Article: Apple vs. Linux: Which Will Win Disgruntled Windows Users?

[karellen]

more details here
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.php/11070_3716486_1

[phenest]

The 1st page of this article is nothing more than statistics, therefor meaningless. The 2nd page is about marketing. This chap seems blissfully unaware that Ubuntu has the best marketing of all Linux based OS's (thanks to Mark Shuttleworth), and what is more, for a free OS, is doing quite well.

He has also made the capital mistake of assuming that, because Vista has achieved 9% of the market, it must be doing well. This is only due to it shipping with OEM hardware. Retail sales of Vista are, in fact, quite poor.

[karellen]

put windows xp instead of vista and the elephant steps into the scene. plus ubuntu may have the best marketing among linux distro, but it's nothing compared to those of apple or ms. and I find statistics to be important, whether we like it or not, user base does matter

[phenest]

...and I find statistics to be important, whether we like it or not, user base does matter

He doesn't mention user base. He mentions market share, which is different. You cannot measure user base by market share. Businesses are running Windows but not by user choice. Even the businesses have no choice because of 3rd party software only supporting Windows.

Given choice, MS would not have have anywhere near the current market share they have presently. And this is the problem with biased articles such as this one. The author is probably a Windows 'fanboy'.

Besides; there is no war - only choice.

[karellen]

He doesn't mention user base. He mentions market share, which is different. You cannot measure user base by market share. Businesses are running Windows but not by user choice. Even the businesses have no choice because of 3rd party software only supporting Windows.

Given choice, MS would not have have anywhere near the current market share they have presently. And this is the problem with biased articles such as this one. The author is probably a Windows 'fanboy'.

Besides; there is no war - only choice.

how is user baser different from market share? "why" and "how" are irrelevant. I'm only interested in the facts, not the "if" scenarios. and I find it funny that anyone who says something not optimistic enough about linux is suddenly "biased". maybe he is, but after all, we're all biased. don't we?

[phenest]

Market share only represents sales. The user base represents those actually using it. These 2 figures will never be the same. Therefor market share is irrelevant. Only user base is relevant. However, just because you know the user base, it doesn't show how many actually chose Windows over another OS.


...and I find it funny that anyone who says something not optimistic enough about linux is suddenly "biased". maybe he is, but after all, we're all biased. don't we?

Not really. It's only biased if no clear research has been done to give accurate figures. Also, the report only asks about users migrating from Windows. What about those wishing to migrate from Mac or Linux? And what makes the author think that people will stop using Windows? I know plenty of people who love Vista.

I am not biased. I just prefer the choice that Linux gives. I dual boot with XP to play games.

[karellen]

Market share only represents sales. The user base represents those actually using it. These 2 figures will never be the same. Therefor market share is irrelevant. Only user base is relevant. However, just because you know the user base, it doesn't show how many actually chose Windows over another OS.
ok, but considering what I know, window's user base is even larger than it's market share. people pirate it all the time. here where I live almost nobody bought windows (even with a new pc). so...the reality may look even grimmer than that depicted by statistics :D
anyway competition is good and I'd love to see another os, be it mac os x or linux, challenge the supremacy of allmighty windows

[Bromo]

Given choice, MS would not have have anywhere near the current market share they have presently. [...]

Besides; there is no war - only choice.

If one were disgruntled with Windows migration to Mac and Linux is a good option - and for embedded and server applications Linux already dominates (or nearly so). People disgruntled with desktop Windows and don't want to switch will stay with whatever version of Windows that they happen to have and hate the least (XP and 2000 for instance - my father has 2 Windows 2000 machines he refuses to take to XP or Vista and doesn't want to put Linux on them --- yet. >:) )

MS is facing a situation somewhat more difficult than than Windows ME - so we shall see. If it were anything other than a virtual monopoly, they would have lost quite a bit of market share already. Businesses certainly don't want to purchase a whole new set of hardware for their companies - for no other reason than to upgrade OS'es - without any additional functionality.

For me, it's "tools for the job" - I use desktop Linux for myself personally, and a Mac for other home applications, and use windows XP at work.

[suchawato]

I just read an interesting article,
to read it go here (http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.php/11070_3716486_1)
The author points out that recent losses of windows market share due to Due to Windows Vista ammount to 2 percent(loss for Microsoft)
Of the gains, 1.5 percent went directly to Apple.

