Ubuntu on Windows 10

[ian-weisser]

It seems that a very important market is made up of lots of individuals like me that want their computer to be a useful tool with a reasonably long life. They also want it to work with few troubles and at a reasonable cost over that time.

Perhaps to you and me. Vendors may see that market as unprofitable, hence unimportant.

More individuals that are not satisfied with their products and aggravated by their methods will continue to migrate, but it will take time.

Satisfaction is less important to the business model than income.
Satisfaction can always be improved later, if it turns out to be an important element of platform choice.
So far, not really. Imprinting, being the first OS people learn, seems to be more important.

[ventrical]

Well, Ubuntu and certain other desktop environments may not be suited for some older hardware.

Why yes, of course. There is no dispute there , at least from my end. On the average, though, many frameworks from 2004 and up have a really good chance of installing a reliable ubuntu-linux system that is current in development.

regards..

[ventrical]

Perhaps to you and me. Vendors may see that market as unprofitable, hence unimportant.


Satisfaction is less important to the business model than income.
Satisfaction can always be improved later, if it turns out to be an important element of platform choice.
So far, not really. Imprinting, being the first OS people learn, seems to be more important.

And that's one of the phemons of Ubuntu. It is the rejection of that imprinting along with the downtime and compromised user_space that make Ubuntu the logical alternative. People somehow just find it and get it running no matter how hard it is. That's a big message sent to the corporate side of hardware/software buisness models.

regards..

[buzzingrobot]

...being the first OS people learn, seems to be more important.

We see this happen in all sorts of areas: Technological change present a business opportunity. A batch of new ventures jump in with products. Sooner rather than later, almost all leave the market. A very few vendors, sometimes one, dominate the market. The conventions they establish become the de facto standards everyone else must follow. Others vendors who want to sell into that market shape their products to work with the market leader's product. Users become accustomed to the specific ways that product tackles generic tasks and quickly find it very difficult to learn new habits. Eventually, the need to sustain compatibility with its own previous products and installed base, and with the products of the industry it has fostered, stifles innovation and leads those vendors to look new ways to sustain their profitability.

That's obviously a synopsis of the PC industry, but much the same has happened in most other markets built around what was once innovative engineering.

[mikodo]

Snippets

North Americans are suckers for punishment. I remember when they advertised that Win XP was the "most secure ever" when actually it was a malware beehive. People are fascintated with virus and malware. And they continue to pay for the punishment.

Nice write up. Remember... with Windows comes vulnerabilites for malware and the vulnerability of all the exploitable ports to spy in on Ubuntu behaviour. Malware writers have had a hard time breaking and interfecting Ubuntu and , now , Windows has opened the door and Canonical has allowed it.

Being N.American and respectful of your work in malware removal, I hope you are wrong.

[T.J.]

Ladies and Gentlemen.


If I might say so, I believe the entire business behind the Linux for Windows subsystem is simply to court developers. Windows has a lost a lion's share of the developer favor over the last few years to Android and iOS. By supporting basic Linux tools on Windows, Microsoft hopes to slow the exodus of commercial developers off of Windows for alternative platforms, by letting them work on Windows while still using the tools they have become accustomed to.

It’s wise move, although I believe it is far too late. Outside of corporate offices and programmers, Windows is already dead.

It's share of the world's computer devices is stagnant at around 14%. Windows' use is certainly not climbing, nor as it seen a serious prospect for the future non-PC era device designs. Microsoft has burned too many bridges with their former hardware partners, so even their former partners are betting on an opensource, non-Windows future. As I see it, Windows as a consumer platform is basically a thing of the past, outside of PC gaming.

Microsoft was one of the original signatories to the POSIX standard. I do believe that returning to being a strong advocate for the POSIX standard is their best hope, not some half-baked compatibility layer with Ubuntu as pleasant as it might be. I don’t see this new Linux subsystem having much effect. Virtualization is too entrenched and offers other tangible management benefits besides a simple programming tool, so I think this initiative will be entirely stillborn.

You might say I sound overly zealous to one point of view. That's all right. I've been working in or around programming and computer science for over 25 years. I've seen the tides rise and fall more times than I can remember. In my opinion, this is little more than stopgap strategy to keep Windows in the news and relevant for a little while longer.

