Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 22nd Jan 2013 21:28 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Linux "If you consider NetApplications' data set, then Linux owns only about 1 percent of the desktop OS market and Windows has almost 92 percent. But if you consider all computing platforms, including mobile, than Windows has only 20 percent and Linux has 42 percent - and that would be in the form of Google's Android alone." No more or less legitimate than claiming Windows owns 92% of the market. It's all a matter of perspective.
Thread beginning with comment 550102
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Marketshare
by BallmerKnowsBest on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 17:48 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Marketshare"
BallmerKnowsBest
Member since:
2008-06-02

There are indeed a wider variety of desktop applications on other platforms, but they are not any better.


Right, we'll just take your word for it. Because it's certainly not as if Linux advocates have a illustrious history of dishonest exaggerations, or doing absurd things like claiming that GIMP is on par with Photoshop...

Actually, as it happens, I am typing this message on a consumer laptop machine that came pre-installed with Ubuntu and no crapware. I purchased it via a customisation page similar to the one linked below, by selecting "Ubuntu" and failing to select any version of Windows.


Too bad that small online-only OEMs like that typically don't include crapware on their Windows PCs, either. So if we apply your reasoning, then in looks like Linux is irrelevant to whether or not a PC has crapware - it's the size of the OEM that matters. Or at least that's the way it looks when you don't conveniently leave out relevant details.

Installing "crapware" is normally a way that OEMs use to offset the cost of Microsoft software they install on machines. If the OEM does not have to pay for Microsoft software, there is no need to offset such costs, and they can deliver a desktop/laptop machine with no crapware and the consumer can still save $AUD109 for the desktop & OS software alone compared with the exact same machine pre-installed with Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium or Microsoft Windows 8. An additional $AUD235 can be saved by not using Microsoft Office 2010 Home and Business Edition as the office suite. This is a significant saving, considering that the hardware itself is $AUD599.


You'd have to be hopelessly naiive to actually believe that. Take any big OEM that currently bundles crapware with their Windows PCs - there's no way in hell they would stop bundling crapware if they switched to selling Linux PCs. Instead, they would look at like this: "Hey, if we bundle crapware with Linux PCs, then we'll make even MORE money from it."

But I guess it's easier to believe some simplistic myth where OEMs would stop bundling crapware AND pass the savings on to customers, if it weren't for big mean Microsoft.

"It is a delight to use KDE right now".


"Kubuntu 12.10 - Fun and Flashy Linux" - "I really like what I see".


What, you couldn't find any more generic-sounding hyperbole? You left out "tour de force" and "rollercoaster thrill ride of excitement." And I assume, of course, that it has an ending that will leave me breathless.

Edited 2013-01-23 17:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Marketshare
by WereCatf on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 18:59 in reply to "RE[6]: Marketshare"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Right, we'll just take your word for it. Because it's certainly not as if Linux advocates have a illustrious history of dishonest exaggerations, or doing absurd things like claiming that GIMP is on par with Photoshop...


At least lemur2 fits perfectly the description of an irate Linux-fanboy with blinders on both sides. Have you noticed how he constantly tries to portray non-Linux OSes -- especially Windows -- in a negative light by comparing the price of Linux+F/OSS-software to e.g. Windows+MS Office+expensive DVD-players+expensive AV+whatnot, always carefully presenting things as if most of the same F/OSS-software wasn't available for Windows at all. When he claims some software isn't available for Windows at all and he's proven wrong he conveniently "forgets" that the whole discussion ever took place or claims that software only works properly when run under Linux, he completely ignores any and all use-cases where F/OSS-software just simply isn't up-to-notch or where there doesn't exist an alternative at all, goes on to explain how re-installing the whole OS is somehow a proof of superiority when it doesn't break and so on?

Rabid fanboy-ranting does more harm than good and he completely refuses to see that. Hell, I use Linux on my server, in a VM on my desktop, on my Pandaboard and on my Nokia N900 and yet lemur2's incoherent ramblings and exceedingly annoying holier-than-thou - attitude makes me want to stop using Linux just to spite his face. An Average Joe would definitely be put off by him and most likely would avoid Linux altogether if he thought all Linux-users are like that.

As for the article in question here: yes, the Linux - kernel is in use all kinds of devices, ranging from wrist-worn clocks to room-filling supercomputers, but... well, it's just a kernel. By itself the kernel isn't really terribly useful, it needs userland to actually become something, and Android is seemingly the dominating userland - package in use nowadays. The problem with that is that neither the kernel used by Google or the Android userland are actually F/OSS, so the comparisons to Linux - distros and the likes is totally bogus and misleading. The adoption of the Linux-kernel for use by Android-powered devices hasn't really boosted the relevancy of Linux-distro, for example, or the development-efforts of even the most popular F/OSS - applications.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: Marketshare
by MOS6510 on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 20:03 in reply to "RE[7]: Marketshare"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12


Rabid fanboy-ranting does more harm than good and he completely refuses to see that. Hell, I use Linux on my server, in a VM on my desktop, on my Pandaboard and on my Nokia N900 and yet lemur2's incoherent ramblings and exceedingly annoying holier-than-thou - attitude makes me want to stop using Linux just to spite his face. An Average Joe would definitely be put off by him and most likely would avoid Linux altogether if he thought all Linux-users are like that.


