Ah well, I guess Linux is free... maybe that'll be good enough to garner critical mass in the mainstream, but I'm not holding my breath.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right. Y'all are confusing the hell out of me now by continuing to agree with me but making it sound like you're making really zingy points by bashing Linux.
I already know this:
Linux is not more usable.
Linux is not 100% compatible with Office.
Linux is not the best at multimedia (especially DVDs).
Linux doesn't do shockwave.
Linux will be a pain in the ass when things go wrong.
I learned this:
Linux hackers aren't moki's favourite people.
The GPL == communism + terrorism.
But I also know this:
Linux is free.
Linux is Free Software.
And you have already agreed (repeatedly, though grudgingly) that because it is free (and Free):
Linux is going to overtake the marketshare of Mac OS X
I was right and I still am right, but don't feel too bad because you agree with me.
Nobody's agreeing with you that LINUX will ever have a decent market share. Just the opposite, LINUX will utterly fail as an everyday desktop OS, just as it will continue to shine as a server OS.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
At last, someone who doesn't agree with me. cool.
So let me get this straight. Linux will shine as a server OS. Does that mean its server marketshare counts? It was heading for 30% last time I checked and looking to demolish competing unixes.
Or do they not count because they didn't come in a box with manuals like real software.
By the way if you were referring to figures in the article linked in the first post then here's a quote:
[quote]IDC says that Linux's share of paid shipments of the worldwide client operating-system market rose from 1.5 percent in 2000 to 1.7 in 2001, while Microsoft Windows grew from 92 to 94 percent in the same period. While this does not include the large numbers of free downloads common in the Linux world, IDC says it is significant.<hr></blockquote>
your next point:
[quote]
The marketshare of LINUX is so pathetic as to be nearly unmeasureable and a commercial failure. The main reason it hasn't and won't go away are charity sites willing to host it for free. Give it a couple more years and it will look much like the current UNIX scene. Another dozen small and fractured OS projects useful to the folks who personally develop and support it.
<hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure if you're just referring to the desktop here, or if you've forgotten that you said Linux would shine as a server.
If you're claiming the only measure of success is commercial then IBM claims to have already recouped a 1 Billion dollar investment in Linux. But of course that is on the server.
And as for the China and India comments my main point is that it is not only developing nations. Even in the States there are moves to Linux and open source in general.
This article is all about Largo county in Florida and their move to Linux based thin clients. It is mostly an interview with the admins but it also links to a previous article from the end users perspective.
Obviously in Europe/South America/Australia etc. the natural distrust of MSFT is a factor that makes the cost savings and flexability even more appealing.
And by the way it's not LINUX, but Linux (or GNU/Linux if you're that way inclined).
What in the world gave you either impression? I have nothing against Linux hackers at all; I was merely pointing out my opinion about the potential for Linux's success based on their focus.
I also never said the GPL is communism + terrorism; I just said, in semi-jest, that it existst to advance Stallman's socialist agenda. And that's actually quite true, Stallman would agree with that statement (though he wouls say there are bigger reasons for this agenda as well).
[quote]Originally posted by stupider...likeafox:
<strong>And you have already agreed (repeatedly, though grudgingly) that because it is free (and Free):
Linux is going to overtake the marketshare of Mac OS X
I was right and I still am right, but don't feel too bad because you agree with me.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You are right that the Linux desktop marketshare may very well overtake Mac OS X as #2 -- however, if it does, it will be because of government decree (primarily in China/India, and to a lesser extent, Europe), not based on merit.
In my opinion, Linux has an extremely long way to go to succeed in the mainstream on its own merit -- yet as we've seen many times before, merit isn't always what counts in terms of success.
<strong>As for the developing countries making LINUX numbers large and popular, think again. The PRC are largely afraid of US software as spyware in general, the work they do is exclusive from the market because they fear the market's products, not because they don't want to pay Gates. The software the PRC is working on for LINUX will likely never see he light of day outside their borders. </strong><hr></blockquote>
That's one reason why Red Flag Linux is doing well in China -- access to source code. The PRC is much less paranoid about an OS that runs source code they can read and modify, and it is understandable to an extent.
