Analyst: It's Game Over for Linux

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
If we make it as easy to use as windows then i'm sure it will gain more popularity. Right now in order to install something you have to do so much in terminal that average users do not want to go through. They just want simple double click and keep hitting next until its installed. Until Linux is made to be simple as that, it wont gain much popularity among average desktop users.
 
[citation][nom]soundthinking[/nom]Not really...Different distros do different things. Fedora is a test platform for the very latest software advances in Linux, Ubuntu is for the newbs, openSUSE/SLED are for businesses, BackTrack is for penetration testing (network security tests), Debian is mainly for servers and long-term desktop systems, Sabayon is for media-center style computers, and distros like Zentyal are for gateways and small-scale servers. It's not just nerds trying to out-do each other, rather it is just a differing of opinions on what to make of Linux's adaptability.[/citation]
SoundThinking,

Since everybody has opinions your analogy suggests that there is no problem with having 1 million different distros to suit everyone's opinion.

I think you missed from the OP comments was that there is a significant benefit to having a limited number of choices -- it means that when problems are solved in 1 flavour, it is solved in "all". This reduces the "wasted" effort of having multiple versions, each of which requires their own maintainers, to focusing the combined effort on solving overall problems faster.

I would suggest that having a single GUI environment instead of the multiple solutions currently available, could have meant that the problem of DirectX could have been solved by now.

"More" does not implicitly mean "better", "more" can actually mean "smaller" and "less efficient"*.

* I am project admin team member for a popular OSS solution. "More choice" means that we need to take our limited time resources away from development (what users want) to spend it on testing the software on the variety of platforms. So, I see more as "less efficient"
 
Maybe linux community have to hire someone from Forrester Research to get the right marketing strategy for linux to gain more market share.
 
I don't think you guys get it. I use Linux also, have 5 different distros on a virtual machine. I love it. But no, it won't ever take over. Ever.
Linux has to be made so simple, that anyone can use it. And right now, they can't. Installing new software is a joke. Unless you use their software center. But finding a nice new app online and getting it installed sucks.
And who the hell wants to have to compile stuff?
Plus, we have to get developers on board en-mass, and fast.
So yeah, until the OS becomes so complete as to NEVER need a terminal window, it wont make it. I know allot about Linux but I just don't like it. I like the ease of loading up windows and things just "work". This CAN happen with Linux, but the developers need to unify on Linux. Not this 300 distro crap.
 
10 GB root partition + home dir running Arch Linux.
20 GB partition with Windows 7 + 50 GB dedicated games partition.
600+ GB EXT4 storage.

And from this "storage" partition I run just two TinyXP/MicroXP virtual machines, inside a:

- 2 GB .vdi file just for iTunes (for syncing my iPod touch). I set it up with an OS X theme, OS X cursor, even an OS X wallpaper. Runs fine with 512 MB RAM allocated.

- 5 GB .vdi file for productivity work (printer drivers, scanner drivers, Microsoft Office, ABBYY FineReader, Adobe Acrobat, etc). Runs fine with 768 MB allocated, even with disk compression enabled.


Everything else is open source:
Firefox, Chromium, Flash + Java
SMPlayer, VLC, Sonata, XBMC
Inkscape, Gimp
Pidgin, xChat
Deluge, Transmission
TrueCrypt, Parcellite, Volwheel, Dropbox, Guake, etc, etc.

Apart from gaming, I have everything I need running on Linux (the 1% is done with the help of VirtualBox). Linux works splendidly as a desktop OS for me. Let's face it, people just don't wanna put any effort into it. In fact, I bet the above setup sounds like a lot of work, done by someone with too much free time on their hands, am I right? Well, it didn't feel that way. It was actually a lot of fun putting it together. Kinda like a puzzle.

"Game over" he says... Pff. Ignorance is a bliss.
 
[citation][nom]zer0net[/nom]If we make it as easy to use as windows then i'm sure it will gain more popularity. Right now in order to install something you have to do so much in terminal that average users do not want to go through. They just want simple double click and keep hitting next until its installed. Until Linux is made to be simple as that, it wont gain much popularity among average desktop users.[/citation]

Actually, installing software is quite easy in most distros, especially Ubuntu. Browsers, CLI, and GUIs are some of the choices you have. Even though most people are idiots, I think they can write a post-it note with this command: apt-get install "package name". The only other problem that occurs is adding a mirror. Most websites will give you detailed instructions on how to install the software from their mirrors, and there is often a direct download option anyway.
 
how exactly does a free alternative disrupt the pricing for established technologies? he talks enough about world domination and linux to make it sound like hes just trolling.

