Mobile Proliferation Killed Linux Hopes For World Domination

Poor Linux. It struggled so hard to dominate the world. It was the little open source engine that could, but it didn’t. It never even came close to Microsoft Windows on the desktop, with less than 2% share of desktops. The bright spot for Linux is that 60%+ of servers on the Internet run Linux.

But the real end to Linux’s hope for world dominance came when mobile platforms iOS and Android cleaned clocks in the mobile market. Sure, Android is built on top of Linux, but Linux is only one of many piece parts of the Android mobile operating system. It is not a Linux distribution
 
The mobile platform space is extremely fluid, and I do not think the open source community can muster the forces necessary to compete. Open source never seems to be the innovator. Instead, it seems to disrupt pricing power for established technologies.
 
Game over for worldwide dominance. But server dominance is nothing to sneeze at.

Comments

Thanks

Thank you for your comments. The truth is, I'm incompetent and ignorant about Linux. I'm sorry for this post, I thought I'm a good analyst...but I'm a complete joke.

:(

None

Nice try

All of my replies are verified. I stand by my analysis that Linux will not dominate the mobile market the way Microsoft dominated the desktop market.

OK - who posted the

OK - who posted the faux "Mike Gualtieri (not verified) on Sat, 10/29/2011 - 08:53 " post?

Sorry, based on the replies that do not say "(not verified)", I think Mr. Gualtieri's ego is too big for him to admit his comment about iOS and Android meaning Linux isn't making it in the mobile market isn't correct. I think it's pretty much been clearly pointed out to him that Android's user interface/virtual machine running on top of a modified Linux kernel constitutes the use of Linux in the mobile market. That makes his statement incorrect. However, Google could, by changing libraries and Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) in its virtual machine, make Android run on top of another kernel, the easiest change would probably be to some derivation of BSD.

So, the short answer is: "Comment posters, don't hold your breath. Mike isn't going to back down."

Do you know what's the

Do you know what's the kernel?

Another reason the linux desktop is irrelevant

The only ones generally referring to Linux distros as "GNU/Linux" are people like RMS, who is now the butt of so many jokes for a reason - most people who are not total freetards use the term "linux" to refer to both the kernel by itself, the kernel+userland tools, and any distro comprised of a linux kernel and a suite of programs.

But back to the main point - the Linux desktop has always been irrelevant to the majority of users for a reason - the desktop is buggy, no matter what distro you use, and doesn't run many of the programs that people want to run.

But instead of arguing over something that you are clearly wrong about, why not answer the question the author asks - are mobile devices making linux even more irrelevant? The answer is yes.

First, linux (the kernel) can fairly easily be swapped out for a bsd kernel in android if the lawsuits go the wrong way - ask anyone who's ever done system programming. To use the bsd network stack, for example, is an extra #include and a few #defines.

Second, linux (the distro) has always been irrelevant to the vast majority of users. It won't run all their programs, it breaks on every update, and it's only free if your time is worth zero.

Now, with mobile devices cannibalizing desktop and laptop sales, the "Year of the linux desktop" is irretrievably lost, and the only real uses of linux, for the vast majority, are as infrastructure - toiling away hidden on servers or underneath runtime systems like Android - and in both cases, it can be replaced by *bsd should any of the current lawsuits require it.

You might not like it, but denying it, or doing a bunch of hand-waving over (your mistaken) terminology (trying to claim that linux only refers to the kernel) must makes you look like a freetard.

"GNU/Linux" is used to mean

"GNU/Linux" is used to mean the Distros in a context where the kernel is also involved.. When the mobile devices are not even using WIMP interface, how can you expect an OS (or distros), made for DESKTOPS, work on it? Linux doesn't run many programs people want to run? Name a few people.. (Don't tell me Photoshop, tell me raster-graphics editor)

and exactly, Android is going to replace Linux only if they face lawsuits (0 probability).. You already meant Linux is the best out there..

If you haven't realised already, these people are talking about the author's ignorance on the topic and not about the entomology/naming controversy and by "Linux", if he meant the "distros", his statement could be translated to

Mac OS X's hopes for global mobile market dominance have been killed.
Window's XP/vista/7's hopes for global mobile market dominance have been killed..

