“We all know who makes the world’s most popular desktop OS. With a greater than 90 percent market share, Microsoft’s status is clear. But what’s not so clear is: Who’s number two? Of the contenders, Mac OS and Linux, which one is leading?” Read the editorial at OSOpinion.
Linux vs. Mac: The Pitched Battle for Second Place
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
All the technical loveliness that I like about Linux, my mac gives me in abundance. I miss the cheap PC hardware, but not enough to want to every go back…Well, I hope that both Linux and MacOS X eat into the Windows desktop share rather than consuming eachother…
Isn’t it quite obvious that Mac OS is way ahead? It has nearly all of the applications that are on windows, greater usability (in my opinion at least), and comes on absolutely beautiful -as well as functional- hardware. Apple provides the whole package and it works very well.
Someone decided that if you want Macintosh, you have to buy an expensive Apple computer.
Perhaps because this is where Apple MAKES ITS MONEY.
They’re a BUSINESS after all. They have to make money.
So while Mac is currently the number two desktop OS, Linux will take its place — probably within the next two years.
But before Linux surpasses Mac OS, someone will need to create a Linux desktop that tech reviewers describe as “blindingly easy to use, and really no different than Windows.” Considering the size of the market, there’s considerable incentive to do so.
Linux is a support nightmare, both from a software vendor’s point of view and a SA’s. Without standardization, I don’t really see any chance for desktop market penetration. And there’s not really any chance of standardization either… every distribution took off running in its own direction, so now there’s a few hundred things known as “Linux” and most of them aren’t intercompatible. Hell, they can’t agree on something as simple as a packaging format.
How will software vendors release Linux applications? Can they ensure that they will dynamically link properly against the libraries on all systems, or will they all have to be staticly linked? What about distributions shifting to the gcc 3.2 C++ ABI, and applications which need to link against system C++ libraries (such as Qt)?
I really think the frustration which vendors will experience from attempting to support Linux will eventually just drive them back to Windows.
Considering all the RPM installation problems I’ve had using Linux, I imagine professional software support must be a nightmare. I know it goes against the whole Linux philosophy and isn’t likely to happen, but I really think Linux needs a standard installer format. That way one package could be installed on any Linux system without constant problems, surely it would be less hassle for both the developer and the user.
Linux advocates sometimes attack people for being lazy or too stupid to RTFM when they criticise software and driver installation. But that just seems like a way of excusing an obvious problem that needs to be fixed. Can Linux really claim to be as easy to use as Windows, let alone Mac OS X, when software and hardware can be so much more difficult to get working?
True, they are still fighting the good fight, and of late,
have showed renewed signs of vigour.
However, our last best hope lies in Linux.
Tux is the new champion.
Let’s hope he prevails and we all live to dance on Microsoft’s grave.
Installing new software and new hardware AFTER the installation of a Linux distribution can be a nightmare for
even the most experienced system administrator. Just having an easy graphical installer and an easy to use graphical desktop doesnt make a Linux distribution a good desktop OS.
–>Pay the money and quit whining already.<–
Linux is GREAT … give ’em coupla years.
I LOVE it when people get their new super duper P IVs I get their old P – PIIs from the bin (recycle …all puns intended) and sell the bastard back to them as the new firewall they’ll be needing (hehe).
Meanwhile back at the OS …
X.2, insanely great.
Sue me.
Linux will probably over take Apple in marketshare. And the Linux threat will have a greater impact on Microsoft.
But I think Apple will take the leadership position: in terms of usability, compatibility, ease of use, innovation, standardization (GUI, installations, app look-and-fell, etc.) that will be undeniable. Apple will essentially be able to reap all of the benefits from the Linux/Unix world and will be able to add a bit more polish and ease to whatever comes from that nck of the woods. And I expect to see Apple become more and more a player in significant OS projects.
So I rate it a tie. Linux is more a threat to Windows and will have greater marketshare than OS X. But Apple will reap all of these benefits and will be the model for Linux in areas that it lags behind and be the leading distribution of a Nix OS with the greatest ease of use of any OS.
I’m sure this is a really stupid question, but how do they calculate Linux marketshare? With Macs I imagine they simply look at how many are being sold, but obviously they can’t do that with Linux. I can’t see how they can possibly know the number of Linux users to know if it is overtaking Mac OS.
I’m sorry, but I forsee Apple gaining market share in the future, not fading away. MacOSX is what Linux _should_ be. Easy to use, powerful UNIX based underbelly, decent stability, and just looks slick. If they can just get a fast processor in there, it will definitely take away from the current UNIX (not Windows) users.
Over the next few years Mac will gain share, but I believe once people get Linux developed a bit more for the desktop, it will finally overtake Macs and actually matter to Joe Consumer.
Calculating marketshare is…
For Linux they do many surveys, look at sales data, apply complex formulas…
Just look at the Mac figures: we have three numbers for last year 2.4%, 2.6%, and 2.9%. IDC who calculated 2.9 says the last quarter it rose to 3.0%.
But this IS only calculated from units sold. Which is a useful metric in some measure, but as regards Apple, almost useless–if only 5 million users are using X and it’s estimated that 15 million or still using OS 9 or earlier, clearly that ~3% number isn’t reflecting 75% of the Mac market (since they clearly aren’t buying new hardware).
There is truly pent up demand in the Mac market. If the economy rebounds at the time that something, anything happens to ease their speed issues, Apple could see a serious surge.
the reason Linux will have greater market share than Apple is simple: Linux offers you choices.
I can tweak and optimsise my Linux boxen the way I can never do with Windows or the Mac. I deeply resent the “we know what’s good for you” attitude from Gates and even worse from Jobs.
