Linux 2015

[heartbone]

According to http://www.netmarketshare.com/
Desktop Operating System Market Share - December 2013
Windows® 8s was at 10.5%
Windows® 7 was at 47.5%
Windows® XP was at 29.0%
Linux was at 1.7%

Desktop Operating System Market Share - April 2014
Windows® 8s was at 12.2%
Windows® 7 was at 49.3%
Windows® XP was at 26.3%
Linux was at 1.6%

Desktop Operating System Market Share - December 2014
Windows® 8s was at 13.5%
Windows® 7 was at 56.3%
Windows® XP was at 18.3%
Linux now included in the Other category 3.8%

Looks like most of the XP people shaken out by the end of support went to Windows® 7 and avoided 8 if possible. Because it's free and open source, I'm truly surprised that Linux has a smaller proportion of users today than than 8 months ago. But perhaps I shouldn't be, as the culture controllers work very hard to keep the populace under surveillance.

On a personal note, for my laptop I just dumped Vista "Ultimate" and went to Win7, but the 15% of the time that I need to use Windows®, it's usually the old trusty XP Pro. Lately I've been setting up and evaluating Linux Mint Cinnamon 17.1 and Zorin 9.1, bouncing between them and UBUNTU. The more I'm exposed to them, the more respect I have for what Linux is. I know that I use Linux 80-90% of the time because its OS interfaces are so much more responsive.

"But there is at least hope for the future. While I'll never be tall enough for the NBA or short enough for the kiddie pool, Linux might eventually get more market share. I think that having a whole plethora of different distros is holding it back though. If one large company would produce a version that costs around $20 and is able to convert most Linux users, that would be the springboard." - netmaestro

Perhaps that's what is needed, some direction for the herd. It's easy to give a current Linux 'distro' an honest evaluation by downloading and burning a LiveDVD .iso. As far as the OS is concerned, unless you need corporate "enterprise" product support (there is big money behind Windows® and Apple), the current "distros" are as good as Windows® for more and more personal tasks every day. The biggest remaining problems are that the commercial application software trickles, and there's no 'killer app' for the platform (one that makes it a must install OS).

I would love to write a 'killer game' and release it as Linux only for a few months. The problem is that nowadays a killer game is taken quite literally, and I'm not interested or wicked enough to direct my energy to the creation of a murder simulator for the youth. That's life.

[bosker]

For developers like me, the problem is that developing for Linux doesn't make commercial sense.
The people who use computers to do stuff for their day to day work almost exclusively use Windows. In my case, (scientific and education) more than 93% of the potential customers out there are on Windows.

For about 20 years I've been listening to confident assertions from Linux afficionados that a major breakthrough in Linux share is just around the corner. I even converted my development systems to Linux about 15 years ago in the hope it was true. It isn't.

Around 8 years ago I converted back to Windows development because all the software I delivered had to run on Windows.
Developing on Linux made no sense at all. I no longer support cross platform because there's no viable business there.

As heartbone's stats show, I don't see any trend that suggests Linux is gaining ground - I wish it were otherwise, but I'll only consider supporting Linux again if it has a decent market share - 25% would make it interesting. But even Windows 8 hasn't made any significant difference to the overall situation.

The problem Linux has is that Joe Public Inc doesn't want to use it and until he does, it's going nowhere.
Part of the reason for Windows' success is that upgrades and changes to the OS internals are managed by Microsoft.
Every upgraded dll still has to support the previous interfaces even if new ones are added. You can get upgrades to Windows software or even a whole new OS and the majority of your stuff still works. Having been a Linux sysadmin I know what kind of problems there can be there. Open Source is the problem because the software is created by many diverse groups and nobody is "in overall charge" to make sure old interfaces are supported.

Maybe netmaestro is right - a single distribution that captures the user-base might have a chance. All the owning organisation has to do is get all the contributing OSS groups on board.

[heartbone]

For about 20 years I've been listening to confident assertions from Linux afficionados that a major breakthrough in Linux share is just around the corner. I even converted my development systems to Linux about 15 years ago in the hope it was true. It isn't.

Around 8 years ago I converted back to Windows development because all the software I delivered had to run on Windows.
Developing on Linux made no sense at all. I no longer support cross platform because there's no viable business there.

A real warrior posts a reply! Greetings brother. A successful Linux based business would be in a niche, much like the Mac used to operate from. Also, as a system administrator, you know that 15 years ago Linux was just too much trouble to use when compared to the better supported alternatives. That's probably no longer true in most areas. Timing is everything, something that I am atrocious with.

I don't see any trend that suggests Linux is gaining ground - I wish it were otherwise, but I'll only consider supporting Linux again if it has a decent market share - 25% would make it interesting. But even Windows 8 hasn't made any significant difference to the overall situation.

Twenty five percent is way too optimistic. Critical mass should be somewhere around 10%, where developers would feel that is too significant a share to ignore.