Do they make sense ^? Same goes for the article.
I don't know what problems you faced with your GNU/Linux but my experience with GNU/Linux has been fine. No matter what, Linux is the best kernel out there and it shall dominate the mobile market kernel share..

Almost nobody calls it "GNU/Linux"

... the only people calling it "GNU/Linux" are the "followers or RMS". Do you call your car a Mazda/Ford because the engine was made by Mazda? Do you call an airplane a GE/Boeing because the engines were made by General Electric? Does anyone call it FreeBSD/OSX? or Mach/Windows?

I thought not.

The proof is in the pudding - the vast majority of programs out there will not run under linux, and have poor, or non-existent, linux versions.

As for "best kernel", in the consumer market, it's just a rounding error. In the mobile market, it has to be hidden from the user, and I've been using linux since slakware 3.2, and it the desktop is still definitely not ready for prime time after 15 years. Just look at how creaky old XP managed to dominate netbooks within 1 quarter, even though it cost more than linux.

None of the linux desktops are stable. They all break critical components on major updates, some of them lack essentials like being able to change the DPI, printer support is still hit or miss (mostly miss - I bought a color laser specifically because it says on the box that it supports linux - it doesn't).

It's gotten so bad that I'm switching my desktop to FreeBSD while typing this on my linux laptop (broken wireless, broken printing, broken sound, broken video ... worked fine when it was installed, but they all fell victim to bad updates).

Linux will simply never be ready for the masses, and after 15 years, I'm tired of wasting my time bit-twiddling to fix the latest breakage. Linux is only free if your time has a negative value. For everyone else, they're far better off with a commercial OS that PAYS someone to fix things properly the first time, and has testers who know what they're doing for a living.

"Do you call your car a

"Do you call your car a Mazda/Ford because the engine was made by Mazda? Do you call an airplane a GE/Boeing because the engines were made by General Electric? Does anyone call it FreeBSD/OSX? or Mach/Windows?"

In that case you should call it "GNU" and not Linux.. ISince GNU was an OS itself, the then Distros used the suffix Linux... "debian linux" and thats how the brand Linux originated... And now because of the not-so-userfriendly GNU stuff (the GUI part), the image/reputation of Linux, the kernel is getting spoiled.. So, than confusing everyone by using Linux for both the entities, its better to use GNU/Linux to mean those GNU-derived OS.. And yeah, am not really a follower of RMS..

I know printer thing is kernel dependent but.. If it doesn't support Linux, I wonder if it would support FreeBSD. Secondly, i think all branded printers support Linux... Because it works for me.. :o
and, users who started using ubuntu recently don't complain...

I don't particularly care if

I don't particularly care if I say Linux or GNU/Linux or what not but I do believe though that you're wrong about Linux desktop irrelevance.

1) desktop is buggy?
Any software has bugs. MS and Apple have bugs - that's why automatic updates were invented. And they're free in most Linux distros.

2) doesn't run as many programs?
It does have alternatives to most of the important software I can think of. I honestly prefer Inkscape and Gimp to rapidly becoming bloated Photoshop/Illustator. And I'm sorry - but how is it hard going to Ubuntu Software center and pointy/click on some random program to install it? IMHO if my 62 yo mom can do it in Xubuntu - anyone can. The thing about Windows - there might be many programs, but huge chunk of them perform the same functions or based on the same libraries. Try to name a program that doesn't have an alternative in Linux - you'll be hardpressed to find them.

3) Breaks on every update?
I honestly don't know what are you talking about. I've been using various distros for years now. It never broken for me once.

4) "it's only free if your time is worth zero"
That was exactly the reason why I switched away from OSx and Windows. You know why - I don't have time to buy and install new OS versions just because of new commercial cycle begins for MS. I don't wanna and don't have time to unscrew infected computers or bother with antiviruses or spend money on them. I don't want to be figuring out how to transfer my outlook mails to a different system because of propriatarity of .pst format. I don't want to be pushed into using new "metro" interface or new Ribbon iterface or whatever interface - I want to have a frigging choice. I don't want to be installing new Office just because MS bents me over with .docx format.

