Linux v Microsoft

[ronan001]

My two cents......

So Microsoft have announced a $14 billion revenue for this quarter. How can the Linux community compete with a business with such resources and such as huge established market share. Like it or not Microsoft currently has 91% of the Operating systems market. Apple and Linux pick up the scraps.

Microsoft's core competency is their control of the distribution channels and their well established name/position. Some might argue they have a bad name, but thats only amongst us minority computer enthusiasts. How can the Linux community convince people like many people i know whom have tried and failed to even turn on a computer for the last 15 years let alone install or run anything on Linux. Ok they are extreme, but this consumer type we need too target. We need Michael Dell (and others) to embrace Ubuntu, it is the only way. Standard users, business users, most users, want a computer with the operating system installed, they do not want to worry about installing an operating system, they just want to turn it on and start surfing. We need to get into the distribution channels, but what if Microsoft decided to revoke Dell's License?? We are all well aware they can do as they please. We all see Microsoft Tv Adverts, Apple Adverts, we need Ubuntu Adverts. But off course where will the finances come from?

Ok thats the first, second ask any business person whom you speak to about Linux, what is their problem, no software exists for Linux or in the case of a CIO who may be Linux enthusiast , it would be too costly to switch. In alot of cases the software does exist or there is a better free alternative, but put yourself in there shoes, the hassle and cost is not worth the switch when the current software does what you need. And also support is a big problem, business people want a phone number to ring not a forum to search.

The third part of society, gamers, why would they even think about switching??

In the last while, our open source community has gotten "smart" we try market our software as free, no cost etc etc, telling CIOs "we'll save you money" because its free, but CIO's are aware of the extra costs in terms of training, driver support, software support, hardware support etc!!! In europe the governments are trying to reduce Microsoft's dominance by encouraging other operating systems in government agencies. Microsoft's answer is $3 operating systems. The more i become a Linux enthusiast the more i feel the community lacks the central leadership that is required to overcome a giant like Microsoft. A disjointed group of enthusiasts will not overcome a centralized company with a $40 Billion cash reserve. We need a company like Google (but not Google), a company who opposes Microsoft with all its might and whom wont change the ethos of Linux.

over and out.

[DoctorMO]

The Free Software choice is the only moral choice for home users. Microsoft and it's illegal and down right immoral business methods put it firmly in the category of 'Not right to use, not right to buy, not right to agree with.'

It doesn't matter how much market what or billions of $, morality is worth more.

[ronan001]

Your opinion is valid, but ultimately you are accepting that Ubuntu will live on the scraps of what Microsoft are happy to give. I personally hope for so much more from Ubuntu. Too me its not a choice of morality, its a hope that Ubuntu will achieve success in terms of global success, that it can compete with a company as dominant as Microsoft.

[PatrickMay16]

AAAAAGHGGHH, RONAN. Are you saying to us that MICROSOFT is better than LINUX? AAaaaaghghhg

****-BENIS

[weasel fierce]

An idea versus a corporation ?

[euler_fan]

I tend to agree MS has many of the advantages of the well placed dominant firm in their market. However, I tent to believe that one of the major indicators of just how powerful linux is in the world is how much time and money MS throws into the FUD campaign against it. And MS throws plenty of time and money against linux.

What is also astounding is that Linux and Mac both exist in a world so dominated by MS and their products. That says to me there is a real niche for them both to exist in serving people with other needs, wants, desires, etc.

Is Linux best for everything? No. But neither is MS--no matter how many people run it.

[hardyn]

are we trolling again?... oh the daily ms v. linux posts...

[JAPrufrock]

It's a 3-way race to the finish. Apple is in the lead but apathy may be its downfall. Microsoft is so bloated that its kernel, post-Vista, will have to be completely re-designed. Could LInux sneak in and win the battle for the 64 bit? Possibly, but they're the backstretch now and Linux is still a few lengths behind. Not likely but possible (http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/world-domination/world-domination-201.html)!