Maybe netmaestro is right - a single distribution that captures the user-base might have a chance. All the owning organisation has to do is get all the contributing OSS groups on board

But in our way of life, the only sure fire way to get everybody on the same ship would be to pay them in money, so it probably won't happen. (Although a campaign to pay users $10 to install and use a distro for ten days might help.)

So there is the public spirited Linux fringe at one end, the Windows® silent majority occupying the vast center, and the materialistic (and Satanic?) Mac freaks at the other end. Windows® ain't so bad, it could be a lot worse.

Yesterday while looking at my receipt for the Windows® 98 Second Edition @ $179.99, (dated 09/04/01 from Best Buy #447 in Tukwila, WA), it made me think about how slow I usually adopt new technology. At the time, Windows® XP's release was imminent and I figured that Win98SE was about as good as it was going to get. Now that Windows® 10 is almost here, I've decided to checkout Windows® 7. It is quite a nice experience after the horror that was Vista. Microsoft should have been made to recall that POS.

I can totally understand why the vast majority of people stick with Windows® since it comes on their computers. But nowadays, you have to go somewhat out of your way to get a new machine with Windows® 7, so it puzzles me why the Linux desktop usage hasn't gone up even a teeny bit. All the grandmothers crusing the singles websites don't need much more than basic functionality to run a browser, to Skype, pay a few bills, make the occasional printout, and to play solitaire, and free Linux would fit perfectly. Even if the masses are switching over to tablets, the quoted numbers are for desktops in use, not portable devices.

Bottom line, something tells me that perhaps I shouldn't place too much faith in the validity of those statistics, because 1.6% for something so good and free, considering Windows® 8 and the economy, seems way crazy low.

[heartbone]

Then again...
more and more, as I encounter a comment like the following one, I think that Linux won't ever gain the respect it deserves.

Francis October 14, 2014 at 5:34 am

I really hate to have to say the things I am about to say. I’ve been a Linux Evangelist for about 10 years and I work in Computer Refurbishing. I’ve watched Linux make huge strides in ease of install, and Hardware Recognition, and in making the new user’s experience as close as possible in a transition from OSX or MS to the Linux Way of doing things. Yet in my world of retailing these refurbished machines, the addition of a Linux OS has been Value Subtractive. By this I mean, that given a White Box or a Linux Installed Box, the buyer will near always select the White Box, even if both are the same Spec at the same price. I personally, and technically, do not understand the why of this. But I’ve done the experiment several times. Each time I have had this faith that Users will see the value in a free and open OS. And each time, I’ve ultimately been told by management to stop installing Linux, because the buyers don’t want it on the machine, even if its just a demo to show that the machine works.

There are the 2% of people that walk in and see a Linux machine and get very excited that we are doing that: It really is only about 2%.

I don’t know the reason why a buyer would prefer a POST ONLY over a Linux install. But that is the case and that is the thing I’ve tried to do over and over again, with many different distros, with the same result with buyers preferring a white box over a full installed Linux machine.

[luis]

It's quite simple. The majority of the people, understandably, wants to know where they have to click to launch the browser, open the printer, set the background color of the desktop.
Also they want to be able to ask about that to their colleague, or friend, and get a simple answer (open that, scroll there, click).
With Win/OSX, you usually get one, sometimes two, maybe three different answers depending on the version of the OS.
With Linux you can get 3758 answers depending on the distribution, sub-distribution, applied customizations, etc.
There is much more than this, this is the most external layer of the answer but this alone is enough to explain that 98%.
Price, technical hurdles, software availability, all that come distant second for the vast majority of the users.

[Teddy Rogers]

Linux will never gain ground until its usable for Mom and Pops. There are still too many times when you have to fallback to shell commands and superuser. In 2015 its never going to cut it for the general populace no matter how easy you make installation and package managers - and Linux is far too fragmented...

Ted.

[skywalk]

Android and the resurgence of the tablet platform is the reason Linux installs appear low. Had Google decided on a Linux distro, there would be an avalanche rush of Windows deletions. In my mind, the desktop computer is no longer a home consumer purchase. With tablets, ereaders, mega game boxes and quad core smartphones, the desktop struggles for clock cycles in the average home. Looking to the corporate world spells small relief for the desktop. In engineering/design/large data settings, Linux farms dominate. Windows and the traditional desktop clings by a thread. For 90% of office use, docking a tablet or smartphone to an external keyboard/mouse/monitor yields a mighty portable solution. Truly, IT departments and management will begin to think outside the box(desktop) and roll these solutions to the benefit of lower OS costs and increased access to the employee.

[bosker]

@skywalk
My experience is somewhat different. I do consultancy work for a VERY large international company that is involved with engineering, communications and so on. Although they use Linux build farms for software creation and specialized Unix machines for circuit design, what's on everybody's desk is a Windows box.
Out of more than 100,000 networked computers worldwide, more than 85% are Windows desktops and laptops - that's a pretty big thread they clinging by.
They will never buy tablets for their employees because they are impractical for everyday use in an office environment and for software development.
Creating large documents or spreadsheets on a tablet would be like trying to wallpaper the hall through the letterbox.

[heartbone]

@skywalk
My experience is somewhat different. I do consultancy work for a VERY large international company that is involved with engineering, communications and so on. Although they use Linux build farms for software creation and specialized Unix machines for circuit design, what's on everybody's desk is a Windows box.
Out of more than 100,000 networked computers worldwide, more than 85% are Windows desktops and laptops - that's a pretty big thread they clinging by.
They will never buy tablets for their employees because they are impractical for everyday use in an office environment and for software development.
Creating large documents or spreadsheets on a tablet would be like trying to wallpaper the hall through the letterbox.

Your analysis make sense to me bosker. I can't imagine the mobile devices good for much more than tasks like note taking (now includes audiovisuals), consuming audiovisuals, web browsing, gaming, and telephony.
Oh yeah, that's basically what most home desktops are primarily used for!
Unless the user is involved in more than the casual YouTube/social media creation, if one disregards the health implications, a tablet would likely seem to work better for most people!

Within a company, it's always about the best solution for the least bucks, and I believe that Linux and its descendants will always have a place.
I agree that the grunts will still be at their keyboards, and the portable toys would be reserved for management and executives.

As time goes on there will be little to differentiate a tablet from a desktop, except the desktop will actually be the top of your desk.
The operating system will be the one that the World Order has authorized for public use, and the use of unapproved systems on the public network will not be tolerated.

[skywalk]

I don't think you read my post entirely? With bluetooth enabled keyboard/mouse and a small video dock(even this is going wireless with 11ac/ad), the end user is not limited to tiny input methods. If we consider the 90% office use case spreadsheets and word processing, then your average smartphone or tablet is more than enough horsepower.

[bosker]

It's not just grunt that's the problem.
I develop software for a living and everything has to be done as quickly as possible (time is money).
That means I use a desktop quad processor with loads of memory. It supports 2 x 24 inch screens, 2 x DVD / Bluray burners, 2 printers, 2 internal hard drives, 2 external hard drives, 8 USB ports with "things" attached and the usual input devices. I have a spare (similar) machine and a laptop as backup.

When I'm working I have the following running: multi-page editor, several consoles, file manager, specification documents (Word / pdf / ?), several help files, email client, web browser, issue tracker and other less important things.
All of this stuff has to be right there when I want it or I'm wasting time - that's why I NEED at least 1 more screen.

When a tablet computer can do that I'll get one.

[heartbone]

It's not just grunt that's the problem.
I develop software for a living and everything has to be done as quickly as possible (time is money).
That means I use a desktop quad processor with loads of memory. It supports 2 x 24 inch screens, 2 x DVD / Bluray burners, 2 printers, 2 internal hard drives, 2 external hard drives, 8 USB ports with "things" attached and the usual input devices. I have a spare (similar) machine and a laptop as backup.

When I'm working I have the following running: multi-page editor, several consoles, file manager, specification documents (Word / pdf / ?), several help files, email client, web browser, issue tracker and other less important things.
All of this stuff has to be right there when I want it or I'm wasting time - that's why I NEED at least 1 more screen.

When a tablet computer can do that I'll get one.

Not meaining to be inflammatory or derogatory towards you bosker, but in the interests of better communication,
you are exactly the type of hard worker that I was thinking about when I used the term grunt.
Peace.

[skywalk]

It's not just grunt that's the problem.
I develop software for a living and everything has to be done as quickly as possible (time is money).
That means I use a desktop quad processor with loads of memory. It supports 2 x 24 inch screens, 2 x DVD / Bluray burners, 2 printers, 2 internal hard drives, 2 external hard drives, 8 USB ports with "things" attached and the usual input devices. I have a spare (similar) machine and a laptop as backup.

When I'm working I have the following running: multi-page editor, several consoles, file manager, specification documents (Word / pdf / ?), several help files, email client, web browser, issue tracker and other less important things.
All of this stuff has to be right there when I want it or I'm wasting time - that's why I NEED at least 1 more screen.

When a tablet computer can do that I'll get one.

Again, you are not describing the 90% user but you did nearly describe my setup.

[bosker]

@heartbone
Re: grunt - can't argue with that. I enjoy what I do so I tend to "just get on with it".
I have done software work for the 'real' grunts on occasion as well.

@skywalk
Re: describing your setup...
It's the "all-seeing eye" you know, but I forgot to mention the Mk 4 Hydrospud double-acting overhead code transmogrifier (with coffee attachment).

[heartbone]

With Linux you can get 3758 answers depending on the distribution, sub-distribution, applied customizations, etc.

And it's getting deeper all the time.
http://ubuntugnome.org/
https://ubuntu-mate.org/
The way it's going, everyone who wants one will have their own flavor.