*The reason why Windows server share is not growing and unlikely to grow - is because it/software guys know what's best for them - that's their job. There is no need to show any colorful ads or use NLP techniques to influence them.

*Mobile linux. Now - IMHo - majority of smartphone users are not techies, - the merely bought what was there and looked shiny. There are of course numerous reasons for Linux success on mobile platform and Windows being at 5% or so. IMHo - one of the main ones - Linux was picked up and pushed by large vendor. Other than that - "most people" don't know and probably don't care about the difference.

*Desktop Linux - can easily be just as popular. If Google would to make android into desktop OS - I thing MS would be near dead by now. I personally don't see market share to be a problem. use Linux if you like it for christ sake. That's why there are choices out there.

OS'es are just bad

Well said Sam. If OS'es were cars we'd all be dead because there are so many fatal crashes. Software is messy because there are so many hardware changes, feature competition, and the sheer complexity of so much code. My argument is that the hardware changes and feature complexity have accelerated for mobile platforms. The open source community self-policing of quality is great, but not fast enough for the constant change of mobile platforms.

Unfortunately, users have learned to tolerate bugs and security flaws in exchange for more candy.

You conclusion "That's why there are choices out there" is my argument too for mobile. Linux can be a key player via Android, but will not dominate the way Microsoft Windows dominates desktops.

Be clear with your

Be clear with your sentence..you probably meant "GNU stuff are not going to dominate the mobile market."

Which would mean "Linux is not going dominate the mobile market via GNU stuff, (we know that, scroll up and read my other comment) but Linux will still dominate in another form!"

and there is no "via" here..

Another reason

Yes, the folks making the distinction between Linux the kernel, and "Linux-based" OSes are splitting hairs, but then, that is exactly what Mike does by dividing Android into something other than a Linux distro. It is a Linux based distro, by all definitions I have ever seen. Mike even considers "Linux" in the server area to be a generic term, then turns around and tries to prove it is irrelevant on the desktop, because it won't be dominant in the mobile market. I'm still not sure how failure in mobile = failure on desktop, since Microsoft seems to have failed a number of attempts in the mobile market, yet still owns the desktop. I'm also not sure how Ubuntu, suse, Red Hat, and all the others all count as generic "linux" in the server market, but Android gets separated out, and considered "not linux". He's working a double standard. He's trying to tell us that vanilla failed as an ice cream flavor, because vanilla with chocolate sauce cleaned its clock.

If you think the kernel could "easily" be swapped out, you obviously have no idea what kernel development is all about. No one I know would want to go through and remake all the custom kernel modules used in Android to be compatible with a BSD kernel.

Linux runs all my programs just fine, thanks. And most people, *if they had a choice* would find that OpenOffice does just fine for them, without the need to pay a thousand bucks for Office MegaSupreme 2010 from Microsoft. And lets not forget, they change Office every time too, adding new file formats, the ribbon bar, and a host of other things that makes everyone essentially relearn the product on every update. Office is only 500$ if your time is worth nothing.

You should also look into the lawsuits being filed, perhaps. Not a single one of them relate at all to the Linux kernel, but rather to the Dalvik Java VM.

By the way, your use of the term 'freetard' just makes you look unprofessional, and underage.

Swapping kernels

On swapping kernels ...

First, I *have* written system software. On one project, we were thinking of embedding a complete http server into the kernel to avoid the overhead of switching between kernel mode and userland.

Second, Apple did it - twice.

The kernel used for Android is far from your vanilla linux. It's highly modified, and porting those mods to bsd isn't that big a deal since you already have the source. It would be mostly drudge work, same as modifying network code to work on bsd is an #include and a few #defines, then test test test.

It's not all that hard. Really. And you can bet Google has already done it, because they're not stupid - they always have a Plan B.

My use of the term "freetard" relates to those who insist (foolishly) on calling it "GNU/linux". You don't see people calling a jumbo jet a GE/Boeing, or a car a Mazda/Ford, or referring to BSD/OSX, or Mach/Windows, or other such nonsense. Just like nobody calls it Android/linux (or Android/GNU/linux). People like RMS who refuse to speak to anyone who calls it "just linux" are the ones who are small-minded, petulant, childish losers.

Its rather you who sounds

Its rather you who sounds like "small-minded, petulant, childish loser".

