On Aug 31, 2:53 am, "Moshe Goldfarb." <brick_n_st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 18:44:02 -0500, RonB wrote:
> > bbgruff wrote:
> Let's see:
Let's assume that your "1 percent of desktop" refers to the number of
PCs produced by the top 10 OEMs (IBM, HP, Dell, Lenovo, Gateway, Sony,
Toshiba, Acer, Apple) over the last 10 years. And that the 1% refers
to those PCs shipped by those OEMs with Linux preinstalled.
> 15+ years and still less than 1 percent of desktop.
Microsoft had identified UNIX as a key threat to MS-DOS back in 1980,
so Microsoft vs UNIX
has been an ongoing battle for over 25 years.
UNIX Graphical workstations were available as early as 1985, from Sun,
HP, IBM, and Silicon Graphics, but the $20,000 to $50,000 price tag
for hardware and software limited the market to CAD/CAM, System
monitoring, Hollywood feature films, and other "real-time critical
display" applications.
Microsoft had identified Sun Workstations as a major threat to Windows
in 1990, when Sun captured nearly 15% of the "corporate workstation"
market. While this was a niche within the overall PC market, it was a
key market to Microsoft and the ability to share a $10,000 Sun
Workstation with 4-5 X11 terminals (or PCs loaded with X11 server) was
bringing Unix TCO down to parity with Windows 3.0 and 3.1.
Linux was identified by Microsoft as a potential threat by early 1994,
when Slackware and SLS Linux began offering the functionality of a Sun
SparcStation on PCs selling for as little as $1000 and used PCs
available for less than $500.
The three biggest threats to Windows 95, as identified by Microsoft
were OS/2-Warp 4.0, Novell Unixware for the Desktop, and Plug-and-play
versions of Linux, including Yddragsil (sic), and Red Hat Linux. Red
Hat had made overtures to OEMs, offering Linux to them for less than
$2 per machine, on a nonexclusive basis. The OEMs could install BOTH
Linux AND Windows on the same machine and let the user decide at boot
time which system they wanted to run. The Linux partition could even
be as small as 10% of the available drive space (drives at the time
were 200-400 megaybytes, Red Hat could work with as little as 70
megabytes).
How Microsoft dealt with IBM and OS2/Warp4 are well documented in the
Antitrust trial, and the testimony and exhibits show tactics that
Microsoft used against their competitors. Many were later ruled to be
illegal, but Microsoft was able to craft clever settlements which not
only granted them immunity from prosecution for previous acts, but
also granted them permission to continue such practices as "business
as usual" with the prior consent of the victim (er I mean customer).
> Free and still less than 1 percent of desktop
Linux is royalty free, but there are costs. The OEMs could provide
their own support, or they could refer customers to distributors who
would charge for a "support agreement".
Microsoft responded to Red Hat's offer by adding new restrictions to
Windows 95 and all later versions of Windows. The OEM was not allowed
to make ANY changes to the "default image" without Microsoft's prior
written consent. When OEMs did request changes to permit the dual-
boot feature, such as adding the boot manager, breaking the disk into
multiple partitions, and so on, Microsoft delayed the requests
indefinitely, or rejected them without giving a legitimate reason.
When the Antitrust prosecutors raised the issue during the complaince
hearings, Microsoft carefully pointed out that there was no explicit
policy that said the OEMs could not request these things, and issued a
public statement to that effect, but in practice, Microsoft directly
defies the portion of the settlement that says Microsoft shall not
interfere with the OEM's attempts to offer Linux (including Linux and
Windows on the same machine).
> Lived through Windows ME and Bob and still Linux is less than 1 percent of
> desktop.
ME was just Microsoft's attempt to "prove" that a version of Windows
micromanaged by the court couldn't be successful. It did hurt
Microsoft in the short run, but it set the stage for Windows XP.
Windows XP was released less than a year later, and "force fed" to
Corporations who had purchased support contracts based on the promise
of a free upgrade to Windows 2000.
