Linux Desktop to pass Apple

[MacBytes]

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Linux Desktop to pass Apple (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040214004738)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by Mudbug

[Nermal]

Link doesn't work, try this (http://biz.yahoo.com/bizwk/040213/b3871118mz063_1.html) instead.

[mainstreetmark]

You know, few of us can fault Word or Excel. They are really powerful applications (once you figure out how to turn off the paperclip guy), and it would be nice of MS focused on that.

But, it's probably safe to say that the days of Microsoft domination are ending. Isildur has cut the One Ring from the hand.

[montex]

So Linux is going to sweep the PC world and take over? Riiiiiight.

I can just see it -- millions of people, fed up with the complexities of and clunkieness of Windows, shifting en mass to an operating system that is... more complex! Every Linux geek I know (and I say this with deep affection) is way out on the Uber-nerd branch of the geek tree. There is no way that a typical user is going to take the time and patience to learn it. Like I'll ever get an email from Mom telling me she's switching to Red Hat and could I help her track down some video card drivers?

Linux is for servers, and servers are sold by the truckload these days. While that will get a "market share" number for the media to play with, it hasn't got the same impact on the world of computer users as people switching to Macintosh has.

[crazedbytheheat]

This shouldn't really be all that surprising. First, this is driven by corporate purchases. Companies go for low cost and, as Steve Balmer says, it's tough to compete with free. Second, a lot of individuals also purchase computers based on price. IMO, if you just want to surf the web and use email, Linux is a pretty decent choice. It's cost effective, has a small footprint, and has better security than Windows.

On the plus side, since a lot of *nix software compiles easily on the Mac and/or has already been ported, this could actually be a really good thing. Imagine a scenario where a) 10.4 includes support for installing/running Linux apps directly and b) Linux grows to a point where major software vendors support it.

[Santaduck]

linux passing apple... hm...


the difference here is of conversion...

*) OS X converts need to convert their *hardware* AND buying habits (i.e. paying more $ than they are used to).

*) Linux converts just put it on their existing hardware.

Steve Jobs killed the project of OS X for the Intel chip right? That might be a mistake... OS X for Intel might be a way to lure people to buy Macs, just like Windows iPods & iTunes... and use some of that $1B development money for OS X on a larger market or users to defray that cost.

Heck if Linux could gain 3% & pass OS X in such a short period of time, it's b/c of its use on the Intel chip. If OS X was available as well, I bet Apple's share would jump 3% as well, and probably much more. People are sick of OS gouging by Microsoft, esp. outside the US, and would love something non-MS for their Intel boxes, but are scurred by Linux. Cmon Steve!

[simX]

Originally posted by Santaduck
linux passing apple... hm...


the difference here is of conversion...

*) OS X converts need to convert their *hardware* AND buying habits (i.e. paying more $ than they are used to).

*) Linux converts just put it on their existing hardware.

Steve Jobs killed the project of OS X for the Intel chip right? That might be a mistake... OS X for Intel might be a way to lure people to buy Macs, just like Windows iPods & iTunes... and use some of that $1B development money for OS X on a larger market or users to defray that cost.

Heck if Linux could gain 3% & pass OS X in such a short period of time, it's b/c of its use on the Intel chip. If OS X was available as well, I bet Apple's share would jump 3% as well, and probably much more. People are sick of OS gouging by Microsoft, esp. outside the US, and would love something non-MS for their Intel boxes, but are scurred by Linux. Cmon Steve!

Yet another post about Mac OS X on Intel.... *sigh*. Give it up already!

Apple makes money on HARDWARE. It also stays in business because of the vertical integration... it controls the whole widget, which is why Mac OS X is so much more reliable. Releasing Mac OS X for Intel processors negates both of those two advantages, and would kill Apple.

Thanks for playing! Please try again.

[barbaloot]

Originally posted by montex
So Linux is going to sweep the PC world and take over? Riiiiiight.

I can just see it -- millions of people, fed up with the complexities of and clunkieness of Windows, shifting en mass to an operating system that is... more complex! Every Linux geek I know (and I say this with deep affection) is way out on the Uber-nerd branch of the geek tree. There is no way that a typical user is going to take the time and patience to learn it. Like I'll ever get an email from Mom telling me she's switching to Red Hat and could I help her track down some video card drivers?

