Submitted by The month of December has already been unkind to Microsoft. The software giant’s Windows operating system and its Internet Explorer browser saw significant market share drops reported on back-to-back days. Not only was the November percentage drop for Windows the biggest in two years, but Windows market share dipped below a number where it has historically held tight: 90 percent. According to Web metrics company, Net Applications, Windows market share as of Dec. 1 is 89.6 percent. Meanwhile, Mac OS X posted its largest gain in two years, with 8.9 percent market share at the end of November.
Windows’ Market Share Slips Below 90%
83 Comments
2008-12-04 3:03 pm
2008-12-04 4:56 pm
-
2008-12-04 5:20 pm
-
-
2008-12-04 8:24 pm
-
2008-12-04 8:55 pm
jbauerThat’s all well and good but why do you use Windows? Is there some software package you can’t run on Linux? Does your work require your use of Windows for various reasons? Were you too lazy (or stubborn) to learn Linux well enough to make it your mainstay? My point is that many people switch to Linux only to switch back to Windows for reasons beyond their own control.
Yeah, I know. Who in their right mind would choose to voluntarily use Windows as his desktop? That is completely unheard of
Edited 2008-12-04 21:00 UTC
-
2008-12-05 2:05 am
2008-12-05 4:01 am
2008-12-04 2:49 pm
-
2008-12-07 9:34 am
2008-12-04 3:45 pm
2008-12-04 5:30 am
-
2008-12-04 6:14 am
-
2008-12-04 6:53 am
2008-12-04 8:29 am
2008-12-04 9:18 am
2008-12-04 10:09 am
2008-12-04 10:35 am
-
2008-12-04 1:17 pm
danieldkThat’s just wishful thinking
. vxWorks, IOS, JunOS and others also take a large piece of the pie. -
2008-12-04 3:54 pm
-
2008-12-04 2:00 pm
-
-
2008-12-04 4:13 pm
-
UltraZelda64
Did they count routers? I suspect it’s like 0% Windows, 99% linux, 1% BSD and 0% Mac OS.
I believe more than 50% of the people have linux in their home.
+1 for Tomato.
However, I purposely and knowingly decided to get Linksys’ WRT54GL. It’s way better than the previous router I used, which was some cheap Netgear. Don’t know which OS it ran, but I doubt it was Linux.
-
2008-12-04 4:39 pm
2008-12-04 5:30 pm
-
2008-12-04 7:27 pm
2008-12-04 11:32 pm
2008-12-04 11:41 pm
2008-12-06 12:48 am
When more people use Apple then Vendors and Websites need to support “other” platforms.
And that will hopefully lead to more open standards.
I hope my beloved “alternative” platforms will profit from that.
Exactly my thought. When two people quarrel, a third rejoices. Apple manages to bring the desperately needed competition to the market. Cross-Platform is becoming an issue for software vendors again. And it also has never been easier than today. A lot of intermediate libraries don’t only bridge between these two, but due to their nature also enable ports to other systems.
Well, like others I certainly relish furter competition in the desktop operating system market.
That said, I find these surveys inconclusive. Here’s a wikipedia page that gathers several sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operating_syste…
Personally, as for OSX’s desktop penetration, when Microsoft starts to launch regular fud campaigns against Apple like they have with Linux (in the server space) then I’m going to say -‘Yay! Competition on the desktop’. But as it stands, Microsofts desktop monopoly strikes me as solid.
Well things are changing. I started seeing Apple computers in stores you would have never thought you will see them there. These computers are being sold along side the Windows PCs. It feels a bit weird as the only place you could have puchased these computers are from Apple stores. I go in a retail store and I see a Mac on the shelve. I can freely play with it as if I was testing a Windows PC.
Edited 2008-12-04 00:20 UTC
Windows’ Market Share Slips Below 90%
Yay, that means that 2009 will be the year of the Linux desktop! 😉
It’s gonna suck though for those doing tech support/computer repair. Suddenly, you’re going to have to know 3-4 operating systems instead of only 1. It’s hard enough removing spyware from somebody’s Windows box… now pile on top of that trying to figure out why the hell Compiz isn’t working with some off-brand integrated graphics solutions.
Having only one dominant platform sucks in some areas, but definitely has its advantages in others.
Edited 2008-12-04 01:54 UTC
I thought I might harp on a bit about “having only one dominant platform sucks”.
Then I thought … it would probably be much better to let other people harp on about it:
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=15…
http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/online/news/ex_microsoft_developer_…
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/a-microsoft-veteran-embrac…
http://www.lulu.com/content/4964815
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS4759851685.html
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20081…
These links are just from the last day or two, BTW.
I’m sorry, but your argument that having just one standard operating system is better because it makes life easier for IT professionals / Technicians flat out doesn’t fly in my book. Competition is always better then monopolies; for myriad of reasons. If IT people are afraid to learn more than one operating system then they’re simply lazy and shouldn’t be in the business to begin with. It’s like saying linguists shouldn’t have to learn more than one language to be successful. The very idea is absurd.
Edited 2008-12-04 03:40 UTC
It would make life much easier for mechanics if we all drove the same brand of car, but yet somehow they manage to get by, despite our stubborn and naive insistence on choice and value.
Sorry, but that attitude looks like laziness mostly.
But let’s say that your work place gets news Linux work stations, when having used Windows only previously. Of course the employer should also guarantee their IT staff enough time and education to learn and know the new operating system and everything related to it. That’s also how it would naturally go. So, what’s the problem then?
But I’d claim that also in general there are all too many lazy system admins (granted, sometimes they may have all too much work and stress too, but then again who wouldn’t), not willing to learn new things. I’ve seen many such people oppose Linux deployment or oppose some other new things only because they wouldn’t like to learn new things.
Even with one platform, like MS Windows, it sucks to ask such lazy system admins to get something done over and over for weeks, and when you also sometimes know that you could have done the same thing yourself already days ago (but you can’t because it is their job, not yours according to the job rules).
Operating systems are not that different from each other, not any more than, say cars are. A real IT pro should be able to quickly learn and understand the basics of other operating systems too. If he wants to, and is not all too lazy to do so. Heck, a real pro – from his own initiative – is willing to learn about all new things related to his work field, including other operating systems too if he is an IT pro.
Well, of course, it is also ok and fine that some tech experts specialize in some tech brands only and know those brands better than others do (a bit like some doctors specializing in some field of medicine). But if not, then it is very much their job to at least learn and know something about other tech bands too than the brand mostly used at their work place. If they are not willing and capable of learning new things, I’d say they may not be the best persons for their jobs then.
Edited 2008-12-04 12:10 UTC
My heart bleeds for those poor bastards who actually, you know, have to keep up with the times. I doubt anything will change in any event, considering 99% of the shops out there still refuse to work on Macs, but as a Network Admin all I can say is cry me a river.
That will change as time goes on. These people h efuse to work on Macs will see customers go somewhere else. Thats no good for business. Getting Apple certified isn;t all that hard, there is no reason why they can’t become an Apple houe as well.
An example, I work in IT at our company. We support asious organizations which are primarily Windows houses. As of late we’ve been seeing request for more support for alternative with OSX being the majority and Linux he minority. I am fortunate enough to have a personal interest and experience in OS’s (or I wouldn’t be on this site). Being that the care now I’m the primary director for support of alternative OS and hardware issues, something which there was no need for just a year ago. Apple is slowly gaining on the market and I’m seign moe and more developers requesting Linux nstalled on their machines to develop their tools. Its really a wonderful thing. Unfortunately for Windows the embrace of change seems to extend to every aspect even computing choices.
Even Valve has been reported of working on a Steam client for Linux and had already stated that they were porting over their source engine to Linux. Porting to Linux usually means that things can get ported to other OS’s as well such as OSX. Once gaming gets detached from being a Windows only experience which thanks to consoles it has, then I really don’t see Windows keeping its market share. Everything else that windows can do the other Os’s can do just as well if not better.
I can uderstand your feelings, and I do sympathize for over-stressed IT workers too.
But here’s an example from real world showing how opposing new things can actually increase stress and work load when compared to learning a few new things:
In the early 2000’s I worked as a web technology specialist in a big and relatively wealthy organization. They still relied on hand coded HTML in almost all their web services, and various units (often without any experienced computer users) were also supposed to update their web pages by themselves using primitive free WYSIWYG tools (believe or not: Netscape Composer was the chosen tool for them…). For years, me and others at the web unit tried to suggest moving to more advanced dynamic and database driven web solutions but without a success. In the end many of my colleagues left the work place and I got a serious burnout too. Had they been even a bit more open to new things, many problems could have been avoided.
Often it just pays of to be open to new things too and be ready to learn new technologies that can often ease the work load needed in many old tasks. Staying in the old ways too long can become more of a burden than a help in the long run as demands and the world around us changes constantly.
It seems like my comment may have been misunderstood. I actually deal with servers day in and day out as well as run the infrastructure for a small-mid sized ISP/CLEC. I was being more or less tongue in cheek about how heavy the burden must be for the poor technician who has more than one single thing on his/her plate.
It’s absurd to think one can maintain a presence in the technology world and at the same time refuse to learn – this isn’t an industry that sits still for anyone. I’d *love* to ignore VoIP and QoS and MPLS and … well, you get my drift – I don’t have that luxury, and neither does anyone else who wants to legitimately consider themselves competent in this field.
I am in favor of muti-vendor whenever and where ever possible, providing it makes sense, and am certainly in favor of FOSS.
Please ignore! Thank yoü
You obviously didn’t think through your post very well at all. I would welcome the change of ditching all of these Windows computers and going with Linux or OSX, where I don’t have to worry about viruses and spyware. I use PING, so I have an image for each computer model at work, so if something gets hosed beyond repair – no problem. Restore the image to it.
Compiz isn’t needed at work, and I personally turn off all of the eye candy on my Linux box when I’m working.
You have a lot to learn about the real world, and what an IT Professional actually is vs some zit faced “PC Technician”.
And do you think that, once OS X or Linux become a contender to Windows, that you won’t be facing viruses and spyware? Yes, OS X and Linux are pretty secure in some areas just by design. But they’re certainly not immune and, once they have become “big enough” as far as marketshare and the amount of users, malware will target them just as much as it does Windows. It may not be as easy to write certain types of malicious software, but eventually you will face it on whatever the dominant platform, or platforms, are. At the moment, Windows is the biggest target because they will hit the most amount of users. OS X trojans are already appearing, though they’re not a danger to anyone with a little common sense as they have to be installed by an account with administrator privileges. They can’t just suddenly take over, but OS X is already getting attention, even if only a little. Malware won’t go away, eve if Windows eventually does.
First, you need to reread my original post. Exactly where did I mention IT Professionals? What I said was:
It’s gonna suck though for those doing tech support/computer repair.
You guys are missing the point entirely.
Sure, having all these different platforms isn’t an issue if you work inhouse and can control the configurations of the computers you work on. But imagine if you’re some schmuck working at CompUSA or a mom ‘n pop computer shop, and you have to work with whatever customers bring in the door. Or doing end-user phone support for a printer manufacturer or ISP. Not to mention the owners of said businesses, who would have to pony up more $$ for the extra costs involved in training their staff to be familiar enough with the operating systems to provide support for them.
Or somebody like me, who becomes the default go-to person for friends and family who have problems with their computers. Right now, it’s not too difficult because they’re all running Win2k or XP. But some of them have gotten Vista machines, so I had to get a copy of that just so that I could keep up. If they started buying Mac and Linux machines, well… they’re basically shit outta luck, unless they can find somebody else to help them.
All that being said, I’m not saying that having many platforms being equal would be worse than having only one. I’m just saying it’s a double-edged sword.
You adapt or find another job, quite simply. Life is pretty boring without challenges.
Besides, if you understand the underlying principle to how something works or should work, it matters very little what platform you are working on. You learn something new but find it is not fundamentally different.
You mean call center people would actually need a brain and not just parrot an idiot board?
Honestly man, people have become so lazy that monopolies and slavery are a sure bet. It’s time to turn things around again and let the smart ones move us forward. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen!
For some of them. But it also gives a competitive advantage to techs who are capable of supporting multiple OSes.
some people that do pc tech support just know how to fix windows more common problems and they are lazy to learn something else if they are not good enough they should do something else, there are a lot of people capable and happy to learn more and it will be people specialized in each or all the areas of computers if the market share is big enough.
We need more diversity in the computing world. 90% windows 10% osx is nowhere near enough
The “unassailable” IE was where Windows itself is now… and not too long ago. This brings cheer to my day. 🙂
Edited 2008-12-04 00:27 UTC
It brings to me a glimmer of hope for the intellectual future. Possibly, finally, we may even see a gradual emergence out of the IT “dark ages”.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/a-microsoft-veteran-embrac…
I don’t mind Apple myself, but they have partially compromised themselves particularly in respect of DRM. But even so, still they are way better than Microsoft. “10% OSX” has got to be considered at least a small step in the sort-of-right direction.
Edited 2008-12-04 00:37 UTC
gartner say linux have 4% of os marked share
http://digg.com/linux_unix/GNU_Linux_Desktop_Market_Share_is_4_Gart…
At my new job I’m already looking at ways to use Linux. Not necessarily to replace the current Windows server, but to add to network stability and reliability in certain areas (DHCP,DNS,Web,Email,LDAP,etc). While I can’t get rid of Windows I can certainly use something else to do some task. My overall hope is that as the Linux or Apple numbers grow developers will start porting or developing for those markets along with Windows.
As for browsers. All I can say is that I like Firefox, Opera, Safari, etc. IE sucks, but version 8 will be at least better for web developers.
Interesting… New job, looking at ways to add Linux.
Not even thinking that MAYBE the network might be WORKING… No, no sir we need to add Linux because after all everything runs better with Linux…
It is this mentality that keeps Linux from the desktop and OSX in the desktop.
I had a recent discussion with somebody who just bought an OSX notebook. The new cheap ones. He said to me that he hates Windows, but he gave up on Linux. He was tired of things not working. So off he went and bought OSX. He is not thinking about OSX on the server side. At least not in the forseeable future.
Though it makes you wonder how much more life Linux has on the desktop. I gave up on Linux on the desktop about 2 to 3 years ago. Have not looked back…
Do I like OSX? Heck yes! Makes you wonder why the Linux people just can’t get it and fix Linux on the desktop. Instead of introducing YET ANOTHER windows manager…
Or maybe it is you who don’t get linux?
That’s some, um. interesting logic:
First Comment: I just got a new job and am already trying to fit linux in somewhere under some possible aegis.
Your Comment: It’s people like you keep Mac OSX and Linux from widespread adoption. I know some guy who bought a new Apple lappy – you know, one of the cheap ones – he’s not thinking about OSX on the server side yet, though. BTW, Linux is doomed since I used it 2 or 3 years ago. I like Mac OSX. It makes you wonder why linux doesn’t “get it.”
Was there actually a point there, or was that just a vaguely off topic, vaguely anti-linux stream of consciousness finger exercise for you?
It would seem that it’s not really their problem. The “Linux people” are mostly concerned with development of the kernel, rather than getting involved with 3rd party desktops.
Which is why they are missing something very important: cohesiveness. Linux, as in the GNU/Linux family of distributions, is not a platform or operating system. Linux is a kernel, the GNU userland is placed on top, X windows on top of that, and a Desktop environment on top of that. The trouble is, this does not lend itself well to being a full and integrated environment, especially when one considers the vast number of distributions all of which do various operations and configuration in different ways.
For desktop Linux, you don’t have a target you can develop for known as Linux. In fact, some of the variations in distribution are significant enough they might as well be their own operating systems, compatible but in the way that POSIX-compliant systems are compatible. In other words, compatible mostly on a source level but not necessarily at the binary level. Linux is not the operating system. Fedora, OpenSuSE, Ubuntu, or whatever distribution you are running is the operating system which is built upon the Linux kernel as its foundation. The packages included with most distributions have many distro-specific patches, which can introduce difficult bugs into the system. This results in a fragmentation between what is upstream and what is in the distributions–just because two distributions have the same version of KDE, for example, doesn’t mean they will behave alike or always act the same.
On the desktop side, which is what most users care about, this results in a variety of user experiences, from the polished to the not so polished. This doesn’t really make it easy to support Linux on the desktop. Supporting, say, OpenSuSE on the desktop or Fedora on the desktop is easy enough, but supporting Linux in general can be a royal pain in the backside with all the differences.
This is one of the reasons I’m not sure how long of a future desktop Linux has with the current state of affairs. I don’t doubt that it will persist as long as enough people care about it, but I seriously doubt it will rise significantly without some sort of guiding influence to bring all the various parts together; something that is very unlikely to happen, since by its very nature there would be absolutely no obligation to support or go along with such an effort (see LSB).
Typical from a non linux user. If they wanted they could support linux easy, it’s just they don’t want to; stuck in their own proprietary, commercial, market driven, embedded ways. You have the community to help you distribute your wares to everyone if your wares are good enough. Just write the code and let the maintainers take care of the distribution, it couldn’t be simpler. For those clever enough – provide the source and they will make it work them selves, it’s been working for years and will continue to work for years to come!
Take your blinkers off and swallow the red pill.
Actually, FYI, I’ve used most Linux distributions around, from Slackware to Debian to Red Hat to Ubuntu to Gentoo and back again. I’m familiar with all of these distributions and I can tell you, for certain, that they handle many tasks differently and are often not compatible on a binary level with one another save for statically linked binaries. I have used and supported Linux, in some form or another, for thirteen years on servers, on desktops, on laptops. I can tell you that it can indeed be a pain to support if the user is not using a distro of which you’re familiar. It is not impossible, and I never said it was. I said it could be difficult, seeing that every distro is different in subtle and often not so subtle ways and often has distro-specific patches applied that make troubleshooting even more tricky.
Your response is typical of a Linux fanatic. What exactly is it about you people that cannot tolerate criticism of your pet os? Is it an operating system to you, or is it a religion? I didn’t say Linux sucks, I didn’t say it has no chance, and I didn’t say I hate FOSS. I said I’m not sure how far it can rise as things stand now, and I also stated why I feel like this.
The devil is in the details. Linux has a decent, overall desktop if configured correctly. It is missing many of the little details, though, that add that extra layer of polish that most non-techies expect to see. For instance, configuring surround sound audio, and often audio in general, is way more of a hassle than it needs to be due to the ridiculous amount of different audio APIs. Mr. Home PC User doesn’t give a crap about the difference between Pulseaudio vs OSS vs ALSA vs JACK. He wants the bloody thing to work and to easily be able to set up his brand new surround-sound speakers with a few clicks, and in a modern os I’d call that a perfectly reasonable expectation. He wants to pull out his iPod and have it sync to his library of music, no fussing or complaining. He doesn’t care about software licenses, or why his MP3s won’t play. If it doesn’t work for all his tasks, then by his thinking, it’s broken. Users like you and I know what to do, and know how to make it work. But the majority of users out there do not, and should not have to know which gstreamer codec pack he needs especially for something as ubiquitous as MP3 and, most especially, when the packages have names like gstreamer0.10-plugins-ugly, gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad. I know what I would think if I saw that for the first time. It would go something like this : um, wha? Which one of these do I need? Well, that’s ugly, probably don’t want to install that one. Hmm… and so on. That leads us to the naming of some of the apps, but I’m not even going to go there. And then there’s the issue of installing applications that aren’t provided in particular distributions, and updating those packages when the distro hasn’t done so, and so forth. I’ll say this: I wouldn’t know, as a new Linux user, how to install Firefox 3 if my distro only had ff2 and I didn’t want to wait for the distro to release an update. In windows it’s easy, double-click the executable and click next a few times, and poof that’s it. On Mac it’s even easier, drag the app from the disk image to the Applications folder. On Linux? Extract the .tar.gz and, if you wish to set it up system wide, add the proper directory to your path, and so on, keeping a watch for any conflicts with the distribution’s own version. I know how to do this. The typical PC user would be stumped by it, and we haven’t even gotten to having to compile an application from source yet.
If everyone agreed (yeah, right, I know) to set the standard down for the various APIs and behaviors, I think desktop Linux distributions would actually have a good chance. The devil’s in the details, remember that, and the little details make a huge difference when push comes to shove. The extra touches can matter more than a shiny new audio API that re-invents the wheel yet again, or bling like compiz.
Oh and I forgot to mention. It is not the distro’s job to maintain code from upstream. It is not their job to patch the living daylights out of it, i.e. Fedora. It is not as simple as you make it sound. Far from it, but I’d probably just waste my time trying to explain it.
Whatever the distro decides is its job, that’s its job.
The OP didn’t give specific details about how or where the poster is using Linux in his job – so you’re making a pretty big leap to assume that there’s no valid reason to (or benefit from) using Linux in his situation.
Although FWIW, systyrant’s post doesn’t really make him sound like a “Linux everywhere, just for the sake of it” zealot – for one, he says he has no intentions / illusions of ripping out Windows entirely.
Did you actually read the post you replied to, or did it just seem like a convenient pretense to get up on a soapbox?
Yeah.
Linux is not working.
Guess this is why all of my workstations (and laptop) have uptime measured in months and why I spend (on average) 10x -more- time on maintaining my Family’s Windows (XP) machine compared to my (own) Linux workstations/laptops.
Thank you for the enlightenment.
– Gilboa
No restart – no patches (to kernel) I believe your system is totally out of date (security wise)
That may or may not be true. And if it is true, it may or may not be significant. As an example, between point updates, RHEL/CentOS only backport security patches to their kernels, and no changes to functionality. Thus 5.2, released 4 and a half months ago has seen 4 updates. That’s an average of less than 1 per month. Depending upon whether or not the machine is isolated on a trusted LAN, connected to the internet for browsing, etc. or exposed to the internet to provide a service, a special reboot to load a new kernel may or may not be required. Also, planned reboots to load a new kernel arguably should fall into a different category than reboots to correct problems a user is experiencing.
Ar we having a Linux-FUD party today and people forgot to tell me about it?
1. User mode security updates do not require reboots. Restarting the effected service / login session is more-than-enough – no need to reboot.
2. I’m using a mix of Fedora (9, 10) and CentOS (5.2) – both at home and at work.
3. RHEL/CentOS usually releases a kernel updates once every 2-3 months.
3. Fedora usually releases a kernel updates once every month.
4. Check the changelogs: ~50% of the RHEL kernel updates are bug fixes and enhancements.
5. As for Fedora, 90% of the kernel updates are version updates.
6. Even if a certain kernel update -does- includes a possible security issue, it’s usually a local privilege escalation. As all my machines (both at work and at home) are in a controlled environment, no need to reboot.