The Mac/intel market share is around 7 percent.
Vista, Already has a 9 percent share.

And, at the moment, all Linux Distro's combined, still do not have as much market share as Windows 98 and Windows NT currently do.

The article points out somthing very clear:
Price of the OS and hardware is of no issue with regard to market share.

People who are switching to Apple, are paying top dollar.

What matters is Ease of use without frustration.

People Love The Apple customer service.
They do not want to have to deal with either constant threats of Malware and Viruses/Security holes, and they DO want things to "just work" an their computer.

Having to search fish for help on forums, because their screen resolution is not correct on their laptop is enough of a hastle that people are willing to spend hundreds more on a Mac that "just works".

Not having to give up current software when they can install Windows on an Intel Mac is worth the Money to people.

They certainly don't want to have to ask why their DVD's didn't play or MP3's when all they have to do is buy the Mac and everything "just works" just fine.

Why would they bother?

Linux is STILL just to techy for most users.

They should NEVER, EVER, EVER have to modify their xorg.conf file to get their stuff working.

In my case, I still don't have FAT32 external drives mounting in Gutsy. Including my iPod. I just live with it and use Fiesty when I really need to.

It's anoying.

All the driver complaints/and excuses really do amount to nothing as far as end users are concerned.

To them, it's just experimental software. Not ready for the market.

So what can we do to fix this:

Well, for starters, how about a Pay-for version of Ubuntu?

One that includes all the DVD drivers and MP3 stuff and Windows fonts, etc. straight from the get-go. Somthing like Mint, just not as glitchy.

Number two, Cannonical should start exploring deals with HP, Compaq, Gateway, IBM, and SONY to get versions of Ubuntu availible PRE-installed with manufacturer driver support. Just like Dell.

As well as support for previous hardware if possible.

If they have to pay for this driver support, so be it.

Pass the price on to users with the "pay-for" version of Ubuntu, as well as in the initial computer purchase prise of such a supported new computer.

We have a 1.34 percent market share.
exactly the same as just Windows 98 currently does.

Really, I once heard one of the "Ubuntu Members" on this forum (you know who they are, they have like thousands of posts) say that a "15 percent market share could not be ignored" in response to a post I made regarding lack of Industry standard software support.

15 percent is a pipe dream.

Apple has 7 percent, and they've been around WAY longer than Linux has.
If we get 3 percent, that'd be amazing.

I think the time has come to start changing strategy.

People (the majority of the market) really don't care about open source either.

Apple's recent success is not just due to their fancy advertising;
They offer an amazingly reliable, and versitale product.

No distro I've ever used is as reliable, user friendly, and versitle as what Mac has going.

It's just the facts people.

We need to look at this soberly.

No amount of free and open source harping is going to get ANY major graphics company to put their company's future on the shoulders of GIMP instead of Photoshop. Ive used it on All three OS's, it is a glitchy as glitchy gets. Especially with complicated edits.

No engineering firm is going to use some open CAD out there instead of AutoCAD.

Hell, there isn't even a reliable equivilant single program that does ALL the things iTunes does for interfacing with the iPod.
Most don't manage photo's, all don't access the iTunes website, and none that I have seen upload album art, organize podcasts correctly, or upload lyrics and photo's.

They just don't cut it people, and we need to realize that.
openOffice rocks, but it was not by volunteers. Sun paid, people to build it.

Give me an Ubuntu, that installs and does all the things a Comercial OS does, without any glitches, and I will be more than willing to give you at least 100 bucks.

Seriously.
Free is nice,
Reliable, Versitle, and Fully functional are one thousand times better.

[SunnyRabbiera]

So are you saying that closed source is better?
Really all apple is is RIPPED from open source, you know this right?????

this smells of anti FOSS FUD

[jrusso2]

The OP has made a lot of very valid points. But Linux prefers to remain a geek operating system thats why it remains a very low percentage of desktops.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Yeh but its making progress, after all linux has made more progress with itself over the last 4 years then apple or windows has in 10

[Murrquan]

So are you saying that closed source is better?
Really all apple is is RIPPED from open source, you know this right?????

this smells of anti FOSS FUD

That's a simplistic dismissal, that doesn't address his points. I think that they're worthy of consideration.