The general populace probably will just keep pirating Windows until CounterStrike runs on Linux (that game is wildly popular there, as well as in Korea).
[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:
<strong>India's LINUX work will wane as they realize it has an expensive indirect cost and the ability to make money really isn't there. They may come up with something new that is a commercial OS though that can enter the marketplace and gain enough of a foothold there to become competitive here. That will be interesting to watch.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think they are adopting Linux mostly because it is free, and runs on just about anything under the sun. It is also excellent as a learning tool for university courses and the like.
I think the situation is less clear; I think that Linux could become much more widely adopted than it deserves to be based on merit. The demographics of who adopts it, though, will have little impact on the modern computing world. It's all rather unfortunate, because in terms of ease of use, Linux takes us back more than a decade.
The demographics of who adopts it, though, will have little impact on the modern computing world. It's all rather unfortunate, because in terms of ease of use, Linux takes us back more than a decade.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's funny you should say that because I've always felt that MSFTs growing hegemony has been holding information technology back for the last decade.
Office, for example, would simply not exist in a healthy software market based on open standards. It is obviously a result of intentional feature creep to maintain market share. If the file formats were open then there could be a myriad of different apps, each tailored to a market niche; instead we have the original bloatzilla (and now an oss bloatzilla clone).
My favourite thing about Linux is its ability to challenge MSFT without fear of being bankrupted or bought. And (I think) there is a good chance of Linux grabbing a significant market share in developing nations where their technological development is, say, 10 years behind ours.
I look forward to seeing what happens, how true capitalistic competition can shape software, and how the Africans and Indians adapt the technology culturally.
I expect the unexpected in the same way that developing nations have bypassed the traditional telephone and adopted mobile telecoms on scales that affect the way their society is run. There was talk about mobile phones and sms messaging ensuring the recent vote in kenya was fair. <a href="http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00587.html"; target="_blank">article</a> Maybe they should try it in Florida.
The way I see it, Linux is on one extreme (totally open sourced, lousy UI, poor industry (aka Microsoft) standards compliance, good open standards compliance), and Microsoft is on the other extreme (totally closed, decent UI, good industry (aka Microsoft) standards compliance, poor open standards compliance).
Mac OS X fits right in the middle. Excelent UI, partially open (Darwin, and other parts of the OS), pretty good industry (aka Microsoft) standards compliance, good open standards compliance.
For many people, myself included, this hits the sweet spot. With faster machines (c'mon PPC 970) and a slightly more refined OS, it's going to be wonderful.
Many people who want an easy to use Linux will love Mac OS X (and already are, in fact). Many people who want an easy to use, robust alternative to Windows XP will love it too. The people who will not adopt Mac OS X are the folks who don't have the money to spend on the hardware to run it, and those who want a completely open system. Mac OS X isn't going to make any grass-roots inroads in less developed countries, Linux will.
I just don't think it's got real legs. Too many professors who don't want to relive their grad days to push it for much longer in the academic world as anything other than life support for a really out of date machine. If they don't push it, it will peter out.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
While some of the quirkier stuff is coming from the academics, especially supercomputing and other science applications, business is really pushing the mainstream of this stuff now.
You have to remember that big companies hate being price gouged by MSFT even more than we do. You know when Walmart is moving its back end to Linux that it's hitting the mainstream.
(I'm assuming your talking about Linux in general, not just on the desktop)
What surprises me, if you're a CS major, is how you can be so into Mac OS X, and so anti-Linux. Surely they are cousins, if not brothers under the skin.
For example, which multi-national conglomerate do you think is maintaining the BSDs? That's a voluntary effort as well.
Though having said it's voluntary, I am sure that damn near every volunteer draws a paycheck related to his or her work on the project. I know Jordan Hubbard does and Wilfredo Sanchez did.
