will linux ever be able to takeover windows in popularity
Quote:Original post by stimarcoQuote:Original post by eedokQuote:Original post by MikeTacular
Nope. Even if there was a revolt against Windows, I think people would go to Mac, not Linux. Anyway, I've posted this picture once before. I'll post it again.
[image with windows 91% mac 8% and Linux 1%
Where did you find these numbers? For my works website the numbers are 89% Windows 8% Mac, and 3% Linux, and we do flash games which *nix users have been vocal about not supporting, so it's odd they have a showing in our numbers.
Could any of those Linux hits be from search engine robots? Those don't tend to be run on Windows or OS X servers and it would explain much.
(Measuring OS share by browser agents has known flaws: Many browsers deliberately spoof their agent string.)
We only count people with cookies, flash and javascript enabled, so unless the bots are parsing both they shouldn't be showing up, and would these said bots come in droves of the thousands?
Perhaps people have found that firing up a flash game is the quickest way to kill a memory hogging Firefox process.
(Sorry, I had to say it [grin])
(Sorry, I had to say it [grin])
Quote:Original post by Promit
Perhaps people have found that firing up a flash game is the quickest way to kill a memory hogging Firefox process.
(Sorry, I had to say it [grin])
Hehe, its more likely that the linux marketshare is above 1% (On the desktop it is probably closer to 2 or 3% on the global market, maybe even higher), any marketshare study that uses visitor statistics from US websites will get a much lower marketshare for linux than a study that uses for example Asian or even European websites.
Also, any marketshare that uses sales as their metric will get extremly low values for linux (Most desktop linux users still buy computers with Windows and then downloads and installs linux themselves, so even if they're not using Windows they might show up in statistics as Windows users)
As for a flashgames website the higher than average number of linux hits could also be caused by the horrible lack of games for linux :)
w3schools currently has linux hovering slightly below the 4% mark on their visitor statistics, According to Context 2.8% of the computers sold in the UK in June this year had linux preinstalled.
It is likely that a large number of UK computer buyers have installed linux on machines originally sold with Windows aswell since a very large number of linux users also run windows on the same machine (And if you want both Windows and Linux your best option is generally to buy a machine with Windows so that you get the licence as cheap as possible)
Quote:Original post by Oxyd
Also, are you guys talking about Linux, as in, the GNU OS kernel, or the platform and the set of all software that happens to be usable with it?
Quote:Original post by Oluseyi
Linux is infrastructure. Linux doesn't matter as a consumer-facing brand, and never will (in part because Linux, formally, is just a component - a kernel that has to be mated to a userspace, filesystems, windowing systems, desktop environments, utilities and applications from third parties). Consequently, Linux and the complete collection of software comprising a GNU/Linux distribution...
The truth is, usage of the name "Linux" is inconsistent. People who try to suddenly re-inject rigor are unnecessarily splitting hairs. Deal with "Linux" as it is perceived in the market - as consumers making a selection would think of it - not as you would wish it were perceived.
Quote:Original post by Talroth
Ah, I feel the need to point out that when I went with 'something I knew' that something was Ubuntu...
Yes, I know. You know Ubuntu, but most people know Windows. That's the challenge Linux faces in penetrating the desktop.
Quote:Original post by DeadXorAlive
True, but successful opensource projects are mostly organized in this way. Take the kernel for example, like Oluseyi pointed out, it isn't a hobby project anymore: I believe the biggest contributors to the kernel are IBM and SUN. Torvalds acts like the dictator with a small circle of trusted developers. For some sufficiently important projects, especially when backed with commercial interests, open source development tend to work.
The kernel works. It's just technically underwhelming. Rather than brilliant, elegant design, it succeeds mostly by brute force and climbing the Intel Power Curve.
Quote:Original post by Evil Steve
Name 3 things that are supposedly "better than windows".
1. Ease of software upgrades
sudo apt-get upgradeAll of my software is automatically upgraded with one command. And I don't have to go through dozens of stupid installation programs asking me to read the EULA and click "Next" half a dozen times.