[ronan001]

i think 64-bit is again not aiming at the correct market if we are lookin for any sort of competition against Microsoft. i'm not sure about the 3-way finish. unfortunately i think its a clear leader. maybe a fight for second place, but we've been lapped a couple of times :( :( :( :(

For the record, i'm not anti-Microsoft. It would not matter which company it was. I am pro-Linux.

[FoolsGold]

May I ask WHY Linux needs a huge market share? Bigger /= better.

Big Brother outrates Battlestar Galactica, but I know which one I'd watch, even if the rest of the viewing public doesn't. I honestly don't care anymore - Microsoft may have the resources, but they can't destroy Linux no matter how hard they try, and to me that's a fight we've already one. Everything else is just extra toppings on the ice-cream.

Microsoft doesn't need to be overcome by Linux, not exactly. Linux just needs to force Microsoft to compete on quality rather than marketshare, something which in my view is perfectly capable. We don't need a winner at the end, we just need viable alternatives. It's an OS after all, not a war.

[ronan001]

previous poster : "May I ask WHY Linux needs a huge market share? Bigger /= better.
Big Brother outrates Battlestar Galactica, but I know which one I'd watch, even if the rest of the viewing public doesn't. "


I am passionate about Linux and i hope for ubuntu to be more than just another Linux variant. Microsoft definately can not destroy Linux no more than they could destroy the web. But i for one want Ubuntu to compete with windows not just make them spend another million or two on smear campaigns or make them think about another Microsoft standard to use that doesnt exist on Linux. or another platform for that matter.

I really believe that the idea of competing against quality is never going to achieve any sort of growth for Linux. Its only going to appeal to the already converted. Its fine if you only want a viable alternative for yourself (being a computer enthusiast), but i hope for a viable alternative that everyone from novice to very experienced can use.

[Hex_Mandos]

More = better support from websites, ISPs, ISVs... I think a bit more IS better. I'd like a sizeable minority to use Linux.

[FoolsGold]

I am passionate about Linux and i hope for ubuntu to be more than just another Linux variant. Microsoft definately can not destroy Linux no more than they could destroy the web. But i for one want Ubuntu to compete with windows not just make them spend another million or two on smear campaigns or make them think about another Microsoft standard to use that doesnt exist on Linux. or another platform for that matter.
Microsoft have tried smear campaigns (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/facts/default.mspx) - they don't work very well. It's after all difficult to read an article written by a company which is praising itself as the superior alternative, and consider it unbiased.


I really believe that chases the idea of competing against quality is never going to achieve any sort of growth. Its only going to appeal to the already converted. Its fine if you only want a viable alternative for yourself, but i hope for a viable alternative that everyone can use.
Oh but there is growth in Linux, just not the sweeping masses we might hope. It takes time, which is probably a good thing since converting to Linux takes time and effort anyway. Also, it already IS a viable alternative that everyone can use. Nothing is really stopping someone from using Linux, short of support for specific pieces of software, but there are ways around that.

What you're really asking for is more marketing for Linux, am I right?

[FoolsGold]

More = better support from websites, ISPs, ISVs... I think a bit more IS better. I'd like a sizeable minority to use Linux.

Websites... less OS and more browser related I suppose. I haven't come across a page in a very long time that won't work in Firefox, at the very least functionally if not aesthetically. If there is a page that INSISTS on a Windows-only plugin or IE, guess what? I won't view it. My life won't come crumbling down due to not being able to view a page - there's plenty of alternative sources of info, that's the power of the Internet. A site that is so damn restricting will either fail due to others having the same issue, or I'll not want to have any part of it anyway. Win/win for the user I say.

ISPs... mainly technical support is the issue, but getting the net working with Linux from most ISPs isn't normally a problem.

ISVs... don't know what they are. Same comments probably.

We'll continue to grow in size, don't worry about it.