Perhaps that is the real 'Pure American' factor, mistaking monoploy hungry corporate monoliths for a healthy capitalist market.
Does no-one else think that Bill Gates pulling net-connected fridge magnets out his ass rather than responding to the real needs of the market is a bit reminiscent of 5-year-plans in Soviet Russia?
Whoops, that was a bit of a tangent, but I'll wrap it up neatly by asking if anyone has noticed the rising influence of Apple design decisions and general ethos on OSS?
I think the increasing mindshare of Apple will only help Linux, even though much of the new software will probably be developed under Mac OS X. I know that almost every programming geek I've got respect for jumped ship to Apple over the last year. Apparently, the entire Perl team is on OS X. How weird is that?
Personally, I think that's great, and long may it continue.
<strong>Personally, I think that's great, and long may it continue.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Linux can definitely have a beneficial effect on OS X -- by reinforcing the idea (esp. to the business world) that UNIX is an acceptable mainstream alternative to Windows. It's also fascinating to watch the most effective challenger Microsoft has faced in years, which is bascially a grassroots, volunteer effort. I think it's rather amazing as well.
That said, I think Mac people get defensive when talking about Linux because
(a) as Andrew has pointed out very lucidly, the OSS model can produce very good technical software, but lacks the inititive and interest to create superior, let alone decent UI (which is very important for the consumer market)
(b) Linux is fairly torturous for the average user to use (as experienced here), so utopian dreams stating that a desktop Linux is ready for prime time tend to rile people up,
and
(c) if Linux does become popular enough to warrant the release of mainstream and specialized software products (such as Photoshop and various drivers) Linux will pose a challenge to the Mac as a viable alternative to Windows.
Not that (c) is the worst thing in the world. Competition is just competition, after all. But it could significantly affect Apple, and I'm sure they're keeping a watchful, nervous eye on it.
Comments
<strong>
Ah well, I guess Linux is free... maybe that'll be good enough to garner critical mass in the mainstream, but I'm not holding my breath.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right. Y'all are confusing the hell out of me now by continuing to agree with me but making it sound like you're making really zingy points by bashing Linux.
I already know this:
Linux is not more usable.
Linux is not 100% compatible with Office.
Linux is not the best at multimedia (especially DVDs).
Linux doesn't do shockwave.
Linux will be a pain in the ass when things go wrong.
I learned this:
Linux hackers aren't moki's favourite people.
The GPL == communism + terrorism.
But I also know this:
Linux is free.
Linux is Free Software.
And you have already agreed (repeatedly, though grudgingly) that because it is free (and Free):
Linux is going to overtake the marketshare of Mac OS X
I was right and I still am right, but don't feel too bad because you agree with me.
<strong>
Nobody's agreeing with you that LINUX will ever have a decent market share. Just the opposite, LINUX will utterly fail as an everyday desktop OS, just as it will continue to shine as a server OS.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
At last, someone who doesn't agree with me. cool.
So let me get this straight. Linux will shine as a server OS. Does that mean its server marketshare counts? It was heading for 30% last time I checked and looking to demolish competing unixes.
Or do they not count because they didn't come in a box with manuals like real software.
By the way if you were referring to figures in the article linked in the first post then here's a quote:
[quote]IDC says that Linux's share of paid shipments of the worldwide client operating-system market rose from 1.5 percent in 2000 to 1.7 in 2001, while Microsoft Windows grew from 92 to 94 percent in the same period. While this does not include the large numbers of free downloads common in the Linux world, IDC says it is significant.<hr></blockquote>
your next point:
[quote]
The marketshare of LINUX is so pathetic as to be nearly unmeasureable and a commercial failure. The main reason it hasn't and won't go away are charity sites willing to host it for free. Give it a couple more years and it will look much like the current UNIX scene. Another dozen small and fractured OS projects useful to the folks who personally develop and support it.
<hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure if you're just referring to the desktop here, or if you've forgotten that you said Linux would shine as a server.