You have got to be kidding

Mr. Gualtieri,

While reading you blog post I checked my calendar. I was sure it was a joke. But it's not april the 1st. I don't have the time to read all comments but I do want do point out the obvious to you. You seem to need it.

When you state that an operating system is more then just a kernel you are right. A full operating system is much more than just a kernel. Every operating system is. That why there is a multi year flame-war on the internet about linux vs gnu/linux. Stating things like "Linux is a part of Android, but that is like saying Mac OS is Unix". Apple is quite clear on that part: "OS X Lion is built on a fully compliant UNIX foundation.". It is UNIX wether you would define it that way or not. Android needs a kernel, that kernel is provided by the linux kernel, there is no other part that is linux except the kernel!

What you are saying sounds a lot like:"Windows server core is not windows because explorer.exe is not the shell". That sir is a ridicules statement. Just as ridicules as:"Android is not linux because gnome/kde/xfce is not the shell", or any other part that is not the kernel.

Your statement makes me question the way forrester does it's research. I agree with an earlier comment by another user that forrester should fire you. Not to punish you or because I don't like you. Solely to distance themselves from your inaccurate statements, make sure it doesn't happen again and do damage control.

A Simple Question

Dear Mike,

I have a simple question have you ever thought that Linux will dominate in your reader base? The readers slapped on your lame and idiotic post without knowing some basic facts about Kernel, GUI and OSes. You should write something about patenting laws and cat-fight between MSFT and Apple or Samsung. You should understand the standard of your knowledge. Please in recent future do not try to write anything about the word "Linux".

Regards

You accusation is false

Soumyabrata,
Apprarently all of the other comments on this post have you fooled into thinking that I don't understand operating systems. I am a computer science major and I have written operating systems in Z80 and later in C related to X-Windows. So, instead of addressing my main point that I do not think Linux (however you wish to define it) will dominate mobile platforms, you attack my credentials.

A simple question: Do you think Linux will dominate mobile platforms the way Windows dominates desktops? Why?

What does it mean by the word "domination" ?

Hi Mike,

When you are writing about OS's market share or specifically Kernel's market share, you are talking about "consumer niche market". Consumer level niche market changes with time and relational factors. Unfortunately in your post you have showed a vested interest to corner Linux and defacto Open Source standards. You did your major in CS, but have you ever tried to understand the reason for Windows' dominance in consumer level niche PC market? Take my nine points

1. MSFT was aggressive and the market was self-expanding for years
2. Manufacturers endorsed Windows due to the fear of "Mac"
3. Due to significance difference between consumer level and developers' level. Communication channels (blog/forum) were absent for years of MSFT dominance
4. A little "openness" about the architecture (i386/x64 Open Standard). Cheaper alternative to Mac
5. An easy installer (linux based OSs lacked this feature till a few years ago)
6. MSFT Office - this changed the game for Windows. It's more innovative than any damn MSFT's kid and no Linux based competitor till date
7. Games - Easy coding and SDK for DirectX have inspired Game Developers to endorse Windows.
8. Adobe - I think Adobe's product arrays for Windows have benefited MSFT more than Adobe itself.
9. Piracy - Easily available pirated copies of Windows. In India (for e.g) 72% of consumer level Windows' PC are running pirated copy of it. This actually benefits MSFT by eliminating the knowledge that there are free, open source, legal alternatives to use.

But unfortunately none of the points tell anything positive about the OS called Windows like performance, efficiency and security. Linux based OSs talk about these three points first. Comparing Linux with Windows is like comparing a not-so-good-looking Nobel laureate with a stupid voluptuous blonde.

And more over desktop market is shrinking and by the end of this decade, probably there will be insignificant PC market. But still there will be some nerds (like me and probably you) using desktops for developing products for handheld(s) running different Linux-based distros. And on that date you will write a blog post how Windows had dominated the market, tried really hard to survive but then left the market silently - another Game over.

(Nothing personal about it). Regards

Sorry?

Analyst? You do not even understand the difference between the concept or Linux Kernel and the concept of Operating System. Since when is ignorance a point of view? You've had your fifteen minutes of fame, congratulations.

