "owncloud..." ugh.

So whatever, Windows works great for me. It was crap 20 years ago, and on the server it's been lousy, but on the desktop? Linux never cut it for me.

..and I'm not alone https://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

Re:Just how bad

[JohnFen]

why run Linux on bare metal?

Personally? Because it's the OS that works the best for me overall. Most reliable, and easiest to make it do the things I want it to do. I literally have no reason not to run it on bare metal.

So whatever, Windows works great for me. It was crap 20 years ago, and on the server it's been lousy, but on the desktop? Linux never cut it for me.

Fair enough. I readily concede that Linux is not the best solution for everybody. Will you concede that it is the best solution for some?

Re:Just how bad

[Gr8Apes]

IE VM, available from MS, no less. And AFAIK there's no locked in IE only apps post IE6, although some devs have tried super super hard to make it so.

Re:Just how bad

[Gr8Apes]

why run Linux on bare metal?

Personally? Because it's the OS that works the best for me overall. Most reliable, and easiest to make it do the things I want it to do. I literally have no reason not to run it on bare metal.

Just: it's faster and there's no down-side.

So whatever, Windows works great for me. It was crap 20 years ago, and on the server it's been lousy, but on the desktop? Linux never cut it for me.

Fair enough. I readily concede that Linux is not the best solution for everybody. Will you concede that it is the best solution for some?

Windows is crap, period. People only think it works better because they don't know any better, or are resistant to learning a new way of working with something, because they know windows and that's the only way anything will ever work for them.

I can concede that Linux isn't the best solution for everybody, because it's still too difficult for the average person to utilize properly. They really do need the overarching helping hand like Apple or MS offers.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

"Fair enough. I readily concede that Linux is not the best solution for everybody. Will you concede that it is the best solution for some?"

I very personally know kernel developers, so yep. For them, it's certainly the best solution.

The same applies for people who are working out the bugs in software on Linux such as ZFS.

I do have a Linux workstation I use with Kali for security engagements, it's a bit ridiculous to virtualize network interfaces when you need low level access. So for that purpose, yes, it's great. It occasionally doesn't recover from hibernation, HDMI out is broken, half the Fn-keys like brightness settings don't work. It makes weird high-pitched buzzing noises in a quiet room. But that's all normal Linux stuff to me. .

For these solutions all the faults in Linux are tolerable because the work specifically requires features which aren't available elsewhere. It's not even a case of "the best tool for the job", it's the only tool for the job.

But unless I use my phone or OWA for calendaring, or get special permission to bypass the challenge response VPN on the customer firewall, it's unusable in business. Toss in the insanity of dealing with domains, MS Office, Visio, etc. and the relatively CHEAP price of the software, just makes it crazy to waste time troubleshooting Linux integration with these solutions. I have a Windows laptop for that and spend most of my time on it.

MAYBE It's nice for a nuts-and-bolts admin to have a similar environment as their servers on their desktop, but they're throwing away compatibility with heaps of software and wasting enormous amounts of time troubleshooting features which simply aren't needed on servers.

So I find it very hard to believe that Linux is a better tool for anyone on the desktop, unless they have specific needs like the ones I describe. And then? it's a lousy compromise compared to MacOS or Windows.

Re:Just how bad

[JohnFen]

So I find it very hard to believe that Linux is a better tool for anyone on the desktop, unless they have specific needs like the ones I describe.

Just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it isn't true. I literally don't have a single one of the problems you describe. It just works for me, without hassle.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

" my Linux based media server that's been humming without incident for well over 7 years"

Linux is great as a server. My Linux media server has been humming along since 2001. It's been upgraded endlessly, transferred to different media, virtualized, and keeps going... I don't use it as a front-end.

If you think answers to issues come up with 5 minutes of Googling, you're just lying. It's a lot of work, and it really ticks me off that in tech communities there are always people who like to minimize their efforts to make it sound like they're secretly geniuses or something.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

What make/model/revision of laptop are you using?

Dell XPS Ubuntu Edition or a couple-year-old Macbook of some kind... I *might* believe you've got working controls, reliable suspend/hibernate/resume and all the Laptop bells and whistles. Possibly a meticulously researched Thinkpad with a carefully chosen distribution, but then you're being dishonest, as the only reason to be so meticulous is to avoid such issues.

But anyway, the software compatibility issues, absence of groupware and commercial VPN issues are invariant.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

"I can concede that Linux isn't the best solution for everybody, because it's still too difficult for the average person to utilize properly. They really do need the overarching helping hand like Apple or MS offers."

I think there's a Dunning-Krugeresque overconfidence here.

Re:Just how bad

[JohnFen]

What make/model/revision of laptop are you using?

I have a couple of laptops, but my primary one is a Dell Inspiron I bought a couple of years ago. I'm not home right now, so I can't tell you the exact model. But it doesn't much matter, my experience has been the same with pretty much all the laptops I've used over the years.

However, I don't use Ubuntu. I never could get that distro to work right. I just use straight Debian.

I *might* believe you've got working controls, reliable suspend/hibernate/resume and all the Laptop bells and whistles.

Well, gee, how generous of you. You know, I haven't insinuated you're a liar. It would sure be nice if you could extend the same courtesy, otherwise there's no point in having a conversation at all.

But anyway, the software compatibility issues, absence of groupware and commercial VPN issues are invariant.

Remember two important things that I said: it does everything that I need it to do, and I acknowledge that Linux isn't the right choice for everybody.

That said, software compatibility has never been an issue for me. I can exchange documents with Office users without a problem, my groupware needs are well met, I have zero problems with sharing calendars with my phone and Outlook, and I couldn't care less about commercial VPNs. I do use a VPN, but it's OpenSSH and serves my needs quite well (it even works with Windows machines).

Re:Just how bad

[jwhyche]

Windows is crap, period. People only think it works better because they don't know any better, or are resistant to learning a new way of working with something, because they know windows and that's the only way anything will ever work for them.

Well that is a pretty dumbass thing to say. In virtually every desktop situation windows does as well and most of the time better than a linux desktop. For a gaming rig it does everything better than linux. Nothing touch windows for gaming.

For office work, again windows does everything better. If linux could touch windows on the desktop then it would be much higher than a mere 3%, if that much.