Linux is for servers, and servers are sold by the truckload these days. While that will get a "market share" number for the media to play with, it hasn't got the same impact on the world of computer users as people switching to Macintosh has.

The problem is Linux isn't as hard to use as it use to be. A normal person could go to their local Compusa and get a copy of Redhat (Fodora) and install it on their windows machine. Linux isn't just the geek tool it use to be.

[awulf]

As the market share for Linux rises. more programs like games are made for linux, these games will use OpenGL instead of Direct X, meaning that more games will come to Mac OS X, plus since Linux also runs natively on a Mac (Yellow Dog Linux is really good and easy to use) you can run PPC compiled Linux apps on your Mac.

Linux is stealing market share from Windows and not the Mac, which is a good thing.

[Photorun]

Kinda misleading hed there, I clicked and read confused, then finished reading the Yahoo! article still a bit confused as to how this is "Linux Passing Apple." If it does, it wont be for a while (quite a long while potentially) and as it's been mentioned it may not take away from Apple's already miniscule market segment. In fact, if the rumors of 10.4 having Linux intigration built in, it may be a good thing, a REALLY good thing. But for now, this is hype, stupid hype with a misleading MacBytes headline at that.

[RHutch]

Originally posted by Photorun
Kinda misleading hed there, I clicked and read confused, then finished reading the Yahoo! article still a bit confused as to how this is "Linux Passing Apple." If it does, it wont be for a while (quite a long while potentially) and as it's been mentioned it may not take away from Apple's already miniscule market segment. In fact, if the rumors of 10.4 having Linux intigration built in, it may be a good thing, a REALLY good thing. But for now, this is hype, stupid hype with a misleading MacBytes headline at that.


This is from the article: Market researcher IDC expects to announce within weeks that Linux' PC market share in 2003 hit 3.2%, overtaking Apple Computer Inc.'s (NasdaqNM:AAPL - News) Macintosh software.

Does that end your confusion?

[0 and A ai]

Originally posted by Santaduck
linux passing apple... hm...


the difference here is of conversion...

*) OS X converts need to convert their *hardware* AND buying habits (i.e. paying more $ than they are used to).

*) Linux converts just put it on their existing hardware.

Steve Jobs killed the project of OS X for the Intel chip right? That might be a mistake... OS X for Intel might be a way to lure people to buy Macs, just like Windows iPods & iTunes... and use some of that $1B development money for OS X on a larger market or users to defray that cost.

Heck if Linux could gain 3% & pass OS X in such a short period of time, it's b/c of its use on the Intel chip. If OS X was available as well, I bet Apple's share would jump 3% as well, and probably much more. People are sick of OS gouging by Microsoft, esp. outside the US, and would love something non-MS for their Intel boxes, but are scurred by Linux. Cmon Steve!

This has nothing to do wtih osx on intel. it has to do with linux gaining marketshare. Marketshare gained through server sales and not consumer desktop purchases. the g5 will help server sales for apple as well as consumer sales when the chip starts trickling down to their other products. ipod g5 woohoo! kidding. let me say that again. KIDDING. see that means i'm jokinng. get it?

[nagromme]

You can buy an easily-installed copy of Linux. But getting all your peripherals and extras to work, and having access to the full spectrum of quality software, is going to be a problem.

I'm all in favor of Linux as a platform, but for your everyday user, I've never met one who tried it--nor one who should!

The situation in which it makes sense for an average user (one who shouldn't have to fuss around) is a turnkey package that has email and WP pre-installed... and the user will never want to do more than that or attach devices. Essentially then you have a limited appliance--but if the price is right...

Consumer Reports reviewed such systems (Lindows pre-installed on cheapo PCs) from Wal-Mart. Their objections were pretty major--but if you never plan to do anything more than the system comes pre-installed with, it's not a bad option to consider on a budget.

[Nermal]

I agree that Linux is gaining marketshare. However, the article appears to imply that Mac marketshare will remain constant. I think that the Mac market will increase, just as Linux does. A lot of Mac switchers were "Linux geeks" who were fed up with Linux (eg. application and hardware support) but didn't want to go back to Windows. I was one of them, and I think as long as Linux's marketshare grows, Apple's will too.