Folks bitch about Linux lack of standards. Yes, that can be a problem WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE A SMALL MARKET SHARE. But think of it this way: lack of standards becomes irrelevant when there are more and more users. Why? Simple – imagine you have 1000 users – you need every one of them to buy your specific system, or you can’t make your margins. But if there are 100,000,000 users, you can afford to have dozens of distros all doing their little thing, because it does not threaten anyone’s margins. If you have 100 distros fighting for 100 customers, you are in trouble. But a 100,000,000 customers can support 100 distros no problem.
So the question becomes how do you get to 100,000,000 users? At first glance it may seem a catch-22 – no standards translates into few users. But you are underestimating four trends. First, frustration with M$ licensing and general bullying will drive more and more people to look for alternatives (Linux as WELL AS MAC), independently of how hard Linux is to use. Second, Linux IS making progress in ease of use (I know, I know, it always seems “Linux ready for the desktop” is always 2 years away) – it WILL eventually get to a point where this will not be an issue. Third, new users are coming up who will NOT be exposed at AT ALL to Win or Macs – the 3rd world – yes, today India, China, Africa etc. are IT midgets – but things change and the trend is that eventually they’ll have the MAJORITY of IT industry share just by sheer numbers of users, which eventually results in innovation, new products etc. which WILL ALL BE MOST LIKELY LINUX BASED – so leadership in IT will pass from the US/Europe – though admittedly this will not happen within the next 10 years… but eventually, there is no doubt… and sure as hell, it will not be MAC out there in the rest of the world. Fourth even back in the U.S. and Europe, you are forgetting that the new generation is coming up that is far more computer savvy than the original Mac/Win drones and blue-haired ladies – they are comfortable around computers from the age of 5, and they’ll want TWEAKING and CUSTOMISATION that Linux can offer and that Mac simply cannot match.
Bottom line – Linux may not overtake Mac within the next 3 years, but it is a cinch that Linux will completely wipe the floor with Mac (and VERY LONG TERM) with Windows some time in the future. Bank on it.
Because it is all about choice – and Linux is by far the most flexible OS out there – something the bloated Win code can never match, nor the micky-mouse kernel of Mac. And I say GOOD RIDDANCE. I want choice – I want to tweak and optimise my way, and Gates and Jobs can get the F*** out of my face.
Sales data doesn’t say anything about Linux popularity IMO. Personally I’ve bought at least a dozen different distributions over the last few years, yet none of them are in use at the moment. Would I be counted as multiple Linux users? Then there are all the downloads and Linux distributions on cover disks, how does anyone know how many are in use?
Surveys are often very unreliable, I’ve seen some bizarre and unbelievable survey results that just don’t match the real world.
I have no doubt that Linux will make it out on the desktop. However, the article seems quite slanted towards linux from the beginning (in my opinion).
I have used both systems before although I am more of a linux user. I find linux more usable than a mac, with the introduction of SuSE Linux Pro 8.1 and CrossOver Office, SuSE has waaaaaay surpassed the Mac in ease of use and functionality. i can run MS Office with no problems Photoshopw with a few quirks and even IE, I find the Gimp to be on par with photoshop and I even use the Gimp professionally. I use Konqueror as my Web Browser with Mozilla being used just for a few things. Sun One Studio which isnt avalable for the Mac. And KDE is more customizable than the Mac. All my inhouse stuff is done with Koffice. I find some Apps for Mac that I like, I like Keynote which I am working on a clone myself for the Linux platform and iTunes which Sumi has almost completely mimiced. Mac is losing some steam and the only way they will be able to save themselves is to port OS X over to the x86 platform. which i dont see them doing so Mac will continue to fade.
Did i forget to mention YaST 2 I think I did. YaST 2 is a great system configurator it makes the install 20 times easier and it helps you overcome RPM dependencies. What more can you ask for.
Most of the computer professionals I know, even the ones who’ve been working with computers for years, just don’t care at all about tweaking and customising their systems. They simply want to get their work done with minimal hassle, be that graphics design, programming, CAD, etc. Even the Linux users I know don’t spend much of their time tweaking the system, they’re too busy using it for something practical. I doubt customising the system is a serious consideration for the majority of users, even the ones comfortable enough with computers to do it.
I consider myself a fairly experienced computer user, I know my way around a CLI and I can do some basic programming. But the only choice I really wish I had in Linux, is the choice of a consistent and easy to use GUI, with simple installation of hardware and software. Being able to tweak the system can be nice. But being able to use it for what I want, rather than spending half my time reading FAQs and struggling with inconsistent apps, is simply essential to me.
I think for most people the computer’s ease of use is very important. It isn’t a matter of intelligence or lack of experience with computers, it’s a matter of not wanting to waste time messing with the OS when they could be doing something more interesting.
As a Mac user, I think Linux has a strong chance of being #2 in the next few years. Apple can’t compete with Linux in raw price and flexibility, and flexibility and (unfortunately) price very often determine the market.
That said, there is absolutely no comparison in ease-of-use between Mac and Linux, in every category — consistent UI, popular applications, drivers, installations, everything. I’ve used both, so I know. The Mac is far ahead in this, and very likely to stay so for a long time.
*That* said, I actually think the two competiting OSes can complement each other quite well. Apple provides millions in marketing dollars to prove that UNIX can be a viable desktop, consumer OS. The rising popularity of Linux as a real business alternative, meanwhile, is making the choice of a non-MS solution more and more acceptable.
I think linux is going to get itself pimped. Basically, all the major corporations that are investing are just going to exploit it in as much as it makes them money. Once they get a product they really like. They’ll rename it X Corporation OS and stop developing GPL software. So you’ll get their OS and all their bits they add will not be under the GPL. So when they make an update and add *new* things – it will not be GPL and be not released to the community.
