The traditional market share numbers would say that Linux is currently at less than 1%, but some more recent numbers suggest that it might, in fact, be almost even with the Mac. This all brings the question of how many Linux users are there really? Unfortunately, we may never know. Certainly, there is no way of knowing currently, but it should be possible to at least get a rough estimate.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
then there are those that dual-boot or similar...
hmm, do a VM install count at install/use?
Member since:2006-01-03
Member since:2005-07-06
Unfortunately you cannot. MAC Addresses are not transmitted past the first router. After that only IP is transmitted (not counting special cases like packet encapsulation for VPN traffic and such).
Once on the local segment ARP is used to match up IP address (or whatever protocol is being used if not IP) to MAC address.
Member since:2007-09-22
Member since:2008-06-24
Counting MACs wouldn't work either since the MAC address that shows up is the one facing the internet behind NAT... Same issue as counting the IP addresses.
There are some distros that allow new installs to send anonymous info about the new install to servers. This would be a much better method.
Edit.. redunant. Never looked at thread view before posting.
Edited 2008-08-18 20:25 UTC
Member since:2007-02-17
Only one of the many Linux installs I have done are taking the place of a Windows install. Normally I buy an "update kit" (motherboard, case with power supply, memory and CPU) and I add a blank hard disk, optical drive, and video card (if I didn't already have these) ... then I install Linux from a liveCD. It costs about half of the price of an equivalent Vista box from the store, it takes no longer after purchase to assemble and set up with all your required applications, and it is three or four times as functional.
The only install I have done to "replace" a Windows install is on a refurbished (second hand) laptop ... even then I got the supplier to wipe the disk of Windows prior to delivery and I got $50 off the price!
A similar approach sort-of works for firefox update ... except that many Linux users get firefox (or perhaps iceweasle) via their distribution's repository, and hence cannot use "firefox update". Firefox's own figures would then tend to show a far heavier use of the Windows version of firefox than any other version as a result. Perhaps unique IP addresses accessing the firefox extensions page?
Even then, in just my domestic situation, there are four (sometimes five) machines using the same IP address via NAT.
This same problem would affect your method, even if updates were not being cached.
Member since:2007-09-06
I believe they tried an Opt In to track kernel updates from unique installs. Basically, if a distro is updating the kernel package; it's not a random software install and it's probably in active use.
Few wanted to volunteer for having there updates lowjacked. This was about the time MS was back in the news over updates policy. I believe it was the validation ball-gag they required before you could get XP sp2 updates.
The problem of accurate market statistics will remain and in it's probably better that it does.
- MS sales statistics will always be the licenses they sold to stockpiles not the number fo activated and regularily updated Windows machines; they keep that stat to themselves, guess it's not good.
- Only Linux based OS purchased through distribution channels like retails outlets can be tracked as difinitively as the MS/Apple units shipped per year. The very nature of the platform means there will always be untrackable distribution methods including roll your own from tar.gz directly for all the various programs you want.
- It's probably better that the various random ways to get your prefered nonMS/Apple OS regardless of branding or collection of commodity parts it's build with. It is a culture and platform meant to impower the end user not the vendor's shareholders.
Member since:
2008-04-10
Another consideration is that almost all confirmed Linux installs would be taking the place of a Windows install; a piece of information that, alone, could double market share estimates.
I have a suggestion on how we can get a more accurate description of how many Linux users there are. Traffic statistics on the software repository servers. Count the number of unique IP addresses accessing the software repositories each day, average it out over about six months, and you'll have a reliable, though probably underestimated, statistic. It would count how many people are either getting updates, or downloading new software. Perhaps not accurate in a business situation, where updates would be cached to a local server, and the software set stays the same all the time, but a good estimate of home market share.