[montex]

How does Linux have a "Market Share" when it is (supposedly) free? Who is profiting from selling Linux if it is open source that nobody owns?

Microsoft sells Windows XP for $100, Apple sell OS X for $130. And Linux is sold for... what? It just doesn't make sense that Linux has any market share if it is free.

[Nermal]

Originally posted by montex
Microsoft sells Windows XP for $100, Apple sell OS X for $130.

Really? Here in NZ, XP is $495, and OS X is $280. I'm amazed that XP is so cheap over in the US.

[Mr.Hey]

Disscusion @ Arstechnica.battlefront also (http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=48409524&m=540000742631); not to take away from MR but I like to keep a nice balance.

[iKenny]

I think he was referring to the upgrade. XP Pro full (since that's what OS X is like) in the US costs $270 compared to OS X's $120.

[Nermal]

The $495 I quoted for XP is the upgrade too. The full is $735. Looks like MS is ripping everyone off as much as possible.

[goku]

Originally posted by Nermal
The $495 I quoted for XP is the upgrade too. The full is $735. Looks like MS is ripping everyone off as much as possible.

You sure your are not looking at Windows 2000 server? XP PRO UPG is 199.00 and full is 270.00
Or you can get the full OEM for 199.00.

[TomSmithMacEd]

I don't know much about linux, but I know it isn't M$ so I am happy to read this news. This isn't going to take away from Apple's marketshare. Apple is in a good position right now. I think we could get a little more marketshare once the g5 is on all levels, but oh well I'm happy where I am right now. I can do everything on my Mac (plus more) that my PC friends do besides for game. So why be mad?

[e-coli]

Once again, Apple's high hardware prices come back to haunt them. Why is it that Linux, a relatively undeveloped OS, can get so many corporations and developers excited, while the Mac OS continues to see a dwindling developer and corporate customer base.

Apple's products are simply too costly. And they (Apple) are perceived poorly in the marketplace. As toys rather than powerful machines.

[MrMacMan]

Linux can help Mac users in some ways... but I feel every Win --> Linux is taking away from the Win--> Apple migration.


Gah, why spend on a less organized operating system...

One guy makes the Kernal... then there are 1000 different versions of Linux (distros)... and blah...

Unorganized... no real software for Linux companies, just tons of Open Source...

:rolleyes:

[nagromme]

So... Mac developers are currently "dwindling"? Now THAT'S an interesting assertion :)

[winmacguy]

Originally posted by montex
How does Linux have a "Market Share" when it is (supposedly) free? Who is profiting from selling Linux if it is open source that nobody owns?

Microsoft sells Windows XP for $100, Apple sell OS X for $130. And Linux is sold for... what? It just doesn't make sense that Linux has any market share if it is free.

How does Linux have "market share" when it is "free"? All the new government departments in many German cities are converting to Linux which means that they are NOT RENEWING their service contracts with Microsoft ( so Microsoft does not gain revenue from them) The Brazilian Government is also converting over to Linux in order to save millions a year in fees to Microsoft. A number of Local body councils and government departments are considering Linux in the UK although Microsoft has gotten in on the act and significanlty dropped its licensing fees.
That is how Linux is gaining market share.
Weta digital (LOTR) uses a Linux/IBM cluster for their render wall although they are due for an upgrade for King Kong)

[Sabenth]

I run Panther Linux Xp home

Panther i love
Linux i can use but hell it aint great
Xp hmm games anyone...


that about sums it up for me

Couldnt care less who has what market share etc blah blah just a load of old numbers to me??

[e-coli]

IBM's advertising for Linux is WWWAAAAYYY better than anything I've ever seen for OS X. That's pbbly part of the problem, as well.

[wordmunger]

The article is misleading. It's about Linux on the desktop, but the figures they quote are *total* market share. As others have pointed out, Linux is primarily implemented on servers. It will be a long time before Linux passes Mac on the desktop.

That said, it can most certainly happen. Some posters ask "who makes money" off Linux. Don't forget that IBM has hundreds of programmers working on Linux. They make money because they have a free operating system for their servers. Red Hat, of course, makes tons of money selling distros and support. Even Apple makes money because even die-hard Linux fans like to use Powerbooks for OS X's *nix compatibility.