2. Its my system. I make the rules.
I don't have to have a stupid "My Documents" folder (I hate that so much it drives me insane). If I don't like the visual appearance of my system, I have dozens of other GUI/visual environments to choose from (I've tried several since I became a Linux user). I can control everything that matters to me as a user. Windows enforces certain restrictions and is much less flexible than Linux.
3. Freedom (in two flavors)
Linux is free in that I don't have to pay for it. I don't have to pay for the kernel, the visual environment, the code compilers, the editors, the word processor, the image editor, etc. etc. etc. I'm building a new PC at the moment and if I had to pay for a copy of Vista, Office, Photoshop, DVD player software, etc. that would set me back at least $250-$300 I would think. The other freedom is in the ability to tweak the system the way you want it, which I already explained.
4. Run a modern OS on anything
Vista has such stupidly high system requirements most people have to buy a new computer to get it to run well (certainly if they want to play the latest games). Linux can run on anything and everything. It runs on the international space station, most of the top super computers in the world, and in embedded devices we use every day. Microsoft ends support for their OSes eventually (XP is about to be put on that list). After that happens, its game over. You are -forced- to upgrade...probably to a more demanding OS that your current hardware can't support. (To most of you this may not matter since you upgrade often anyway, but what about the people who only care about checking their e-mail and other small tasks?)
5. Its a great learning tool
I've learned a ton about computers since moving to Linux (and this was during my final year as a student of computer engineering in college). At my job right now I'm having to deal with the Win32 API for the first time and I hate it. I think MSDN and the documentation is complete shit. All they give me is an API, but don't explain how anything in their system works or why.
There are tons of reasons why Linux is "better" than Windows, and vice versa why Windows is "better" than Linux. But better is such an arbitrary term. What I think makes an OS better is not what you think makes an OS better. The whole question of this topic in the first place is equally bogus. What does it mean for Linux to be "more popular" than Windows? Linux is very popular with technically minded people, and not very popular with gamers and casual users. It all depends on the demographic you are looking at.
Arguing why Windows is better than Linux or Linux is better than Windows is a stupid discussion to have. Each have their strengths, weaknesses, and everyone formulates their own opinions (informed or otherwise). I think a better discussion might be "Why do you prefer Linux over Windows?".
1.) Such a system gets incredibly buggy and hard to maintain when you have as many apps as windows does. While that would be a nice feature, it is not plausible when an OS gets as big as windows.
2.) Hate the My Docs folder? Just don't use it... And there are a ton of different apps out there that let you tweak every aspect of windows' visuals, heck if you have the time, you can edit the registry directly, windows does not limit you nearly as much as you seem to think.
3.)Hard to beat free. However, why toss the other apps into the discussion? Even more, there are free alternatives to the software you mentioned, for windows.
4.) Vista can run on pretty low end hardware. Saying they need to high requirements to run the latest games... is not really the OS's fault at all is it? Plus, linux is not some magical OS that suddenly runs the same app a billion times faster on crap hardware, so i find this comment absurd "Linux can run on anything and everything"
5.) I can't comment on this as i am not entirely a programmer myself. But i must ask, if you have already graduated as a computer engineer, shouldn't you have already touched the win32 api? Again, i am not a programmer, so i may be incorrect, but just wondering.
2.) Hate the My Docs folder? Just don't use it... And there are a ton of different apps out there that let you tweak every aspect of windows' visuals, heck if you have the time, you can edit the registry directly, windows does not limit you nearly as much as you seem to think.
3.)Hard to beat free. However, why toss the other apps into the discussion? Even more, there are free alternatives to the software you mentioned, for windows.
4.) Vista can run on pretty low end hardware. Saying they need to high requirements to run the latest games... is not really the OS's fault at all is it? Plus, linux is not some magical OS that suddenly runs the same app a billion times faster on crap hardware, so i find this comment absurd "Linux can run on anything and everything"
5.) I can't comment on this as i am not entirely a programmer myself. But i must ask, if you have already graduated as a computer engineer, shouldn't you have already touched the win32 api? Again, i am not a programmer, so i may be incorrect, but just wondering.
Quote:Original post by owl
besides... WTF is a pound?
The pound is equally as arbitrary as the newton. Neither can be replicated in a laboratory environment as part of their definitions (the mass component) are defined by prototypes sitting in dark closets (which, interestingly enough, have proven not quite as stable as once thought).
