Apple's iOS tops Linux to become third largest browsing platform - Page 3

Originally Posted by solipsism

Yep, more than two decades later and you still don't understand that Apple chooses not to license their OS to every Tom, Dick, and Harry PC vendor on the planet because they are capable of not just putting together a PC or just making an OS or just around software for a PC OS, but are capable of the creating a whole package which is why they take 1/3 of all the proits from the PC industry. Despite your insistence on the subject Apple could license their OS to everyone, but no one else is able to make PC sales as profitable as Apple per quarter.

Originally Posted by Newtron

You miss his point. The point is NOT that Apple's marketshare is tiny, even though that is the fact of the matter.

The point is that Apple's marketshare is HALF of what it once was. He is talking trends while you are talking absolutes.

Yes, Apple makes good profits. No, Apple does not inspire a large proportion of customers (relative to the past) to buy their products.

Originally Posted by solipsism

And yet they continue to sell more and more Macs per quarter and continue to make more and more profit per quarter, which already bests everyone else in the industry by a large margin. I think you miss the point of business. Some economic courses would do you some good so you can understand what drives a successful company to produce.

Originally Posted by Newtron

The point is not that Apple makes a tidy profit. Indeed, I said exactly that in the post you responded to.

The point that is being examined is that the Mac has lost half of its marketshare. This is like the third time that this simple point has been made, and the tenth time that somebody has tried to change the subject.

Originally Posted by nht

Yah...10.04 didn't suck...unless you wanted audio that wasn't borked again in that continuing pulseaudio fiasco, updgrades that didn't hose your system and display drivers that weren't borked or somehow borked your configs.

Seriously...audio? How hard is it to get audio working for everybody in a desktop OS? Audio has been a source of issues since Heron and it was STILL borked for some people in Lucid. If all you want to do is run Skype and audio doesn't work without mucking around then it's the definition of "suck". And they put it in Heron...the LTS...which guaranteed pulseaudio suckage until Lucid two years later (if you were on the LTS train) where it was still borked but a lot less borked.

Glad it worked for you. Lucid upgrade worked (as far as I know...don't use it for much) but both Karmic and Jaunty had issues and that sucked.

http://www.ubuntututorials.info/linu...-about-it.html

The REALLY amusing part? The comment that every session so far has had 5 minutes technical issues setting up. By a bunch of linux geeks. No presentation until 5:33. But "Hey comppiz is cool!" (around 5:25)

This is at least the second year Brian has given this talk and as near as I can remember it didn't change much. The litany year after year is the same for desktop linux: audio sucks, display drivers suck, multi-monitor suck, wifi drivers suck, xorg sucks, package managers suck...

Originally Posted by screamingfist

works fine for me. on my ASUS laptop no problem

Originally Posted by screamingfist

works fine for me. on my ASUS laptop no problem, made one simple change to my thinkpad and it works well too. sorry some are having bigger problems. i imagine if i go to the mac forums i will find people with problems involving macs yes?

yes its true linux never set out to be the desktop for the technically illiterate.

that is what apple wants to be and is. i like tinkering and the mac/apple doesn't want to be tinkered with. it is a wonderful, easy to use system as long as you stay in the little apple gui garden. try or need to wander outside that garden and its just like linux/unix i.e. get your terminal out and prepare for some real work.

Originally Posted by nht

I'm a mac, iOS, windows, android, bsd (rarely) user. Linux sucks as a desktop OS and has for the [B]two and a half decades I've been using it[/B}. I actually still have in my basement my old Dell Dimension Pentium 90 and slackware 2.1 and Debian 0.91 beta on it circa 1994. Somewhere around here I have an old Walnut Creek CD with FreeBSD on it.

Distrowatch back then was whatever distros were shipping on InfoMagic CDs.

Originally Posted by jfanning

Let me get this right, you have been using Linux on the desktop for 2 and a half decades? So for 25 years you have been using Linux on the desktop? Are you trying to say you have been using Linux on the desktop since 1985? So you starting using Linux on the desktop six years before Linus wrote the kernal?

Originally Posted by nht

No, since '94. The math error should have been obvious given the dates provided. That's grasping some straws buddy. Wanna correct some spelling too? I'm sure I have more than a couple typos in there.

Anyway, it sure felt like 25 years....

