Is linux competing with windows?

asininity

Hi guys, was wondering about what Marty said about linux in another thread so did some searching and found on the same site these articles:

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=556&!!!!!rbxccnbtr1

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=528

I liked reading them but found the arguments in the first one a little silly, like number 7 which gives a reason why windows is triumphing over linux as "Vista being a bump in the road". How is vista being crap a reason why windows is triumphing over linux? And number 9 is a joke, ever heard of Debian/Slackware or Vista???? Anyway...:T

Obviously I'm a little biased what do you guys think?

fuzzball172

For the last 15 years or so computers have shipped with windows, so most people refer to their computer and operating system as a windows computer and think that all PCs are the same. Apple are starting to change this view and now that mainstream manufactures are selling linux based machines, people will become familiar with the alternate options. Once hardware vendors start shipping significant numbers, peripheral manufactures and software companies will start supporting linux too...
Right now I don't see Microsoft losing a significant market share, but I do think they are now having to rethink their strategy of dealing with Linux. Rather than scaremongering or threatening to sue everyone who uses it. They need to see how open source can be incorporated into their revenue model. I'm surprised they have not bought out one of the more stable distros to allow them to rebrand it alongside win7. If I were Steve Ballmer I'd be touting Windows Linux as Linux professional... say that now linux has grown up and can be taken seriously... Grab a slice of the pie rather than compete

Lee

asininity

They can buy it out, thats the thing the licence protects it. Also see what happened when SUSE made a deal with them... and what it opened up on m$. They could use the code and make their own version but that would be admitting defeat for them.

Marty_J

I posted this in another thread, and it's an interestingly read, as it shows what Linux is up against.

While Microsoft have a dominant market position, they can abuse it by pushing standards that lock-out its competitors and punishing OEMs for installing their competitors' products.

Linux has a lot of its own problems as well; it's vastly configurable, but arguably confusingly so. It comes in so many different flavours, which is even more confusing than the various Windows product editions. It has made huge advances in usability, but in some ways it still doesn't pitch itself at the average person. Someone can use Windows for years without ever having to touch the command line (maybe they never will), but its likely the average person is going to have to get their hands dirty with code sooner or later with Linux. Installing software in Linux is either easier than doing so in Windows, or much more difficult. Users shouldn't have to figure out how to do something on their computer, that's the computer's job. In many ways it still gives the impression that it's written by techies for techies.

Linux's main problem is that it is both too much and not enough.

But, it's getting better all the time, and perhaps someday it'll be ready to take on Windows, but I don't think that day is today.

RobTang

forget technical aspects, forget de facto standards.

Linux will never be a major COMSUMER OS for the simple reason theres no money in pushing any linux disto as a consumer os. costs are too high, returns too low.
Short of a major paradigm shift in computing or economics, its just not going to happen. tbh everyone abandoning PCs for Macs is far more likley, than any other linux disto making inroads to windows' comsumer market.

asininity

I read somewhere once that most people use linux without even knowing it, its in a lot of stuff like routers etc. I find that interesting. I shall read the pdf later looked at the contents and looks interesting.

Linux isn't a consumer OS. For it to be you'd have to buy it. Its a business OS, and the majority of home versions (Desktop) are subsidised from that or they are made for free and given away for free.

Fact is linux, slow as it is, is making inroads into windows shares. I'm not saying it'll happen over night and I know how people dont like change but its happening, the third world are doing it and theres certain governments swapping it out.

Honest question (cos I dont know): what companies have moved to vista? And what companies will move to 7? Cos like linux thats where M$ makes the majority of its money.

RobTang

lots of stuff used windows embedded as well, eg lots of ATM machines are windows embeded these days. So for the sake of argument its probably best to stick to desktop type machines and ignore everything else.

When I say consumer im really refering to the demographic (ie your average home user or a client computer) rather then say a traditional customer, even if i was I dont actually have to pay anything to be a customer.
When I install Linux or Windows I have to agree to a licence, this is essentially "buying" into a system, any monetary exchange is purely incidental.

Vista probably isn't used a lot (win server 2008 is probably used a lot more but im ignoring this type of machine) then again how many companies will use linux as a base desktop machine ?

TBH im not a big fan of this argument because generally most of the people doing the argument are not really stakeholders in either system (fine some of you may hold ms or rat hat shares or are developers). I am not a slave to a system, it works for me, I dont work for it why should I defend it ?
(ok admittidly being a .net developer I have a direct intrest in windows doing well, but I still dont think arguing this point is really that important)

busenbust

Linux? Chrome OS, yes.

Marty_J

busenbust wrote: »

Linux? Chrome OS, yes.

Probably best to wait until they actually write it before trumpeting its ability to compete with Windows.

fwor

asininity wrote: »

I read somewhere once that most people use linux without even knowing it.

The first freeview box that I bought (a Netgem Iplayer) was Linux-based. Soon after it was launched various groups tried to crack it and run a generic Linux distro on it. Unfortunately Netgem - for reasons I don't fully understand - had it comprehensively locked down, which is a shame, as it would have made a great MythTV front end.

Much as I'd like to argue otherwise, I'd have to agree that the average PC user will still find Linux too hard when even the most minor thing goes wrong.

In the last year or so, much effort has been put into making installation and configuration "point and click" within distros such as Ubuntu, but eventually you can't escape the command line.

And, despite it's strengths, the community nature of Open Source development often leads to confusion and inconsistency. I've recently been playing around with VOIP and the Open Source (and very versatile) TrixBox/Asterisk voice switch. It has a great example: in some of the config files, a # sign indicates the start of a comment, and anything after it is ignored. But in other config files, the # sign signifies the start of a certain type of command! Needless to say, the documentation does not explain this clearly...

wolfman

The command line isn't always a bad thing. You find a tutorial/solution, copy, paste, enter, done.

None of this, click the bottom button, a new window will appear, go to the 3rd tab, click the second dropdown etc...

That said Linux is a time involved OS if used for the desktop.

If you just want to do some browsing and file usage, and have hardware that is a year or two old, it works very well. It's when you want to do more advanced things, dual monitors, sync'ing with your phone, tv cards, on newer hardware etc... that it requires time and devotion.


Regarding moving to Vista. I know a few companies that moved to it, and are even now trying Windows 7 (after not being to fond of Vista). We'll be moving to 2008 Server (development work) very shortly. It and Windows 7 are very nice.

I only use Linux at home though, and develop in a Windows 2008 VM.