All operating systems have kernels

Jacob,
1. All opertaing systems have kernels.
2. My post was not an essay question to prove I understand operating systems. I have written operating systems in Z80 and C.
3. The key point of the post is whether or not Linux (however you want to define it) will dominate mobile platforms the way Windows dominated the desktop.
4. For the sake of argument, let's stipulate the Android = Linux (however you want to define it). It has momentum in the mobile space, but because the mobile market is so fragmented and still chaotic, I don't think Linux will dominate.

So you are also completely

So you are also completely ignorant to the fact that Android has 50% marketshare?

50% is not dominance

Warrick, 50% is not dominance, especially in the rough and tumble of the mobile marketplace. A fraction of mobile users worldwide even have smartphones or tablets.

No, 50% isn't dominance your

No, 50% isn't dominance your correct but I plucked this figure from an interview of googles 4-5 months ago, so the real figure should be nearer 55% with the current extreme rate of growth.. Androids current growth is insane, a year ago they were registering 150,000 new devices per day, this summer it was 500,000 and by the end of the year were talking almost 1 million per day! Show me another platform with growth on that level. Not even the mighty Windows had such rapid growth. Don't forget, the number of mobile users far outnumbers those with computers/laptops.

"But the real end to Linux’s hope for world dominance came when mobile platforms iOS and Android cleaned clocks in the mobile market."

Sorry, but which planet are you currently living on??

Shocking Ignorance!

"Sure, Android is built on top of Linux, but Linux is only one of many piece parts of the Android mobile operating system. It is not a Linux distribution."

Could this be the dumbest comment ever made online?? I think it's quite possible!!

Ok. But, do you agree with me

Warrick, My characterization of Linux and Android has been the cause of great controversy on this post. But, do you agree with me that the mobile market is very fragmented and chaotic? Do you agree that Linux is unlikely to dominate mobile platforms they way Windows dominated desktop computers?

It's impossible to agree with

It's impossible to agree with you for the simple reason that 550,000 people are registering Android devices everyday, This number is only getting bigger and bigger, there is no sign of a slowdown, and that slowdown will only happen once Android has completely taken over, which is only a matter of time now.. Case in point, The Amazon Fire Tablet.. In it's 1st week it's taken more per-orders than the Ipad I & II did in the same time-frames.. Yes the end user doesn't see Linux and it doesn't matter whatsoever to 90% of users that it's running on Linux or that it's Android and Amazon have stuck their own UI on top of it.. The point is that these huge companies are using it, they aren't using something else. Saying it matters if users know it's Linux for it to count is ridiculous.. Do people on a flight ask what engines are in a plane and which company built them before they strap themselves in? No they don't, but they might want to know what type of plane they are flying in and gain a preference for that particular type of plane.

IS THIS GUY SERIOUS!?

Let's face it, someone here needs to do their homework before blogging!!!

- Linux is where it's at. If we all look back to the leaked Windows 7 presentation to Best Buy, they sighted Ubuntu more than once. Every big box store computer department has at least two people using Linux (usually Ubuntu) at home.
- In the past AND more recent months, Microsoft has been selling Suse Linux licenses.
- Let's not get into the details about Secure Boot that Windows 8 is boasting.

If Linux "struggled so hard" why is Microsoft going to so much effort?
Let alone making their profit in the mobile market by sewing HTC and Samsung.
http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/Androids-Biggest-Fan-Is-Microsoft-of-C...

Very serious

Todd, I am serious. I could have brought gaming consoles into the dominance argument. Where does Linux stand when it comes to game consoles.

All I am saying is that Linux won't dominate the mobile platform the way that Windows dominated the desktop. Sure, there are different reasons. I am just making and observation and a prediction.

I haven't even made the argument that Linux kernel is based on 40+ year old ideas of what an operating system should be.

How can you even go there??

What's next, suing people for thinking the same thing? I think I'll have the steak with chips and gravy please.. Hey.. Shouts from across the restaurant.. That's what I was thinking, That's my idea!! I'll see you in court!!

I used Windows for 16 years exclusively, I knew nothing else, I now use Linux/Ubuntu Exclusively for the past 3 years now..

I used to use Windows mobile on my phones exclusively between 2002 and 2008.. Now I use Android Exclusively..