The fact is that what the Linux community's doing is working. People are taking us seriously now more than ever. In many ways and for many people, though, it's "not quite there" yet. And suchawato's post isn't just one complaint, it's a whole litany of them.

The solution is to identify how we can improve, and work on it. The people making the media players can keep making their players better. Red Hat can publish their Global Desktop, and Linspire or someone else can base their pay distro on Ubuntu. Gimp users can keep making their program better. And all of us can recommend Ubuntu to our friends, because we see them struggling with their computers and we know they deserve better than that.

Let's identify what we can do as individuals, and then do it. And let's work together as well.

[SunnyRabbiera]

but really talk like this makes it look we have gone nowhere, from my perspective we are coving more ground then most ever dreamed of.
linux is getting easier by the day it seems and talk like this seems like we are double backing.
really if we keep on moving forward one day there will be no need to edit diddlysquat.

[Murrquan]

really if we keep on moving forward one day there will be no need to edit diddlysquat.

Now where would be the fun in that? ^.^

[aysiu]

People who are switching to Apple, are paying top dollar.

What matters is Ease of use without frustration.

People Love The Apple customer service.
They do not want to have to deal with either constant threats of Malware and Viruses/Security holes, and they DO want things to "just work" an their computer.

Having to search fish for help on forums, because their screen resolution is not correct on their laptop is enough of a hastle that people are willing to spend hundreds more on a Mac that "just works". Macs don't "just work."
http://ubuntucat.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/macs-are-just-computers-not-magic/

[23meg]

Number two, Cannonical should start exploring deals with HP, Compaq, Gateway, IBM, and SONY to get versions of Ubuntu availible PRE-installed with manufacturer driver support. Just like Dell.

They're probably doing that already.


Really, I once heard one of the "Ubuntu Members" on this forum (you know who they are, they have like thousands of posts) say that a "15 percent market share could not be ignored" in response to a post I made regarding lack of Industry standard software support.


That was me, hello.


15 percent is a pipe dream.

Apple has 7 percent, and they've been around WAY longer than Linux has.

Apple probably has less than 7 percent, and how long they've been around is irrelevant. Apple's business strategy is vastly different (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=3941631&postcount=43) compared to that of the thousands of Linux vendors.

15 percent is an achievable figure. You've probably seen too little, don't know how much progress has been and is being made in how little time, so you lack perspective.

The future is unwritten. Whether we'll ever achieve 15 percent or not, nobody can tell for certain. But it's not an unreasonable or unrealistic figure at any stretch. Among other things, that depends very strongly on how well we can do this:


Let's identify what we can do as individuals, and then do it. And let's work together as well.

Really, there's a ridiculous amount of (mostly immature) speculation on LINUX MARKET SHARE FUTURE OF LINUX APPLE VISTA MICROSOFT NEW USERS PERCENT whatever. Too many people are spending / wasting too much time speculating on the role of FOSS in the future of the IT industry.

The big picture is too big and too complicated for most of us to make sense of. Stop worrying about it. Put your head down and get to work if you want to change it.

[aysiu]

I've merged the two threads on this same article.

[tuebinger]

I never put Linux on any of the computers I owned in the past because I was afraid I would totally screw them up. The only reason I tried Ubuntu on this old iBook is because I was bored while home sick from work, and my thinking was this computer was never really going to be used for anything else so I might as experiment on it.

I was still scared sick about what would happen to it. Would it fail to boot up? Would the hard drive get fried? Would it just die? These were thoughts going through my head at the time.

If people only have one computer that they rely on for everything, it is very improbable they will try to put Linux on it.

I think that's part of the reason it has such a small market share -- simply fear of the unknown.

[boast]

with the asus EEE laptop, many ppl were asking if they could install windows on it, instead of having linux. Now many await for asus to release the windows version.

*shrug*

[suchawato]

Oh no,.
That would be terrible.
I'm saying and the author of the artirticle is saying that it doesn't have any effect on market share.

The insult to injury is that we use the most advanced OS out there, User interface incl.
Every time I think Apples UI might be better, I just watch utube videos of diff peoples Compiz fun, and remind my self of my own fireworks.

Ends that concern.

I definitely think the "wow" factor of compiz is going to help us more for the general market than whether or not it is open source.

Most people I talk to don't even understand what an operating system IS much less why they should switch to open source.

