Do you think Linux will ever threaten Microsoft's and Apple's share of the market?

Question

Apple overcharges for their hardware AND software, and they aren't really great, but they're good enough if you're a casual user. Not saying that people who are "Advanced" Users, or programmers, Hackers, or even Developers use Mac OS/X, but I'm saying that most of the people I know who use Mac only use it because it's not complicated. Microsoft is doing a good job with their computers, Windows XP was fantastic, but Vista was a fail. Windows 7 is a very good and stable OS, but the biggest problem with Windows operating systems are their security. Viruses that destroy the entire Operating System and require you to reinstall your OS. Who knows what else Viruses will be able to do in a few years, possibly even overwrite or delete an entire Partition or corrupt an entire HDD. Linux is safe and stable, and fast, and if "Open Source" means anything to developers, that's a key factor too. I don't like the GNOME Desktop much, but I love KDE, and I plan on using KDE 4.6 soon. Linux can be either easy to use or complex depending on the user and the Distro he uses. Also, not to mention it's free and majority of the tools are too.

*I am NOT a Linux Fanboy, I haven't even heard of Linux a year ago and I started using it a few months ago*

Answer 1

To answer the OP, linux is already dominant on servers. On the desktop, it holds about a 1% market share on paper, though this number is skewed because many computer systems come with Windows pre-loaded, and many linux users have to toy with their user-agents to pretend to be using windows so certain poorly written websites will grant access, so there are a lot of fake Windows numbers.



Next, to the ignorant and uneducated people who keep repeating the myth that if linux were as popular as Windows, it would have just as many security problems: Wrong. This is completely incorrect. Linux has an inherently different structure that is much more secure than Windows, which is why it is used on servers and on sensitive military systems. It is simply not possible to write a virus for linux with the same effects as you can get on Windows. At best, a linux virus might affect files in the user's home directory, and it is impossible for the virus to run without the users a) knowing and b) giving it executable permission. If you want to understand it better, you can use Google and easily find sufficient explanations. Now stop spreading your half-baked Microsoft-minded ideas. You obviously don't know how operating systems work, so don't attempt to make claims about how another one you have no knowledge of will work.



And to treva:

How does it feel to be paying for an overbloated OS littered with security flaws that you have to spend hours either recovering from or prevention infection of, only to have support for it dropped when the next version comes out, while my OS is lighter, faster, more customizable, has all the same capabilities, never loses support, inherently more secure, and free? Think about that before you open your mouth to knock on Mac users.

Answer 2

first of all,vista was not a fail.there is nothing wrong with vista,it seems the only people that complain about it are the people who don't know how to use it,which isn't that hard.the linux os has been around for a while and actually im kind of surprised more people don't use it because it is easy to use.im sure if more people took the time to research it the would figure that out,but every one is in a hurry and doesn't bother to.as for mac,it may be easy to use but you need to buy specifically for that os,its not like windows xp,vista or windows 7 where almost any thing is compatible.i know a number of people that are not computer literate and were talked into buying macs,only to be pissed off now because of this,this buying specifically for the mac was never explained to them.as for the person who suggested that linux cant be hacked and that was a half baked statement,im sorry but every os can be hacked one way or another.if linux couldn't be hacked then its kind of stupid for every large corporation in the world not to be using it,where there's a will there's a way.maybe linux will catch on if people take the time to check it out,as for threaten the market,any things possible.hope this helps.

Answer 3

Linux is not threatening MS & Apple much but eventually It will take a big share of market in future. Chrome OS is on the way. Android is already dominating in mobile market. Consider also the share of embedded systems with Linux. Open Source project ReactOS progressing slowly as well which is a free, modern operating system based on the design of Windows XP/2003. ReactOS is similar project as was the GNU/Linux based on the Unix.



I recommend Zorin OS 4, based on Ubuntu 10.10, to Windows users http://youtu.be/R0cXRfmoLrs

Answer 4

You're right about Mac OS, I think. Most people are moving to it because they're sick of having to format their Windows computers after getting infected with a virus. Apple capitalized on this trend big time with their PC vs Mac advertising campaign and you're seeing Apple grab more and more of Microsofts share of the market. Not heaps at the moment, but I imagine that the trend will continue over time and eventually it should work its way out to about a 50/50 share.



As that becomes more of a reality though (i.e - as Apple gains more and more Market Share), you will find more developers turning to Apple as a development platform which also means that more developers will be writing malware for it (worms, viruses, trojans, etc).



Once that happens (I'm guessing we're talking 10, maybe 15 years down the road), I think you might find people turning to Unix or a particular Linux distro which is particularly easy to use and stable. I doubt you'd find average users running to Linux before they 'have to' though, just like people were reluctant to port to Mac OS until they became fed up with Windows and the amount of malware that comes with it.

Answer 5

Matt- The universal package is called source. The binary interface with the kernel and glibC is very stable/ backward compatible to it's just a matter statically linking to odd libraries if you want to distribute a binary.



Linux already dominates every niche of computing (servers, supercomputers, embedded space) except the desktop.



Will Linux ever be popular of the desktop is another question. I think the capability is there, it's just that nobody has really figured out a way to sell Linux. The best way to do it (offer computers with a dual boot option) is prevented by the OEM deals M$ makes with major manufacturers.

Answer 6

Linux is only safe because it's not on the desktop. If people used Linux machines for the same purposes they use Windows machines and in the same quantities, you'd see the same security problems. Yes, Linux has threatened the server market, but there's no path I can see for Linux to threaten Microsoft's and Apple's desktop market. But I guess they won't be the kings of that market forever, and there's no more likely place than Linux for a new desktop OS to come from.

Answer 7

if Linux could end up with a universal package instead of .rpm, .deb, and .apt (and a few others) then they could get quite a bit more market share. right now i exclusively use linux because we got a modem that never works with anything linux based, even if i give it the exact same settings as windows :<

Answer 8

I don't think so not as long as it stays open source. For the Mac fans I'm PC for life. I don't mind formatting my hard drive every three years or so, because I backup all of my drives periodically and keep those backups offline until I need them. If my job didn't issue me a Mac I would never use one. They're far too overpriced for what you get. Spending an hour every three years on redoing my hard drive verses paying an extra grand for a machine with similar specs is not even up for discussion.