Since basically the GPL just forces you to submit your maintinance to pre-existing GPL code. Not to release your additions of features to it. (remember its supposedly not viral) So, they pimp you all until they get what they want and then dump you like a bitchy prom date afterwards.
@JK – I think you see tweaking and customising as opposed to “just getting things done” – and that is not correct. The reason for tweaking and customising is not just the “tinkering instinct” of a geek – it is the fact that my tweaked and customise Linux boxen allows me to OPTIMISE my work productivity – yes, I grant you, there are hobbyists who just like to tinker for the hell of it, but I’m talking about those who do it in order to ENHANCE productivity. Being able to configure my desktop and tools just the way I want to allows me to be far more productive.
And that’s the problem with Mac and Win – those are OS that try to be all things to all people – you can’t. You can’t design a system with limited customisation and fulfill the needs of a disparate market target. The strength of Linux is that it allows you far greater targeting – down to the point of almost every individual being able to optimise it to HIS/HER greatest productivity, rather than the “one size fits all” approach of Win or Mac. As I pointed out – the trend is for new generations getting more and more comfortable with computers which means more comfortable with individual customisation. The old way was like a train – you had to move along rigid rails. Then came individual cars which allowed every individual to pick their own route and their own path along the road. Same with OS – as generations grow more comfortable with driving/computers the more they’ll demand individualised choices. Because that is the most productive way. Instead of a train stopping at a station and a mass of people going from there to their homes, every individual picks their own optimal path home from the beginning. More productive = more customisation and tweaking.
> I find the Gimp to be on par with photoshop and I
> even use the Gimp professionally
What for? It’s not up to the job. GIMP has no CMYK support and is thus worse than useless for print work – it’s a Photoshop clone that’s only suitable for screen imaging (i.e web design).
To do serious graphic design you need layout and illustartion sw also – Linux hasn’t goe pro quality for either.
Even new media design needs other apps – say Flash or Dreamweaver. Don’t give me that “I hand cod HTML”. HTML is a markup language – hand coding sites of today’s standard would require the same effort as actual programming, and isn’t worth it.
Oh well…
> Once they get a product they really like. They’ll rename it > X Corporation OS and stop developing GPL software.
Wrong because the GPL requires them to submit ALL changes, maintenance or not. On one note I do agree with you though, we do need to keep an eye out for corporations who dont abide by this. Especially like Microsoft’s use of BSD networking code. Won’t Someone HURRY UP and sue them for this
Just to clarify what I said before. I didn’t mean that Microsoft are unable to use the BSD networking code (as the BSD licence permits this). Just that they are required to make the appropriate statements in their licence that credits the BSD developers.
Oh, and flamers… Go burn somebody else.
I live in Brazil and here Macs are very very expensive, two or three times the price of a good PC. Linux here is very popular between technical students. Macs are used only for richs and designers.
There are a lot of statements on the GPL so here are some clarifications :
The GPL isn’t viral
You don’t need to give the source away if you don’t distribute you’re program (ie a modified mozilla for company use etc)
You can sell GPL software, you just can’t impose restricted rights on the one you sell it to, ie he/she/whatever may also sell it.
One of the bigest strengts of the gpl in my opinion is that it’s so much easier to place all the code under the gpl so that you you’reself don’t have to babysit the code all the time
PS correct me if I’m wrong ofcourse
check out http://ftp.exe in Windows. look for Berkeley.
if you look @ the MS Winsock interface, it closely resembles BSD code. that’s becuase its DIRECTLY BASED
some Linux zealots are blind. They support Linux for everything, even though they might use windowmaker or twm or console. Have they TRIED to go from Windows -> KDE? The first few things I noticed were that KDE was slower, harder to do common things, and in general sucks.
What people have failed to notice is that people dual-boot Linux with Windows, and indeed, OSX with Linux as well. Just because people have Linux installed on their machines it does not mean that it is their main desktop OS. In most cases it isn’t. Driver problems, and new program installations are still a pain.
Linux for many is still a toy, and few do any real work on it, but this will still bump up the market share.
The answer is quite obvious, I think. No need to argument.
The merit of the article, if one can say so, is crying like the child in the fable “the King is naked”.
Merely asking which one is second place indicates Linux is the answer (this involves using limits, a mathematical concept, for those “in the know”).
Last move from Apple, the K-based browser Safari release, shows (IMHO, at least) that it intends to ride the FOSS wave like many others (IBM, HP, Sun etc.) are doing.
I find this great.
Maybe Apple keeps the second place. When Linux rules, that is.
Mmmwahahaha <—- insert your favourite mad scientist laughter here.
Linux is improving year by year in leaps and bounds, and is cheap. MS is shooting itself in the foot with attempts to appease interest groups with copyright concerns rather than it’s average customer. Apple is expensive.
Linux will gain at the expense of both Apple and MS, as it becomes simpler in the basic functions of program installation and file management.
Muhahahaha
“More productive = more customisation and tweaking.”
I don’t really disagree with that, I just think that ease of use and consistency are more important. There are lots of things in Windows and even Mac OS X that I would like to change, I think the KDE UI is better than Windows in many ways. But despite that I find Linux very frustrating and less productive than Windows.
The tweaks that are possible in Linux just aren’t as important to me as having consistent apps. Despite all the choice that Linux provides, consistent apps aren’t an option when there isn’t a standard UI. It’s great that you can customise the Linux desktop and tools more than others, but personally I spend 95%+ of my time working in apps. The main reason I like working in Mac OS isn’t it’s desktop, it’s the well designed applications that run on it and work well together.