7. Even if it’s a network facing security issue (-very- rare), I’m usually unaffected. No need to reboot.
… So in short, I usually reboot when:
A. There’s a new kernel.
B. The new kernel includes are security fix.
C. The security issue is network facing.
D. The security issue affects my machines.
… Once every ~2-5 months?
– Gilboa
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11
Every time someone spit 90% windows market share I know they are lying and pointing at that piece of crap Net Application.
With less then 400 website worldwide ( mostly english speaking only website ) and declining , with erronous tools that report some safari version as IE , Opera as a IE , Firefox as IE , Chrome as IE and others.
That almost no website with real high traffic use.
You don’t have an accurate view of the Internet or the OS used worldwide at all.
The reverse of this is using a Photoshop class where all the student use Apple product as it’s sold by the class and a requirement.
Or using a GNU/Linux repository as source.
Or say that Ferrari are worthless because only 0.00001% of the population own one or can own one due to it’s price based on the number of drivers.
Sorry but I will always discard information like this and those who point to it.
I know … propoganda sucks.
Console yourself with some counter-propoganda:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
Firefox at 44%
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
Linux at 3.8%, Mac at 5.5% and Vista (despite being the only OS you can have in most stores) only at 14.4%.
It probably isn’t going to get through to the public consciousness just yet, but at least there are some number of people out there who don’t buy into the “95%+” Windows/IE propoganda.
There is hope yet.
My home system for the last year has been linux before that it was xp and Linux. I have no issue supporting people using Vista. It’s a little different but I only needed google a few times. I could support apple I don’t see why not it is just unix with different libraries and a new gui. It will probably have me running to google but I’m not worried.
Here’s the open secret we all know through experience: once a windows user crosses over to Linux of mac, they don’t go back. So that 10% will slowly increase over the next decade.
Remember, the tipping point for Firefox to make an unprecedented impact on the market was not much more than that.
Really. I was a Linux-only user for three years or so and I’m back using Windows again, with no plans of changing my mind for now. Not that this means much in the big scheme of things, of course, but at least it tells that it’s not always the case.
I don’t think he meant 100% of people switching switch for good, he obviously meant generally, which in my experience is true of a great many apps aswell as the OS. OpenOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird etc.. Many people switch and generally stay on the other platforms as they offer a lot more.
Of course in an ideal work Windows, MacOS and Linux would each have a 3rd of the market share, this of course is great news that finally the market share is beginning to change for the better and finally we can get back to having a big open computing arena where many companies compete with good ideas and good products, the 80’s was the last time there was a level playing field and it was anybodies game.
As it has been said before by Apple, Microsoft doesn’t have to disappear or go out of business for others to succeed, there is enough of a market for everyone.
I can completely understand… Though I think this time it is different. Not with Linux mind you. I mean with OSX. OSX has really gathered market share and mind share.
I mean what does Apple do? Build a notebook that has an operating system that actually allows you to do simple things, like, scan, print, etc, etc…
Yes, Yes I heard, its the “evil driver people” who are not playing ball. Hmmm, maybe because Linux people are cheapskates!
I like Open Source, but money has to fit into the equation because otherwise I go hungry. And as we have seen services are not it (a’la Redhat, or Novell).
What I think is a real game changer is the iPhone and its app stores. By pricing most things in the 1 to 5 USD dollar range you have taken Microsoft’s playbook and shredded it and put Apple’s name on it. That was a brilliant move…
The appstore is nothing new and is not designed to compete with Microsoft but with Nokia/Symbian/Vodafone.
Vodafone has an appstore since years. If you want to make money from mobile apps, code in J2ME and you can sell millions of copies of your software.
While I believe that most people who use an alternative OS for that period of time probably don’t “go back,” I don’t agree by any means that most people who switch stay either. In my own experience, very few people are willing to deal with the hassle of learning something new – even those who have alternative OS tech support at their fingertips. Better the devil you know, I guess.
You’re absolutely right. Microsoft’s market share — at this point (2008) — can be explained by the QWERTY phenomenon (