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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You keep saying it, and it?s still as pointless as the last time you said it. Your repetition won?t change the fact that Apple?s focus on marketshare is only in regards to increasing it within a market segment as it relates to profits.
You can stick with your ?Oh noes, netbooks are selling for $200 and Apple doesn?t have anything that will compete, so they are losing marketshare.? comments, but you?ll still be woefully wrong every time.
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.
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...
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.
Ubuntu 10.04 LTS worked out of the box here on a Dell laptop, EeePC netbook, HP desktop, Lenova nettop, and my 17" Macbook Pro, all without modification.
Sure, with a nearly infinite variety of hardware configurations outside of the Apple world there are bound to be some that require a driver update. But millions of people are having a good time with Linux regardless of the FUD from some corners of the Mac community.
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, but neither MS nor Apple released a completely broken audio stack before it was ready...on a LTS build no less. PulseAudio was a fiasco that folks are STILL complaining about. Why? "Because if we don't put it in we'll never actually fix the problems."
Quote:
yes its true linux never set out to be the desktop for the technically illiterate.
Or given the fact that it took 5 minutes to get a presentation up on a projector at a linux conference it never really set out to be the desktop for the technically literate that wanted to get work done as opposed to futz around with xconfig.
Quote:
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.
Dude, I've got 50K lines worth of commits on ohloh just on various open source projects and didn't have to touch a terminal. How much "real work" have you done? In any case, there's a full fledged unix below that pretty OSX GUI and the reason I like OSX is because I can do all my unix stuff without using linux day to day.
Tinker. Ubuntu. Real "tinkerers" run gentoo starting from stage 1 bootstrap, not futz around with different desktop themes.
Dude, I've got 50K lines worth of commits on ohloh just on various open source projects and didn't have to touch a terminal. How much "real work" have you done? In any case, there's a full fledged unix below that pretty OSX GUI and the reason I like OSX is because I can do all my unix stuff without using linux day to day.
Tinker. Ubuntu. Real "tinkerers" run gentoo starting from stage 1 bootstrap, not futz around with different desktop themes.[/QUOTE]
sure dude, i am an old timer, no one uses term with linux/unix anymore.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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....
There were no maths provided, just two constants. But in saying that, I think I have the same InfoMagic disc set, I enjoyed using Linux back then. I think the modern distros have got overly complicated compare to those ones.
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.
She's full of it. Her only comeback is that linux users are faking their user agents. Something I might have believed in 2000 but not 2010. There are damn few sites that don't support Firefox correctly.
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.
Wanna what happened to Dell's support of Ubuntu? Completely evaporated when Ubuntu upgrades borked drivers on Dell machines previously sold with Ubuntu. Canonical didn't even freaking test those to make sure they still worked.
She's full of it. Her only comeback is that linux users are faking their user agents.
Where exactly does she say that specifically?
In light of what she actually wrote, this appears no more substantial than the other tidbit you contributed:
Quote:
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.
Yes, the readers here may have wondered about that and thank you for admitting his bias.
RedHat has done well in recent years, garners major installations like the US Army and doubling their market cap. But they've lost significant ground to Ubuntu, which among other things drives Google:
As for the faulty "very high rate of return" meme about netbooks, a little more research reveals that the meme comes from stats from just one manufacturer, MSI, because they advertised the price difference boldly but failed to explain that those machines were running an OS that was very different from Windows.
Smarter companies see a very different trend:
Quote:
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.”
As for the netbook market overall, it's true that the rate of growth is smaller than it was last year when growth in that segment was so often described as explosive, but note that sales are still growing year over year:
Quote:
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.
Still, anyone enjoying a Microsoft OS on a netbook can thank Linux: before netbooks started shipping with Linux, Microsoft's OEM pricing was more than twice what is it now.
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.
"By Caitlyn Martin in reply to comment from Baton de Marechal on September 8, 2010 8:25 AM | Reply
Any web counter, even if one is truly unbiased, will under count Linux precisely for the reason you describe. Many people will change their user agent to report IE and Windows to get around websites from companies that only want to support Windows. Not all Linux distributions are configured to have their browser report the OS accurately. The numbers will always be skewed downwards for Linux."
In 2000 maybe. 2010? Not. And when challenged she couldn't name a single distro that set their browser to report itself as IE on Windows. Why? There's no need. The only sites that can't be viewed by Firefox are those that require ActiveX which isn't going to run anyway so setting the user agent does nothing for you.
Her bizzaro contention is 4/5ths of Linux users are running around with spoofed user agents.
Quote:
Yes, the readers here may have wondered about that and thank you for admitting his bias.
Yes, a guy who works at RedHat is saying she's full of it. I think that's very telling.
Quote:
Dell has also publicly stated for their customers that Linux is safer than Windows:
Are you seriously quoting Prince about Win7? That guy is almost on par with linux advocates in his fanaticism about a computing platform. Almost.
Quote:
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.
I wrote a couple dismissive posts in a forum and now I have an obsessive agenda. More like correcting excessive linux enthusiasm and wishful thinking.
Comments
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You keep saying it, and it?s still as pointless as the last time you said it. Your repetition won?t change the fact that Apple?s focus on marketshare is only in regards to increasing it within a market segment as it relates to profits.