Also, there are UI tweaks available for Windows and Mac OS, such as StarDock software for Windows, various alternative docks for Mac OS X, virtual desktop software, CM plugins etc. Mac OS X also has UNIX CLI tools just like those available for Linux, plus good old AppleScript. They may not be as tweakable as Linux, but it’s enough to satisfy most users IMO.
Just a little side thing about package managers making Linux too difficult to be a great desktop- I think it’s true, and something will be done about it, but in the meantime, the problem is that enough people support most packagers to an almost good enough extent, which is the way a lot of things in Linux are, and because of that, no packager will come out on top until this problem is really realized. It’s a problem, I don’t like it, but at the same time, I like Linux and believe that it’ll come out on top simply because Apple’s tied to its expensive hardware that has a shaky looking future. I do think Apple will make gains in the next few years, but it’ll never be #1. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with going from #2 with 4% of the market to being #2 with 34% of the market, though. I wouldn’t doubt if that happened with Apple. Linux is developing very quickly, especially in the desktop arena. It’ll be “good enough” in a couple years, for sure. I don’t know how much penetration it’ll make, but it will improve, and I have a little hope that it’ll come out #1.
I can tweak and optimsise my Linux boxen the way I can never do with Windows or the Mac. I deeply resent the “we know what’s good for you” attitude from Gates and even worse from Jobs.
That’s wonderful until your aim is large scale deployment in a corporate environment where you wish to deploy a standardized system which is easily upgradable.
Folks bitch about Linux lack of standards. Yes, that can be a problem WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE A SMALL MARKET SHARE. But think of it this way: lack of standards becomes irrelevant when there are more and more users.
You’re missing the point: applications. If you want to package your application and sell it on shelves at stores, what format should it be in if you wish to install it under Linux? How can you ensure it will dynamically link with the libraries installed on a particular user’s system? Because there’s a total lack of standards, you can’t. Your only option is to statically link the entire binary, making it unnecessarily large. It’s a solution, albeit not a particularly effective one.
Now that you actually have the application binary, what about the installer? Should you place the application binary in /usr/local/bin and scatter the application data throughout /usr/local/share while placing the config in /usr/local/etc? What happens when it comes time to uninstall the application? For that matter, how will the user find the uninstaller?
How will you make icons to run the application with? How will you detect what desktop environment they’re using? What if they don’t use a desktop environment and instead use something like Window Maker?
Wide-scale deployment of Linux is a nightmare… believe me I know. The professional applications for Linux that we’re using require upwards of a half an hour per system to install successfully, simply because they either release with the intention of their system running on any distribution of Linux, requiring a great deal of distribution-specific customization, or they’re tailored specifically to whatever was the latest release of RedHat at the time, meaning the packages require a great deal of modification to be able to run on any distribution, including newer releases of RedHat.
“I find linux more usable than a mac, with the introduction of SuSE Linux Pro 8.1 and CrossOver Office, SuSE has waaaaaay surpassed the Mac in ease of use and functionality.”
Let’s see how long it takes you to install or uninstall professional software.
“i can run MS Office with no problems Photoshopw with a few quirks and even IE, I find the Gimp to be on par with photoshop and I even use the Gimp professionally.”
Oh please, everyone knows the majority of graphics proessionals use Macs and the remainder use Windows. Can you run, oh, painter? If I give you an ICC profile for our plotter can you save it in embedded PDF/Postcript so we can print it with proper color correction, or are you going to *pay* us to do that because your software is unable. Oh wait, you can’t even save in the proper colorspace for prepress.
Gimp zealots seem to forget that there’s this entire sector of graphics professionals dealing with material that is eventually destined for PRINT. The Gimp has NOTHING that these professionals need. These professionals need support for ICC profiles, support for line screens. And finally, since printed materials reflect light, they need support for a subtractive colorspace, which is, of course, CMYK.
Please, Gimp zealots, remember this: no professional is EVER going to take you seriously until your gimpy program supports the colorspace of their medium. They’re going to look at you as a complete idiot, which is how you ALWAYS come off in any post where you say the Gimp is anywhere near “on par” with Photoshop, because the Gimp has nothing for a professional who is working on material destined for print.
Walk into any newspaper or any magazine in this country, and what will you see? Macs, Macs, and more Macs. Images being manipulated in Photoshop, and layout being done in Quark (or failing that, InDesign). Can your SuSE Linux Pro 8.1 run Quark? Didn’t think so.
Now, I ask you, is there ANY place for Linux machines in the professional desktop environment?
In a word: NO.
This is a typical “horserace” approach to a phenomenon you see with journalists looking for a lazy way to write a story.
The biggest thing holding back apple is not price. The laptops are the same price, and they are becoming a bigger part of the market. The consumer desktops have a minor mac premium, but is there anything like the new iMac? It gets a premium easily. All processor related issues (G4/sucky Motorola) will be over soon – sorry PC guys, cite it while you can because the days are counting down to the IBM 970. Most people don’t even care about the speed of a 3.4 gig processor.
The biggest issue holding apple back is the “compatibility” with Windows issue. It’s largely perception, though there is some part that’s real. But perception matters.
OK, now switch to a world where instead of every company having windows, 30 percent are running Linux. This is an environment much better for Apple than the current one.
The perception will be – there’s not one standard, one choice, there’s a POSSIBILIY of multiple choices, windows,linux, apple based on unix. And everything written for Linux will be or can easily be written for OS X. Open communication standards and file formats will be in much greater use.
Linux only replaces Apple when it’s as good at everything Apple does (e.g. digital hub, pro video, music, graphics). Linux ain’t nowhere close and Apple moves so fast, I doubt they can catch up. No, catching up to MS is a different story, because MS is moving so slow they are practically standing still.
