Indeed… is going up… about 1 percent in 5 years… do we really need to wait 250 years ???
Honestly, most of the linux developers need to think a bit how to improve the whole stuff, and i can say, GUI play a huge role here.
I think peoples need to start to identify whats the problem with linux and why is not adopted at lage scale like MS OS’s.
Agreed, linux have lots of problems. Lets fix them? Who are the best candidates? Installers? GUIS? Updaters? Security? Packages systems? Libs versions? Games? WTF i can continue all day…
I say also, remove the **** old compatibility with old systems, write down everything around today computers.
Fine, you have an ancient computer, will be a distro for you, or grab an older version.
Thanks for reading, maybe peoples involved or who cares about linux get any ideas from that.
PS. As you can see, MAC is going up for a couple of reasons (even cost money)… try to identify them.
You’re forgetting one important thing - Microsoft established their foothold a decade before Linux was even implemented for the first time - they were able to build their Microsoft DOS / Windows culture into large corporations during the 80s and 90s - with much of the software written directly for Windows in mind, porting it over to other systems would have been ludicrously expensive.
I can make the same list about almost every other operating system - each of them have their problems.
Not a realistic idea - even Vista has compatibility modes with 90s applications because businesses and even individuals still need them.
Again not a good idea nor a sensible one - if you tell people to grab older versions, you’ll effectively tell them to run out of date software putting both their machines and their privacy into risk.
Macs are doing well because they don’t have to support a large variety of hardware - that’s one of the key selling points. When you isolate certain components you can design your entire system around them - improving both stability and compatibility also they have a unified system - it’s like if you only had one Linux distribution.
Whilst I’m in favour of reducing the number of Linux distributions, other don’t agree - it’s their choice.
Macs also have a different design philosophy in mind, many of the applications rely on the “big app that gets the job done” whilst on most Unices it has always been “small applications that do their things well” patchwork mentality.
ok…but, from your posts in other fora here i think you now have about
three days Linux experience, and all of that with version 11 and KDE4,
and none of it totally pleasing…am i right?
if so, then let me gently suggest at this point you might be better off
to do less throwing of suggestions and more INITIAL tuning of your system…
–
DenverD (Linux Counter 282315)
A Texan in Denmark
Because Linux isn’t windows, there is a small learning curve. Just like any other OS, if someone used linux all there life and then tried windows, they’d think it’s jacked up
Things like proprietary codecs can’t come with suse because it’s illegal to have them in many countries, let alone distribute them(yes that includes the US and many European countries)
IMHO the major reason is Microsoft have a monopoly and have the OEM new PC OS market sewn up. This has also ensured that they have a monopoly on getting hardware manufacturers to always provide drivers for Windoze OS, with priority over every other OS, and often to the exclusion of every other OS.
I also don’t believe the amount of “under-the-table” deals, nor the “arm-twisting” deals that have taken place wrt Microsoft to ensure they keep the OEM OS market for PCs, has come to light yet for the general public to fully understand.
In general, wrt monopolies, it takes a very long time (and sometimes only government intervention can succeed) to crack a monopoly.
I guess the main reason is that the most new pcs are sold with a preinstalled oem windows version (the most users then don’t even think about their os they just use it). The bigger part in the stats are then the home pcs where the preinstalled windows runs. In the other sectors the stats may look different (server market for example).
On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 15:16:03 +0000, lasterror wrote:
> I agree with learning curve, EVERYTHING in that world have.
>
> But, i was talking about the OS percents, Linux imho have much more
> advantages that any other OS on the market today, and still is under
> 4%… why???
Because people use applications. Applications get built for popular
platforms. In order for Linux to become popular, software developers
need to develop applications for it, but it’s not economically viable to
do so until the OS reaches a certain userbase.
So you end up in a cycle of apps becoming available when the OS becomes
popular enough to sustain the development efforts, but that doesn’t
happen until the apps are there.
The thing that breaks the cycle for Linux is the development of OSS
equivalents of the apps. But that takes time, especially when people are
doing the development work unpaid (ie, they have real jobs to put food on
the table).
So if you really want to see Linux take off, learn to program and
contribute to a project or two.
Also you need to throw in the fact, that regardless of anything else, people are conservative when it comes to computing. That and most folks only want to “write e-mail, do a little IM’ing, browse the web and play games”.