> Lived through windows 2000 which was NOT marketed as a personal desktop and
> still Linux is less than 1 percent of desktop
Windows 2000 was probably the best Operating System Microsoft ever
produced. It was fast, reliable, and with the right third party
software, was relatavely secure (more secure than XP or Vista with
Microsoft's shovelware security solutions). The problem was that it
wasn't a money-maker for Microsoft. Most of the Windows 2000 licenses
were shipped as automatic upgrades that had been promised to corporate
customers who had purchased NT 4.0 and customers who signed up for a
service contract.
Windows 2000 had one of the shortest shelf lives of any version of
Windows, with Windows XP being released less than a year after the
release of Windows 2000.
> Vista is less than accepted and still Linux is less than 1 percent of
> desktop.
I notice you target only "desktop" and avoid laptop and subnotebook
markets.
Very clever, especially since ASUS and ACER are both putting Linux
powered
subnotebooks on the retailer shelves, and are having a hard time
keeping up with
the demand.
> Windows has lock in and proprietary applications and still Linux is less
> than 1 percent of desktop.
However, many Linux applications have now made it to the Windows
desktop, which is gradually breaking the Microsoft lock on the
desktop.
> Linux runs super computers and still Linux is less than 1 percent of
> desktop.
One of the interesting things here is that Linux Servers can offer
desktop environments to Windows client users. With VNC or X11, users
can run GUI Unix and Linux applications without even realizing that
it's not Windows doing the work. They think they are running a
Windows application, but it's actually a Linux application running in
an X11 Window.
> Would you like me to continue?
You very carefully avoided any reference to any indication that END
USERS and Corporate desktop might have installed Linux as an AFTER-
MARKET add-on (roughly 95% of all Linux systems were originally sold
with Windows).
You also carefully avoided the possibility that users might be running
BOTH Windows AND Linux concurrently.
> Bottom line, Linux as a desktop system is a piker.
> It has failed, and failed miserably.
Microsoft has spent $billions per year to keep Linux from showing up
in retail markets. Even today, Linux has to compete against Vista
with both hands tied behind it's back. The Linux system is typically
512 Mb RAM, single CPU, and 4-16 gig of "flash drive". Next to it is
Vista, with 2 or 4 core CPU, 4-6 Gigabytes of RAM, and 500 to 700
Gigabyte 7200 RPM SATA hard drive.
And yet the little Linux system is currently the hottest new market.
It looks like it will also be a hot christmas gift this year as well.
The biggest problem might be that there Acer, and Asus won't be able
to keep up with demand.
Linux on the "home user's desktop" hasn't done that well, but Linux
has found it's way onto corporate desktops. The most popular
applications are point-of-sale terminals (electronic cash registers
with graphical displays), and Call Centers. Neither of these would
show up in web browser surveys. Neither of these would show up in OEM
sales numbers.
> You guys should abandon your desktop fantasy's and work toward server and
> embedded devices because those are areas where Linux might actually stand a
> chance of competing.
Actually, Linux has been very successful in these markets, and as a
result, many users have more Linux devices in their homes and offices
than Windows devices. You may not even know that your HDTV is running
Linux, that the Cable box with DVR is running Linux or Unix, that the
cable modem is running Linux, or that the WiFi router is running
Linux. And that Voice-over Internet phone - (Vonage et al) is yet
another little Linux box).
> Bottom line is Linux is free, nobody is interested and it is in effect a
> piker.....
September 1, 2008 marks the first time in the history of Linux that
Linux has been on display next to Windows machines in a wide variety
of Retail stores including Carrefour, Target, Circuit City, and other
key retailers. Perhaps this is because Vista has had such a Negative
impact on the retailers' bottom lines. If Linux does well in one
niche market, it might not be long before Linux will be on more
laptops and end up taking as much as 60% of the Laptop market, and
possibly 40% of the "desktop/server" market (Linux desktop units often
also act as servers as well).
In the Server Market, Linux has proven itself to be an effective and
reliable server. Linux machines cost much less and Virtual machines
mean more "bang for the buck". IDC reported Linux vs Windows success
in terms of Revenue, and Linux STILL got 18% of teh server market,
even though it costs about 1/3 to 1/5th the price of Windows 2003 or
Windows 2008 enterprise editions.
> Moshe Goldfarb
> Collector of soaps
an.2008.08.31.09.04.36@lazyeyez.net...