PCword Desktop Linux: The Dream Is Dead?!?!?

[Cavsfan]

Just noticed this pathetic article in PC World online:

Desktop Linux: The Dream Is Dead (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/207999/desktop_linux_the_dream_is_dead.html&tk=pcw_brent)

[Half-Left]

Just ignore them. Linux hasn't even started in the desktop market until companies like Canonical can get Linux sold with OEMs. This is party due to OEM resisting because of pressure from Microsoft and their dirty tactics.

Linux is successful in just about everywhere other market that matters, so I wouldn't worry about it.

[Cavsfan]

Just ignore them. Linux hasn't even started in the desktop market until companies like Canonical can get Linux sold with OEMs. This is party due to OEM resisting because of pressure from Microsoft and their dirty tactics.

Linux is successful in just about everywhere other market that matters, so I wouldn't worry about it.

Sounds good to me! They mention that Linux has the server market pretty much. I am not too impressed with PC world anymore anyway because of this.

[fatality_uk]

Bugger! You mean I have wasted the last 6 years for nothing?
*Where's that copy of Windows 7?

[realzippy]

Yep.
Never been at PC world online.Only
know
that the german printed version (related?) is an absolutely lowlevel
magazine,with amazing windows tricks speeding up your system and
stuff like that.
Really nothing to wonder about,it's their level.

[exploder]

Ubuntu Maverick is a glimpse of things to come in the desktop market. Who even reads PC World anyway?

[KiwiNZ]

. Who even reads PC World anyway?

at least 6 :P

[LowSky]

at least 6 :P

nice one!


I hate drab articles like this. These pieces are made to work up the naive and excitable. It is meant to create comments and sell ad space by the controversy it brings in.

[Half-Left]

The simple fact of the matter is, Linux has millions more users than it did 10 years ago, which makes it successful.

Now if the "Linux Desktop" didn't have many users more than ten years ago, this article would be right but it's clearly wrong. Desktop share is a bonus to Linux as a whole.

[KiwiNZ]

Grain of Salt

These Computer Mags like PC World have become like Womens Day and Vogue. I stopped buying them a long time ago and seldom look at their web sites. Syndicated Garbage.

[pwnst*r]

Well, we know it's not dead, but the article makes some very good points, whether you like it or not.

[Cavsfan]

Grain of Salt

These Computer Mags like PC World have become like Womens Day and Vogue. I stopped buying them a long time ago and seldom look at their web sites. Syndicated Garbage.

Totally! I hope they are fated to go by the wayside like a lot of printed newspapers/magazines that every one can read online now.

I used to like some of those magazines back before the internet became so accessible and I was more naive.

[Half-Left]

Well, we know it's not dead, but the article makes some very good points, whether you like it or not.

You mean about how Linux Desktop had a chance to gain share due to Vista not being popular? Linux cannot magically gain share if it's not sold on par with Windows via OEMs, it's that simple.

I'm not sure where people get the idea that linux needs to capture the desktop market, that's down to companies like Canonical. Apple has around 7% share and yet it's been 10 years since OS X was launched. If a massive public aware company brand like Apple cannot gain share in huge amounts, Linux won't.

[Cavsfan]

you mean about how linux desktop had a chance to gain share due to vista not being popular? Linux cannot magically gain share if it's not sold on par with windows via oems, it's that simple.

I'm not sure where people get the idea that linux needs to capture the desktop market, that's down to companies like canonical. Apple has around 7% share and yet it's been 10 years since os x was launched. If a massive public aware company brand like apple cannot gain share in huge amounts, linux won't.

^^ +1

[kenos]

To each their own. I think that Windows 7 is the best to hit the block as far Microsoft products go. I have Windows 7 on one partition and Linux on the rest of the partitions. I use Ubuntu as my main distro (normally solid as a rock except on the occasions when I try I to push the bleeding edge too far), I also dabble in Gentoo (masochist -I love to compile days on end - but at least I am in control of every option and use every USE flag I can throw at it). I also use Free BSD.

I am self taught on both Linux and Free BSD. Experience, trail and error, the Internet have made me the Linuxer that I am. I have had very few bad experiences on forums and certainly no worse than on the MS forums.

I guess in the end we should not be concerned about the man "behind the curtain" proclaiming doom and gloom. As long as there is choice there will be Linux on the desktop. the percentage of users only matters to those who sell their distro's and have a board of directors to please.

[MisterGaribaldi]

Interesting article. I think it's actually an accurate, objective assessment of the situation.

I remember reading on here a while ago back when I was still just lurking that one of Linux's greatest weaknesses was a lack of central focus or vision. I have to wonder if that wasn't a half-bad assessment of the situation.