[ronan001]

Unfortunately smear campaigns do work when aimed at people who are not as knowledgeable as we are about the computing industry.


The second most recent posters question:
"What you're really asking for is more marketing for Linux, am I right?"


My answer to you is no, not just marketing, check out my first post, but in summary its about getting into the distribution channels, its about offering a feasible alternative to the business community, enterprise software that does what their current enterprise software does and also allows them switch easily, its about telling a CIO that moving to ubuntu is worth the switching cost and will be relatively easy.

Ubuntu need to develop highly innovative software to differentiate themselves from windows. Ask a standard user of operating systems to differentiate xp from edgy, vista from fiesty fawn, Mac Os from vista. They will not be able too. So why would they switch?

[FoolsGold]

It's not just about the software though, or at least it shouldn't be. If I could perform my work on a system with a far higher level of security, then I would, hence Linux. If I am able to use a wide range of software, for free, without having to resort to cracks (which can have their own issues) then I would, hence Linux.

I think people just don't know what they can gain by using something like Linux. Comparing it on software alone will cause Linux to be given the flick - other factors are at stake.

[ronan001]

If there is a page that INSISTS on a Windows-only plugin or IE, guess what? I won't view it. My life won't come crumbling down due to not being able to view a page - there's plenty of alternative sources of info,


I agree with you, but for the standard user who gets their Office 2007 next week and wants to download the new power point layout. They can not download it using Firefox unless they have the required plug ins. This is were Microsoft use their tactics to manipulate the standard users. and this is where Ubuntu loses out. We need to confront Microsoft, develop everything compatible with their software, but also making innovative software that is not compatible with anything Microsoft makes, until we are in the position where users will not immediately pick Microsoft.

[steven8]

Ask a standard user of operating systems to differentiate xp from edgy, vista from fiesty fawn, Mac Os from vista. They will not be able too.

The average user or even the CIO can't tell, but convincing a CIO isn't about convincing them the OS is special, it's convincing them they can still get the same productivity at at greatly reduced cost.

[ronan001]

I think people just don't know what they can gain by using something like Linux. Comparing it on software alone will cause Linux to be given the flick - other factors are at stake.

we all have a tendency to think like this. you can not think for people. It is there decisions to pick what is right for them, we have to make the software that makes them think as you have described. You have to think about your friend or family member who knows nothing about computers and ask yourself "how could i make him like Linux". Only then can we compete against any others.

[FoolsGold]

You have to think about your friend or family member who knows nothing about computers and ask yourself "how could i make him like Linux". Only then can we compete against any others.
Fairly simple - you install Linux on their computer, install all the necessary software and walk away. If my experience with regular computer users is anything to go by, they'll thank you for the lack of viruses/spy-ware/slowdown, and you'll thank them for the lack of calling you around to fix their system.

[ronan001]

Fairly simple - you install Linux on their computer, install all the necessary software and walk away. If my experience with regular computer users is anything to go by, they'll thank you for the lack of viruses/spy-ware/slowdown, and you'll thank them for the lack of calling you around to fix their system.

Ok in a perfect consumer environment your friend has a you to install Linux for him/her.

What about the many people who dont?

Are you also willing to act as customer support for your friend when he needs to get his mp3 to play?

[Tundro Walker]

Microsoft won't go anywhere any time soon. But it can go the way of the Rockefellers by over-monopolizing, driving up costs, enslaving users and eventually driving them away. But, Microsoft won't go the way of the Dodo since they'll adapt. They won't always be top dog. But, they got into the market during the 80's / 90's with lower cost software operating on lower cost PC's (vs. higher cost, but more reliable Mac's), and took the majority of the business market by storm, because the business ethics then was "what costs lowest now" w/o much concern about how much it will cost in the future.

Of course, to give business folks some credit, they're not IT tech junkies, and they can't fore-see the future. In their minds, at the time, they were making the best choice. However, a lot regret the choices they made in hind-sight. And, you're right, it would cost a fortune to change.