I think if we are going to be serious about making serious market strides we need to fit the wants of the market, and not try to make the market fit us.

The latter is a suicide approach.

What the majority of the market seems to want is Fun, Flashy, easy to use, "everything works" one-step ease of install. and programs they recognize.

Price, Ethics, the state of the Source Code; -These are all non-issues as far as the general market consumer-user is concerned.

They really couldn't care about computer ethics.

They care about having a system where they do not have to think about it any further than turning it on, and clicking "send" to get their email out.

That's it. They don't ever want to adjust any settings other than their desktop background and/or screensaver.

That's it.

If we really do want that market, then we sill likely have to sacrifice things that make Linux so loved by us techs: the infinitely fiddle-able nature of it.

That nature needs to be hidden behind a seemless user interface that "just works" if we are ever to get the kind of market share we claim we want.

Most people just aren't techy, and they don't want to be either.

And we do need comercial software support.

Yes we do. There is no way around that if we want market share.

Focussing on ways to get that and cleaning up the interface would be well a better strategy than trying to convert people to Open Source, or even offering it for free.

We don't live in communist Russia.
Most people I've talked to about this equate free software with cheap(as in shoddy), or stolen/pirated.

And they definitely expect their DVD's to play.

We will never get the market share we want if people's DVD's don't play from the get-go.
Or their music collection.

It's just how it is.
Some won't even take a second look, they'll just toss it aside in desgust, and go get a Mac, or reluctantly buy a copy of Vista.

Remember Vista currently has 9 percent market share dispite all the howling about it.

People don't even want it and they get it anyway.
Why? Photoshop and iTunes work.
Their software they need for work, works.

We don't offer that, no-matter how advanced our stuff is.

That's the bottom line to the market.

We have to meet that, or we fail.

[23meg]

In Soviet Russia, market shares YOU!!
(disambiguation (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Russian_reversal_%28joke%29))

See you in five years.

[suchawato]

In Soviet Russia, market shares YOU!!
(disambiguation (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Russian_reversal_%28joke%29))

See you in five years.
Haha,
Oh, hello Meg, good to see you again.
Five years eh? I hope you are right.
I tell you what though.
I go to art school right? I study Interactive Media Design.
There is zero sign of my industry switching to open source.
I wish they would.
Honestly they only use the windows computers for office stuff which Open Office could handle just fine.
But on all the Macs where we do our graphics work, 3D modelling, video editing, etc? I don't see that changing in five years unless Photoshop, Quark ExPress, Illustrator, all of our Expensive 3D and Video software, etc. becomes avalible on Ubuntu.

You claimed in that one post that this might happen with 15 percent market share.
I think it would take less than that, considering Apple's Market share.
But how are we going to get it in the first place without software support?
I'm currious.
In five years, how is that going to happen with Commercial software support?

The only possibility that I believe might just do it is the matter of developing countries useing Ubuntu. If enough growing countries start using it, it could become a new standard overseas, where price is still a major factor.
That might create enough users for the major software vendors to start porting their apps.
Then? Oh yeah. I could see it happening.
But otherwise?

Iffy.

I just don't know.
I do know what my field is using. And what they aren't.
The media design field is only getting more pro Apple, not less.
I do see a selling point for Open office.

I have begun the process of starting an Open Source Software Education Club at my school, and will give away coppies of Open Office to students, but Ubuntu? We will make it avalible, but honestly, even when students get a used Comp, it already has windows on it.
We will be giving out shwag and discs, as well as provide classes and information demonstrations, but that isn't going to get them to use it.

When someone pays good money for a college course in Photoshop as part of their major towards Photography, video, or media, why would they use GIMP?
When they went through school using Macs and Windows, why would they use Ubuntu? It's a small field in a sense, but a very influential one. Our bosses, bosses, learned on Macs, and use Windows in their office.
Only in the office area do I see a realistic switch.

For home users, and anything media related I do not.

Some home users are just insistant on ethics like I am and put up with the glitches.

I still use Macs for stuff at school and I will be using Photoshop more and more, dispite that I do do all of my current work in Rawstudio, Gimp, and Irfanview(with wine).
I am a minority of me.
I think one other person in my Dept. heard of GIMP.
that's it.

So what I'm saying is that we have a long ways to go.
Huge progress has been made.
Huge progress still needs to be made.