An there are plenty of us that work in both windows and linux. An yes, we do know better. Apparently, much better than you do.

Re:Just how bad

[Gr8Apes]

Well that is a pretty dumbass thing to say. In virtually every desktop situation windows does as well and most of the time better than a linux desktop. For a gaming rig it does everything better than linux. Nothing touch windows for gaming.

Doom server.

Re:Just how bad

[Gr8Apes]

Did you quote the wrong line there or were you attempting at some subliminal humor?

Re:Just how bad

[Bert64]

There's the key point, you started on mainframes so you were never locked in to the windows way of doing things... users who start out on windows tend to get stuck there.

Re:Just how bad

[Mr.CRC]

why run Linux on bare metal?

Uh, because Linux is the only OS I can reasonably comprehend, I have all my data organized in ways that can't be reproduced in Windows, I don't understand Windows, I hate Windows because it almost ate my history paper in '96, Linux has become far easier to use for me (because I comprehend it) whereas Windows is baffling and opaque, Linux is free, Linux doesn't spy on me, I have written many scripts that make my work-flow efficient on Linux, I feel happy using Linux and miserable using Windows, an increasing number of programs I use are becoming available on Linux so I don't even need VM, my kid started using Linux at 8 and 4 years later is still doing fine, likewise with my wife since 2000, etc.

Linux (as a desktop distribution with GUI) is an OS, so of course it sucks. But it sucks at a level that doesn't bug me most of the time. Windows sucks in a way that every single moment of using it pisses me off. And I'm not paying an arm+leg for Apple.

If there had only been Gnome however, and no KDE, my opinions about all of this could have turned out quite different.

Re:Just how bad

[Mr.CRC]

"An there are plenty of us that work in both windows and linux." I do both as well. Linux is the base, however. No way I can manage my data on Windows as efficiently as I can with Linux.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

I used to sit Debian booths doing tech support. No, really. Solving wifi issues, video drivers, grub nightmares, etc. I wouldn't touch weird things like brightness controls and suspend issues because they're flaky.... the solution was "maybe they'll fix it in an update" or "try thinkwiki", or I would put them in touch with somebody in the Debian community who had a similar machine. I didn't see a lot of Dell machines, but aside from a recent bout of XPS machines and "my company makes me" machines, they're uncommon at tech conferences.

It's very strange that you write as though you have no idea what I'm talking about, but in the next breath, you say that Ubuntu gave you too much trouble.

Ubuntu is a fantastic distro with a good LTS model. Their support for "non-free" codecs, drivers, etc, out of box is among the best.

OpenVPN is great software. It was not suitable at my most recent engagement because the network team was doing static routes, didn't know Linux and couldn't deal with maintaining an OpenVPN server in the DMZ. The helpdesk couldn't handle it because 2FA was best handled with individual certificates, distributing and managing those certificates was too much work.

Ubuntu out-of-box would do VPNs compatible with PA, but would not do challenge-response. This meant ultimately going with Cisco AnyConnect. A very expensive solution for a group of devs. Some might say the mistake was going with PA in the first place, but this is just an example.

If I correspond with Linux users on "office" documents, I use convert once, use LibreOffice for Windows and leave it in native odt/ods format. The incompatibilities in format conversion are insidious. If it has to go for publishing, I have somebody convert it to plain text and re-do all the markup and image work from scratch.

Good luck if you're using Evolution or Thunderbird+lightning for Exchange integration... it's at best a poor equivalent to Outlook Calendaring, at worst, it's a time bomb. Just use OWA and your phone, it will save you weeks of pain and embarrassment. Although maybe my standards are too high, I used to do QA writing and executing test cases for calendaring.

Don't assume that people are using Windows because they don't know any better.

Re:Just how bad

[jwhyche]

No arguments with you here on this. A few weeks ago I used sed to search and replace some words in almost one million files. It took about 40 minutes to do a search and replace on that many files. I don't even know of a windows tool off hand that would let me do that.

Windows server has a new gui-less mode but I don't know any one that uses it. If you are going create only server I have yet to see anything that beats linux or unix. An for straight up batch processing text and data, nothing does.

Just as windows has it strengths, linux has its. I know you can run webservers on windows but apache really excels on linux. Right tool for the right job.

Re:Just how bad

[Gr8Apes]

Just as windows has it strengths

It's only strength is that most people are familiar with it.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

This to me is a very honest answer.

Privacy (except for that Canonical incident), scripting, familiarity and expertise are awesome reasons to run Linux on bare metal. They're the reason I run it on my personal servers and the reason I occasionally run it on my laptop. Bash is my Windows command line and I have a Linux VM running most of the time on Windows.

This whole thread bugged me because honestly, the disservice I've seen the Linux community perform for people by recommending Linux as an alternative to Windows and MacOS is terrible.

My hat's off to you, and I share your disappointment with the desktop fragmentation around KDE, then the disaster which was Unity.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

No, I'm saying that it's very possible that the reason you can't understand why people use Windows is not because they don't understand how to use a computer properly, but it is because you don't understand the work these people do.

Re: Just how bad

[buchanmilne]

"I'm having fantastic luck with Virtualbox these past few years. I can move images from Linux to Windows to MacOS hosts no problem."

Being required to use a Mac for work at present, Virtualbox (while it's GUI support is a bit better) feels quite limiting and I am missing the flexibility KVM provided, but docker works for some of those use cases (although of course on Linux I would have had all 3 options plus potentially Xen my disposal).

"KVM has some nice properties, but it's Linux-only so who cares? VMWare is your enterprise virtualization anyway."

In my previous job, Red Hat Virtualisation (the commercially supported version of oVirt, which uses KVM) was our "Enterprise Virtualisation", and some NFV environments (provided and supported by network equipment vendors) were Openstack on KVM. RHV can import VMWare images, or copy from a vCenter Server, so "Linux-only" (I assume you mean where KVM can run) is irrelevant. You may want to give oVirt (on CentOS 7 or Debian) a try, if you have 3 spare machines to play with.

"If your company can't afford VMWare, you're probably not being paid well anyway."

My current company doesn't run VMWare, and they pay better than any company I have worked for that does run VMWare ...

It sounds like your Thonkpad has some hardware issues, and if you have issues with NetworkManager messing with your KVM bridges, maybe you should opt for training or use a solution made for KVM (e.g. RHV or one of the others) rather than blame the kernel/distro ...

Re: Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

I am using CentOS 7 on that KVM host. Did you solve the filesystem passthrough issues? virtio-9pfs doesn't exist in RHEL or CentOS. Why? ...Stability issues. It doesn't seem worth recompiling my kernel and qemu, or going to Fedora.

https://access.redhat.com/discussions/1119043

It looks like virtio-vsock might make it into 7.5.

This feature has existed in Virtualbox since 2010. VMware's hgfs goes back further. It's almost essential for the work I do and it's a big part of why I saw no reason to troubleshoot the issues with the bridged networking.

My Thinkpads are rock solid on Windows. Virtualbox is working fine too. Not sure why you would think I have hardware issues.

Re:Just how bad

[Gr8Apes]

And I was hoping for an incorrectly quoted insightful comment. What's sad is your reference is precisely the issue, yet you fail to see it.

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

If I ever run into you in person, I'm going to stuff my Linux HDD into my Thinkpad and watch you try in vain to resolve the shearing in Kodi or challenge you to squeeze smooth 1080p Youtube video out of it.

I'll boot Windows ahead of time and show you that it's not the hardware.

You might even run into me at various international Linux events. I'll be the guy people heckle because I'm running one laptop with Windows.

Re:Just how bad

[Mr.CRC]

"the disservice I've seen the Linux community perform for people by recommending Linux as an alternative to Windows and MacOS is terrible."

What do you mean?

I don't think there's any problem with recommending Linux as an alt., since it can be a credible alt. It all just depends on what you want to do with it. These days it does seem to be the case that some distros. are useable "out of the box" for most purposes. This was not the case at one time, which is quite a long time ago now.

OSes are tools, not religions. It's all about weighing the pros/cons and then just making a decision.

My personal experience is that, since I want certain things to work a certain way when I set up a Linux machine, I have to put in tremendous effort for the first few weeks to get it mostly right. But then I can just use it. For years and years and years, with rarely any problems. The only reason I ever change is because of hitting a roadblock with some software that won't work unless I upgrade.

It's also the case that when you plan a new Linux machine, you have to do your homework. I research what hardware will work, then put together my own machine.

With Windows OTOH, it seems like the hair pulling is spread out continuously. At my job it's really hilarious. Every single time I turn on the Windows machine, it has to update something. Update nag-o-grams from the central management team pop up in the middle of doing work. I usually end up muttering "how the heck does anyone actually get anything done like this?"

I actually bought two Surface Pros, because I tried to condition myself to accept that the OS is just a mechanism for running programs I want to use. But I can't figure out how to get data to be synchronized btw. them and my Linux machines. I can get close, but end up wasting a lot of time trying to reverse engineer shit – where does the IDE store it's config data, can I get the configs to be consistent on both sides without having to manually set up all my tweaks on both, etc.

I don't seem to be using them much anymore. If I had time I'd install Linux on them.

Windows in VMware is useable, since it can access my Linux files semi-directly.

"Every OS sucks..."

Don't get me started on the recent changes to KDE though. Argh! I had to go through an ordeal to figure out how to turn off that stupid Baloo shit, as did many others. The guy who insisted it be in KDE with no way to turn it off posted somewhere re his motivations. It sounded exactly like the attitude everyone in the OSS world always hated about M$.

I should seriously look into XFCE and other more "crude" desktop environments that don't do much at all except what you tell them to do.

The strange thing is, I can easily imagine how to make Linux *and* Windows much better. I don't mind stuff like the Win 8 UI being included, if there is more flexibility about whether one uses it or not. Actually I didn't find it that hard to adapt Win 8. Nor do I have many problems with Windows instability. It's just a time sink to figure out how anything works under the hood, with many cases leading to impossible dead ends because it's just not OSS.

I think M$ really blew it by chasing the phone/tablet market. If I was in charge there, I would have put up billboards saying "For those of you who still have to do actual work with your computers, it's still mainly on Windows where you can run all your industrial strength applications..."

Re:Just how bad

[Dr. Evil]

"the disservice I've seen the Linux community perform for people by recommending Linux as an alternative to Windows and MacOS is terrible."

What do you mean?

Anyone who knows enough about systems to be able to judge the pros and cons has certainly already heard of Linux

I'm stuck with xfce on everything. It has its own issues, all the themes are low-contrast for the foreground window, mimicking Apple and MS, so some customization is needed on my part. Gnome and KDE, despite being FOSS have gone amateur night designer. The design-and-abandon issues are worse.

Apple's been right about touch interfaces, keep them separate from the desktop metaphor. Balmer was a disaster for MS, and Canonical copied their mistakes, complete with Unity and Ubuntu phone. Now Libreoffice looks like it's trying to copy the Ribbon.

Syncing files is a pain. I use a mix of rsync, git, unison and Dropbox (for IOS) when needed.

As for updates, just this weekend I was on the road and needed LibreOffice Calc on my Kali box... it's a Debian rolling-release. To install Calc, I had to install 100's of MBs of updates, when it installed, the icons were all dead. Probably fixable with a reboot, but whatever. Kali's not a desktop distro. Really should have used my VPN to reach home and RDP'd into my Windows box. It would have been less trouble... RDP on Windows is excellent.

My personal experience is that, since I want certain things to work a certain way when I set up a Linux machine, I have to put in tremendous effort for the first few weeks to get it mostly right. ...

It's also the case that when you plan a new Linux machine, you have to do your homework. I research what hardware will work, then put together my own machine.

This is consistent with my experience, although often the answer to an issue is "you should have picked different hardware". Options with notebooks are far, far more limited. People who say "Linux works on teh everything!!" are very tiring.

My next Thinkpad I'll look at the model-type of Thinkpad with Ubuntu preinstalled... and probably get the OEM Windows on it anyway: https://certification.ubuntu.com/desktop/models/?category=Laptop&vendors=Lenovo

Chromebooks?

[MBGMorden]

I wonder if this includes Chromebooks? If it does, that's likely the uptick. They've saw decent adoption rates. My niece in third grade was actually just given one for the school year to take home.

Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[Anonymous Coward]

I really don't get why people consider Android to be Linux.

Is the Linux kernel present? Yeah, but it's buried so deeply that most Android developers, and pretty much all Android users, have absolutely no idea that it's there.

When you develop Android apps you have pretty much no direct interaction with the Linux kernel. You aren't writing POSIX-style applications that could be ported to the BSDs or macOS or Solaris or HP-UX with ease. You aren't using the GUI toolkits commonly used with other Linux systems. You're actually writing apps for what's effectively a proprietary Java-based environment.

When you use Android, you really aren't using the GNU utilities, systemd, X, Wayland, or any of the desktop environments typically found on a Linux system. You're using other software that is quite specific to Android.

Android is "Linux" in the most minimal sense. It clearly doesn't resemble other traditional Linux distributions. In fact, that's probably why it has been successful: a lot of the userland software that makes Linux a rather hostile environment for users has been totally discarded and replaced with far more effective, albeit essentially proprietary, replacements!

Google could probably silently switch the Linux kernel to the NetBSD kernel or some other kernel, and nobody else would have any idea it happened. That's how irrelevant and hidden the Linux kernel is to Android developers and users.

Perhaps that's what will eventually happen with something like the Fuchsia project.

We shouldn't consider Android to be an example of Linux being popular. I think it's the opposite: we should see it as Android (that is: what's essentially the proprietary software and environment running on top of the Linux kernel) being popular, and the Linux kernel just happens to be along for the ride.

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[GameboyRMH]

Excellent post, shame I have no mod points today. GNU tools on a BSD kernel would far more closely resemble "Linux" to the user than Android does (which is not at all).

Re: Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[MBGMorden]

Meh - at least on the desktop, few users directly use the GNU crap either - it's just as buried as the kernel.

GNU/x.org/Gnome/Firefox/Linux just doesn't roll off the tongue too well, so the desktop system that we're all familar with is just "Linux". The smartphone OS, despite running the Linux kernel, is "Android".

The kernel might not be the whole system, but for one the whole system got colloquially named after the kernel - on the other it didn't.

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the Linux kernel present? Yeah, but it's buried so deeply that most Android developers, and pretty much all Android users, have absolutely no idea that it's there.

And that's exactly why Android is considered a Linux operating system.

By George, in fact I think you stumbled upon the perfect criteria for whether something should be considered a Linux operating system!
[x] Is it an an operating system?
[x] Is the Linux kernel present?
[x] Is it buried deeply enough that most developers and pretty much none of its users know it's there unless told?

When you develop Android apps you have pretty much no direct interaction with the Linux kernel. You aren't writing POSIX-style applications that could be ported to the BSDs or macOS or Solaris or HP-UX with ease. You aren't using the GUI toolkits commonly used with other Linux systems. You're actually writing apps for what's effectively a proprietary Java-based environment.

You're still making it sound like Linux.

When you use Android, you really aren't using the GNU utilities, systemd, X, Wayland, or any of the desktop environments typically found on a Linux system. You're using other software that is quite specific to Android.

Here you are attempting to argue your claim with an argument whose entire premise is the assumption that your claim is true: the petitio principii fallacy.
Either we assume Android is not a Linux operating system, in which case the argument is pointless because your claim is true by assumption. or that it is a Linux OS, in which case it does use a desktop environment typically found on a Linux system after all!

Besides, those are odd choices for examples. Plenty of use-cases don't involve any display server at all,and the presence of GNU utilities is hardly a requirement (since we're not discussing whether Android should be called GNU/Android). A host that uses Tomcat to let users run apps on a Java VM via the web is further removed from your idea of Linux than a host using Android to let users run apps on a Dalvik VM via the Android UI. systemd and Wayland weren't even released when Android first came out - did using either of those disqualify OSes from being called Linux?

Google could probably silently switch the Linux kernel to the NetBSD kernel or some other kernel, and nobody else would have any idea it happened. That's how irrelevant and hidden the Linux kernel is to Android developers and users.

See, it's just like Debian :)

We shouldn't consider Android to be an example of Linux being popular. I think it's the opposite: we should see it as Android (that is: what's essentially the proprietary software and environment running on top of the Linux kernel) being popular, and the Linux kernel just happens to be along for the ride.

Linux is a program to use as a basis for an OS. Android is an OS. The kernel is not a matter for end users to be concerned about unless they're looking for drivers. The concept of Linux being popular basically amounts to whether there exist operating systems build on it that are popular. Android is popular on phones, and that makes Linux a popular choice for phones.

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[cheesybagel]

I've got bash installed on Android but I kinda see your point.

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[jedidiah]

The modern Linux userland is not user hostile.

What modern Linux lacks as a desktop operating system is application support, not features in the core OS. This is the advantage that Android has over conventional Linux.

It is a brand and an ecosystem with a lot of marketing and developer mind share behind it.

Your entire post is a stupid red herring including the nonsense about the number of obscure distributions that exist, a metric that only TROLLS are even aware of.

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[MSG]

I really don't get why people consider Android to be Linux. ... You aren't writing POSIX-style applications

DING DING DING

You've stumbled upon the very reason for the name GNU/Linux: That platform implements (with a few modifications) the POSIX specification. Linux, by itself, does not. Linux implements no specification other than its own proprietary API.

Linux is an OS whose target audience is primarily system developers. Thus, Android is Linux. WebOS is Linux. Tizen is Linux. Your WiFi AP's OS is probably Linux.

GNU/Linux is an OS whose target audience is slightly different. Typically the people who choose a GNU/Linux OS will be server admins and application developers, and desktop users.

We shouldn't consider Android to be an example of Linux being popular.

Yes, we should. We should see it as an example of Linux being popular with its target audience: system developers. New platforms are mostly built on Linux, because it's a decent OS for the development of new platforms.

Re: Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[MSG]

GNU/x.org/Gnome/Firefox/Linux just doesn't roll off the tongue too well

No one would suggest that you call it that, because the combination of GNU, X.org, GNOME, and Firefox doesn't implement any specification you can name.

You do, however, know the name of the specification that's implemented by GNU/Linux: POSIX. (Yes, I know that GNU is not strictly conformant).

Linux, by itself, does not implement POSIX. It implements its own proprietary interface.

