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

Agree ... However...

Linux on the desktop struggles for sure.

However....

Trying 74.201.44.71... Connected to blogs.forrester.com. Escape character is '^]'. HEAD / HTTP/1.0

HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:02:46 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.14 (Ubuntu) X-Powered-By: PHP/5.3.2-1ubuntu4.5

I guess we all get the point.

This blog runs on Drupal, an open-source CMS

I will add that Mike's blog also runs on Drupal, an open-source CMS.

OMG still people think that

OMG still people think that Android is Linux and open source, is laughable. Just like Dalvik VM on Android is not Java, Android is != Linux. As the author points out Google has modified the kernel itself to make it mobile ready in such a way that its no more linux. The device driver architecture is totally different. Any device driver written for Andriod can't be integrated into the upstream tree.
And again Android development is not open source too. Just because Google tosses the source code whenever it wishes doesnt make its open source at all. Even then it doesnt disclose everything.
If Android is open source can you point me to the source code location of Ice Cream Sandwich???

The Author is spot on when he says in Destkops Linux is dead. Its market share is like rounding error.
Speaking of innovation, when is the last time there was innovation from Open source world? Everything is rip off of the existing Commercial software and given for free. Dont mention Hadoop or Firefox or Linux itself... they are not innovation. Hadoop was based on Google's internal file systems. Firefox is just improving upon (not innovating) on existing browser technologies. Linux was shamelessly copied from Minix ~ Unix.
Dont get me wrong. I use BSD as PCBSD for my networking needs and as MAC for my personal computing all the time. That doesnt mean we shouldnt call spade a spade.
Let me point out where open source missed the bus and Proprietary software companies were pioneers in innovation
1. Virutualization
2. ZFS
3. Desktop Usability
4. Search (ofcourse Google search and Bing are not open source)
5. Social Networking (Again Facebook code is not "free")
6.Office suite (Reverse engineering MS office is not innovation).

Where is Open source in all of these? Just copy once the technology is out and widely adopted.

Let me point out where open

Let me point out where open source missed the bus and Proprietary software companies were pioneers in innovation
1. Virutualization
2. ZFS
3. Desktop Usability
4. Search (ofcourse Google search and Bing are not open source)
5. Social Networking (Again Facebook code is not "free")
6.Office suite (Reverse engineering MS office is not innovation).

For a start, social networking was around many years before facebook with many free open source projects which started it all. Facebook relies heavily on open source platforms.

Even I can see that you are going to get shot down with a semi automatic over this one, Yes the source for Facebook and Google isn't available, of course it isn't, do you think they want clones of their companies all over the world? These are bad examples and you forget that they both wouldn't exist or be the size that they are without Linux. In fact, show me a MAJOR online service where the source code is available and that company is still in business. All the other search engines have been attempting to copy and figure out how Google works for years, why on earth would they release their code and seriously damage their company??

Never Argue With A Fool

After reading most of the comments, I came to one conclusion. Never argue with a fool.

Sri

Wasn't SRI working on mouse keyboard windowing system before Xerox or am i misconstruing that as a gui?

How very embarrasing

I felt a bit sorry for this "analyst" But after several well meant corrections; It is not even possible to create a "what I really meant" scenario.
There is no other way than admitting that Android is Linux or making the claim that Linux does not exist.
By this definition Redhat or Centos or Suse or Ubuntu are not Linux either.

The definition seems to be: "If it is successful it is not Linux".

Comforting then that what the rest of the world call Linux is extremely successful.
All the Supercomputers in the world run on Linux (by the normal definition) and most of the "gadgets" run on Linux. There is a niche in between called traditional PC, that is getting increasingly narrower these days.
In the private market tablets replace them and often/mostly with Linux. You are pretty alone in calling Android something else than Linux.
"Analyzing" with a definition like that is.....pretty exotic.

Linux desktop reported demise

Bullshit. Hobbyists wanted to keep Linux all to themselves and not make a profit on it, which isn't a good business model. As a result, Linux has had to prostitute itself out to big businesses in exchange for R&D. Linux could've hit the big time, big time if it'd been permitted to grow. As a result, Ubuntu is getting dragged through the mud because of Unity and we're living in a post-PC world. Sorry technology couldn't just slow down long enough for you to catch up to the understanding that people really like to make money, Linux.

Linux, I love you. You're beautiful and so smart. But you can be so dumb sometimes.

Should probably add this

Should probably add this since I just remembered.. The Kindle runs Linux 2.6.26, and that was the top selling gadget of 2010, Will probably also top the list this year too as there are even more Kindles now.

This is great drama

Mike, your little drama here makes Monty Python's "Dead Parrot" routine read like Shakespeare's "Hamlet".

WRONG!

1. People use Linux every day without even knowing it. Examples: ATMs, cash registers, phones*, in-car screeny whatsits, aircraft, servers, thin clients, etc.

2. Windows may dominate the desktop market, but if you disregard desktops and look at everything else, then you would see that nearly 95% of devices run Linux, UNIX, ***BSD or some variant of those.

3. This site is..........wait for it..........powered by a L.A.M.P. server.

* Android is a distribution in all but name. If you take out the Linux kernel, it's dead.

The question that no one ever

The question that no one ever asks is "How much does world domination matter?" World domination is the Microsoft business model, but Linux doesn't need to take over the world, and that's the beauty of it.

I've been using Linux on the desktop for ten years, exclusively for maybe five, and all my experience suggests that it's thriving. Always new distos, new Desktop environments, new applications. The rate of development is actually getting to be a little annoying. They tell us that Linux is about 2 per cent of the market share, but with so much going on in Linux, why is market share supposed to matter? The focus on market share seems pretty twisted, as if domanance is the only thing that matters... not growth, not customer loyalty. I guess that market share matters, but why is it the ONLY number that matters? Why don't we EVER get numbers that reflect the number of actual users, and not the relative number of users. The stagnant market share doesn't really mean that Linux isn't growing, it means that Linux and Windows are growing at about the same rate.

Hear ye, hear ye!

Let it be known that, from here to eternity, the action of declaring Linux a loser by looking at a crystal ball, shall be known as Gualtiering.