I am very interested in the progress of Linux. But, a face off with Apple, I think, is not so good. Everything is shifting. Apple is shifting to a consumer electronics company – like an American Sony – that makes great hardware and great software for it – and only for it.
you said:
“Walk into any newspaper or any magazine in this country, and what will you see? Macs, Macs, and more Macs. Images being manipulated in Photoshop, and layout being done in Quark (or failing that, InDesign). Can your SuSE Linux Pro 8.1 run Quark? Didn’t think so. ”
When you say Macs, Macs and more Macs, you know I will agree with you there. But are these Macs running OS X? I wonder about that because we have a hard time getting print drivers for a good amount of printers.
I have also read about a lot of professionals being ticked off at the lack of printer support for their industry in OS X. Have you experienced this?
Do you think that Apple included CUPS in order to compensate for the lack of printer support?
Also, do you see PC’s taking their place?
Linux and Mac both suck ! Microsoft will forever rule the OS world becuase they have features that people want and you don’t have to fork over your entire life savings to buy a PC.
stopdabombing has the answers. The only question now is, which Linux company do I buy stock in for the long-term?
I also agree with you on tweaking–compared to many users I’ve seen who stick to the defaults (for whatever reason), I can FLY through the OS when it’s set up right. (Which is the way it damn well should be–the ideal OS you should not even be able to tell is there.)
Though sometimes the OS can’t keep up with my flight…
“stopdabombing has the answers. The only question now is, which Linux company do I buy stock in for the long-term?
”
None because they will all go bankrupt in a few years/months. LinSuck will never ever topple Microsoft let alone Apple. Get a freaking clue buddy !
<<… Microsoft will forever rule the OS world …>>
Losers is spelt as LOSERS and not OS
When you say Macs, Macs and more Macs, you know I will agree with you there. But are these Macs running OS X?
I think in some solely graphics firms, there has been OS X penetration. However, any of these shops that do layout will continue to use OS 9, and will probably continue to do so even after Quark is carbonized (whenever that is) as they use 3rd party plugins which must also be carbonized.
I wonder about that because we have a hard time getting print drivers for a good amount of printers.
OS X has horrible printer support. Apple’s solution was to bundle CUPS. Unfortunately, CUPS is a piece of shit, as anyone who has to deploy it or use it on a daily basis can attest to.
I have also read about a lot of professionals being ticked off at the lack of printer support for their industry in OS X. Have you experienced this?
As I no longer work in a prepress environment, I’m not in a position to say.
Do you think that Apple included CUPS in order to compensate for the lack of printer support?
Yes, and this was a bad move on their part. They should’ve developed something better in-house.
Also, do you see PC’s taking their place?
I think Microsoft will slowly erode Apple’s hold on this niche market, but emphasis on slowly. I don’t think we’ll see any newspapers or magazines dumping all their Macs and replacing them with Dells for a long, long while.
I wasn’t aware LINUX and APPLE were competeing.
Apple puts out plenty of OSS (sure, not as much as Stallman would like – but more than most /.’ers care to admit) which HELPS Linux.
There are Linux distos FOR Macs. Apples not bending over backwards to help these people, but there not fighting too hard to slow anybody down?
I know there is SOME overlap but MAC OS users and LINUX users are two entirely different folks. As BOTH user bases grow; so will the overlap. Also as BOTH userbases grow, Windows userbase will decline accordingly.
We must look at WHERE this overlap is:
1. EDUCATION. Hmmn. APPLEs got a good following here, and its a traditional MAC stronghold. Its been slipping though. Linux is probably not seen too much at the grammer or high school level – – but its college level use is probably gaining. Linux will NOT make significant inroads into grammer or high shcools UNTIL it gains more standards.
2. HOME USE. This is the forefront of the battle as most would see it. APPLEs recent switch campaign is clearly targeted here. Is it working? We’ll I don’t think it is, maybe just enough to keep ’em afloat. Whith APPLEs current CPU/Speed issues a lot of home users trying to keep up with the Jone’s are not looking at Macs. But they aint looking at Linux either for the most part. Windows is safe here for now. APPLE needs moe’better hardware; LINUX NEEDS STANDARDS.
3. SMALL OFFICE. APPLE is probably growing here. A LOT of small business crop up everyday. People like to run a business; and not have to play IT god whilst doing it. MACs are easy and flame away if you like but for small business THEY ARE CHEAPER (its called TCO people). A small business can survive with a Mac without massive or expensive upgrades longer than with a PC (partly because APPLE is slower at putting out HARDWARE thats much beyond previous models). Now of course new small business that are technical in nature, may opt for Linux – but this isn’t much.
4. MID SIZE BUSSINESS. This is where APPLE would fit in GREAT. But they won’t. The initial costs for Macs to growing bussiness is probably a little much for the power you get (or dont get). Also this is where LINUX is hurting Windows the most. Its hard to beat FREE here.
5. BIG ARSE BUSSINESS. I don’t think MS UNIX LINUX APPLE or anyone else for that matter will “RULE” here for quite sometime. Most large companies got where they are by not being stupid. Almost every large business is likely to have a combonation of Win/lin/mac. I thinks APPLE will grow in this space thanks to Xserve and OS X (and I’m sure we’ve not seen APPLEs last endevour here), and of course EVERYBODY and their brother in big IT depts are trying to show their boss how Linux can save the company a dollar (now that its socially acceptable) if they use it to replace XXXXXX box running ‘doze… file server here; mail server thier yada yada yada.
6. THE GEEKS. Thats us. We’re small but growing. We’ll never be an important market, and don’t care. Any geek worth his/her weight in salt uses both.
Did I miss a market space? Anyways, the way I see it LINUX and MAC about even out. APPLE has some hardware/price issues to address before they dethrone anybody, and LINUX needs some standards (packaging system, libs etc etc) before MS will get too nervous.
BTW I use both MAC OS 9 and X and Linux on PC and MAC. And I pray everyday that BeOS will rise from the ashes and kick all ya’alls asses!
an excerpt from one of the rh errata:
Syncookies are used to protect a system against certain Denial Of Service
(DOS) attacks. A flaw in this mechanism has been found which can be used to
circumvent certain types of firewall configurations.
Note: syncookies are not enabled in the default installation of Red Hat
Linux but many server administrators do enable syncookies.
if you’d read any of them, you’ll notice some trends.
1) 2 people use this package and we’ve patched ours 😉
2) everyone uses this package but it isn’t exploitable by default.
also, most of redhat’s errata are “theoretical” whereas on windows they are working exploits available. really tho, you can’t beat redhat for security updates, bottom line: shit happens. but redhat is the ONLY place you can read about a vulnerability and get updated packages THE NEXT INSTANT.
also, everyone using your computer with windows who hasn’t tried a linux distro, you haven’t really used your computer… yet.
to everyone who tried and failed. you’re an idiot, you deserve windows 🙂
i think windows’s time is over, but for now they have too much inertia to die suddenly. windows’s death will be slow and drawn out, but it HAS BEGUN.
linux has standards -> http://www.linuxbase.org
if you(Bascule?) were really a graphics professional you could do this subtractive coloring with an add-on script in gimp 🙂 but people of this caliber are probably few and far between.
glibc’s threading is setting new records in speed. what’s your *SPECIFIC* problem with it? ->https://listman.redhat.com/pipermail/phil-list/2002-September/000009…
Bascule again -> gcc 3.2 maintains source compatability. release two versions -_- LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. do programs on the Mac work on both OS 9 and OS X?
I did not see any use in linux…all i saw was a slow operating system that was hard to install and took up to much space and ran slow….the software on the OS is just stupid….sure the OS is great for a Server…that is if you can keep it from crashing…Linus was not thing out his plans very good…
Linux Crashes….is not really any good….and let you do a little too much with how it looks…
and im sorry to say people….Mac OS X….has not crashed on me one time since i bought it….and it has a lot of programs….I mean what could you need that is that hard to find…and if you are so stupid to need a program that is hard to find…then learn how to program…
There are OVER 15,000 app’s for Macintosh…
Linux will not get far in the future….with in the next few years it will loose interest like Unix did and wil go down hill…
It is ok i have tryed to use it…but it is not an easy to use OS like Mac OS X….it will not make it in the local familys home…it is just a pain to use compared to Mac….
So my vote would go with Mac and stay with mac forever….
The fact that someone like you is representing macs is BAD.
if you(Bascule?) were really a graphics professional you could do this subtractive coloring with an add-on script in gimp 🙂 but people of this caliber are probably few and far between.
How do I load an ICC profile in the Gimp?
How about support for Pantone colors?
How is an “add-on script” any substitute for an essential feature for any preprint user?
Can you manipulate images once they’ve been converted to CMYK?
Bascule again -> gcc 3.2 maintains source compatability. release two versions -_- LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. do programs on the Mac work on both OS 9 and OS X?
Carbonized applications will run on both OS 9 and OS X.
Non-carbonized applications run on OS X through Classic.
So… yes, yes they will.
Jesus christ, get a clue…
Big Fat Hairy Deal.
Let me know when you can firewire some DV into your hard drive and edit a vid to share with your friends and family.
Downloading necessary software allowed, but no trips to the command line for installs or compiling. In fact, no compiles allowed.
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
And after that, let’s go bust out our respective image creaton/editing software and do what my friend Laura has done here
http://lauradepuy.ghostcolor.com/
namely, color in rgb for eventual printing in cmyk
good subject matter….very few intelligent responses.
even fewer people here who are proficient at both.
it’s hard to tell which are worse the mac only zealots or the linux only zealots.
oh well.
>>release two versions -_- LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. do programs on the Mac work on both OS 9 and OS X?<<
Yes. Uber-tard.
“Wrong because the GPL requires them to submit ALL changes, maintenance or not”
Uh where did you get this brilliant idea from? If I modify GPL code, then yes I have to “make it avaliable.” But I can make it avaliable for 200 million dollars only. Does that mean your going to get it? Not this lifetime. Additionally if I don’t modify GPL code, I don’t have to submit my changes. For instance if I write a GIMP plug-in, I don’t have to release its source. You’re confused here Matthew. Just because my code “interacts” with GPL code does not mean its part of the GPL’d code and has to be released. In particular, if I replace the VMM in the linux kernel with my own, I don’t have to release the source, even if I give out the binary because I didn’t modify the code. I took out a module and replaced it with something else. Again my code interacts with GPL code but is not a modification of it. Keep trying though… you may convince me that somehow this license is useful.
Actually the Demo of QuarkExress does work with Crossover I just tried it tonight after the dork/mac cultist asked if I could run Quark since the Demo rns I dont see any reason why the Full Version wouldnt. I do not use Quark so i dont know how many bugs if any exist. As for the GIMP not being ready for pro use…Tell that to the three print houses here that use Linux exclusively for everything. They do have inhouse programmers who do inhouse software, I do not know what they have developed inhouse but these guys are part of my Linux user group and they do very good work, One of the companies print our newsletters and several catalogs for businesses around here. Linux has caught up alot in functionality, sure we have to rely on Windows software being run under emulation but as soon as more pros start using Linux the Apps will come, until then Crossover Office and Wine offer a great bridge with which to leap over some hurdles. perfect example look at Nvidia who swore just a few years ago they would never do drivers for Linux because they considered it a dead platform, they now do Linux drivers and even went a few steps further and developed FreeBSD drivers.