So when I see people waving the victory flag, like the "paradigm shift is just around the corner.." I laugh, because my iPod still doesn't mount.
Oh, and GIMP just crashed on my friends Mac so bad I probably won't rreccomend she try it again on her computer for at least another year.
And she was so stoked that there was a free Photoshop-like software out there for her to use.

See what I mean?

All the hype, and "ubuntu just works" and "there are tons of free equivilant, open source versions of popular proprietary software avalible.." stuff isn't helping.

They are not equivilant.
They just aren't.
The only App. this is true for is Open Office.
That's it.

Long way to go in five years Meg.
I'm still using.

[23meg]

You claimed in that one post that this might happen with 15 percent market share.

I didn't. I was talking about hardware vendor support (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=3710315&postcount=2), not the backing of the mainstream proprietary software industry.


I think it would take less than that, considering Apple's Market share.

Again, that's an apples and oranges comparison, completely ignoring the history, business model and target audience of Apple. It can take less, or more, or just the same. The variables are different, and you're not taking them into account, so it's all up in the air; just speculation.


In five years, how is that going to happen with Commercial software support?

You probably mean mainstream proprietary software support. The amount of people who can do just fine with what Ubuntu or other distros offer, and don't need any specialist proprietary software is enormous. We haven't tapped into this market yet. GNU/Linux is almost not being marketed at all to this audience.

I'm not saying we'll have 15% market share in five years (re-read my first post). I'm saying that in the next five years, you'll witness an amount of change and development that you don't seem to be expecting.



So what I'm saying is that we have a long ways to go.
Huge progress has been made.
Huge progress still needs to be made.

I agree. And progess isn't made with worrying and speculation; it's made with just the right amount of planning, and lots of sweat.

More food for thought:

http://log.ometer.com/2007-11.html#21

[suchawato]

1

[somethingkindawierd]

Here are two interesting articles regarding Windows users switching to either Apple's Mac OS or Ubuntu Linux. This is the first, asking why people bother switching to Mac (http://prosenjit23.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/switch-to-ubuntu-linux-not-apple-mac-os/), and here is the second, comparing the experience of both Ubuntu and Mac OS (http://www.ubuntuproductivity.com/journal/macintosh/10/2008/re-switch-to-ubuntu-linux-not-apple-mac-os/).

[aysiu]

Here are two interesting articles regarding Windows users switching to either Apple's Mac OS or Ubuntu Linux. This is the first, asking why people bother switching to Mac (http://prosenjit23.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/switch-to-ubuntu-linux-not-apple-mac-os/), and here is the second, comparing the experience of both Ubuntu and Mac OS (http://www.ubuntuproductivity.com/journal/macintosh/10/2008/re-switch-to-ubuntu-linux-not-apple-mac-os/).
That first blog post doesn't really address why people bother switching to Mac. It actually makes the case that there's no reason to switch to Mac when you can switch to Ubuntu.

I wrote a blog post about what Apple has that Canonical is missing:
Ubuntu: The Open Source Apple Challenger? (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/ubuntu-the-open-source-apple-challenger/)

[karellen]

considering that Apple's market share (on desktops) is approximately 8% and Linux market share around 1% (the rest of 90% obviously Windows) it's pretty logical to say that Apple has increased its market share faster than Linux
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=8
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=93&qpnp=25
simple facts

[KiwiNZ]

Apples growth rate sits at about 29% while the other main contenders sit at 6% growth

Maybe thats indicative as to where the migration is going

[saulgoode]

considering that Apple's market share (on desktops) is approximately 8% and Linux market share around 1% (the rest of 90% obviously Windows) it's pretty logical to say that Apple has increased its market share faster than Linux
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=8
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=93&qpnp=25
simple facts
Not facts, statistics. And the statistics presented are culled from visits to sites which pay a monthly fee to HitsLink so that HitsLink monitors visitation to those sites. Hardly a sampling methodology which one would expect to accurately represent usage levels of Free, or free, operating systems.

[danbuter]

OS X will capture the majority of disaffected Windows users. Why? Because the VAST majority of people have either never heard of linux, or think it's just for servers.