What does that say when a platform is able to pull somebody away from another one completely? And when that platform is entirely alien to them as apposed to something they know as if it's a part of their own body? It says that this platform has more to offer or why the hell would I be using it?? Once I was shown an alternative I was gone because with Windows earlier dominance, there was no alternative, it was Windows or nothing, but that has changed and is still changing.. People are becoming more aware that there is a choice. MS rode that Windows concept into the ground and now they have realized people are moving away they are fighting back, throwing crap at the wall and hoping something sticks because that old horse ain't got it anymore.

Game On

Ok Warrick. You make a good point about Android's momentum. Even if I think it won't dominate, there is a strong case to be made in the opposite. I still stand by my argument that the mobile market will continue to fragment.

Perhaps instead of saying "Game over", I should have said "Game On."

Mike

"I could have brought gaming

"I could have brought gaming consoles into the dominance argument. Where does Linux stand when it comes to game consoles. "

I would say it stands VERY WELL:

Wii – 89.36 million as of 30 September 2011
Operating system is a proprietary development of Linux.

PlayStation 3 – 56 million as of 2 November 2011
Operating system of the PlayStation 3, called CellOS, is based on FreeBSD.
(FreeBSD is not linux but as linux is unix-like and opensource).

Xbox 360 – 55 million as of 4 June 2011
Yup that's windows based.

As I said in a previous post, linux and to a greater extent unix-like OS's have a significant share on all segments except desktop.

"I haven't even made the argument that Linux kernel is based on 40+ year old ideas of what an operating system should be."

Good ideas are good no matter how old they are. Cars still use wheels, which is a 6000 years old idea.
Thta is probably why linux and other unix-like kernels (all based on good 40 years old ideas) are used where robustness is more important than nice appearance.

Mike, In case you didn't

Mike,

In case you didn't know, your very blog is already running Linux ...:
$ curl --head http://blogs.forrester.com/mike_gualtieri/11-10-25-mobile_proliferation_...
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Behavior
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 08:12:04 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.14 (Ubuntu)
X-Powered-By: PHP/5.3.2-1ubuntu4.5
Set-Cookie: SESS40553164c3cdaa5b728383de0af90d41=ip6sba19jssgjm9f55ojlrhrh3; expires=Thu, 24-Nov-2011 11:45:24 GMT; path=/; domain=.blogs.forrester.com
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html

I'm not sure why you are

I'm not sure why you are pointing this out? He already acknowledged that Linux has a huge server market share, the topic is mobile domination of which there seems to be conflicting views. Looking at the data and the facts available it's really difficult to see where he has drawn these conclusions from..

While Apple, Nokia and RIM are reportedly struggling to maintain growth in the smartphone market, the Open Handset Alliance seems to have barely gotten started. According to Google's Andy Rubin, more than 500,000 Android devices are currently being activated on a daily basis, up from 400,000 devices a couple of months ago.

Approximately 1 billion users are currently using a Nokia-branded device, most of which are relying on Oracle's J2ME technology for apps and games. However, the Open Handset Alliance clearly has a goal to make Android-powered devices the preferred choice for any type of mobile device, whether we're talking about mobile phones, smartphones or tablets.

Even if the current 4.4% week-over-week growth in Android activations should take a hit, Google will be activating 1 million devices every single day by the end of 2011. By the end of 2012, half a billion users could be carrying around Android smartphones in their pockets. Within a couple of years, that number may have reached 1 billion.

Did you even read the post?

I said that Linux has large share of servers on Internet.

Mike, Yes, I did. And you

Mike,

Yes, I did. And you said, that Linux is only used in the area of webservers and co.

However, since your very blog is running Linux, and more specifically Ubuntu, this is quite contradictionary, since Ubuntu is the one Linux distribution that is easily the most widespread desktop distribution currently available.

I just thought I might point that out.

On an unrelated note, allow me to educate you by telling you that Linux is, infact, not an operating system, but a mere Kernel.

And since both Ubuntu and Android are using the Linux *kernel*, they are Linux operating systems.

No matter how you put it, they always were, and will always be Linux.