That's how I often felt when I was a full-time Linux user.

Linux has many strenghts, but also weaknesses and these can't be resolved by denying them or by claiming that Windows is worse.

Making stuff up is just embarrassing. Windows users will have no idea what someone is complaining about.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: Marketshare
by lemur2 on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 23:28 in reply to "RE[7]: Marketshare"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

At least lemur2 fits perfectly the description of an irate Linux-fanboy with blinders on both sides. Have you noticed how he constantly tries to portray non-Linux OSes -- especially Windows -- in a negative light by comparing the price of Linux+F/OSS-software to e.g. Windows+MS Office+expensive DVD-players+expensive AV+whatnot, always carefully presenting things as if most of the same F/OSS-software wasn't available for Windows at all. When he claims some software isn't available for Windows at all and he's proven wrong he conveniently "forgets" that the whole discussion ever took place or claims that software only works properly when run under Linux, he completely ignores any and all use-cases where F/OSS-software just simply isn't up-to-notch or where there doesn't exist an alternative at all, goes on to explain how re-installing the whole OS is somehow a proof of superiority when it doesn't break and so on?


Oi, fair go. Yes it is perfectly true that a lot of FOSS desktop applications are available for Windows too.

That is the point that Windows apologists often try to put forward, but their doing so misses the point. For Windows, one has to scrounge around all over the place to try to collect a usable assembly of decent FOSS software. It takes ages and ages, and on Windows this process is fraught with potential difficulties:

http://www.osnews.com/story/24934/VLC_Suffers_from_Companies_Spread...

Windows utterly lacks a unified package management, and unsuspecting users are vulnerable to installing malware via trojans. Then, even when you do eventually get the bona-fide software installed, very often it doesn't auto-update, so you could easily miss security updates.

Compared to running these same FOSS apps under Linux, the ongoing pain of running them under Windows is enormous. Multiple updaters, some apps not getting security updates, IE vulnerabilities, slow-to-update default vulnerable browser that cannot be un-installed completely, anti-virus strictly required, botnets, embedded anti-features, installation keys, DRM restrictions, cost of keeping track of licenses, CALs to access servers, lost drivers CDs, lack of drivers for legacy hardware, cannot backup apps, re-registration required after replacing hardware, single point of failure in the registry, slows down over time, susceptible to trojans, carries legal restrictions, susceptible to spyware and monitoring by big brother, lock-in obscured data formats, patent royalties to be paid, etc, etc, etc.

So why put up will all that pain ... why not just run Linux in the first place?

If your answer is "but commercial apps like MS Office are only available for Windows" ... then you have nicely illustrated my original point ... in order to justify putting up with Windows you have to invoke the commercial desktop apps for it, and in order to use the commercial desktop apps for Windows, there is a $$$ price to pay. Therefore, including the price in these comparisons is a perfectly valid thing to do.

Edited 2013-01-23 23:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Marketshare
by zima on Sat 26th Jan 2013 01:24 in reply to "RE[7]: Marketshare"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Rabid fanboy-ranting does more harm than good and he completely refuses to see that. Hell, I use Linux on my server, in a VM on my desktop, on my Pandaboard and on my Nokia N900 and yet lemur2's incoherent ramblings and exceedingly annoying holier-than-thou - attitude makes me want to stop using Linux just to spite his face.

Yes, similar with me; and more: he basically managed to make me dislike & avoid KDE ...me, who was at some point a sort of supporter of it. Now, I don't want anything to do with it if that means stumbling onto lemur2 from time to time.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Marketshare
by lemur2 on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 23:58 in reply to "RE[6]: Marketshare"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Right, we'll just take your word for it. Because it's certainly not as if Linux advocates have a illustrious history of dishonest exaggerations, or doing absurd things like claiming that GIMP is on par with Photoshop.


Personally, I wouldn't advocate GIMP, I would use digikam for digital photos, and krita for creation of raster graphics such as comics.

For a tablet, I would advocate krita sketch, which is available for Windows too.

http://krita.org/item/124-krita-on-the-go-krita-sketch

Now as for your claims of dishonesty ... what exactly can I do with Adobe CS6 Photoshop for Windows, costing $AUD965, that I cannot do with some combination of FOSS software costing nothing?

As an ordinary non-professional consumer and a private individual with a limited budget, please recognise that value-for-money is indeed a part of my decision-making process here, and I would include value-for-money as a part of my assessment of being "on par".

Edited 2013-01-23 23:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Marketshare
by zima on Sun 27th Jan 2013 16:13 in reply to "RE[6]: Marketshare"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Take any big OEM that currently bundles crapware with their Windows PCs - there's no way in hell they would stop bundling crapware if they switched to selling Linux PCs

Additionally... Android phones often already include what is essentially crapware! (UI "enhancements" would be counted as crapware on Windows PCs...)

Reply Parent Score: 2