But, some companies are switching to web-apps, which are usually OS-independant. Some are using thin-client, where the server spawns multiple "desktops" on trimmed-down desktop computers, and Linux is pretty strong in the server market. A lot of home-users are using web-apps, too, so the OS isn't as important, and they rely more on portable appliance devices, like mp3 players, cell phones, etc, to do their work and fun on. If the future of computing really does focus on web-centrilization rather than desktop centrilization, then Linux can compete.

Plus, as one person said, the line between OS's has really blurred. Apple, Linux, Microsoft, Sun, they can all do pretty much the same things these days. Some have a little more flash or a few extra features, but they all have some kind of GUI that runs some apps and tries to make peoples' lives easier. The stuff I do at work on Windows is pretty much the same I can do at home on Linux (except without the random slowdowns...hehe).

I know a lot of folks get worked up over "Linux vs. Microsoft", but you really shouldn't. If there's a need, things will shift. And, usually there's a set of hurdles that prevent users from shifting. As more hurdles get knocked over, you'll see a few more users switch, until the final hurdle gets knocked over, then there will be a huge rush of folks.

Currently, things like OpenOffice.org are knocking over hurdles by making MS Office documents (.doc, .xls, etc) files usable in Open Office. Folks don't want to migrate if it means losing a lot of their work. Likewise, Ubuntu's trying to make it easier by migrating over FireFox / IE bookmarks and other things from a person's Windows installation.

Actually...let's just go through some of the hurdles...

1) Make it easy to use...Ubuntu's doing a good job of that...less command-line work (but it's there if you like using it), and more GUI work...tech-paranoid folks will like it

2) Make it easy to migrate to...OpenOffice.org makes MS Office stuff usable in Linux...Ubuntu makes it easy to migrate some Windows stuff. Wine makes it (somewhat) ok to use Windows programs in Linux.

3) (This is one a lot don't think about)...Make it easy to SWITCH BACK. A lot of folks don't want to jump into the Linux / Ubuntu pool if they can't find a ladder to help them back out. You make it easy for them to get in, and back out if they don't absolutely love it, and you'll hook a LOT of fish.

If you just focus on those 3 hurdles, you'd make a killing in switch over clientele. That's how Microsoft made a killing with Excel...they made it compatible with Lotus123 spreadsheets and macros, so folks could migrate easy, they made it easy to learn & use (by making it a GUI), and they made it easy for folks to go back. The thing was, once folks realized how much better it was, they didn't want to switch back. But they had the COMFORT of knowing they COULD if they wanted to. It's not that people don't want to try something different, they just want the security of knowing they can go back if it doesn't work out.

Destroy those hurdles and, even without some marketing, a lot of word-of-mouth will make Ubuntu take off like wild-fire. (Of course, cracking a lot of MS' proprietary software formats makes it really darn difficult...d'oh!)

[macogw]

Like it or not Microsoft currently has 91% of the Operating systems market. Apple and Linux pick up the scraps.

No they don't. It's somewhere in the low 80s, I believe. You're forgetting that something like 60% of servers run a *nix of some sort, like 10% Mac, and the other 30% Windows.


Popping up Synaptic and saying "you can click the checkboxes for whatever you want to install, hit apply, and it downloads and installs it all for you. oh, and all the software is totally free" worked rather well to get a "you don't have to go online and try to find it or pay anything? wow, the computers here should have that" response yesterday.

Actually, a better Excel-replacement is something we REALLY need. OOo Calc doesn't handle the VBA macros well at all. Gnumeric does, but neither has all of Excel's functionality. I know that's a LOT of functionality, but it seems that the graph abilities are lacking in both Calc and Gnumeric. Neither can give a trend line (with a y=mx+b for it, not just a drawing) for a scatter plot or take a function of the form y=mx+b and graph it. In either case you have to type out every possible variable-value combination for which you want to test...yuck. Excel is the best product Microsoft ever made.


i think 64-bit is again not aiming at the correct market if we are lookin for any sort of competition against Microsoft. i'm not sure about the 3-way finish. unfortunately i think its a clear leader. maybe a fight for second place, but we've been lapped a couple of times :( :( :( :(

For the record, i'm not anti-Microsoft. It would not matter which company it was. I am pro-Linux.

Linux kinda did win on that one, I think. I heard Linux has better hardware support on 64bit than Windows (okay, Linux *always* has better hardware support than Windows, but this time I'm counting those little driver disks as if they were part of Windows).

[macogw]

Fairly simple - you install Linux on their computer, install all the necessary software and walk away. If my experience with regular computer users is anything to go by, they'll thank you for the lack of viruses/spy-ware/slowdown, and you'll thank them for the lack of calling you around to fix their system.
Ok in a perfect consumer environment your friend has a you to install Linux for him/her.

What about the many people who dont?

Are you also willing to act as customer support for your friend when he needs to get his mp3 to play?
I'm with FoolsGold on this one. If you install and get it all set up (including codecs), and probably also a good idea to ask what programs they use a lot so you can install their equivalents from the start so they don't need to figure out the name of it in Synaptic, they can get on just fine. You don't have to act as tech support for that if you set it up right to begin with and you don't have to act as tech support for anything else either because it won't crash "just because" or get viruses.

I'd say most people probably know someone who's used Linux. It's not that uncommon these days. Most geeks try it at some point, even if they switch away.

[Tundro Walker]

Actually, a better Excel-replacement is something we REALLY need. OOo Calc doesn't handle the VBA macros well at all. Gnumeric does, but neither has all of Excel's functionality. I know that's a LOT of functionality, but it seems that the graph abilities are lacking in both Calc and Gnumeric. Neither can give a trend line (with a y=mx+b for it, not just a drawing) for a scatter plot or take a function of the form y=mx+b and graph it. In either case you have to type out every possible variable-value combination for which you want to test...yuck. Excel is the best product Microsoft ever made.

Dude, you still plot out stuff in Excel? Last few bosses I worked for thought Excel was too "complicated" to use, so they would say things like...

"look, you're the one that wanted to do upper and lower control limits, and those make it look bad, so just narrow them so it looks like things are in control more..." (seriously, this is an almost verbatim quote from one of Demming's books...I had deja vu' when my boss said it...)

...or...

"I don't like those numbers...make the good numbers higher by moving some out of the bad numbers..."

...or...(my favorite)...

"just draw a line on the graph that kinda looks like this" (draws wavy line in air with hand) (this was for a chart presented to an executive board involving progress on current company-wide projects...d'oh!)

You're obviously not working for folks that know how to get things done if you're having to use line functions to calculate things on your charts. LOL!

(That's all sarcasm of course. In fact, the boss fudging numbers was a main reason I quit working at some of those jobs...LOL!)

Supposedly, Python replaces VBA in Excel, but there's no "converter" to translate the macro's over. If there was something like that, it'd be another hurdle to knock down, making more users want to give Open Office a try.

[jiminycricket]

It's a little disheartening but it does show the strength of MS's monopoly that even poorly reviewed products break records (no innovation in Vista, which is what happens to fat monopolies), so perhaps the EC antitrust ruling will be a little more aggressive. Samba w/ Win2k3 or Longhorn Server features would be a great selling point and gateway to Linux.

I don't think Canonical itself will develop a whole bunch of software. From what I've read, MS (sabdfl) wants to enable the community to create cool. nichey things for itself and make it trivial to do so. Like you said, they don't have Microsoft's cash reserves or revenues to do that. But if Firefox can kind of take off in the face of IE being pre-installed everywhere, mainly on the back of its extensions, Linux has a chance albeit with a higher barrier. Eg., AIGLX/compiz/beryl/ brought in many new users and tons of youtube vids (equaling free advertisement).