I don’t see what the argument here is about. If OS X weren’t Unix based, perhaps there would be something to argue about; however, since it is (somewhat) easy to make programs that run on one Unix work on another Unix, what’s good for one community is good for the other. In my book, if it’s Unix, it’s a winner.
The diffrence (besides the BSD/Linux thing) between OS X and Linux is, at best, only on the surface. Platform independence is a good thing – and Apple is going in the right direction. In any case, this article was little more than a surface analysis of the OSs. Most of the real nice stuff about Unix ( everything’s-a-file, modular design, powerful shells and command line programs) weren’t even covered. Sad realy … If only people weren’t so opposed to actualy learning how stuff works. With a little bit of shell programming (or C, or PERL, or whatever … Unix is nice that way) you can do absoloutly incredable things with a machine – which is much more than I can say about windows.
“Uh where did you get this brilliant idea from? If I modify GPL code, then yes I have to “make it avaliable.” But I can make it avaliable for 200 million dollars only.”
Yup. And once you sold exactly 1 copy, i can LEGALLY download it off
eDonkey or copy it from the guy you sold it to. Feel free to try and make
money on GPL code. Feel free to shoot yourself in the head, too.
Does that mean your going to get it? Not this lifetime.
Oh really?
Additionally if I don’t modify GPL code, I don’t have to submit my changes.
What are you trying to say here? first you say “i don’t modify” then you
say “don’t submit changes”. Are you changing it or not, dammit? :o)
For instance if I write a GIMP plug-in, I don’t have to release its source.
Quite true. a plug-in can be a piece of softare on its own.
You’re confused here Matthew. Just because my code “interacts” with GPL code does not mean its part of the GPL’d code and has to be released.
true.
In particular, if I replace the VMM in the linux kernel with my own, I don’t have to release the source, even if I give out the binary because I didn’t modify the code.
FALSE. VMM is not depending on a plug-in interface and is, therefore, an
integrated part of a piece of software. You can keep your VMM undisclosed
if you are going to use it in-house, but you cannot make a Linux Kernel
“statically link to a VMM” so you have a choice there:
a) Close the source for the rest of the kernel and get sued to death.
b) Open up your VMM.
I took out a module and replaced it with something else.
You can make a closed-source module. yes. but you would have
to ship it SEPARATELY from the kernel. And that means your module
would be compiled against some specific kernel version and would not
work on any other…
And this has nothing to do with GPL. feel free to make
a module. a module can be programmed from scratch. Feel free to
write your own kernel from scratch also. But if you take Linux and
erase all the VMM related code to implement yours, then YOU ARE
NOT PROGRAMMING FROM SCRATCH: YOU ARE USING GPL CODE
AS A BASE (all the rest of the kernel) and therefore, you have to make
the source available for anyone that gets to use your VMM.
I know what you were trying to say here, but you are a bit
confused. One thing is a plug-in. Those can be added closed-source
no problem. But if i take OpenOffice, delete the “file” menu, and implement
my own file menu (even if my file menu is completely new) then it
counts as a modification to the original program. My work would go GPL.
Again my code interacts with GPL code but is not a modification of it.
Yes, it is.
Keep trying though… you may convince me that somehow this license is useful.
The license is useful only if you can make your braincells work.
do programs on the Mac work on both OS 9 and OS X?
It’s called a “Carbonized Program”, moron, something that Apple designed into OS X from the beginning.
Time Cube debunks god lies.
Evil people deny Time Cube.
Educators are flat-out liars.
Evil media hides Time Cube.
-1 x -1=+1 is stupid and evil.
Word worship equates to evil.
Bible induces a barren Earth.
Evil 1 day Biblekills children.
Linux will probably demolish proprietary UNIX first, Apple second, Windows third.
Yeah, Apple second. How many of Apples users are now former Linux or FreeBSD users? No idea, but considering that 50% of new sales went to “switchers” according to Apple, but I’ve yet to see a non-geek/non-former-Mac-user actually with Apple hardware, it’s probably most of them.
Meanwhile Linux on the desktop is advancing quickly. I don’t buy the argument that Linux will never be as easy to use as MacOS, I think it’ll be easier, I think it’ll be more usable, I think it’ll be cheaper – I think it’ll be better.
So what then? Well, those people switched from Linux to MacOS, they can go back just as easily. The moment Linux reaches MacOS in terms of ease of use (which *will* happen) Apple are up the creek.
Windows is a harder bet because of preloads and Wine isn’t good enough yet. Work is starting on making it far easier to setup, think of Wine as like X was a few years ago, lots of potential but hard to configure. It’ll be getting a lot easier. The Mac has no equivalent. I thought the first comment about how the Mac has nearly as many apps as Windows was funny, real world experience has shown me that most people have one or two apps they don’t want to leave behind.
For those who are slagging off the gimp, get a clue. The vast majority of computer users will at some point want to do image manipulation, but the vast majority of computer users couldn’t care less about colour accurate print work. Or what, do you think every copy of Photoshop out there goes to professional print designers? The Gimp is great for photo manipulation, web design and so on. It’s an invaluable tool.
Linux basically IS standardised. What, you don’t believe me? Well, I could argue this out with people I guess but really Linux is just as standardised as Windows these days. The lack of packaging formats is one of the last big usability killers imho, and there are at least 2 separate teams working on new systems.
… and looking to the user base, it’s obvious that Linux will be the second. In not-so-prosperous countries (which actually give the most growth of computer newbies, BTW) Apple cannot compete with Microsoft. Linux is the only another choice to Windows in many countries, including mine.
(Surely, I am not talking about professional workstations)
… one last thing, you can of course run the real Word and Excel on Linux no problems, and you’re not dependant on Microsoft deciding it loves Apple.