If you're claiming the only measure of success is commercial then IBM claims to have already recouped a 1 Billion dollar investment in Linux. But of course that is on the server.
And as for the China and India comments my main point is that it is not only developing nations. Even in the States there are moves to Linux and open source in general.
<a href="http://newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=02/12/04/2346215&mode=thread&tid=19"; target="_blank">http://newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=02/12/04/2346215&mode=thread&tid=19</a>;
This article is all about Largo county in Florida and their move to Linux based thin clients. It is mostly an interview with the admins but it also links to a previous article from the end users perspective.
Obviously in Europe/South America/Australia etc. the natural distrust of MSFT is a factor that makes the cost savings and flexability even more appealing.
And by the way it's not LINUX, but Linux (or GNU/Linux if you're that way inclined).
<strong>Linux hackers aren't moki's favourite people.
The GPL == communism + terrorism.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
What in the world gave you either impression? I have nothing against Linux hackers at all; I was merely pointing out my opinion about the potential for Linux's success based on their focus.
I also never said the GPL is communism + terrorism; I just said, in semi-jest, that it existst to advance Stallman's socialist agenda. And that's actually quite true, Stallman would agree with that statement (though he wouls say there are bigger reasons for this agenda as well).
[quote]Originally posted by stupider...likeafox:
<strong>And you have already agreed (repeatedly, though grudgingly) that because it is free (and Free):
Linux is going to overtake the marketshare of Mac OS X
I was right and I still am right, but don't feel too bad because you agree with me.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You are right that the Linux desktop marketshare may very well overtake Mac OS X as #2 -- however, if it does, it will be because of government decree (primarily in China/India, and to a lesser extent, Europe), not based on merit.
In my opinion, Linux has an extremely long way to go to succeed in the mainstream on its own merit -- yet as we've seen many times before, merit isn't always what counts in terms of success.
Sorry for the confusion.
<strong>As for the developing countries making LINUX numbers large and popular, think again. The PRC are largely afraid of US software as spyware in general, the work they do is exclusive from the market because they fear the market's products, not because they don't want to pay Gates. The software the PRC is working on for LINUX will likely never see he light of day outside their borders. </strong><hr></blockquote>
That's one reason why Red Flag Linux is doing well in China -- access to source code. The PRC is much less paranoid about an OS that runs source code they can read and modify, and it is understandable to an extent.
The general populace probably will just keep pirating Windows until CounterStrike runs on Linux (that game is wildly popular there, as well as in Korea).
[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:
<strong>India's LINUX work will wane as they realize it has an expensive indirect cost and the ability to make money really isn't there. They may come up with something new that is a commercial OS though that can enter the marketplace and gain enough of a foothold there to become competitive here. That will be interesting to watch.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think they are adopting Linux mostly because it is free, and runs on just about anything under the sun. It is also excellent as a learning tool for university courses and the like.
I think the situation is less clear; I think that Linux could become much more widely adopted than it deserves to be based on merit. The demographics of who adopts it, though, will have little impact on the modern computing world. It's all rather unfortunate, because in terms of ease of use, Linux takes us back more than a decade.
<strong>
The demographics of who adopts it, though, will have little impact on the modern computing world. It's all rather unfortunate, because in terms of ease of use, Linux takes us back more than a decade.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's funny you should say that because I've always felt that MSFTs growing hegemony has been holding information technology back for the last decade.
Office, for example, would simply not exist in a healthy software market based on open standards. It is obviously a result of intentional feature creep to maintain market share. If the file formats were open then there could be a myriad of different apps, each tailored to a market niche; instead we have the original bloatzilla (and now an oss bloatzilla clone).
My favourite thing about Linux is its ability to challenge MSFT without fear of being bankrupted or bought. And (I think) there is a good chance of Linux grabbing a significant market share in developing nations where their technological development is, say, 10 years behind ours.
I look forward to seeing what happens, how true capitalistic competition can shape software, and how the Africans and Indians adapt the technology culturally.