Also how exactly is linux dying if the android market is rising so darn fast.

Linux = kernel (tool for creating OS)

Android = OS(is created with a kernel[android uses linux])

The big server chunk linux has, ubuntu, the programming thats done on linux by MANY programmers, and android are going to prevent this from dying for a very long time.
 
[citation][nom]pcito[/nom]Linux is free as in "don't give us your money... your soul and your adherence to our anti-capitalist political movement will do."[/citation]

This may be true for some parts of Linux distributions (especially the GNU toolchain), but Linus doesn't subscribe to such an agenda. The Linux kernel project has never been about Free software, that's the FSF's and GNU's world view. Just ask Stallman, he doesn't like Linus' views on Free software either.
 
[citation][nom]dspider[/nom]10 GB root partition + home dir running Arch Linux.20 GB partition with Windows 7 + 50 GB dedicated games partition.600+ GB EXT4 storage.And from this "storage" partition I run just two TinyXP/MicroXP virtual machines, inside a:- 2 GB .vdi file just for iTunes (for syncing my iPod touch). I set it up with an OS X theme, OS X cursor, even an OS X wallpaper. Runs fine with 512 MB RAM allocated.- 5 GB .vdi file for productivity work (printer drivers, scanner drivers, Microsoft Office, ABBYY FineReader, Adobe Acrobat, etc). Runs fine with 768 MB allocated, even with disk compression enabled.Everything else is open source:Firefox, Chromium, Flash + JavaSMPlayer, VLC, Sonata, XBMCInkscape, GimpPidgin, xChatDeluge, TransmissionTrueCrypt, Parcellite, Volwheel, Dropbox, Guake, etc, etc.Apart from gaming, I have everything I need running on Linux (the 1% is done with the help of VirtualBox). Linux works splendidly as a desktop OS for me. Let's face it, people just don't wanna put any effort into it. In fact, I bet the above setup sounds like a lot of work, done by someone with too much free time on their hands, am I right? Well, it didn't feel that way. It was actually a lot of fun putting it together. Kinda like a puzzle."Game over" he says... Pff. Ignorance is a bliss.[/citation]

Preach on
 
[citation][nom]soundthinking[/nom]Not really...Different distros do different things. Fedora is a test platform for the very latest software advances in Linux, Ubuntu is for the newbs, openSUSE/SLED are for businesses, BackTrack is for penetration testing (network security tests), Debian is mainly for servers and long-term desktop systems, Sabayon is for media-center style computers, and distros like Zentyal are for gateways and small-scale servers. It's not just nerds trying to out-do each other, rather it is just a differing of opinions on what to make of Linux's adaptability.[/citation]

Sounds convenient and hassle free...
 
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]What keeps Windows dominant is compatibility with old software. Nothing else.Would have ditched my Windows machine long ago if I wasn't a gamer.[/citation]
This. Most people don't want to run a dual-boot machine and they have to use Windows for certain programs. OSX has done well for itself the last few years, but that is based nearly 100% on marketing.
 
that guy is dead set on believing that linux is an OS and that noone would buy a linux phone! Hes ignoring what the smart people say. He literally has no clue what hes talking about.
 
This ia directly from M$
They fear that Linux might gain even the desktop
Android is creeping from Tablets to Ultranotebooks
That's why Win8 goes to ARM CPU in order to stop that

M$ even send Elop to Nokia to stop the Linux distro
Symbian was not a thread
but MeeGo was looking way too good to be ignored
Tht'a why the 1st time in history a CEO blashemed a product of his own co
Wlop claimed that MeeGo is dead
and it will be late in 2012 and that it sucks
Look what happened! It was released way before Christmas 2011
and is the ONLY device cooler than iApple phones
Yes
Linux has to be destroyed and definately on Tablets (and phones)

What was Steven Jobs passion before he died on his hatred?!
Kill Android! Destroy it! It's Linux!

I say that Linux will creep into Ultranotebooks in 2012
You can delay it, but you can't stop it!
Resistance is futile! Cyborgs, I mean: Android is here!
 
Linux dominates everything but Desktop computing at the moment, and there's nowhere for Windows to go but down from there. Linux dominates servers, smartphones, device firmware for everything from routers to DVRs(even if you don't realize your device is using it). Linux is also picking up steam in mission-critical mainframe servers, whereas mission-critical and Windows have never been mentioned in the same sentence before until I just did it now.