Photoshop is coming, but like I said, most PS users would actually be fine with the Gimp anyway. For those who need it, they can use it under Wine. Quite how apps can go to the Mac is beyond me.
I just installed the development version of the Gimp 1.3.11 and it’s look like it’s got some form of CYMK support, but then i don’t know much when it comes to graphics programs
here’s a screenshot
http://zion.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/linux/Screenshot.png
Is that KDE or GNOME?
GNOME. Didn’t get the panel at first.
Another thing that is holding back Un*x is the lack of a common clipboard format. As it is now, it is impossible to take an image from a Qt application and paste it into a GTK/GNOME/Motif, etc. program.
This, is one of the biggest obstacles that Linux will face in the business environment. Something needs to be worked out whereby apps can communicate w/each other in this manner. Ideally, some sort of common protocal could be devised between the two big camps but in the mean time, perhaps a beefed up Kicker which can accept input and give output to Gtk and Qt apps. And since Kicker already will run on GNOME now…
Sorry Dubhthach… that screenshot shows CMY and RGB not CMYK. To see if it will produce real CMYK (Cyan Magenta Yellow Black) try to print out color separation (4 color). That’s what the print industry looks for… Four Color Process = Cyan Magenta Yellow Black. A three color mode like you picture is RGB.
“I just installed the development version of the Gimp 1.3.11 and it’s look like it’s got some form of CYMK support, but then i don’t know much when it comes to graphics programs
here’s a screenshot
http:/ /zion.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/linux/Screenshot.png “
alright thanks for the heads up, though i basically figured i was wrong earlier when using google to check what the state of CMYK was, It’s not plan to be operational until Gimp2.0 which is the stable release planned after 1.4
The point of the comparison is not which is technically more advanced or which one can do what the whole point is Which OS will be #2 Apple does not stand a chance because A) The PowerPC chip is much slower than x86 chips and offers no real advantages. B) a good portion of OS X is proprietary and no open source developers are going to want to write for it. X11 was the best thing Apple did because it realized it can cover much more territory with an X11 interface than they can trying to get everyone to code for Aqua. Apple makes the hardware and software and many of you say that thats the perfect package which is a load of crap, If Apple was to knock off most IBM clones and managed to get the Dominant OS slot then there would be alot of problems. They wouldnt be able to keep up with supply and demand, meaning they would take a bunch of shortcuts in engineering which would cause alot of problems. They cant even keep up with supply and demand now, Most Apple stores and CompUSAs have bunches of iPods and certain models of Macs on backorder. With engineering shortcuts you will have major faults and major consequences. The hardware will bcome shotty, they would have to modify and enhance different versions of Mac OS X which would create way to many forks and they would have a hard time keeping up with what is what. Apple will have to do 1 or 2 things if it ever hopes of knocking Microsoft out of the top slot. 1. Reinstate the clone program and allow others to produce PowerPC boxen 2. Port OS X over to the x86 program. Apple will not do either because then it will cut into their precious Hardware sales. Now Linux has a stronger case than Mac OS X does because it is a good solid stable OS. It has its problems but which OS does not and so far SuSE is the only company that I see that has done anything about it. They have produced a good solid Linux distro which is extremely user friendly and has made alot of headway into the home user market. Red Hat still rulesthe server. SuSE uses RPM but they have made alot of progress in terms of automatic dependency resolves. It extremely user friendly and any idiot can install SuSE. Linux is also very cross platorm with distros produced for almost every CPU architecture on the Planet. What makes Linux so attractive is that if I have a lab or an office I can take the 266 Dells in my office or lab and turn them into extremely powerful workstations. But wait I have the UltraSparcs and I ahve solaris what am I going to do now? Linux sparc edition. But I also have some macs, I cant afford OS X and the classic Mac OS is just terrible what am I going to do now ? Yellowdog Linux or SuSE Linux PPC edition. I do not have to give up my current investement in hardware and accessories because Linux supports most of them and if you need a device driver. Find some 14 yr old uber geek and pay him 20 bucks to write it for you. Linux has so much going for it in terms of hardware and software compatibility that any start up to the biggest corporation can easily deploy it. Apple makes good products but it just doesnt have the stamina or the resources to make it to the top. Linux has almost no resources except the volunteer time from thousands of developers yet it has stamina. The road for Linux has been hard, harder than Apple ever had it and it will pay off. Too many advantages and just too few disadvantages.
“For those who are slagging off the gimp, get a clue. The
> vast majority of computer users will at some point want to do image manipulation, but the vast majority of computer users couldn’t care less about colour accurate print work. Or what, do you think every copy of Photoshop out there goes to professional print designers? The Gimp is great for photo manipulation, web design and so on. It’s an invaluable tool.”
It’s not about colour accuracy – RGB images will print in GREY only on a commercial press, that’s wht NO PRINT DESIGNER anywhere uses GIMP.
Any print shop using Linux is doing so ONLY for file sharing, serving or RIP. Not for design work.
Gimp, being a Photoshop clone is too complex for the part-time home user.
I don’t care what OS people use, but idiotic Linux nutters are really beginning to get on my nerves.
Oh, and by the way as for who’s using OS X for design, well, I am for one.
MAK Publishing (Belfast, Ireland)
All Mac OS X.
Photoshop, Illustrator, Freehand, Flash, Dreamweaver, Painter, Art Director’s Toolkit, GraphiConverter.
Quark in Classic mode.
Like previously stated I know three print shops that use it exclusively for everything, including Printing. These people who are claiming, ” No one uses Linux for print shops ” are Mac users who obviously dont know any better. I can run any graphics app on Linux wether it is thru Wine or wether it is thru MOL. Get over it people. Linux is here to stay and it will be #2 as long as Apple keeps its current business plan. It might even be #1 one day.