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/openweekfeisty/askmark2


<sampbar> QUESTION: sabdfl - Mark, what new features would you like to see implemented in ubuntu in the next couple of years? and are there any features you would like to see improved?

*

of course :-). there are two separate lines of attack, i think. one is "the race to parity". we need to get our category-specific apps to be as good as the current best of breed proprietary app in that category. we need a word processor that is as good as word. a spreadsheet as good as excel. we already have a better browser :-). then there is the second race, which is "the thought leader", which is all about innovation. we saw with firefox, when it hit parity, that the extension mechanism was a HUGE driver of creativity and innovation. this is why i fund bazaar - because i think innovation comes from the periphery of the community as much as from the center and we need revision control which is cross-platform, robust, and distributed. i would like to see us reach parity in more desktop apps and of course, i'd like people to start to see free software as the place where the genuinely groundbreaking innovation happens. this is also why i think it's so important to get compiz/beryl into ubuntu, because they are fertile grounds for creativity. the proprietary guys are not far ahead. if we give developers the tools and an audience, they will do amazing things


BTW I just noticed new Microsoft advertisements tonight; the last ones I had seen were abysmal ones for Vista. Coincidence..?

[ronan001]

No they don't. It's somewhere in the low 80s, I believe. You're forgetting that something like 60% of servers run a *nix of some sort, like 10% Mac, and the other 30% Windows.



My 90% statistic is from http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2! Another site reports apache server having 58% of the market and Microsoft servers having 31%. http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html, in this discussion i am interested in desktop operating systems as opposed to servers.


I think we all must recognize the importance of the distribution channels, we need a PC manufacturer, HP, Dell, Lenovo etc to encourage pre-installation of Ubuntu. It is the only way to reach to masses. We are all enthusiasts, our natural interest and curiosity has brought us here. But you can be near certain that a vast majority of the 90% of people using Microsoft desktops have not been here and will never be here unless they buy a computer with Ubuntu pre-installed.

[cunawarit]

But you can be near certain that a vast majority of the 90% of people using Microsoft desktops have not been here and will never be here unless they buy a computer with Ubuntu pre-installed.

They won't be here.

Even if they are running Ubuntu they won't go to a forum to talk about an operating system, the average Joe just doesn't care. They just want to shop online, put music in their iPod, store photographs, edit a few Word documents, and maybe play some games.

When do I think Linux will make serious inroads in the desktop market?

* When you can buy a 100% Chinese made desktop-box PC in Walmart for less than $100. The cost of the OS matters then. It doesn't matter so much in the corporate world, despite the cost of Windows, like it or not it is often the cheapest and best solution there.

* When the developing world gets online, I don't think many will be convinced by crippled $3 versions of Windows. A localized Linux distribution is a much better proposition, and I suspect it will end up winning in the end. Many developing countries are backing open source software, once they start educating the next generation using Linux this new generation will accept Linux as the obvious desktop OS.

I don't want MS to go away at all, I like plenty of their products. But I do want to see a balanced OS market.

PS: Anyway, it doesn't have to be Linux that does it in the end, it could be any other open source OS, Unix like or not... Who knows what the future will bring.

[use a name]

[wishful thinking]
Someday, hardware manufacturers will stand together and tell MS to hold their threats. They will all embrace the free offering of the open source community to code their drivers, by releasing the specs. Linux will be the best supported OS in no time, with no extra costs for the hardware manufacturers.
[/wishful thinking]

Now just the software part... But a little wishful thinking can fix that as well. :)

[samjh]

Hmmm....

1. Linux has no clearly proven TCO advantage over Windows platform solutions.

2. Company-wide conversion from Windows -> Linux = Huge Expenses.

2a. Huge Expenses are directly proportional to the size of the IT infrastructure of an organisation and its reliance on the Windows platform.