Linux is an OS kernel. A very advanced OS kernel. Why would any company spend years and millions of dollars hiring 100 software engineers to write an OS kernel from scratch, when they can use Linux for free if they just comply with the GPL license? Even for companies like Apple who refuse to be open and comply with the GPL, there's the much less advanced BSD kernel that anybody can use for free, with no restrictions. Linux is a democratically developed operating system, Windows is the equivalent of ye olde feudalism meets mafia protection racket.

Posted from my Ubuntu laptop.
 
Linux distributions are moving in the right direction. I grew up on Windows but I own a linux box and I think they are getting better about UI, look and feel, and other issues similar to these.

Virtual machines will in the next 10 years make application development for different platforms an inconsequential detail. Back when processing power was going at a premium and you needed to squeeze out every ounce of performance out of your program, you wanted all code to execute natively and not through a Java or .NET interpreter. Now, hardware has reached a point where most tasks that are given to processors are trivial. Having an extra layer will not hurt the user experience at all.

Once this happens, less people will be willing to pay 100$ for an OS when there is a free Linux distribution that can run all the same apps for free. The reasons I don't use Linux for everything is because it can't run my programming software, CAD software, and games (conveniently). I believe this will change.
 
[citation][nom]GreaseMonkey_62[/nom]Yes from my understanding OSX is based upon a linux kernel.[/citation]


Actually it is based on the BSD kernel which is Unix. Linux is a Unix clone and shares no actual source code.
 
I nearly spilled coffee on myself after reading this post and just had to put my two cents in. Firstly if you call yourself an analyst well you are missing so many perspectives on the linux matter, especially how "basic" your article actually is, you surely must have been paid by M$ as several users stated because you are way off base and obviously do not even see the strategy that is being used to gain the FUTURE marketplace. I could bet you $1000 that within 10 years (most likely about 7) but lets just give us that amount of time, that M$ will be in the exact same position as Blackberry is today but in the desktop market. (Why are they trying to get patents for PAGE UP/PAGE DOWN (Which CLEARLY XEROX owns that? WHO DOES THAT? Why do they lie/cheat/steal/scam vendors to collect license fees for "patents" to thrive in todays world, why is M$ collecting fees from every android ever developed.. You call that BUSINESS? How about the Y2K scam/coverup... LMFAO! I see that as a company slowly drowning in failure) Sure you are right that desktop adoption isn't that of Windows or OSX, but look at in just mere TWO years what has happened with Android and its acceptance and is almost at 100 million users now and ahem... TWO YEARS! Name ONE company or product that achieved such a feat in such a short duration of time... That means 100 MILLION WILL be aware of Linux at some point or another and its Open Source concept, if they aren't already and how WORKING TOGETHER DOES WORK FOR A BETTER FUTURE FOR US ALL... and as Android matures ever so rapidly its intent is ALWAYS with the USER in MIND and not the pocket and that alone will assist in desktop acceptance over time because the desktop will become what everyone NEEDS, HOW they need it and can actually USE. The one thing that EVERYONE (almost) in the world has aside from Televisions is a PHONE and NOT a computer... what better way to make people aware of such a technology than with something people are familiar with? now with LINUX slowly being PRE-BUILT into Televisions... hmmmm what is next? I bet soon we're going to have LINUX powered fridges and stoves and microwaves and still the desktop market CAN BE LAST.. IT DOESN'T MATTER! because IN THE END THE CONCEPT IS RIGHT which has the PEOPLE and A BETTER FUTURE WORLD IN MIND.

Sure Linux has a lot of issues that require attention but its being worked towards, how was it different with windows? say, 95? 98? ME, XP, Vista, 7, etc, etc.. This response could be longer than your entire article, but you get where I am taking all of this...Anyways I haven't even begun to scratch the surface 1% as far as Linux is concerned and most people reading this entire post would agree..
 
android most certainly is Linux. it uses the Linux kernel, as does TiVo, webos (which is truly dead) and many other embedded systems. Linux has found its niche in the mobile/embedded market, and is far from dead. The reasoning he gives for Android not being Linux makes no sense. it may have a different GUI, but underneath its shiny exterior beats the heart of the Linux kernel.
 
This makes me unhappy, especially considering that I am posting this from a Linux machine. With over half of the server market, if the project continues, it might be that with the desktop market in a couple of decades. Also, because it is open-source there is many distributions. Again, in several decades, there will be so many that people will gradually migrate for Windows or OS X to Linux. I remember the day I formatted my disk to install Linux. Do you think that windows add-ons for DOS, or even Macintosh was popular recently after they came out? And Linux must battle Windows And OS X. I call this war the open source revolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom