Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
That old warning: Do not feed the trolls....
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Just Joined! lonewolfbr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    0

    Cool As always....


    That old warning: Do not feed the trolls.

  2. #12
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    6

    Talking Don't rain on my parade

    Ever since I quit Facebook, I have been looking for a good spot to pick a fight.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    19
    The author is not wrong you know.

    For 10 years everybody had been boasting about the infamous '200x will be the year of the Linux Desktop'. This means that Linux had from 2000-2009 to make a dent and capture some significant usage share in the PC market.

    And after 10 years, what do we get? We see people eating their words and saying that "2010 is the START of the Linux desktop". My my, so it took 10 years of not being able to break into the mainstrem desktop space, only to backtrack and say that 2010 will be the 'START' of it all?

    Yawn. Even Microsoft did not need 11 years to dominate the home PC market. All it took was 2 generations of Windows (Windows 3.x, Windows 95) to secure total control of the market. And mind you, Windows 95 was released BEFORE Microsoft started dabbling with anticompetitive practices.

    So much for desktop Linux, huh?

  4. $spacer_open
    $spacer_close
  5. #14
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Etna View Post
    Windows 95 was released BEFORE Microsoft started dabbling with anticompetitive practices.
    Their bad practices, or some would call it marketing skills, could be tracked back to 1980-1981, when MS resold Q-DOS as MS-DOS and pushed Gary Kildall out of the market. STFG: The Man Who Could Have Been Richer Than Bill Gates

  6. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by uldics View Post
    Their bad practices, or some would call it marketing skills, could be tracked back to 1980-1981, when MS resold Q-DOS as MS-DOS and pushed Gary Kildall out of the market. STFG: The Man Who Could Have Been Richer Than Bill Gates
    Microsoft did not steal Q-DOS. They just happened to know someone who had written a similar clone of Q-DOS, bought it from them and rebadged it as MS-DOS.

    Don't blame MS for jumping on a business opportunity when it saw one. Blame Kildall for being dumb enough to let such a rare chance pass by him.

  7. #16
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1
    I don't have any usage statistics to show but I think that Linux is anything else but dead! It's the only operating system I use (no dual boot) in my desktop computer (which, by the way, is a Mac but since I don't like OSX I removed it right away, replaced with Ubuntu and so far it works perfect!) at work, my laptop and my netbook!

  8. #17
    Linux Engineer MASONTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Mason Texas
    Posts
    934
    A good refutation of the article can be found at: Desktop Linux: The Presstitutes Strike Again! | Eye On Linux

  9. #18
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2
    The author talks about the 'failure' of desktop linux. Specifically, the failure of linux to catch on with desktop users, lost opportunities over the past 10 years, and its stagnant 1% market share.

    By this, he is implying the success of desktop linux should be measured by how many users have converted from Windows, and a bigger market share.

    Is that the goal of desktop linux? - To convert people from Windows and grow market share?

  10. #19
    Linux Engineer MASONTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Mason Texas
    Posts
    934
    When you are talking about an OS that is free to download, how do you judge market share? Windows and Mac can point to units sold, but wiht no money changing hands, no SKU's to count, linux is probably grossly under reported.

  11. #20
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    6

    The desktop is not terribly relevant

    It really doesn't matter that Linux in not yet widespread on the desktop. The installed base of Linux may already be larger than Windows. Virtually every home router runs Linux. It's on phones, embedded into media devices and even used in avionics. Plus Linux is now really beginning to eat Windows in the server market. So who cares if it is not the dominant desktop.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •