- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Guilty by Association
|
|
|
Comments (59)
39 earlier comments in the full thread.
> ...the only way to conclude that Linux desktops outnumber Apple desktops by any appreciable margin...
From previous comments, I don't think dcparris, tuxchick, or myself are arguing "any appreciable margin" here Dino. Merely that it's greater than or equal to. I can't speak for herzeleid, as i haven't read enough of his comments on the matter.
From previous comments, I don't think dcparris, tuxchick, or myself are arguing "any appreciable margin" here Dino. Merely that it's greater than or equal to. I can't speak for herzeleid, as i haven't read enough of his comments on the matter.
OK, now we're going all fuzzy and making confused comparisons. The total number of Unix-type operating systems in all categories- server, desktop, network devices, and whatever else you can think of outnumbers Windows. It always has. Yet Unix/Linux have always been the unwanted stepchildren to hardware vendors. It wasn't that long ago that Unix users had to pay a premium for custom network card drivers. Yep, the same old cruddy Ethernet adapters that Windows lusers could pick up cheap, with drivers.
It doesn't do any good to separate into desktop, workstation, server- that just weakens the position of the "more users = more clout" argument. There isn't anything that's unique to any category. I know, someone is going to argue "but multimedia only belongs on desktops." Feh. Go shoot yourself in the foot somewhere else, please. If you're going to argue that market share = clout, then count all users. Because that's the legitimate measure, not some nitpicky categorization. Because real Unix/Linux admins in the real world move machines around according to need. The desktop PC of today is the file server of tomorrow. The hotrod Windows laptop with all the bells and whistles gets turned into a hotrod Linux development box. I just purchased a batch of ASUS mobos for a customer that are going into both servers and workstations. These mobos have everything onboard- sound, video, GigE, etc. We got a nice discount for buying the batch, and we have all the flexibility we want to move these beasts around as we need. Some will be windoze boxes, some will be Linux. Our hardware has to be supported cross-platform, and we don't want to have the OS tied to the hardware, despite Microshaft's desires to the contrary.
That's just one example of the fallacy of ghettoizing the desktop category. And even if a person finds it useful to do so, then you have to include Mac OSX, because the drivers and codecs are virtually the same. It's a lot shorter step from Mac to Linux than it is from Mac to Windows, yet you see many vendors supporting Mac and Windows. But not Linux. A single codebase for Unix-type systems will support a larger number of users than a Windows driver. It isn't even possible for a single windoze driver to support all windozes- most vendors don't bother with anything older than Windows 2000. And now we have Vista which breaks both hardware and software applications right and left.
That's why I think that Ubuntu's argument that they need to include non-free guff by default, instead of using the traditional method of putting it in a separate repo apart from the free repos, is bushwah. We already have the numbers. I'm bored with hearing the "embracing non-free software produces free software" song. What's the plan? How does this magic occur? As someone posted somewhere else on LXer, if Ubuntu gets ten million users using Nvidia and Flash and non-free codecs, where's their leverage for change when there are no alternatives?
Read the whole commentIt doesn't do any good to separate into desktop, workstation, server- that just weakens the position of the "more users = more clout" argument. There isn't anything that's unique to any category. I know, someone is going to argue "but multimedia only belongs on desktops." Feh. Go shoot yourself in the foot somewhere else, please. If you're going to argue that market share = clout, then count all users. Because that's the legitimate measure, not some nitpicky categorization. Because real Unix/Linux admins in the real world move machines around according to need. The desktop PC of today is the file server of tomorrow. The hotrod Windows laptop with all the bells and whistles gets turned into a hotrod Linux development box. I just purchased a batch of ASUS mobos for a customer that are going into both servers and workstations. These mobos have everything onboard- sound, video, GigE, etc. We got a nice discount for buying the batch, and we have all the flexibility we want to move these beasts around as we need. Some will be windoze boxes, some will be Linux. Our hardware has to be supported cross-platform, and we don't want to have the OS tied to the hardware, despite Microshaft's desires to the contrary.
That's just one example of the fallacy of ghettoizing the desktop category. And even if a person finds it useful to do so, then you have to include Mac OSX, because the drivers and codecs are virtually the same. It's a lot shorter step from Mac to Linux than it is from Mac to Windows, yet you see many vendors supporting Mac and Windows. But not Linux. A single codebase for Unix-type systems will support a larger number of users than a Windows driver. It isn't even possible for a single windoze driver to support all windozes- most vendors don't bother with anything older than Windows 2000. And now we have Vista which breaks both hardware and software applications right and left.
That's why I think that Ubuntu's argument that they need to include non-free guff by default, instead of using the traditional method of putting it in a separate repo apart from the free repos, is bushwah. We already have the numbers. I'm bored with hearing the "embracing non-free software produces free software" song. What's the plan? How does this magic occur? As someone posted somewhere else on LXer, if Ubuntu gets ten million users using Nvidia and Flash and non-free codecs, where's their leverage for change when there are no alternatives?
I would argue for an equivalent or slightly higher market share for GNU/Linux. dino matched what I said, as far as the full-time users are concerned. I think that would be the only way to demonstrate that Apple has a larger market share. Even then, I wonder by how much?
What difference does it make if users are full-time, or multi-boot, or whatever? We still want everything to work.
That's true, TC.
>We still want everything to work.
But only up to a point, in some cases. Some of us draw the line at binary drivers, some of us don't.
But only up to a point, in some cases. Some of us draw the line at binary drivers, some of us don't.
Shouldn't we be looking at market size rather than market share? Apple has done very well the last year, but I'm not sure that means Linux is a less-profitable market to support.
If the million Fedora users were all the Linux/Unix users in the world, and Nvidia gets half of the market, by my calculations, that is 500,000 customers. That seems to be a lot of customers to ignore even if it is like 0.05% of the Windows market.
Just curious what is the share of the market for, say, blind computer users?
If the million Fedora users were all the Linux/Unix users in the world, and Nvidia gets half of the market, by my calculations, that is 500,000 customers. That seems to be a lot of customers to ignore even if it is like 0.05% of the Windows market.
Just curious what is the share of the market for, say, blind computer users?
>but I'm not sure that means Linux is a less-profitable market to support.
Apple has some advantages.
Apple is Apple. Linux is Debian, Fedora, opensuse, Mandriva, yada, yada, and yada.
That's got to be easier for manufacturers to deal with. One place to turn to, one place to worry about.
Apple has some advantages.
Apple is Apple. Linux is Debian, Fedora, opensuse, Mandriva, yada, yada, and yada.
That's got to be easier for manufacturers to deal with. One place to turn to, one place to worry about.
Quoting: That's got to be easier for manufacturers to deal with. One place to turn to, one place to worry about.
one ring to find them and in the darkness bind them...
;-)
dino, not quite. That's one selling point of open-sourcing drivers- the distribution maintainers take on the job of packaging them.
>dino, not quite.
Yes. You and I both know that. Experience with printers and scanners highlights the fact. The Video Card manufacturers haven't progressed to that point yet.
The saps.
Yes. You and I both know that. Experience with printers and scanners highlights the fact. The Video Card manufacturers haven't progressed to that point yet.
The saps.
quote:: It wasn't that long ago that Unix users had to pay a premium for custom network card drivers. Yep, the same old cruddy Ethernet adapters that Windows lusers could pick up cheap, with drivers. ::quote
The fact that those are now well supported for Linux - Server and Desktop - is because Linux as a Server has such a large market share.
When it comes to technologies, 3D for example, which are not useful on the server, they are not well supported for Linux. The reason for this, the lack of market share for Linux as a Desktop.
When the manufacturers are convinced that they will loose their market share by not supporting Linux on the Desktop, they will support Linux on the Desktop. When they are convinced that not opening their drivers or their CODECs will loose them market share, they will open their drivers and CODECs. They will only be convinced of that when Linux on the Desktop has sufficient Market share.
The solution to the problem of convincing the manufacturers that they will loose market share is to get more Market share for Linux on the Desktop (enough that the manufacturers need Linux on the Desktop, for product sales, as they currently need Linux on the Server), is to get more people using Linux as their preferred Desktop OS. One solution to this is to make all those proprietary CODECs and Drivers, that Microsoft users are currently familiar with, available to new Linux Desktop users in a form that is easy for them to install (as I have mentioned, in other posts). Microsoft users are conditioned to install extra drivers etc from a CD which accompanies Hardware, so this is how, I believe, it should be done.
If anyone has a better, realistic solution, that leverage's current non Linux users (Mr and Mrs Joe Public) expectations, please let me know.
Read the whole commentThe fact that those are now well supported for Linux - Server and Desktop - is because Linux as a Server has such a large market share.
When it comes to technologies, 3D for example, which are not useful on the server, they are not well supported for Linux. The reason for this, the lack of market share for Linux as a Desktop.
When the manufacturers are convinced that they will loose their market share by not supporting Linux on the Desktop, they will support Linux on the Desktop. When they are convinced that not opening their drivers or their CODECs will loose them market share, they will open their drivers and CODECs. They will only be convinced of that when Linux on the Desktop has sufficient Market share.
The solution to the problem of convincing the manufacturers that they will loose market share is to get more Market share for Linux on the Desktop (enough that the manufacturers need Linux on the Desktop, for product sales, as they currently need Linux on the Server), is to get more people using Linux as their preferred Desktop OS. One solution to this is to make all those proprietary CODECs and Drivers, that Microsoft users are currently familiar with, available to new Linux Desktop users in a form that is easy for them to install (as I have mentioned, in other posts). Microsoft users are conditioned to install extra drivers etc from a CD which accompanies Hardware, so this is how, I believe, it should be done.
If anyone has a better, realistic solution, that leverage's current non Linux users (Mr and Mrs Joe Public) expectations, please let me know.
>Mr and Mrs Joe Public
Rockeaters can keep using Microsoft. I don't personally want them using Linux. They don't use Macs and Apple is fine without them, Linux will be fine, too.
We need someone like Sun producing boxes for the discriminating *nix crowd, something for the high end without being for the elite or for people serving a billion files a second. Sun could make a buck, and any drivers that work well with Solaris would (at least I think they would, IANAP) work well with Linux.
The fact that Linux works well with old hardware makes a difference, also. I don't need the fancy new stuff (although I regularly drool over it) because that old POS that I found out next to the garbage works fine. It's actually a pretty good little box. My three year old Dell keeps chugging along, as does the six year old Dell on top of it. Nvidia isn't very motivated to open source drivers for six year old cards.
Rockeaters can keep using Microsoft. I don't personally want them using Linux. They don't use Macs and Apple is fine without them, Linux will be fine, too.
We need someone like Sun producing boxes for the discriminating *nix crowd, something for the high end without being for the elite or for people serving a billion files a second. Sun could make a buck, and any drivers that work well with Solaris would (at least I think they would, IANAP) work well with Linux.
The fact that Linux works well with old hardware makes a difference, also. I don't need the fancy new stuff (although I regularly drool over it) because that old POS that I found out next to the garbage works fine. It's actually a pretty good little box. My three year old Dell keeps chugging along, as does the six year old Dell on top of it. Nvidia isn't very motivated to open source drivers for six year old cards.
Quoting:When it comes to technologies, 3D for example, which are not useful on the server, they are not well supported for Linux. The reason for this, the lack of market share for Linux as a Desktop.
This makes for a nice thought: Will high-end 3D cards on the server be required to publish Vista applications from the Longhorn server to the Vista desktop because of the Aero UI? If so, we can expect high-end 3D cards to appear in server and as a consequence, FLOSS drivers -- because those same servers will need to run Linux. That last part is now becoming especially true with the virtualisation hype.
What a story that would make. Vista Aero and virtualisation being responsible for open-sourcing 3D drivers :-)
quote:: What a story that would make. Vista Aero and virtualisation being responsible for open-sourcing 3D drivers :-) ::quote
nice thought.
nice thought.
And very realistic. The reason Linux started working so well on laptops is because all the new-fangled blade-servers use a lot of laptop components. Same story, different hardware :-)
quote:: And very realistic. The reason Linux started working so well on laptops is because all the new-fangled blade-servers use a lot of laptop components. Same story, different hardware :-) ::quote
Now you are starting to get it. This is what I've been saying all along. It's due to the fact that the manufacturers see an advantage to them in supporting Linux Servers, because Linux Servers have a large Market share. The fact that Desktop Linux - on Laptops - benefits is a fortuitous accident.
They did not set out to support Desktop Linux on any platform, they set out to support Linux Blade Servers.
Linux Servers don't need high end Graphics cards, so there is no reason for the manufacturers to support Linux with high end graphics cards. Maybe Linux Distributors should make it necessary that all Linux Server run with the latest 3D desktop.
Now you are starting to get it. This is what I've been saying all along. It's due to the fact that the manufacturers see an advantage to them in supporting Linux Servers, because Linux Servers have a large Market share. The fact that Desktop Linux - on Laptops - benefits is a fortuitous accident.
They did not set out to support Desktop Linux on any platform, they set out to support Linux Blade Servers.
Linux Servers don't need high end Graphics cards, so there is no reason for the manufacturers to support Linux with high end graphics cards. Maybe Linux Distributors should make it necessary that all Linux Server run with the latest 3D desktop.
Quoting:Linux Servers don't need high end Graphics cards, so there is no reason for the manufacturers to support Linux with high end graphics cards.
Yeah, but the question remains: Will Vista/Longhorn servers require 3D cards?
quote:: Yeah, but the question remains: Will Vista/Longhorn servers require 3D cards? ::quote
I don't see why they would, Vista runs quite well, without the foofery, on low end video Cards, as indeed does any other version of windows.
You go Control Panel -> System -> Advanced -> Performance Settings and in the Performance Setting popup, in the Visual Effects Tab select Adjust for best performance. This sets a Windows 95/98 style desktop. As far as I'm aware that's how most Windows Sys Admins run Windows Servers.
I don't see why they would, Vista runs quite well, without the foofery, on low end video Cards, as indeed does any other version of windows.
You go Control Panel -> System -> Advanced -> Performance Settings and in the Performance Setting popup, in the Visual Effects Tab select Adjust for best performance. This sets a Windows 95/98 style desktop. As far as I'm aware that's how most Windows Sys Admins run Windows Servers.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
Real numbers = real threat.
When you define something and give it a name, you have something to fear. When it is the big 'unknown' you can lump it in with other things you've defined and feel safer because you have one less thing to fear.