"The FSF today launched a campaign with a twofold mission of exposing the harms inflicted on computer users by the new Microsoft Windows Vista and promoting free software alternatives that respect users' security and privacy rights. "Vista is an upsell masquerading as an upgrade. It is an overall regression when you look at the most important aspect of owning and using a computer: your control over what it does. Obviously MS Windows is already proprietary and very restrictive, and well worth rejecting. But the new 'features' in Vista are a Trojan Horse to smuggle in even more restrictions. We'll be focusing attention on detailing how they work, how to resist them, and why people should care", said FSF program administrator John Sullivan."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-02
About 10% actually. Apple is between 3% and 4% and Linux is around .36%.
No, actually it's about the same, between 3 and 6% for Linux, according to the latest market share data.
The .36% number you suggest is not a market share figure. It is derived from web stats, which cannot identify the number of unique visitors and therefore are useless to determine market share. Furthermore, there are many factors affecting web statistics (clientele bias, caching issues, user agent masquerading, AOL user oversampling, broadband bias, etc.) and therefore their accuracy is approximative at best - if they could be used to determine market share in the first place, which they can't.
IDC's research gave 3% in january 2005. There's no reason to believe it has decreased since then.
So why can I buy a D*** with Linux on it?
NotParker, stop being such a D***.
Why does D*** sell so few of their computers with Linux on them?
Virtually no marketing push behind it. Compare it to the marketing push behind Windows...it's really not all that complicated.
Member since:2006-12-16
OK, firstly, Linux isn't ".36%" of the global desktop market. We both know that, so please don't tell fibs.
Dell? Sure, you can buy a Dell with Linux on it *now*. But a few years ago? Nope. And, I seem to remember that Dell took action against Microsoft in the DOJ case. Why? Cos of certain clauses in Microsoft's OEM Windows contracts - if you sell any other operating system, you don't get discounts on Microsoft Windows for your OEM products. Do a bit of research, and you'll indeed see that I'm right.
Linux's problem (and bonus as well I might add) is that it's basically splintered. For Linux to get mainstream support several things will need to happen:
1. Become much easier to use. I know the above average, willing computer user can use Linux successfully these days. Your average Joe Blow would be lost though. Yes, I've heard the stories "I installed it for grandman and she loves it". Until something goes wrong. Leave her to her own devices and she'll have no idea how to fix it, so she calls her loving son/nephew who installed it and gets him to help her fix the problem. When Granma can fix it, it'll be user friendly for the masses. That's what counts.
2. Much better OEM hardware driver support. I know the Linux kernel is pretty damn good, much better than the Windows kernel at supporting hardware devices, but there's still a long way to go.
3. Popular software such as Office and Photoshop and a certain CAD program MUST be ported to the Linux platform. Maybe not so much Office, but the other two definitely. In fact, throw in accounting software - either Quicken or MYOB to the list now that I think of it.
4. The number of distributions must dwindle down dramatically. It is a strong point, because if encourages competition, but it does splinter the Linux development I feel.
5. The number of Desktops must be dwindled down to one. Same reason as point 4.
6. Package management system must be graphical and fool proof, with a limited number of quality packages, not the 15,000 plus, where most of them are far below release quality. Oh, and again, the package management system must be dwindled down to 1, same reasons as point 4.
When that happens, you'll suddenly see many OEM hardware manufacturers dropping Microsoft Windows like hot cakes and looking seriously at Linux.
Oh, and by the way, Dell is ONLY one PC OEM hardware manufacturer. Dell doesn't sell many Linux pre-loaded PCs, simply because the average person doesn't know alternatives exist. Even the press doesn't get it right. You see an article in the paper, saying "a new virus was released today and will affect millions of computers worldwide". What they don't say is that it's ONLY Microsoft Windows based PCs. Macs don't have problems. BSD and Linux based systems don't have problems. Only Windows. Does that tell you something? Money makes money my friend, and Microsoft has a lot of money, and with that money it buys not only politicians, but the media.
These are what I consider the reasons why Linux isn't selling more on OEM PC hardware manufacturer's PCs. There are other reaons, but they are minor.
Dave
Member since:2006-08-09
For Linux to get mainstream support several things will need to happen:
1. Become much easier to use.
Easier than Linspire, Suse, Mepis or Xandros? Like, letting inadvertent users be su - all the time? Computers are complex machines, and a tiny little learning is crucial for Windows users too, to be productive. I got confused myself trying to install a simple .dmg in OS X (being used to Yum, YaST, Synaptic). "So, where do I drag this icon? Or do I have to click it?" Nobody tells you, since it's supposed to be "intuitive".
And Finder bugged me too (that's fine now).
2. Much better OEM hardware driver support.
"Much" is an exaggeration. Call Theo.
3. Popular software such as Office and Photoshop and a certain CAD program MUST be ported to the Linux platform. Maybe not so much Office, but the other two definitely. In fact, throw in accounting software - either Quicken or MYOB to the list now that I think of it.
Photoshop would be nice. Does Adobe have any special deals with Microsoft? All these e-mails sent to them by Linux users must bug them by now. 
4. The number of distributions must dwindle down dramatically.
And the number of car, toaster, mobile phone, PC, chili sauce, etc. brands too? That's "confusing" too.
5. The number of Desktops must be dwindled down to one. Same reason as point 4.
Unrealistic. The *Buntus, Freespire, Mepis, etc. are already doing their best to have only one desktop per 'distro'. No way Gnome and KDE will merge by force. And who could live without Gnome vs. KDE flames?
6. Package management system must be graphical and fool proof, with a limited number of quality packages, not the 15,000 plus, where most of them are far below release quality. Oh, and again, the package management system must be dwindled down to 1, same reasons as point 4.
Package management depends on the distribution. Who can get confused? Normal distributions have only one package manager. Usually graphical. The number of packages is irrelevant; package description could be better, though.
Package quality is always vital. However, it's a trade off. Latest and greatest vs. stability. Unless someone pays developers to do the dull work of intensive testing, sloppy packaging will not be eradicated. For well-tested packages, take something like CentOS or Debian Stable. New installer, easy for anyone.
Bug reports made easy for the lazy, that's a very important thing, I'd say. I saw Edgy Eft worked on that.
When that happens, you'll suddenly see many OEM hardware manufacturers dropping Microsoft Windows like hot cakes and looking seriously at Linux.
It's all about the margins, in the end. And don't underestimate how conservative and risk-avoiding major corporations can be.
Member since:
2006-06-01
Just as many people (if not more) use GNU/Linux as their desktop these days, as use Apple's OS X.
About 10% actually. Apple is between 3% and 4% and Linux is around .36%.
The facts of the matter are that Microsoft Windows is pretty much the only known 'computer software' to the average person, and that is due to an illegal monopoly with OEM manufacturers.
So why can I buy a D*** with Linux on it?
http://www.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/precn_n?c=us&cs=...
Why does D*** sell so few of their computers with Linux on them? No demand.
When D*** signs an OEM agreement with Windows they:
1) Get it really cheap and basically sell it to the customer at cost in order to entice him/her to buy the PC.
2) They agree to do customer support.
D*** doesn't want to support the hundreds of available distros on hundreds of different combinations of computers. SO they offer Linux on a few they think they can sell and support.
They don't offer 25 distros as an option because it would cost them 10 times more to support and their margins are so small they would lose a fortune.
If D*** thought they could make money selling PC's with Linux on it, they would. And they do. But they obviously don't sell many.