Linux and the low global Desktop marketshare...

[sstomek]

Hey everyone,

I am doing some research on issues in the Linux community. Undoubtedly there is a low market share when it comes to the personal computing front. However, the server side of things has seen a lot more of Linux. probably more than 30 percent.

As a prior Windows user turned Linux I find Linux to be far better. Now with the fancy graphical interfaces it makes using Linux that much easier. So why is the global market share for Linux so low? I have my own theories but I'm more interested in what you guys think. haha we might want to keep the Microsoft bashing to a low but if its necessary and funny that it's allowed heh. Good thoughtful input is appreciated.

Thanks for any input,

Tomek

[Juan Pablo]

People use what is installed in their computers by default, and it is usually WinXP. A lot of them think it is the only thing available.

Also there's a myth that says that Linux is hard, it's hard when people try to apply what they learned on windows in Linux

[a12ctic]

The reason its so low is that microsoft has brainwashed everyone into thinking that theyre solution is so much better. And because theyve locked oem's into using their crap.

[eraker]

People use what is installed in their computers by default, and it is usually WinXP. A lot of them think it is the only thing available.

I agree with this entirely. I think too few people know about it.

In fact, it's mistifying to me that comparatively so few people use something that works so well and is given away freely. My only conclusion is that people must not know enough, or anything, about it.

[carlosponti]

most people dont even know what linux is or even heard about it. there have been times when i mentioned i dont use windows they ask me with a dumbfounded look on thier face then what do you use. i say linux and i they look even more puzzled than before. thats about the point where i start having to explain what an operating system is and go into detail about the way computers function.

[sstomek]

Alright so far its been the ignorance of the consumer. But than it can't be the consumers fault for not trying something they don't know about. So who would there be to blame? I mean the average customer doesn't spend their days researching what is the best choice, it has to be stuffed in their faces. In comes advertising. But would advertising fix the problem?

-Tomek

[Juan Pablo]

A fix would be large computers companies preloading Linux, but Microsoft doesn't allow this, if you want to blame some company it would be OEMs or Microsoft

[smolloy]

It all depends if you think there is a "problem" to fix, and not everyone agrees that there is. It seems to me that, despite the low market share, the linux world (and the OSS world in general) is thriving. The software being produced is of a very high quality, and it is being advanced at quite a rate.

Power computer users will be aware of this, as their experience with computers will inevitably lead them to be aware of the existence of multiple operating systems. They can then make an informed choice between these. For them a problem doesn't exist, as they get a choice of high quality software.

I agree with the idea that Window's huge market share is due to people using the pre-installed operating system -- which is almost always Windows. But for these people Windows is perfectly acceptable for their needs. They don't feel any need to change because they are happy with Windows (and, surprisingly, happy with the increased security risk of using it).

[bigtomrodney]

It seemed to me there was a big upswell of linux usage after Firefox took off. There was a greater awareness of FOSS and its perceived quality no to mention cost to the end user. I remember a time when people said we shouldn't port Linux apps to Windows. But this brings awareness and when people arrive at linux it already seems familiar because 90% of modern home computer usage is surfing the net.

Amarok is due to get a Windows port alongside its 2.0 release (KDE4 release). If you read any of the big geek sites like slashdot or digg you'll see how popular Amarok is. It reminds me of the enthusiasm for Firefox in its early days. If we see a Windows port of that too and possibly the growth of other apps like gaim and open office we will really have the whole nest set up for migrating users. This combined with the smaller issues like nVidia/ATI driver licences and broader wifi chip support I think we will really see an upsurge in OEM boxes providing linux.

Look at the Philips iQon series. You can buy them in Tesco. And pretty much every model comes as an Intel or an AMD, with the AMD costing much less. There is the consumer choice - and there is where the consumer gets the benefit of reduced cost and (arguably) better technology.

[sstomek]

It all depends if you think there is a "problem" to fix, and not everyone agrees that there is. It seems to me that, despite the low market share, the linux world (and the OSS world in general) is thriving. The software being produced is of a very high quality, and it is being advanced at quite a rate.

Power computer users will be aware of this, as their experience with computers will inevitably lead them to be aware of the existence of multiple operating systems. They can then make an informed choice between these. For them a problem doesn't exist, as they get a choice of high quality software.

I agree with the idea that Window's huge market share is due to people using the pre-installed operating system -- which is almost always Windows. But for these people Windows is perfectly acceptable for their needs. They don't feel any need to change because they are happy with Windows (and, surprisingly, happy with the increased security risk of using it).

I have no doubt that the software being produced today is of very high quality, as a computer science major I can see that. But the quality of the software is not necessarily what I mean. I believe the "problem" is that even though Linux is a superb operating system, maybe even better than the others, they have a surprisingly low market share.

Power computer users definitely can become aware of the multiple operating systems and eventually find out/switch to Linux. However, your average computer user/consumer is not a power computer user by any means (however, i believe that number is growing). Although, like many people, they do like to save money. So why wouldn't Linux be an obvious choice. Not only is it cheaper(much cheaper ) but its safer, more stable, and now easier to use.

I do think a big part of it is indeed computer's coming with pre-installed operating systems which leads to the consumer's ignorance towards other operating systems.

Would you say that if a company came out that sold computers with Linux pre-installed, that they would be successful and in turn make Linux a much more popular OS?

-Tomek