3. Limited enterprise-strength software for Linux.

3a. Limited integration between enterprise-strength software on Linux. In fact, I can't think of any enterprise software packages on Linux that are as integrated as Windows Server + MS SQL Server + .NET Framework + MS Office (this set up is extremely popular, which Linux will need to break). Linux could have adopted Sun Java and Sun could have adjusted their license to achieve Linux + Apache/Tomcat + [any OSS database] + Java EE + Open Office integrated solution, but both Sun and the Linux community screwed it up by their own stiff-necked obstinacy.

3b. Handicapped compatibility between existing Windows IT infrastructure and potential Linux-based systems (possibly able to be overcome by EU anti-trust ruling/s).

4. Most computer users are familiar with Windows and Office. Most have never used Linux, some have never heard of Linux.

5. Lack of experienced system administrators and system architects who are skilled in working with Linux platforms, compared to those with skills in Windows platforms.


There are numerous other problems in the Linux vs Microsoft battlefield, but those are the most obvious reasons I have observed to date.

[Zuph]

The biggest problem out there, aside TCO issues and transference costs is the fact that there are not enough competent sysadmins out there for Linux that have the knowledge and skills to run a company. The desktop market will follow the corporate world, and the corporate world won't switch until the TCO is lower. The TCO can't be lower until there are a sizable number of Linux sysadmins out there. And no, installing the Ubuntu LAMP stack does no make you a competent sysadmin.

[kelvin spratt]

Guys i admire your ethics but the microsoft monopoly is simple virtually all computers sold by the big stores
have fitted as standard the public dues not have any choice but to give Microsoft money working on that
microsoft will always have the monopoly unless just one large chain offers the the customer the choice
by not charging the customer to setup linux or manufacturers offer the choice as the general public will stick with whats already installed regardless your ideas about compatibility are spot being able read and write
to ntfs is a major step forward in my mind being able to use windows based programs in linux is starting to
evolve more rapid but linuxneeds to put more into presentation fonts spring to mind some distroes are apalling
ubuntu being the best of the bunch well thats my opinion i was always put of by being told linux was hard to
use i find command line very hard as i'm word blind and need to copy paste but the rest is simple

[u.b.u.n.t.u]

I like Ubuntu.

I have followed the development of Ubuntu for years, and I hope one day to use it as a complete replacement for XP.

XP didn't happen over night and Ubuntu is doing very well. Some areas are very advanced and others are inadequate.

I see a bright future for Ubuntu and all that it represents and I see the begining of the end for Windows with Vista.

[prizrak]

Some might argue they have a bad name, but thats only amongst us minority computer enthusiasts.
I happen to know quite a few computer users (not enthusiasts by any means) who are quite tired of MS. So no it doesn't have a bad name among just enthusiasts, they just don't know where to go. Apple is too expensive and Linux too unknown, might change when Dell offers Linux on their laptops/desktops though.

[gashcr]

I don't care about M$, and I don't see a good reason for any of us to do so. Let them do whatever they want. I think it is better if we focus on our product and quit this "race", cause we all know ubuntu has a greater potential than any other product on the market. Instead of being comparing, we should be developing!!

[Zuph]

I don't care about M$, and I don't see a good reason for any of us to do so. Let them do whatever they want. I think it is better if we focus on our product and quit this "race", cause we all know ubuntu has a greater potential than any other product on the market. Instead of being comparing, we should be developing!!

Exactly. The best part about Linux is that it's BETTER than Windows in many respects. It's better because it's DIFFERENT, not because it's trying to copy things.

[ronan001]

Exactly. The best part about Linux is that it's BETTER than Windows in many respects. It's better because it's DIFFERENT, not because it's trying to copy things.

Both valid points, but if we want Ubuntu to at least achieve market share parity, You gotta study your competitors and you gotta try understand what allows them maintain their dominance, and then produce a model to beat them or else things will remain the way they are and Microsoft's dominance will continue.

[Zuph]

Both valid points, but if we want Ubuntu to at least achieve market share parity, You gotta study your competitors and you gotta try understand what allows them maintain their dominance, and then produce a model to beat them or else things will remain the way they are and Microsoft's dominance will continue.

The open source community is not run like a business, not in the sense that Fortune 500 companies are. Ubuntu is very much a community driven project. If we try and run the community like a business in a concerted effort to get people to use Ubuntu, the community will fall apart and you'll quickly find yourself without an developer, bug-finding or user base.

[ronan001]

The open source community is not run like a business, not in the sense that Fortune 500 companies are. Ubuntu is very much a community driven project. If we try and run the community like a business in a concerted effort to get people to use Ubuntu, the community will fall apart and you'll quickly find yourself without an developer, bug-finding or user base.

I agree thats its not run like a business as per say. But a project, organisation or community has structure to it no matter where a proprietary or a free software project. I fail to see how identifying ways that would make ubuntu more popular (i.e. access to distribution channels) would result in losing developers. I accept that with growth more opinions come on board and therefore more potential for forks but this possibility exists with or without growth.

[gashcr]

Ok. M$ and Apple are obviously interested in market-share because their income depends on how many people buys their products--- more people. more money-- but ubuntu is not about money, is about ideology... I insist that if ubuntu grows to a point where, indeed, EVERYBODY think it is a better option, market will grow, independently of any effort from M$ to compete... I actually think it is better, but I must admit there are some things that need to be polished... So, before thinking about global dominance, we should concentrate in help the developers to fill those gaps.

[ronan001]

Ok. M$ and Apple are obviously interested in market-share because their income depends on how many people buys their products--- more people. more money-- but ubuntu is not about money, is about ideology... I insist that if ubuntu grows to a point where, indeed, EVERYBODY think it is a better option, market will grow, independently of any effort from M$ to compete... I actually think it is better, but I must admit there are some things that need to be polished... So, before thinking about global dominance, we should concentrate in help the developers to fill those gaps.

I am in total agreement with you. but i think Microsoft is a smart company and they will use every trick in the book to make things difficult for our developers. and that some parts of the bigger plan need to occur in parallel with the developers work.

[Snowmayne]

A couple of things people might not be aware of.... Back 'in the day' when PCs (whether Apple, IBM, Amiga or even Texas Instrument) were first becoming available for personal/home use. Most people started veering away from Apple. Why? cost. Apple PCs tended to cost about twice as much as an IBM (or Olivetti) PC. Why? Partially because Apple decided to keep their OS and software more exclusionary than the other OSes at the time. So you ended up having to ask yourself this question when buying a home computer: "Do I want to pay $5000 for a machine with only 20 programs available to do stuff with, or do I want to pay $2500 with a couple of hundred programs to do the same thing?" no brainer right there.

Fast forward a few years to the start of the internet. Mosaic comes out with an application that allows you to look at pages over something called a 'web browser'. M$ at first didn't like this whole 'internet thing' and didn't think it would take off. Along comes Netscape with it's own browser and suddenly everyone's doing this thing called 'web surfing'. M$ jumps on board and in order to compete with Netscape they make the promise that their browser will be free forever. This almost drives Netscape out of existence and end up getting Microsoft sued when they started integrating IE with their OS, making it hard for other companies to compete with them (why Apple was never sued for the same thing, I'll never know. Maybe 'cuz Steve Jobs looked better in a suit than Bill Gates)

A couple of decades pass and now here we are with this whole 'Linux v Microsoft' issue. Personally, I'd like to be able to use a mac for hardware (it's just so pretty! :) ), Ubuntu for the OS (fast, stable, secure) and M$ compatible software (choice, choice, mmorpgs and choice ;) ). But that's just me. Until hardware, software and OS programmers/vendors/manufacturers all get on board with the idea, I'll just schlep along and keep dual-booting and 'wine-ing' when I can

[EdThaSlayer]

Linux has some organizations of itself, such as Novell and Red Hat Linux. :D