[AoSteve]

Sounds like the author was scared of gnome-terminal

[pwnst*r]

You mean about how Linux Desktop had a chance to gain share due to Vista not being popular? Linux cannot magically gain share if it's not sold on par with Windows via OEMs, it's that simple.



Uh no. This:


Ultimately, Linux is doomed on the desktop because of a critical lack of content. And that lack of content owes its existence to two key factors: the fragmentation of the Linux platform, and the fierce ideology of the open-source community at large.

[Cavsfan]

To each their own. I think that Windows 7 is the best to hit the block as far Microsoft products go. I have Windows 7 on one partition and Linux on the rest of the partitions. I use Ubuntu as my main distro (normally solid as a rock except on the occasions when I try I to push the bleeding edge too far), I also dabble in Gentoo (masochist -I love to compile days on end - but at least I am in control of every option and use every USE flag I can throw at it). I also use Free BSD.

I am self taught on both Linux and Free BSD. Experience, trail and error, the Internet have made me the Linuxer that I am. I have had very few bad experiences on forums and certainly no worse than on the MS forums.

I guess in the end we should not be concerned about the man "behind the curtain" proclaiming doom and gloom. As long as there is choice there will be Linux on the desktop. the percentage of users only matters to those who sell their distro's and have a board of directors to please.

I agree Windows 7 is by far the best Micro$oft OS by a landslide and I could go on, but I won't. They have been at it for how many years?
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows NT
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows 2000
Windows Vista
and Finally in Windows 7 they got it right.

It still a lame $%* article about Ubuntu though you have to admit!
Bill Gates is one of the world's richest men achieved by deceptive and brutal means and Micro$oft has spent millions upon millions
to be where they are. No wonder...

[pwnst*r]

I agree Windows 7 is by far the best Micro$oft OS by a landslide and I could go on, but I won't. They have been at it for how many years?
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows NT
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows 2000
Windows Vista
and Finally in Windows 7 they got it right.

It still a lame $%* article about Ubuntu though you have to admit!
Bill Gates is one of the world's richest men achieved by deceptive and brutal means and Micro$oft has spent millions upon millions
to be where they are. No wonder...

Lol? Do you even have a clue what you're talking about?

[Zoot7]

Well there's been talks of this ever elusive "Year of the Linux Desktop" for years now, still hasn't happened yet.


Linux cannot magically gain share if it's not sold on par with Windows via OEMs, it's that simple.
It is worth noting that Windows 7 managed to surpass the Linux marketshare while it was still in Beta, despite the fact that the only way to install it was to download it, burn the disk and install the OS yourself much the same as any Linux distro. So I don't think the argument "Its needs to be pre-installed like Windows" holds any water at all.

[pwnst*r]

^Good point.

[szymon_g]

I agree Windows 7 is by far the best Micro$oft OS by a landslide and I could go on, but I won't. They have been at it for how many years?
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows NT
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows 2000
Windows Vista
and Finally in Windows 7 they got it right.

1. what's Micro$oft? is it something similar to "freetard" :?
2. sorry, but in its time (i.e. of time of release of those OSes) linux had *nothing* to offer for desktop use for ordinary man (ok, with exception of Windows Vista- ubuntu existed at that time, but linux sc****d up the chance to gain popularity).

##edit
Zoot7
you are right! (sorry, i havent seen your comment before i've wroten mine)

[Half-Left]

Uh no. This:

Again those points are not driven by the need to achieve desktop share. Free software people make software for their own reasons, but mainly to share their software with whomever it's useful to.

The whole Linux Desktop thing is a made up fantasy by bloggers, users and the media, thinking Linux can gain share by simply being useful.

[Half-Left]

Well there's been talks of this ever elusive "Year of the Linux Desktop" for years now, still hasn't happened yet.


It is worth noting that Windows 7 managed to surpass the Linux marketshare while it was still in Beta, despite the fact that the only way to install it was to download it, burn the disk and install the OS yourself much the same as any Linux distro. So I don't think the argument "Its needs to be pre-installed like Windows" holds any water at all.

Right, because Windows has a massive user base captured by Microsoft's monopoly. Why wouldn't hundreds of millions of users not download Windows 7 beta?

Thanks captain obvious.

[Spice Weasel]

I agree Windows 7 is by far the best Micro$oft OS by a landslide and I could go on, but I won't. They have been at it for how many years?
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows NT
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows 2000
Windows Vista
and Finally in Windows 7 they got it right.

It still a lame $%* article about Ubuntu though you have to admit!
Bill Gates is one of the world's richest men achieved by deceptive and brutal means and Micro$oft has spent millions upon millions
to be where they are. No wonder...

Microsoft... UNIX!? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix)

Holy crap!

Yep, they got it right to start with then decided that it wasn't a good idea to get things right.

[Zoot7]

Right, because Windows has a massive user base captured by Microsoft's monopoly. Why wouldn't hundreds of millions of users not download Windows 7 beta?
Yeah, but how many would actually seek out an OS from the internet, download and install it on their own machine? I'd say you'd find the number would be quite few, Windows users or not.

Whatever you may say, it does debunk the notion that the lack of pre-installed OEM machines with some flavor of Linux is the Achilles Heel for it when it comes to marketshare.

[Half-Left]

Yeah, but how many would actually seek out an OS from the internet, download and install it on their own machine? I'd say you'd find the number would be quite few, Windows users or not.

Whatever you may say, it does debunk the notion that the lack of pre-installed OEM machines with some flavor of Linux is the Achilles Heal for it when it comes to marketshare.

So where do you think those users got their copy Windows from then? Out of fresh air?

They either brought it off the shelf or got it with a new computer from an OEM supplier, both of which Linux does very little of.

EDIT: If you want any proof of that happening, look at the netbook market. Linux has about 30% share and that's because more netbooks are sold via OEMs then desktops with Linux. How did Linux on netbook get that share? Well, not by magic.

[juancarlospaco]

If its pathetic article why do you give Free Publicity to it here...?
:D

[Zoot7]

So where do you think those users got their copy Windows from then? Out of fresh air?

They either brought it off the shelf or got it with a new computer from an OEM supplier, both of which Linux does very little of.

EDIT: If you want any proof of that happening, look at the netbook market. Linux has about 30% share and that's because more netbooks are sold via OEMs then desktops with Linux. How did Linux on netbook get that share? Well, not by magic.
Good job at missing the point. ;) I'm talking about before one could avail of both options you mentioned to obtain it.

Again I'll say it, while Windows 7 was in beta it surpassed the marketshare of Linux. This was despite the fact that it wasn't pre-installed or even for sale on the shelves. The argument that if one want's to install a Linux distro, one has download an ISO, burn it, boot from it etc. whereas the lion's share of Windows installs are pre-installed by OEMs is often quoted as being a huge barrier for Linux adoption. Many have the notion, were that barrier not there, then Linux marketshare would climb exponentially.

But yet, despite that notion, while Windows 7 was in beta, to install it, one had to jump through the same 'hoops' one had to install a Linux distro, ie. download, burn, etc. and in the face of all that, it still managed to surpass the figure for Linux marketshare.

Also regarding that 30% figure, that's quite questionable, the lion's share of netbooks seem to have Windows installed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Dell seem to be the only mainstream OEM selling pre-installed Linux machines. If you can find me a reputable source to back up that 30% figure, then I'm all for it! ;)

[Half-Left]

All you needed was a hotmail account to get a key(which millions of Windows users have). Windows 7 beta download links were reported all over the net.

Microsoft actively marketed that Windows 7 would be available to try, it's not rocket science.

Just a small example:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=125892

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/downloads/default.aspx?pv=36:350

[KiwiNZ]

Well there's been talks of this ever elusive "Year of the Linux Desktop" for years now, still hasn't happened yet.


It is worth noting that Windows 7 managed to surpass the Linux marketshare while it was still in Beta, despite the fact that the only way to install it was to download it, burn the disk and install the OS yourself much the same as any Linux distro. So I don't think the argument "Its needs to be pre-installed like Windows" holds any water at all.

Not quite correct there were DVD released as cover disks on magazines such as PC Authority and PC World

[KiwiNZ]

But this "my one is bigger than your one " argument is so school yard. Common folks lets move on from it .

This is making the Cafe bloody horrible every time someone mentions Windows wham it starts, the same if someone mentions Apple it starts or BSD it starts. They are just OS's and its a case of horses for courses and people are free to select and like what the bloody like.

[Half-Left]

I couldn't care less if Linux doesn't have a big market share, since I've been a happy Linux user for over 10 years, it's irreverent to me but Windows users' use it as leverage for their argument and as is shown here as well.

[pwnst*r]

Good, close this piece of ****.

[Arex Bawrin]

This article gets at a few key ideas but mostly misses the mark. I can understand how the average computer user can get intimidated by Ubuntu. Every time I install Ubuntu I have to make a few corrections for my system to function properly, but I can't imagine the average user taking the time to search the forums/google for a proper solution without messing up their OS. I feel like the one MAJOR thing Linux needs is proper flash support. Flash sucks on Ubuntu plain and simple and nothing will change until Adobe provides better support for their plugin.