Android implements its own interface, and when you refer to Android, it's clear what interface you mean. The same reasoning that justifies calling Android "Android" would conclude that you should call the desktop and server OS "GNU/Linux."

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[schweini]

While you're right that Android or ChromeOS aren't 'real' Linux, I do think that They are very Linux-like. The point of "linux on the desktop" for me was always to break the OS monoculture that Windows created. The whole Android/ChomeOS ecosystems are way more fun and hacker-friendly than Windows ever was. And that happened because of the underlying Linux systems, and the culture that goes with it, IMHO.

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[nasch]

(since we're not discussing whether Android should be called GNU/Android)

If we followed Stallman's advice, it would be Android/Linux! (that's Stallman who goes on about GNU/Linux, right?)

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[Tough Love]

the Linux kernel just happens to be along for the ride

Sorry, you come across as way out of touch. You do realize that Google's entire infrastructure, all the search, AI, services, etc etc, runs on Linux? Not just Android? Linux is hardly "along for the ride". Without Linux, Google simply would not be what it is.

Re:Android is not really a "Linux" smartphone OS.

[LubosD]

What a load of nonsense. No clue why this post got so modded up.

I do embedded Linux development (besides Android platform porting) and when you do embedded Linux, you also don't use "GNU utilities, systemd, X, Wayland, or any of the desktop environments typically found on a Linux system". We use Busybox (which is also used on Android, at least optionally), custom scripts and EGL for rendering.

But I see no reason for not calling these embedded systems Linux.

Google could probably silently switch the Linux kernel to the NetBSD kernel or some other kernel, and nobody else would have any idea it happened.

That also bull****. Have you ever heard of the NDK?

That's like pre-OS X PowerPC based Mac numbers ...

[drnb]

That's like pre-OS X, as in the 1980s style Mac OS (cooperative threading, no preemption, no protection, etc) PowerPC based (before the switch to Intel CPUs) Mac numbers. Congrats.

You must work at a US corporation

[HBI]

Your ability to focus on the current quarter is astounding. Look a little further back.

Desktop, not an appliance

[drnb]

You mean "traditional desktop computers".

No, they mean "desktop" period. Yes Linux is used behind the scenes in many appliances and servers where users never see or touch Linux. The point of "desktop Linux" is that users see it, use it, and choose it; unlike in appliances, which sort of includes phones.

Best example is Chromebooks

Agan, an appliance. Linux is not seen, used or chosen by the user. Not "desktop".

Been using it for 10+ years now

[AntronArgaiv]

Linux -- it doesn't suck any worse than Windows.

Seriously, I use it because it does what I need it to do, and lets me control when updates are done (with no telemetry or hidden controls).

// Mint MATE 17.3 at the moment...

Re:Been using it for 10+ years now

[Major_Disorder]

Mint Cinnamon 17.3 here.
I use it because I swear a lot less using Linux, than when I am forced to use windows.

Re:Been using it for 10+ years now

[VeryFluffyBunny]

Using Lubuntu on an old MacBook Pro. Works great for 95% of what I do. The creative arts stuff though... still have to dual boot into Windows to get a decent driver for my Wacom graphics tablet and run Adobe for reasonably productive graphics software. Yes, there are Linux alternatives but they don't work anywhere near as well for what I do. I'd love to go all Linux because I like it and it's a pain to switch OS', especially when Windows takes so damn long to boot.

Re:Looking at the trend

[drnb]

It seems clear that the losses in MacOS have appeared over in Linux.

No. Both growing but at different rates results in the same sort of numbers.

Oh, this is easy.

[sootman]

> According to Net Applications, the desktop market share of
> Linux jumped from 2.53 percent in July to 3.37 percent in August.
> There's no explanation for what amounted for this growth.

A 30% jump in one month, after two decades of "YYYY will be the year of Linux on the desktop!" ?

The explanation is obvious: bad data.

Re:Oh, this is easy.

[Myrdos]

If you look at the rest of their data you can see it varies by up to 0.5 percent each month. The data's fine, but it needs error bars. (which would probably be about 0.5% high).

Re:Oh, this is easy.

[sootman]

Ah, nice. Yeah, if you graph their data on a reasonable scale, this is what you get: http://i.imgur.com/bzLMMX5.png

Re:Oh, this is easy.

[Kjella]

A 30% jump in one month, after two decades of "YYYY will be the year of Linux on the desktop!" ? The explanation is obvious: bad data.

Almost certainly, it would take an extreme swing in sales/installations to make the number of active Linux devices swing 30% in a month. After all, the vast majority of people use the same OS this month as they used last month. If you say people make an OS choice every 3 years, you'd at most expect 100%/(12 months/years*3 years) = 2.8% change per month even if everybody switched to a new OS. Also it's not collaborated by other sources, the desktop market share on statcounter has barely moved, Linux has gone from 1.74% to 1.79%. When these curves swing it's because there's been some kind of change in how they identify devices and platforms, either because they changed the definition or because new devices challenge it.

Re:Oh, this is easy.

[sootman]

> Lies, damn lies and statistics. 30% of a big number
> is completely different to 30% of a small number.

Right back at you. They are small numbers in percentages, but you DO realize we're still talking about millions of people, right? Assuming there are a million desktop Linux users, do you really think 300,000 people picked it up in one month? And the number of Linux users is in the multiple millions, so your case just gets weaker and weaker.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... :
"The Linux Counter uses an alternate method of estimating adoption, asking users to register and then using a mathematical model to estimate the total number of desktop users. In November 2014 this method estimated 73 million Linux users."

Let's just pretend those numbers are WILDLY optimistic and are off by a factor of TEN, giving "only" 7.3 million Linux users. So you're saying 2.2 MILLION people just spontaneously started using Linux last month?

> But it had only 2.53, so there's nothing suspicious.

LOLOL. You're such a dumbass.

> You do realise that it's just an in-joke, right?

Look at my UID. I've been here nearly 20 years. In the early days, it was said with sincerity. THEN it became a joke.

Here's a LATE example -- STILL almost ten years old -- when True Believers (tm) were still around.
https://linux.slashdot.org/sto...