I urge everyone to get a

I urge everyone to get a refund for your manufacturer installed Windows operating system.
ACER for example won't even ask you questions: acer.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/280

Refund for Windows

Sorry, I still need to boot into Windows to print using my "Linux-supported color laser printer".

Sorry, I still need to boot into Windows to use wifi because it's broken - again (updates do that a lot).

Sorry, I still need to boot into Windows because simcity2000 (and 3000 and 4000) still crash under Wine.

Sorry, I still need to boot into Windows to work with my camcorder and video editing - linux lacks both the drivers and the codecs.

Sorry, I still need to boot into Windows to do compatibility testing.

I figure ~ $50-$75 for a working printer/wifi/camcorder/ driver and game host is worth it. Everything else I mention above is a bonus.

Not that I like the current situation, but the alternative is to do without, because the linux desktop is still not ready for prime time, and by the time it is (if that ever happens), everyone will have moved on to smart devices anyway, where the underlying OS will be both invisible and just a replaceable commodity component.

better way

Happy to see that you still want to keep using Linux.

It would be better if you look it from another angle. It would be better if you use Windows as the main OS, and keep using Linux - as a hobby etc.

Nowadays "stress is the main killer - not hardwork". Atleast you could be away from being stressed.

Which Codecs does it lack??

Considering Linux based systems are the premo choice for media servers and such, which codecs are you referring to? Because I can 100% guarantee that Linux distros support more formats than Windows based systems after a fresh installation.

I don't know what your using but my Ubuntu installation plays absolutely anything at all nomatter what the filetype is.

I do all my video editing on Ubuntu using Openshot or Kdenlive and have no issues at all.

Sorry, I don't have hours of time to waste going around checking if I have the latest version of a program installed, I'd rather just do 1 click on Ubuntu and all the software on my machine is updated to the latest version.

Sorry, I'm so sick of viruses, trojans and things taking over my machines and I am sick of constantly having to be aware of it, even when your virus scanner says you don't have any, you still do!! Just the virus company doesn't know about them yet and they haven't been added to the definitions file.

Sorry, I'm not buying a new computer because Windows 7 won't install on it because of a hardware incompatibility.. You cannot force me to buy another one, I'll just use something that works instead.. Any Linux Distribution.

Sorry, I will not put up with how slow and pathetic Windows XP & 7 makes my netbook, I will put A lightweight distro on it instead and turn it in... To A Multimedia Beast!!

Sorry, I will not have my computer behave like a snail for an hour or so while it defrags, I'd rather use something which doesn't need to.

Sorry, I don't want to restart my computer after simply installing a driver, why should I?? I have my computer running for months at a time without a reboot. I never managed to keep a Windows based machine running for longer than 2 weeks without one and only then it was because I gave in because of the constant messages that I need to restart.

And If I do decide to turn my computer off, I want it to turn off, not suddenly tell me not to turn it off becuase it's installing updates 1 to 100 which drags on for an hour. Why don't I just walk away knowing it will switch off when it's finished?? Because it rarely does! I've done that before and went out and when I came back my machine was still stuck on the Windows is shutting down screen.

Windows isn't so perfect either, how many cds do you need to get your wireless sticks working, printer, webcam etc?? Cos I can tell you I need about 6 different CDs. Whereas all these things work instantly without any driver installation required on Ubuntu.

Sorry, How many Linux based programs does Windows run Exactly?? Many Linux based programs are better than the paid for Windows versions so I want to use them.

Not to mention that after a few months with a Windows install, the machine becomes laggy and slow nomatter what you do.. What are their so many tweak & speed programs for Windows??

Sorry, but if i'm using somebody elses computer, I don't want to leave all my evidence behind or have them standing over me incase I see something of theirs, I want to just boot Live Ubuntu from my USB stick and when i'm done pull it out and none of what I did is left behind.

Sorry, but if my hard drive breaks, I want to still be able to use my computer until I can buy a new one and not sat around crying.. Again, Booting a Live Linux Distro straight from a DVD/USB comes to the rescue!

Each OS has it's pluses and negatives so there's no point in you slagging off Linux when you know the list for Windows is longer.

@Warrick Green: She's

@Warrick Green: She's probably paid M$ troll or Mike Gualtieri's gf or something.