It is somewhat of a paradox. Many devs overestimate what users desire but without that “oversight” a lot of features that get adopted by the masses never get off the ground.
lasterror wrote:
> PS. As you can see, MAC is going up for a couple of reasons (even cost
> money)… try to identify them.
Well, I’ll take a shot. Given that Macs are becoming popular platforms for web-app development (platform of choice for RoR etc.), and given the fact that you’re pulling statistics from a website targeted at web developers to establish your argument (???), I think I can draw a line to connect those two points.
I’ll also point out that in trying to establish the idea that linux isn’t succeeding, you’ve selectively produced web stats that actually show linux ahead of where most of the webstat sites place it (usually <2%).
In doing so, you’ve inadvertently weakened your argument by refering to an area where linux has a natural inclination. Development.
I only bring this up to point out that the myth that linux is supposed to supplant Windows must die. Linux is an alternative to Windows, offering advantages and disadvantages, it’s not a replacement. People need to choose what works best for them. And judging from the stats you pointed to, web dev is apparently one area where linux has higher penetration than in the general market. That’s a good thing. And that’s what we need to think about. Who can most benefit from using linux (and don’t say everyone)? And where can we focus our strengths? And then what can we do to make it better?
On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:36:04 +0000, Slammer64 wrote:
> Also you need to throw in the fact, that regardless of anything else,
> people are conservative when it comes to computing. That and most folks
> only want to “write e-mail, do a little IM’ing, browse the web and play
> games”.
And write documents - I think most people do that as well.
But when it comes to Linux, it handles all but the “play games” bit
really well, and Linux gaming isn’t exactly in the dark ages.
Name 10 good comercial games comparable with windows top games… 1…2…3… and…
Thats one of the reasons why peoples dont switch to linux massively… actually, is a chain reaction, the games aren’t for linux in same quantity as windows, because of developers, why developers don’t do them for linux also?? You got it… answer here…
>
> Thats one of the reasons why peoples dont switch to linux massively…
> actually, is a chain reaction, the games aren’t for linux in same
> quantity as windows, because of developers, why developers don’t do
> them for linux also?? You got it… answer here…
>
The whole “gaming” thing is overblown, me thinks. It’s a narrow market, all things considered, and consoles are taking a significant chunk out of the PC-gaming market as it is. Certainly the gaming market is large, and lucrative since gamers often tend to seek higher quality systems and components, but it is still a relatively small segment of the overall userbase. There are dozens of other issues that need to be addressed, I don’t think lack-of-gaming is a primary blocker for desktop linux adoption.
Firefox took a good chunk of the market share for a couple of reasons.
1 - They had a great marketing campaign. They advertised in the New York Times with full page ads. They had getfirefox.com and all kinds of things.
2 - Installing Firefox was easy and risk free. Many people are afraid of change.
3 - You lose nothing by switching. The web is still there. Switching from Windows to Linux means leaving apps, and sometimes data behind.
4 - Some people were switched by others. I install Firefox on all kinds of peoples boxes and gently shove them into using it. Switching people to Linux isn’t as easy.
Linux will gain market share when it is easier to switch. The openSUSE installer will detect your Windows partition, resize and plan around it. It easily sets up a dual-boot system. Windows even sees the openSUSE install DVD and asks to start the install process from within Windows (which I haven’t tried).
I’d love to see a distro-agnostic open tool that runs in Windows, backs up your documents, looks for settings for common OSS apps, and helps migrate your existing Windows profile into a Linux profile.
Lastly, people need to realize that there is a vicious cycle here. When an OS has dominance, everyone develops app for the dominant OS. When one OS has the most apps, people don’t want to leave that OS. Linux has tons of apps, which is why it is a viable alternative, but even if many of the Linux alternatives are superior, there are plenty of cases when Linux can’t replicate Windows functionality (sometimes due to proprietary formats). For those people, switching isn’t easy, if an option at all.
Once a dominant OS is entrenched, it is hard to break the vicious cycle.
Alternatively when the centre of gravity moves away from desktops, then the OS becomes less important. Like, do you care what OS your mobile runs? It’s what the phone does that counts.
No desktops won’t disappear, and no thin client isn’t the alternative. There are lots of alternate computing devices that are not desktops already in use. Neither are they thin clients, they work pretty well on their own. And a lot of them don’t run Windows.