"Over at Maximum PC, we're betting that Linux will pick up unprecedented momentum in the coming year. With phenomenal new distros, swelling international support, and a little extra momentum from Dell, we think Linux is poised to exploit the current atmosphere of doubt surrounding Vista and pick up serious traction in '08."

Re:Oh, this is easy.

[erapert]

But which is the bad data? The data leading up to the current measurements or the current measurements?

Bad data! Mac is a lot more than 2x Linux

[Khopesh]

I don't know how they collect their data, but it can't possibly be true. This has Linux rather consistently around half as popular as Mac, suggesting that for every two people you know with Macs, there's a third running Linux on the desktop. I don't know of any regions in which this would be true.

Furthermore, I find it disturbing that there's a lack of any data for FreeBSD, OpenBSD, or even Other when the specificity is in hundredths of a percent. That means if the sample had 20,000 "desktop" users, 1188 run Mac, 674 run Linux, and less than 1 run any of the BSDs or something else. The sum of these numbers is 100.01%, so Windows + Mac + Linux includes at least two values that were rounded up, further supporting the theory that these are absolute zeros. Most studies like this tend to show more "Other" than Linux.

Re:Bad data! Mac is a lot more than 2x Linux

[JohnFen]

This has Linux rather consistently around half as popular as Mac, suggesting that for every two people you know with Macs, there's a third running Linux on the desktop.

This actually correlates reasonably well with what I observe in my area. Almost everyone is running Windows of one flavor or another (about 50/50 between Win 7 and Win 10), and of those that don't, there are about twice as many Mac users as Linux.

I'll bet there's a great deal of regional variation in these sorts of things, though.

Re:Bad data! Mac is a lot more than 2x Linux

[nasch]

You don't find it plausible BSD users are less than 1 in 20,000? I've never met one or seen it, and don't even recall anyone ever mentioning it outside of places like slashdot. There could still be 10 thousand or so in the US at that percentage.

Easy to explain

[DontBeAMoran]

1. Microsoft Windows 10 which removes user control and adds spying/telemetry/etc.

2. Tim Cook as the CEO of Apple believes iPad Pro can replace computers, macOS is receiving mostly visual updates that do nothing and even removes useful features for pro users and Mac updates are a joke, they remove things users need, add features no one asked for and the machines are more overpriced than ever.

Re:Easy to explain

[DontBeAMoran]

I don't even use Linux, apart from Web servers to which I connect for work.
Me, I have a Windows 10 PC which is only used for games and an old 2010 Mac mini for work/etc.

Re:Easy to explain

[thegarbz]

1. Microsoft Windows 10 which removes user control and adds spying/telemetry/etc.

2. Tim Cook as the CEO of Apple believes iPad Pro can replace computers, macOS is receiving mostly visual updates that do nothing and even removes useful features for pro users and Mac updates are a joke, they remove things users need, add features no one asked for and the machines are more overpriced than ever.

Yeah sure. After 2 years of Windows 10 without any upgrade or anything out of the ordinary, a long time after the release of the iPad Pro, and out of bounds with any MacOS release, suddenly from one month to the other there was a near 50% increase in Linux usage.

You're right. It is easy to explain when your mouth (or fingers) are not attached to a functioning brain.

Re:Easy to explain

[DontBeAMoran]

You're right. It is easy to explain when your mouth (or fingers) are not attached to a functioning brain.

I wanted to make sure you'd feel comfortable with me. /MI2

Re:Easy to explain

[Zontar The Mindless]

I'm a very regular Linux desktop user, thanks very much. And I'm pretty normal as well--no third eye or any of that nonsense here.

You were saying...?

Re:Easy to explain

[JohnFen]

Be fair. No /. commenter is a "normal person".

No explanation?

[ilsaloving]

I seriously doubt that there's no explanation. IMO, it's a desperately needed correction that has been a very long time coming.

Windows 10 is the most user-hostile operating system Microsoft has ever released in their history.

Apple continues to jack up their prices on increasingly stupid hardware and are generally doing everything they can to take the piss out of their consumer base.

Chromebooks are providing an inexpensive, viable linux-based option that is is taking advantage of the not just the general frustration of the above, but also it's finding a sweet spot for people that do very little localhost work that can't just as, or more easily be, done through cloud services.

Re:No explanation?

[JohnFen]

Not even close. Windows 8 was certainly hostile -- even more hostile than Windows 10.

However, the history of computers encompasses an awful lot of operating systems that were worse than anything Microsoft has produced. Without even trying to hard, I can come up a half dozen mainframe OSes from the 60s and 70s that make any Windows OS look like heaven in comparison.

Re:No explanation?

[EETech1]

The rest *haven't turned their computer on in like forever" and are using a phone.

Re:No explanation?

[ilsaloving]

Simple. Windows 8 has a brain damaged UI, but at least you still had control of your machine.

Windows 10 has a slightly less stupid UI, but Microsoft has taken away control of the most critical elements of computer administration. On top of that, their update QA has gone down the toilet, to the point where they routinely knock out hunderds of thousands of computers on a routine basis.

So I guess I can see why they are forcing updates. If people had a choice, they wouldn't update at all.

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[shaitand]

"on the server. They've fixed most of the major issues. You still have to reboot them for no good reason, but with load balancing that's not really an issue."

The biggest issue is that it's a less capable platform with more overhead and no upside except where it supports windows desktops. Nobody uses SQL server, IIS, or SharePoint because they are the best answer to their problems, they use them because of interaction with other products in the windows ecosystem (including things produced by windows focused developers). Without the windows desktop there won't be new generations of developers and admins who took the easy path of developing and learning on the windows platform their desktop runs on. Also without the windows desktop, you have no AD servers, without AD servers the rest of it becomes a major headache and platform doesn't make sense.

Smartphones are personal computers

[Atmchicago]

As a matter of fact I know quite a number of people who no longer own a computer and do all their personal tasks ONLY on a smartphone.

Smartphones are computers -- in fact, because they fit in our pockets and come with with "personal assistants," they are the most "Personal Computers" we have ever had!

Yah I ditched my Desktop for a phone

[future assassin]

and now I'm so happy processing my photos, internet browsing, playing games and just about everything with a 5" screen held in my hands a few inches from my face, yet again experiencing Nintendo thumb from the early 90's

Photography

[future assassin]

With RAW/Image processors like Rawthereapee and Darktable I've seen quite a few photographers switch to Linux. Sure if you like to cook your images beyond what you saw in the camera you'll stick to Windows for Photoshop.