[sammiev]

Outside of offices and programmers, Windows is dead. It's share of the world's computer devices is stagnant at around 14%.

Would like to read the article with all this info. Please post the link.

Thanks

[T.J.]

Certainly!

"The reality is the world's shifted, the world's evolved. We now measure ourselves in the total device space. And in the total device space we have a 14% share of devices, total worldwide devices."

-- Kevin Turner, Microsoft Chief Operating Officer, at Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference in Washington DC, 2014. (http://www.computerworld.com/article...-just-14-.html)

Please do a simple Google search if you wish to verify attribution. Have a wonderful evening! =)

[atrab101]

It's share of the  world's computer devices is stagnant at around 14%.

This number looked crazy to me. I guess since I only used Windows for 24 years until I recently built a dual boot WinXP/Ubuntu desktop, I thought Microsoft still enjoyed a dominant market position. After looking at the Gartner web site, I clearly see where the 14% number is coming from. Desktop devices were only about 10% of total shipped devices in 2015 (including tablets, phones, etc.). Microsoft has almost none of the tablet and phone markets, so the number makes sense. Very surprising to me! I personally enjoy using a desktop, and I am not a gamer. I am not interested in giving my life to Google on a phone or tablet, and I don't think I am alone with that feeling. I guess I am part of a coming niche market! Of course, a few hundred million PC's is still quite a few, and they are much more substantial platforms that users will invest more dollars in than any phone, which will probably one day become near give-away items (many are getting close). It does not cost much to make a phone in China. Please continue to support my niche, Ubuntu! Strange thoughts, indeed, but apparently Microsoft may have a rough road ahead.


Regards

[T.J.]

Desktop devices were only about 10% of total shipped devices in 2015 (including tablets, phones, etc.). Microsoft has almost none of the tablet and phone markets, so the number makes sense. Very surprising to me! I personally enjoy using a desktop, and I am not a gamer.

I am not interested in giving my life to Google on a phone or tablet, and I don't think I am alone with that feeling.

I know. I feel much the same way, except that I like games.

As a developer, I have seen the consumer market move off of the desktop. It makes me glad actually. Desktop workstations are overkill and the average users simply do not need that level of computing power. What we are seeing today is simply the long delayed transition of regular users to less costly devices. It was something that was inevitable. Microsoft and Apple actually knew this back in the 90's and 2000's but Microsoft in particular went out of its way to prevent it because its largest products: Windows and Office - are designed around a keyboard and mouse - using a lot of screen real estate. If you need proof, look up the Newton or Courier tablets.
.

As a rule, Windows - because it is closed and proprietary - has been a tech support nightmare for most OEMs. An alternative tablet running opensource - by design - is a simple flash/restore because most of their data is stored elsewhere. I'm not an advocate for cloud use or the massive privacy invasions that it invites. I actually despise it. I simply recognize the reality of others' use patterns, and cultivate the necessary tools to do my job.


In my experience, while acknowledging their contributions, front running tech giants like Intel, Apple and Microsoft aren't visionaries, as much as they are restraining forces. I can give you many examples I have seen in my career of how we would have been better off without them, and their legions of lawyers; who are responsible for killing off real advancements in technology. It's very sobering. The reason Microsoft is so far behind now is that their corporate culture wouldn't let them acknowledge the fact that they can't control everything.

I guess I am part of a coming niche market! Of course, a few hundred million PC's is still quite a few, and they are much more substantial platforms that users will invest more dollars in than any phone, which will probably one day become near give-away items (many are getting close).

To some degree, certainly. You can rest assured that they will never fully "go away." What you call a "PC" was called a "workstation" in the pre-PC days. Workstations are not going to go away, because like a consumer tablet, they serve a specific design purpose. A developer does probably 90% of their actual work on a workstation. An office worker perhaps uses it approximately 60-80% of the time at a rough guess.



I use mine nearly 100% of the time because I prefer having the ability to run Windows and Linux simultaneously, rather than dual boot. I develop on both platforms. I see Windows as a "dead end" not because it is bad, but because it is closed source on a highly restrictive license. Microsoft is simply becoming too costly for developers to maintain on a profit margin, now that opensource runs most devices.

! Strange thoughts, indeed, but apparently Microsoft may have a rough road ahead.

We will see. I hope they come to their senses, and start making Windows more open and relax the license.

Take care