It cracked 'the nut' some years ago - people just didn't realize it when it happened.

It cracked 'the nut' some years ago - people just didn't realize it when it happened.

It cracked 'the nut' some years ago - people just didn't realize it when it happened.

On the desktop Linux' main area is Europe (at least when considering 1st and 2nd world countries).

Cool. Useless statistics. There is no way to reliably measure OS adoption using web statistics.

Besides that, an adoption of Linux around 30% (in the mobile area) can hardly be considered a failure. Of course this is not in all countries, but nonetheless predominantly in Europe. Of course there are countries with lower adoption rates, but also countries with higher adoption rates. Which is what I wrote.

So thank you for proving me right.

EDIT: You must feel really powerful when you mod down people, right? Nothing like bashing other persons with lies, damned lies and statistics, eh?

Huh?
Entranched world view? No evidence? WTF? Did you read nothing? And evidence of what? Numbers? The stats are already there. Take a look at Ukraine, Denmark etc. in regard to the mobile OS area.

On the desktop Linux' main area is Europe (at least when considering 1st and 2nd world countries). The situation in USA may be very different.

They can at best represent a trend, and that trend is damn clear.

You are twisting my words around and using them with the opposite meaning.

My claim was that Linux on the Desktop was a reality several years. This is merely a matter of technological level and has NOTHING to do with Market Share which will always be near-zero because Linux is free and gratis.

My second claim was that Europe was the main area for GNU/Linux desktop. I didn't claim GNU/Linux was larger than Windows in Europe. Just that Europe was an area where GNU/Linux was doing well. And it is. Flawed statistics does not disprove that, no matter how much you try.

Besides that my claims have nothing to do with market share or usage share per se. But rather with usability.

Linux conquered the desktop back in 2003/04 AFAICT.

Year on year it's the year of Linux on the desktop and year on year it just doesn't seem to crack that nut in any meaningful way.

Cool. Useless statistics. There is no way to reliably measure OS adoption using web statistics.

Besides that, an adoption of Linux around 30% (in the mobile area) can hardly be considered a failure.

"[q][q]Besides that, an adoption of Linux around 30% (in the mobile area) can hardly be considered a failure.

You seem to get lost between "It uses a modified Linux kernel" and "Android is not a Linux product". A Linux product is a product built on Linux technology.

an adoption of Linux around 30% (in the mobile area) can hardly be considered a failure.

This is my last post to you.

Claiming Gnome equals Windows 95 with a screenshot which could be used to prove Windows 7 is identical to Win95.

WTF? That small screenshot proves nothing except that you are a troll, a Microserf and a damned lier and zealot.

The same could be proven with Vista or Mac OS X or Windows 7.

AFAIK Windows 95 didn't have antialiazing of small fonts, 3D desktop nor subpixel hinting.

Windows 7 still cannot do drag'n'drop properly.

There is NO development coming out of Canonical. Compared to what Red Hat produces its not even on the map.

That is something that doesn't matter at all for a company when they compare the products. They care about reliability, support, ..

You seem to get lost between "It uses a modified Linux kernel" and "Android is not a Linux product". A Linux product is a product built on Linux technology. Android is. It really is just that simple. (Maybe you meant it's not a Gnu/Linux product? We'd agree there - Android has a custom user land built on Java technology. ;-)

" This is my last post to you.

70-80% returns compared to 3-5% for Windows. Now since you have to sell returns as used by law that VERY quickly made Linux MORE expensive than Windows. The reason for returns? Their apps don't work, their PMPs won't interface, their printers won't print, and of course the always lovely "update broke my stuff" fun.

Fact is, though, that Linux is big enough to sustain a healthy developer community, which in turn makes it a usable desktop platform for most purposes. For the rest, you need Photoshop.

Most users' needs can be adequately met with Linux.

"It cracked 'the nut' some years ago - people just didn't realize it when it happened. On the desktop Linux' main area is Europe (at least when considering 1st and 2nd world countries).

Most anyone that has really used Linux, on the desktop, in the last few years knows that it is ready for the average user. The same is true for a number of other open source projects. Many FOSS projects are on-par with (or better than) their closed source counter parts when it comes to the number of features and functionality.

Irrelevant. The fact that most people can use something doesn't mean they will. People will stick to the brand name they know, and more people know Windows. Even Apple hasn't enjoyed much of a rise in market share, despite getting more PR than practically everyone else put together. The only thing relevant to Linux's success is that it's usable. 10 years or so ago, it wasn't, as IE and its mangled HTML dominated the web; after Mozilla and OpenOffice took off, and libdcss took care of DVD decryption, Linux has been pretty much on par with Windows and Mac OS for everything except specialist applications like Photoshop. Whining about market share, for me, as a user, is like crying into my beer for it being less popular than the inferior Budweiser. I'd rather just enjoy my drink.

"Market Share which will always be near-zero because Linux is free and gratis" Sorry, could you run that one past me again?

"Most users' needs can be adequately met with Linux.

That is something that doesn't matter at all for a company when they compare the products. They care about reliability, support, ..

Android is not a "Linux product". It's a Google product. I supose if you want to get down to it, we're both wrong as the site describes it as a software stack.

http://developer.android.com/guide/basics/what-is-android.html

... which you're not gonna get from a company like Canonical. Giving away CDs and hype can only take you so far.

Irrelevant. The fact that most people can use something doesn't mean they will. People will stick to the brand name they know, and more people know Windows. Even Apple hasn't enjoyed much of a rise in market share, despite getting more PR than practically everyone else put together.

Are you a graphic designer?

Do you work in a drawings office?

TBH unless you work in these industries ... your opinion of whether an open source alternative is good enough is pretty much worthless.

Assumption can be dangerous. I, as graphic design, often work with open source alternative. Even your favourite industries do use them though they will not admit these facts.