[sparkix]

I feel one of the main reasons MAC's seem to "just work" is because they have a limited amount of hardware they support and they know "everything" about this hardware. OS X wouldn't do so well if it tried to "just work" on everyone's PC. I have to give Windows credit for doing this well. It is hard and they pull it off for the most part.

I still prefer Linux to either OS mainly because I've been dabbling in it since 2000. Because of solidworks, I still need to run Windows on at least one computer at home. I am shortly going to try Ubuntu 8.10 on my EEE 901.

[karellen]

Not facts, statistics. And the statistics presented are culled from visits to sites which pay a monthly fee to HitsLink so that HitsLink monitors visitation to those sites. Hardly a sampling methodology which one would expect to accurately represent usage levels of Free, or free, operating systems.

do you have a better proposal? what do you suggest? every source one cites might be interpreted as biased by someone else ;)

[tsali]

I agree. I used Macs for many years. Sometimes, even certain models within Apple's line were supported better than others by the MacOS.

Interestingly, I'm finding that Xubuntu supports my old iMac Bondi much better than any of the new MacOS...and defintiely better than MacOS 8.6 that shipped on it.

Here's simple reason why consumer users migrate to Macs instead of Ubuntu...

I can go to a retail outlet and "play" with a Mac. I can buy one off the shelf. I can buy them in college bookstores. Apple has these very cool TV commercials...I know who Apple is and what they are selling. When was the last time you could walk into a big box store and "play" with an Ubuntu machine? When was the last time you heard anyone other than a computer geek espousing how great Ubuntu is?

As far as being free goes, I have never seen an OEM linux machine that offer a significant cost advantage over a Windows PC. People who buys Macs are perfectly OK paying more for something they think has "value".

LiveCDs really don't get it because most people don't understand that they really can't harm their computer. For many, the OS IS the computer and a LiveCD LOOKS like they have done something serious to their computer and sets them on edge (unpleasant experience). In most cases a live CD is limited in what it can show them (usually no wireless). Additionally, if the LiveCD does not come up and detect all of the existing hardware, that "sale" and any potential future "sales" are lost forever. Now you have a consumer who had a bad experience with Ubuntu and will call it "hacker junk" from now on.

Perhaps Shuttleworth could spend some cash to open a few high profile brick and mortar Ubuntu retail outlets as Apple has done? Wouldn't a well lit Ubuntu logo on a storefront pique the curiosity of shoppers in a London mall or a New York shopping district? This kind of retailing would ensure that hardware and OS are matched...and pull in some "cool" clientel.

[billgoldberg]

I agree. I used Macs for many years. Sometimes, even certain models within Apple's line were supported better than others by the MacOS.

Interestingly, I'm finding that Xubuntu supports my old iMac Bondi much better than any of the new MacOS...and defintiely better than MacOS 8.6 that shipped on it.

Here's simple reason why consumer users migrate to Macs instead of Ubuntu...

I can go to a retail outlet and "play" with a Mac. I can buy one off the shelf. I can buy them in college bookstores. Apple has these very cool TV commercials...I know who Apple is and what they are selling. When was the last time you could walk into a big box store and "play" with an Ubuntu machine? When was the last time you heard anyone other than a computer geek espousing how great Ubuntu is?

As far as being free goes, I have never seen an OEM linux machine that offer a significant cost advantage over a Windows PC. People who buys Macs are perfectly OK paying more for something they think has "value".

LiveCDs really don't get it because most people don't understand that they really can't harm their computer. For many, the OS IS the computer and a LiveCD LOOKS like they have done something serious to their computer and sets them on edge (unpleasant experience). In most cases a live CD is limited in what it can show them (usually no wireless). Additionally, if the LiveCD does not come up and detect all of the existing hardware, that "sale" and any potential future "sales" are lost forever. Now you have a consumer who had a bad experience with Ubuntu and will call it "hacker junk" from now on.

Perhaps Shuttleworth could spend some cash to open a few high profile brick and mortar Ubuntu retail outlets as Apple has done? Wouldn't a well lit Ubuntu logo on a storefront pique the curiosity of shoppers in a London mall or a New York shopping district? This kind of retailing would ensure that hardware and OS are matched...and pull in some "cool" clientel.

It would be great, but I don't think Canonical has the cash to pull it off.

[aysiu]

It would be great, but I don't think Canonical has the cash to pull it off.
Canonical may not, but Shuttleworth certainly does.