Re:Photography

[markdavis]

>"Sure if you like to cook your images beyond what you saw in the camera you'll stick to Windows for Photoshop."

Or you will learn GIMP and do maybe 90% of the same thing, depending on your needs. If you are not a publisher or designer who needs CMYK, needs to edit using some of the super-duper filters/tools, or have to live in an Adobe-centric team, GIMP will get the job done just fine.

Re:Photography

[future assassin]

I'm all for Linux and that's all I use 99% of the time but to me GIMP is just not as user/tool friendly as Photoshop. Now before anyone gets their mouth frothy yes I don't expect GIMP to do what a billion dollar commercial program can do but using the tools in GIMP is just frustrating as its not as smooth/easy as in PS. I could possibly overlook that if GIMP had proper adjustment layers which I think would bring in quite a few people if/when that becomes available.

Re:Photography

[cheesybagel]

The problem with GIMP is the tools lack polish. Everything always feels half baked. Inkscape has the same issues only worse.

Fonts and anti-aliasing quality have always been a problem. The tools typically lag behind. One example would be when the healing brush tool came out.

Re:Photography

[markdavis]

I don't disagree with anything you said. But GIMP is still very, very useful and can still do most of what most people need.

Re:"No explanation"

[PPH]

That's a 33% increase. Never mind that the baseline is low.

Re:Oblivious

[arth1]

Yeah, I wonder whether the Windows 10 installations with Ubuntu count as Linux here, which gives it a boost.
It shouldn't, any more than a Linux host with WINE should count towards Windows installations.

Old people!

[internet-redstar]

We nerds don't want to clean viruses of the computers of our parents... so we install Linux for them!

Total box share or total sales share?

[WillAffleckUW]

We buy expensive blade servers that run Linux, so we show up in both stats, but if you do metrics by market share, the Win boxen will always show up with a larger market share than the (cheaper) Linux boxen.

Statistics are only useful when you understand what your numbers mean. If I did a map of electoral votes by geographic area, I'd be seeing a vast map of red. Red in areas with very few people. I would have to use a dot plot to show the correct distribution, with each dot centered on the voting boundaries, and representing an equal quantity of voters or voter shares for states.

So, if it is increasing on a market share basis, it's corporations buying Linux blade servers that are causing the increase, unless you literally buy a pre-made Linux box yourself and pay tens of thousands of dollars for it. But you're all cheap, like me, so your $500 purchase of a box shows up as only $500, not $25,000.

Re:Total box share or total sales share?

[WillAffleckUW]

Nope. OS free. Bought in parts. Costs around $4000 if bought as a unit.

But the Windows OEM OS disk did cost $75.

Re:Looking at the trend

[markdavis]

>"Unless it takes 10 Linux desktops to replace each Mac, the math doesn't seem to work..."

It does if you are looking at price :)

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[Anonymous Coward]

SQL Server is pretty much the best answer to a lot of problems I have to deal with on a day-to-day basis. The alternative is Oracle, but it's not "better" by any measure I've found, and I'm just not into S&M enough to try it.

IIS is a perfectly capable web server, with the added benefit of .Net web apps, which are far and away the nicest to work with IMNSHO. But IIS itself is nothing special. Just "the" web server for Windows, with no competition because it's vendor-provided and it's unsexy infrastructure stuff, so nobody bothers to compete.

Sharepoint sucks massive quantities of elephant nuts.

Re:Desktop is dead for consumers

[Anne Thwacks]

And for those that still have not got a table yet, help is at hand ...

http://www.andrewgrillet.uk/

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[Gr8Apes]

SQL Server is pretty much the best answer to a lot of problems I have to deal with on a day-to-day basis. The alternative is Oracle, but it's not "better" by any measure I've found, and I'm just not into S&M enough to try it.

Oracle is a non-starter in any real system unless you've already been hooked into their eco system. Try postgresql, mariadb, cassandra, or any number of other systems to create whatever you need. SQL Server is the old Sybase server that was so terrible that they thought they'd hoodwink MS by acepting money for a dead codebase. Unfortunately, they didn't realize MS's plans were to have SQL Server be the replacement for MS Access, which is like a script kiddie's answer to a real DB. In that scenario, MS succeeded, and sold it cheap enough to get a lot of Sybase customers to jump ship instead of updating to the new Sybase DB that cost multiples more. Really bad strategy plan on Sybase's part and eventually killed the company.

IIS is a perfectly capable web server, with the added benefit of .Net web apps, which are far and away the nicest to work with IMNSHO....Sharepoint sucks massive quantities of elephant nuts.

This is laughable. Sharepoint and IIS are two sides of the same coin. IIS just started with more competition and had to be prettier, but I can assure you compared to the competition, it sucks just as badly as Sharepoint does compared to its competition. Well, if the "competition" decided to have a lobotomy first to dumb itself down enough to be on Sharepoint's level.

Re:Looking at the trend

[Gr8Apes]

I don't know, I saw a brand new mac mini advertised for $329? yesterday. Not sure you can get a competing Linux desktop for $33.

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[jedidiah]

> SQL Server is pretty much the best answer to a lot of problems I have to deal with on a day-to-day basis. The alternative is Oracle, but it's not "better" by any measure I've found, and I'm just not into S&M enough to try it.

It has plenty of it's own forms of self-flaggelation. Don't let the shiny shiny fool you. It's got plenty of annoying syntax quirks of it's own. Plus the shiny-shiny isn't all it's cracked up to be.

For the trivial stuff, Oracle isn't really S&M. For the non-trivial stuff, Microsoft will quickly get left behind.

Habits of the "can't be bothered" crowd don't help. This contributes greatly to MS apps built on SQL Server imploding when they grow to become non-trivial. It doesn't help that they (sqlserver developers) indulge in scary embarrassing shit that hobbyists using mysql wouldn't even pull.

They can't even be arsed to read or follow Microsoft's own documentation and insist on on indulging in the stupid despite.

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[jedidiah]

> Oracle is a non-starter in any real system unless you've already been hooked into their eco system. Try postgresql, mariadb, cassandra, or any number of other systems to create whatever you need.

Oracle for whatever faults you want to lay on it is at least robust. It is not built for speed. It's built for robustness. For a lot of serious work, that matters. Systems that don't really believe in integrity can't be swapped out for any of the serious DBMS products.

Some people actually care about their data.

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[Gr8Apes]

> Oracle is a non-starter in any real system unless you've already been hooked into their eco system.

Some people actually care about their data.

If you care about your data, you won't use Oracle at all. I care about my data's security, and Oracle's licensing clause that they can come in and demand lots and lots of information is pretty much a deal killer.

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[shaitand]

Yes, but all the systems the GP mentioned are also robust Oracle is just well known and an easy sell in Enterprise. It's like the old "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" mantra.

Re:Looking at the trend

[cheesybagel]

The problem with market percentages is that total desktop market size isn't constant either.

Re:Looking at the trend

[cheesybagel]

So what's the price of a Raspberry Pi?

Re:Biased data selection ?

[JohnFen]

Those geeks that blow away the OS that comes with the machine and build their own systems from scratch are much less likely to be interested in their business news stories

Maybe, but an awful lot of them do follow business news. I wouldn't hazard a guess about the percentage vs the general population.

More likely, the 3% are the ones that mistakenly clicked a poorly identified link to a business news story and accidentally got counted.

Don't forget that a lot of them do what I do: spoof the browser and machine IDs in order to be able to use those brain-dead websites that refuse to function if you aren't using the browser/machine that the website designers think you should use.

So I get counted as Internet Explorer running Windows 7, even though neither of those things are true.

Not so surprising.

[JoelBarriosDueñas]

My company runs almost entirely on Linux. Both servers and desktops. The only non-Linux desktop we have is one used exclusively for invoices (Mexico's electronic invoices technology is a little hostile towards non-Windows platforms), and we access it through RDP from Linux Desktops.

due to all the Raspberry Pi installations

[Locutus]

Those are adding up to real numbers and Microsoft has noticed. They are pushing into Adafruit and others to get Microsoft tech on these embedded devices. Lots and lots of hackers and wana-b-hackers are getting Pi's and putting NOOB or other on them and it's a full Linux desktop so when they see and are amazed they fire up the browser and check their favorite web sites. This kicks up the numbers.

And all the rPi clones is helping too but most of those developers are probably already running Linux on desktops.

LoB

Re:Looking at the trend

[Gr8Apes]

The better question is how many Raspberry Pi's does it take to equal 1 mac mini?

And Google is dropping Linux and the GPL

[drnb]

And Google is dropping Linux and the GPL.

"With Fuchsia, Google would not only be dumping the Linux kernel, but also the GPL: the OS is licensed under a mix of BSD 3 clause, MIT, and Apache 2.0. Dumping Linux might come as a bit of a shock, but the Android ecosystem seems to have no desire to keep up with upstream Linux releases. Even the Google Pixel is still stuck on Linux Kernel 3.18, which was first released at the end of 2014."

https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...

Re:And Google is dropping Linux and the GPL

[Tough Love]

Google is dropping Linux and the GPL.

See -> believe. Or translated into English: Good luck with that.

Re:Doesn't take much to add GNU tools

[drnb]

FYI ... Google is abandoning both Linux and the GPL.
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...

Re:There is some fishy data there

[Bert64]

Not really, many people don't or can't upgrade for a variety of reasons...

No admin rights.
Slow or metered connection (updates are large).
Older OS that won't run the newer versions of chrome.
Updates turned off for whatever reason.

Proprietary software is always untrustworthy.

[jbn-o]

Nonfree software didn't recently "add spying/telemetry/etc". The malware was a part of nonfree OSes (such as Windows, iOS, MacOS) for a long time in both the OS and various apps. Here are a few examples concerning Windows: the backdoor in Windows by which Microsoft can impose any change it wants and when this was used, and who can forget Microsoft's choice to trick or force Windows 7 and Vista users into Windows 10 "upgrades". Since that software was nonfree even technical users and developers couldn't legally remove the malware and distribute the improved malware-free variant to help others.

When it came to spying, Windows 10 gave users a UI that apparently deceived them into believing that the user had a say in how much their OS ratted them out. Windows 10 shipped with bad defaults for preserving user's privacy and continued "talking to Microsoft" (as Condé Nast put it) "even if a user turn[ed] off its Bing search and Cortana features, and activate[ed] the privacy-protection settings" (quoting the GNU Project). So now Microsoft assures Windows users things are better, but one has to wonder for whom and what users are legally allowed to do if they discover the proprietor's words aren't how the software behaves.

thanks satya

[enrique556]

desktop market share of Linux jumped from 2.53 percent in July to 3.37 percent in August. There's no explanation for what accounted for this growth

Besides the unlikelihood of this statistic being accurate, I'll take a wind stab in the dark and say that windows 10 being a steaming pile of shit that people fucking hate more with every update might have something to do with it.

Re: Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[KGIII]

I'd just like to take this moment to say, "Fuck Oracle."

That is all, actually.

Re:Looking at the trend

[Heir Of The Mess]

There's another factor that should be taken into account, last month is also when Microsoft released Ubuntu for Windows 10 in the Windows store. So potentially a whole lot of new Linux desktops got installed as people were trying out the new functionality.

Re:Believe it or not Microsoft's been gaining

[erapert]

It's a pain the butt to "servicify" any arbitrary executable (one which hasn't been specifically built for such a scenario) such that it starts and stops with the OS without a particular user being logged in-- a task that's trivial on Linux especially if you're using nodejs (for example, use pm2 if you want a really sweet process manager).

We wound up using Non-Sucking Service Manager to accomplish this.
I'm not totally averse to such solutions, but it's really disappointing that M$ hasn't bothered to supply such a tool and leaves users to fend for themselves. With Linux there's no assumptions: it's very much geared for DIY and you get what you pay for. What are we paying M$ for if not to provide exactly these kinds of tools? If I have to scrounge around and curse and kick things into working then why not just use Linux on my server for free with less hassle?

You still have to reboot them for no good reason, but with load balancing that's not really an issue.

Rebooting a server?! Is this some kind of joke?

No, I don't consider Windows to be a good server OS.