Quote:Original post by Rootssudo apt-get upgrade
All of my software is automatically upgraded with one command. And I don't have to go through dozens of stupid installation programs asking me to read the EULA and click "Next" half a dozen times.
Ok. What was updated? How does a non-technical user trivially review what was changed, or, perhaps more importantly, selectively upgrade applications - ie, not upgrade every piece of software on the system?
No, Windows doesn't address this either. In fact, I think that Microsoft missed a huge opportunity with MSI. Instead of just a system service and installation media package format, it should have supported checking a URL for updates and managing which packages to update - like *nix package managers, but slicker. Like Apple's System Update, but not just for Apple (or Microsoft) software.
Quote:I don't have to have a stupid "My Documents" folder (I hate that so much it drives me insane). If I don't like the visual appearance of my system, I have dozens of other GUI/visual environments to choose from (I've tried several since I became a Linux user). I can control everything that matters to me as a user. Windows enforces certain restrictions and is much less flexible than Linux.
Those are conventions, not restrictions. Conventions aid familiarity. Any Windows users can sit down at any Windows computer (generally speaking) and know how to get around.
That said, they truly are conventions. You don't have to have a My Documents folder; you can name it whatever you want and place it wherever you want.
Quote:Linux is free in that I don't have to pay for it. I don't have to pay for the kernel, the visual environment, the code compilers, the editors, the word processor, the image editor, etc. etc. etc. I'm building a new PC at the moment and if I had to pay for a copy of Vista, Office, Photoshop, DVD player software, etc. that would set me back at least $250-$300 I would think.
That cash expenditure buys back the time I would have to spend trying to get my Linux distribution to work precisely the way I want, reliably. It's a trade-off: money or time? You have more time than money, or prefer to spend your time. I have very, very little time. I'd rather spend money so that what little time I do have can be frittered arguing pointlessly on GDNet instead! [smile]
Quote:The other freedom is in the ability to tweak the system the way you want it, which I already explained.
While Linux is considerably more configurable than Windows, the overwhelming majority of Linux users are unaware of the actual level of configurability of Windows, which they underestimate. Further, OS X is almost as configurable as Linux, but provides many of Windows' benefits as well.
Quote:Vista has such stupidly high system requirements most people have to buy a new computer to get it to run well (certainly if they want to play the latest games). Linux can run on anything and everything.
This is false. Yes, the Linux kernel can run on anything and everything, but can I run a functional, modern Linux desktop distribution comparable to Vista on anything and everything? No. So let's stop with the disingenuous comparison. I can't run KDE4.1 on an embedded device.
Quote:Microsoft ends support for their OSes eventually (XP is about to be put on that list). After that happens, its game over. You are -forced- to upgrade...
This, too, is false. You can continue to use your Windows OS even after Microsoft has stopped offering support. Besides, how often does your average home user turn to Microsoft for support, as opposed to Geek Squad or the local "computer guy"?
Quote:I've learned a ton about computers since moving to Linux (and this was during my final year as a student of computer engineering in college). At my job right now I'm having to deal with the Win32 API for the first time and I hate it. I think MSDN and the documentation is complete shit. All they give me is an API, but don't explain how anything in their system works or why.
Wow.
Any unfamiliar system is difficult to use at first. Throw in ideology and of course you "hate it." But to suggest that MSDN is just an API sans explanation is just not true.
Improve your search-fu.
Quote:Arguing why Windows is better than Linux or Linux is better than Windows is a stupid discussion to have.
But you did it anyway.
Linux isn't better than Windows. Windows isn't better than Linux. People just have preferences, but Linux is not geared to cater to the apparent preferences of the majority of consumers.
Quote:Original post by CrimsonSunQuote:Original post by owl
besides... WTF is a pound?
The pound is equally as arbitrary as the newton. Neither can be replicated in a laboratory environment as part of their definitions (the mass component) are defined by prototypes sitting in dark closets (which, interestingly enough, have proven not quite as stable as once thought).
It's also what they call their dollar. Youtube for "Dragon's Den" and watch!
Warning: addictive show!
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement