You know how I know that the desktop market is no longer the primary consumer market? Because Linux has a 3% market share.
Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
431–440 of 564 posts
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#432I wonder why they keep making these articles. Linux is on more computers both today and all of the computers ever made put together than any other OS. It is on virtually all servers on the Internet, the majority OS on phones, its in many TVs and STBs and streaming sticks, its one of the few OSes ever in space, its one of the few OSes ever on Mars, and it is also the OS behind ChromeOS (which that article mistakenly b…
> 19XX will be the year of Linux on the desktop > 20XX will be the year of Linux on the desktop They've been saying it so long it's part of our psyche. It doesn't matter the other places Linux is running, it hasn't conquered that one place they've been trying to conquer since the start. You never get over the one who got away.
> it hasn't conquered that one place they've been trying to conquer since the start
Who is "they"?
There's are a heck of a lot of people happily building [software for] Linux systems that give precisely zero care to the success of Linux desktop.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
So true. If you get a System76 laptop you can get some really amazing hardware and make sure to never pay the Windows license fee.
System76 won't make MFC drivers for every MFC there is or make Linux clients for wacky corporate VPNs and Wifi appear.
Sure, because they (or whoever) don't make it.
Many printers, especially the MFC ones, support Linux. For instance, Brother has drivers: https://help.brother-usa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/52188/~...
WRT corporations, they can do what they like with their own hardware and software. And yes, a lot are short-sighted. Most won't be using Mac any time soon, because they've locked themselves in quite effectively.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
It uses the Linux kernel with a browser userspace. Some selected models allow to run GNU/Linux, WSL style, in its own sandboxed environment.
What a long way to say that "yes, it is linux indeed" :-)
Only if one wants to make the point of GNU/Linux being available, which isn't always the case, many only get the Linux kernel.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good luck trying to run a proper GNU/Linux on those Android devices. Actually tbere are plenty of other options for embedded. As for the server room, UNIX was already the winner there anyway, since the 1990's.
>Good luck trying to run a proper GNU/Linux on those Android devices. How is toybox not good enough to replace the GNU coreutils for a phone? Or what GNU software are you talking about that someone would even want to run on a phone?
ISO C and ISO C++ isn't Linux.
To be a proper replacement, anything in GNU/Linux must be available.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No. I will use the OS I like and others will use the OS they prefer. It’s called choice. But I can't use the OS I like. I can't go in a store, pick a laptop I like, and get it with an OS I like. I can get it with an OS I don't like; and gamble that I can install on it an OS that I do like. It would have been very different if Linux market share on the desktop were in double digits.
This is a wholly valid point when it comes to Linux desktop penetration. However as an aside, it seems to me that the computers for sale in actual stores are usually of terrible quality. They’re the last the computers I would choose, and this isn’t really a Windows or ChromeOS thing. (I’d just wipe them and install Linux in any case) This doesn’t detract from your point at all, but it just seems like the most-availab…
I agree, and am sad to observe that it is very different with Apple, where laptops available on display in a physical Apple store are often the ones a savvy customer would want to buy.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good luck trying to run a proper GNU/Linux on those Android devices. Actually tbere are plenty of other options for embedded. As for the server room, UNIX was already the winner there anyway, since the 1990's.
> Good luck trying to run a proper GNU/Linux on those Android devices. The Termux App [ https://termux.dev/en/ ] provides a full linux terminal with zsh, emacs, and apt based package manager. I've been using it in lieu of creating full apks for personal projects -- much easier to spin up a database and local webserver via ssh on my phone than to build a proper app package. I find it fits most of my linux on the go ne…
I bet it wasn't installed from Play Store, nor you are using one of the latest versions.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#438The problem is the desktop situation is such a mess. Do you go with a gtk or qt desktop and which one? And then X11 which is ancient and creaky, or wayland which is fatally nerfed in design (if not it's entire development philosophy) even when it does do what you need which is far from always? OTOH windows is becoming adware/spyware and macos is becoming big brother lockdown-wear, so maybe it is time for linux to shi…
Been using for 15 years, I've never sat there and worried about gtk or qt, Maybe wayland or X11, but I've just naturally moved to wayland? Just install something like Fedora, and you won't worry about it, it will just work. I personally hate Ubuntu btw Canonical is just not for me. I have no idea how it's so popular. Personally Fedora or NixOS are just so superior I don't know why anyone bothers with anything else.
Personally, I prefer OpenSUSE to Fedora. I've been running Leap for several years. Fedora didn't perform as well on my hardware nor was it as stable. Over the last several months, I've been piloting Arch and will likely settle there. Canonical and SUSE are both moving in directions that I'm not in favor of, e.g., tighter coupling to the enterprise/money making side. From a company perspective, sure it makes sense. But from an individual perspective, perhaps less so. I'm not looking for the Linux equivalent of Windows: bloated, telemetry, privacy invading, etc.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. I will use the OS I like and others will use the OS they prefer. It’s called choice. What stung before was that people were forced to use Windows because of lock-ins, software compatibility, etc. That doesn’t really exist any more. If there is one good thing about web apps, it’s that browsers are now the application run time and browsers are more cross platform than any software libraries that have come before it…
I'm sure as hell locked in. Linux Desktop doesn't even remotely come close to offer the things I ask out of a PC (high quality music production and image editing). On the other hand, both Windows and macOS do. And let's not even get started about work.
I have run high quality music production software on Linux. It was Windows software, that runs thanks to Wine. It works and it's even better than native applications because native applications expire when a distro version is discontinued and the application is not packaged for the current version. Windows applications installed in Wine never expire. Wine is Linux, Linux does the job.
And high quality image editing is possible, though it's probably done differently from whatever you're used to. There are plenty of graphic artists making their work on Linux and bragging about it.
So "doesn't even remotely come close" is either a lie or a display of your ignorance.
Re: Linux has achieved a 3% desktop market share
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
I might be a NT fan, yet I am the first to acknowledge NT never had a big market share on the server room. The only places where NT managed to succeed on server room have been Microsoft shops, or places where .NET was adopted as the main development stack. Workstations is another matter. In the 80's many banks were either on mainframes/micros, or using stuff like Novel Netware.
> The only places where NT managed to succeed on server room have been Microsoft shops, or places where .NET was adopted as the main development stack. .NET came out well after NT was replaced with windows 2000 (unless you claim that 2000, and thus XP and later windows OSes were also NT) > In the 80's many banks were either on mainframes/micros, or using stuff like Novel Netware. In my experience in the late 90s NT c…
.NET came in 2001, to be more precisely yes.
Until then it was all about ASP, Outlook, and SMB shares, nothing else.
All big stuff was on UNIX.
Again, when talking about the server room.
From 1999 to 2003, I was doing project delivery across Aix, Solaris, HP-UX, Windows NT/2000, so I might have an idea of how our customer based actually had their server rooms configured.
Likewise the university campus was wired to DG/UX, Solaris, eventually Red-Hat came into the picture as DG/UX server died.
Computer labs desktops were a mixture Windows 9X, NT, Mac and some lucky professors had a couple of NeXT Cubes, which they eventually replaced by Red-Hat (before Apple's aquisition).
So to each their own 1990's anecdote.