I expect the unexpected in the same way that developing nations have bypassed the traditional telephone and adopted mobile telecoms on scales that affect the way their society is run. There was talk about mobile phones and sms messaging ensuring the recent vote in kenya was fair. <a href="http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00587.html"; target="_blank">article</a> Maybe they should try it in Florida.
Mac OS X fits right in the middle. Excelent UI, partially open (Darwin, and other parts of the OS), pretty good industry (aka Microsoft) standards compliance, good open standards compliance.
For many people, myself included, this hits the sweet spot. With faster machines (c'mon PPC 970) and a slightly more refined OS, it's going to be wonderful.
Many people who want an easy to use Linux will love Mac OS X (and already are, in fact). Many people who want an easy to use, robust alternative to Windows XP will love it too. The people who will not adopt Mac OS X are the folks who don't have the money to spend on the hardware to run it, and those who want a completely open system. Mac OS X isn't going to make any grass-roots inroads in less developed countries, Linux will.
<strong>
It's funny... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, it is. Thanks for the entertainment stupider. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
I just don't think it's got real legs. Too many professors who don't want to relive their grad days to push it for much longer in the academic world as anything other than life support for a really out of date machine. If they don't push it, it will peter out.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
While some of the quirkier stuff is coming from the academics, especially supercomputing and other science applications, business is really pushing the mainstream of this stuff now.
You have to remember that big companies hate being price gouged by MSFT even more than we do. You know when Walmart is moving its back end to Linux that it's hitting the mainstream.
(I'm assuming your talking about Linux in general, not just on the desktop)
What surprises me, if you're a CS major, is how you can be so into Mac OS X, and so anti-Linux. Surely they are cousins, if not brothers under the skin.
For example, which multi-national conglomerate do you think is maintaining the BSDs? That's a voluntary effort as well.
Though having said it's voluntary, I am sure that damn near every volunteer draws a paycheck related to his or her work on the project. I know Jordan Hubbard does and Wilfredo Sanchez did.
Perhaps that is the real 'Pure American' factor, mistaking monoploy hungry corporate monoliths for a healthy capitalist market.
Does no-one else think that Bill Gates pulling net-connected fridge magnets out his ass rather than responding to the real needs of the market is a bit reminiscent of 5-year-plans in Soviet Russia?
Whoops, that was a bit of a tangent, but I'll wrap it up neatly by asking if anyone has noticed the rising influence of Apple design decisions and general ethos on OSS?
I think the increasing mindshare of Apple will only help Linux, even though much of the new software will probably be developed under Mac OS X. I know that almost every programming geek I've got respect for jumped ship to Apple over the last year. Apparently, the entire Perl team is on OS X. How weird is that?
Personally, I think that's great, and long may it continue.
<strong>Personally, I think that's great, and long may it continue.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Linux can definitely have a beneficial effect on OS X -- by reinforcing the idea (esp. to the business world) that UNIX is an acceptable mainstream alternative to Windows. It's also fascinating to watch the most effective challenger Microsoft has faced in years, which is bascially a grassroots, volunteer effort. I think it's rather amazing as well.
That said, I think Mac people get defensive when talking about Linux because
(a) as Andrew has pointed out very lucidly, the OSS model can produce very good technical software, but lacks the inititive and interest to create superior, let alone decent UI (which is very important for the consumer market)
(b) Linux is fairly torturous for the average user to use (as experienced here), so utopian dreams stating that a desktop Linux is ready for prime time tend to rile people up,
and
(c) if Linux does become popular enough to warrant the release of mainstream and specialized software products (such as Photoshop and various drivers) Linux will pose a challenge to the Mac as a viable alternative to Windows.
Not that (c) is the worst thing in the world. Competition is just competition, after all. But it could significantly affect Apple, and I'm sure they're keeping a watchful, nervous eye on it.
[ 01-14-2003: Message edited by: Hobbes ]</p>