Originally Posted by jfanning

There were no maths provided, just two constants.

It seems like almost every day someone in the tech press or someone commenting in a technical forum will claim that Linux adoption on the desktop (including laptops) is insignificant. The number that is thrown around is 1%. These claims are even repeated by some who advocate for Linux adoption. Both the idea that Linux market share on the desktop is insignificant and the 1% figure are simply false and have been for many years.
...
Let's start with netbooks, the area where Linux has made the biggest inroads. According to ABI Research Linux regained 32% of the netbook market in 2009 despite being next to impossible to find in brick and mortar stores. That number did not include systems sold in dual boot configurations with both Windows and Linux. On such systems Windows is still considered to be the default operating system.

Dell also reported that nearly a third of their netbook sales in 2009 were systems preloaded with Ubuntu. Recent reports that there was no longer demand for Linux on netbooks and that Dell was dropping Linux proved to be false. Indeed, as of today Dell is offering laptop and desktop models preloaded with Ubuntu in addition to the Inspiron Mini 10n netbook.

What do the netbook numbers mean in terms of overall desktop and laptop sales? According to Forrester Research netbooks were 18% of total desktop/laptop sales last year. If we do the math we find that due to netbooks alone Linux captured nearly 6% of the desktop market in 2009.
...
Additional confirmation of the growth in Linux desktop market share last year came from an unlikely source: Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. Using a slide to visualize OS market share Ballmer had Linux desktop market share as a slightly larger slice of the pie than MacOS
...
Does anyone believe that Microsoft would see Linux as a serious competitor is Linux had captured just 1% of the market? That doesn't seem very likely, does it? All the figures I have quoted so far represent sales of systems preloaded with a given operating system: Windows, MacOS or Linux. They do not represent actual usage. If you go down to the local brick and mortar computer shop or big box retailer, buy a system with Windows, wipe the hard drive and install Linux that still counts as a Windows system, not a Linux system.

Where does the 1% number come from? There are two sources: very old data and web counters. The problem with using web counters to try and ascertain market share is that they generally only include websites that have paid to be counted. That pretty much guarantees that Windows will be overcounted.... Similarly, most Linux and technical websites do not pay to be counted by the web counter companies, which in turn skews numbers wildly in favor of Windows.

So what is Linux real market share on the desktop? The best estimate for present sales is around 8%, which puts Linux just a little behind or perhaps just about even with MacOS.
...

Originally Posted by RationalTroll

http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2010/09...he-1-myth.html

Originally Posted by nht

She's full of it. Her only comeback is that linux users are faking their user agents.

Dude works for Red Hat in case you're wondering about bias. He does bag on Canonical a bit but in many cases it's deserved.

Mini 9 Netbook Running Ubuntu Returned Less Than XP

According the recent sales figures by Dell, the Inspiron Mini 9 netbook running Ubuntu Linux has been remarkably successful and experienced supremely low return-rates.

Unfortunately, MSI has been returned a great deal of its netbooks by consumers. A few months ago its MSI Wind netbooks running SuSE Linux brought in return rates four times greater than those of Wind netbooks running XP.

Dell’s Jay Pinkert, however, is pleased with Linux sales: “A third of our Mini 9 mix is Linux, which is well above the standard attach rate for other systems that offer Linux.”

Netbook Sales to Reach 36 Million in 2010

Last year, the netbook market practically boomed, showing an incredibly fast growth, and the segment has since continued rising as a fairly rapid pace. Still, the rate of growth appears to be slowing down, mostly because the market is starting to get saturated. Still, the amount of shipments is expected to rise for a while still, and Techaisle believes that this year, as a whole, will yield a 13% growth compared to 2009 in terms of sales.

Originally Posted by RationalTroll

Where exactly does she say that specifically?

Yes, the readers here may have wondered about that and thank you for admitting his bias.

Dell has also publicly stated for their customers that Linux is safer than Windows:
http://www.thevarguy.com/2010/06/10/...-than-windows/

Meanwhile, Microsoft is not without its netbook issues:

Why Windows 7 on Netbooks Wont Save Microsoft
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/0...ave-microsoft/

Look, we get it: you don't like Ubuntu. Millions of others feel differently, and at least a few readers here find your obsessive agenda against Ubuntu fascinating.