You can stick with your ?Oh noes, netbooks are selling for $200 and Apple doesn?t have anything that will compete, so they are losing marketshare.? comments, but you?ll still be woefully wrong every time.
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...
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.
works fine for me. on my ASUS laptop no problem
Ubuntu 10.04 LTS worked out of the box here on a Dell laptop, EeePC netbook, HP desktop, Lenova nettop, and my 17" Macbook Pro, all without modification.
Sure, with a nearly infinite variety of hardware configurations outside of the Apple world there are bound to be some that require a driver update. But millions of people are having a good time with Linux regardless of the FUD from some corners of the Mac community.
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, but neither MS nor Apple released a completely broken audio stack before it was ready...on a LTS build no less. PulseAudio was a fiasco that folks are STILL complaining about. Why? "Because if we don't put it in we'll never actually fix the problems."
yes its true linux never set out to be the desktop for the technically illiterate.
Or given the fact that it took 5 minutes to get a presentation up on a projector at a linux conference it never really set out to be the desktop for the technically literate that wanted to get work done as opposed to futz around with xconfig.
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.
Tinker. Ubuntu.
Tinker. Ubuntu.
sure dude, i am an old timer, no one uses term with linux/unix anymore.
caio,
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.
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?
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?
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....
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....
There were no maths provided, just two constants. But in saying that, I think I have the same InfoMagic disc set, I enjoyed using Linux back then. I think the modern distros have got overly complicated compare to those ones.
There were no maths provided, just two constants.
Gotta subtract 1994 from 2010...probably what I did was think 1990 to 2010 is 20 years so add 4 years...
Yah linux was awesome because it worked as well as regular unix and on the P90 I got more performance than I did on my Sun IPX at work.
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.
...
http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2010/09...he-1-myth.html
http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2010/09...he-1-myth.html
Wikimedia web stats:
Windows 86%
Mac 6.63%
Linux 1.88%
iPhone 1.78%
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia...ingSystems.htm
She's full of it. Her only comeback is that linux users are faking their user agents. Something I might have believed in 2000 but not 2010. There are damn few sites that don't support Firefox correctly.
Linux on netbooks 2010 - MIA
http://www.happyassassin.net/2010/08...x-netbooks-go/
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.
Wanna what happened to Dell's support of Ubuntu? Completely evaporated when Ubuntu upgrades borked drivers on Dell machines previously sold with Ubuntu. Canonical didn't even freaking test those to make sure they still worked.
She's full of it. Her only comeback is that linux users are faking their user agents.
Where exactly does she say that specifically?
In light of what she actually wrote, this appears no more substantial than the other tidbit you contributed:
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.
Yes, the readers here may have wondered about that and thank you for admitting his bias.
RedHat has done well in recent years, garners major installations like the US Army and doubling their market cap. But they've lost significant ground to Ubuntu, which among other things drives Google:
http://content.dell.com/us/en/gen/d/...68&lid=1491495
As for the faulty "very high rate of return" meme about netbooks, a little more research reveals that the meme comes from stats from just one manufacturer, MSI, because they advertised the price difference boldly but failed to explain that those machines were running an OS that was very different from Windows.
Smarter companies see a very different trend:
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.”
http://netbookboards.com/2009/02/24/...-less-than-xp/
Dell has also publicly stated for their customers that Linux is safer than Windows:
http://www.thevarguy.com/2010/06/10/...-than-windows/
As for the netbook market overall, it's true that the rate of growth is smaller than it was last year when growth in that segment was so often described as explosive, but note that sales are still growing year over year:
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.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Netbo...0-151301.shtml
Meanwhile, Microsoft is not without its netbook issues:
Why Windows 7 on Netbooks Won’t Save Microsoft
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/0...ave-microsoft/
Still, anyone enjoying a Microsoft OS on a netbook can thank Linux: before netbooks started shipping with Linux, Microsoft's OEM pricing was more than twice what is it now.
Welcome to Ghandicon 3.
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.
Where exactly does she say that specifically?
"By Caitlyn Martin in reply to comment from Baton de Marechal on September 8, 2010 8:25 AM | Reply
Any web counter, even if one is truly unbiased, will under count Linux precisely for the reason you describe. Many people will change their user agent to report IE and Windows to get around websites from companies that only want to support Windows. Not all Linux distributions are configured to have their browser report the OS accurately. The numbers will always be skewed downwards for Linux."
In 2000 maybe. 2010? Not. And when challenged she couldn't name a single distro that set their browser to report itself as IE on Windows. Why? There's no need. The only sites that can't be viewed by Firefox are those that require ActiveX which isn't going to run anyway so setting the user agent does nothing for you.
Her bizzaro contention is 4/5ths of Linux users are running around with spoofed user agents.
Yes, the readers here may have wondered about that and thank you for admitting his bias.
Yes, a guy who works at RedHat is saying she's full of it. I think that's very telling.
Dell has also publicly stated for their customers that Linux is safer than Windows:
http://www.thevarguy.com/2010/06/10/...-than-windows/
Linux is "more secure" for the same reason that OSX is more secure. Smaller market, slightly harder OS for viruses.
Meanwhile, Microsoft is not without its netbook issues:
Why Windows 7 on Netbooks Won?t Save Microsoft
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/0...ave-microsoft/
Are you seriously quoting Prince about Win7? That guy is almost on par with linux advocates in his fanaticism about a computing platform. Almost.
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.