You sound to me as the most

You sound to me as the most unlikeliest case of all of the unlikeliests cases.

Microsoft doesn't deserve my money

Geeesh. Just pirate Windows, it doesn't deserve to be treated in any other way.

Give up

Barbara,

From the sounds of your issues, I would strongly suggest you remove Linux and stick with Windows.
If Windows does everything you need, how the hell did you get stuck with Linux? and what distribution?
I
Seriously, Linux is a much better OS than windows.
If you want to continue with Linux, let me know, and I would be gland to help you.

Thanks,

Joey M

DERP

DEEEE DERRRRRRR. Someone can't admit when they are wrong. Come on man, just accept your mistake and stop making excuses. You are a complete and utter joke. I'm amazed people are bothering trying to explain it to you anymore. You most definitely understand by now that you have made yourself look stupid. You just make you self look more stupid by not acknowledging this fact.
Learn how to accept when you've made a mistake.

Linux still dominated

Linux still dominates. If it is on more than 2% of the desktops and 60% of servers, as your claiming is this not a bit of Domination? . I wouldn't go by that whole "User Agent" calculation it is inaccurate, and anyone with a brain knows that "This is an inexact science for a variety of reasons. "

Linux could be on .001 % of the systems, and its still dominates.

For a dead OS, as people make it seem, it is still around for 20+ years. As long as I have hardware to run, Linux will run as the desktop.

It's not about world domination

I think this blog post and the reaction to it underscores the importance of educating the public about free software. The author makes several classic mistakes when trying to make his point. Unfortunately, I'm not sure what that point is since he confuses so many concepts and technologies in so few sentences. One major mistake, as many of you have pointed out, is the lack of distinction between the Linux kernel and an operating system based on the Linux kernel. True, I don't expect to see a mobile phone version of Ubuntu any time soon. But who knows, right?

As for open source community being up to the challenge of mobile computing, it should be pointed out that the two dominant platforms, iOS and Android, both have open source kernels: xnu and Linux, released under the Apple Public Source License and the GPL, respectively. These mobile devices are in reality a hybrid of open and closed software. Again, more ignorance about what constitutes free and open source software.

The most disturbing part of this post is the title. The goal of the free software movement isn't 'world domination', it's 'world adoption'. In keeping with the author's militant phraseology, the open source community is more concerned with defending freedoms than winning battles.

So, let's get our terminology straight and we can have some more meaningful conversations about the future of technology, our freedoms and our mobile gadgets.

World adoption

Jerahmie, Thanks for your comments. I like your phrase "world adoption" versus my "world domination".

Why is the kernel the lowest common denominator in an os? We could keep going lower and lower to the C programming language, libraries, assembly language, microcode....when does it end.

I think operating systems these days are much more than just a kernel. Of course the kernel is a very key component. My point is that I don't think that Linux will be adopted in mobile platforms the way Windows dominates on desktop and netbooks? I think the mobile market will continue to be fragmented. So, even if you Android = Linux, then I don't think it will take 70%+ market share in mobile. The circumstances are not right for any one dominate platform.

I think Linux fans had aspirations that Linux would eventually be adopted by all platforms. Mobile device innovation is happening too fast and the way Linux gets enhanced cannot keep up with that pace in my opinion.

We'll see. I fully acknowledge that a credible argument could be made that Android could be adopted by the billions of people who don't have a smartphone or tablet. My argument is that fragmentation will continue for the foreseeable future.

"Mobile device innovation is

"Mobile device innovation is happening too fast and the way Linux gets enhanced cannot keep up with that pace in my opinion."

Who supported ipv6 first?
Linux

Who supports the most architectures/file-systems/hardware?
Linux

and so on.

If Linux doesnt support a feature a company needs then they just modify it. (Companies like IBM etc. play a huge role in the kernel development)

And lol, Windows still not supports USB 3.0 natively (but Microsoft announced that for Windows 8). Linux since 2009 btw.

Well, Actually, now that you

Well, Actually, now that you mention it, Mark Shuttleworth said a mobile version of Ubuntu will be along in 2014 or who knows, maybe even before then!

And sorry, I fell for the Windows Troll above, I just didn't see it!! Now that I read it again it is the most unlikely of cases.