While there are technical and legal reasons why M$ will retreat from their monopoly position on the desktop, the manner and timing of their demise is uncertain. A stock analyst has written a good piece about the economic/market forces keeping M$ afloat.
e.g.
- When desktop PCs dominated, M$ had a virtual competitor in small businesses and individuals building their own PCs from parts and installing illegal copies of M$’s stuff. Now that notebooks dominate that is more difficult. There are still relatively few notebooks produced without that other OS, mostly netbooks. Except for the netbook this is a big up-side for M$.
- That other OS is tricky to move from one PC to another so large deployments keep a few prototypes and do disc copying to install/update/repair systems. GNU/Linux loves to run on anything so this is a huge threat to M$.
- The virtual machine makes it much easier to run other OS with the stability/reliability of MacOS on Apple and the low cost of GNU/Linux.
- GNU/Linux is more than ready for the desktop.
TFA is an initial assessment of the status, not a conclusion. I tend to conclude that in the long run, M$ cannot win and the desktop will be free. M$ can do lots of holding/delaying actions and with enough spending can drag the end out for more profitable years but as the netbook showed, large hits can come quickly. One point the authour missed largely is the continuing growth of malware as an industry attacking M$. The cost of that other OS as licensing and maintenance is large enough. Fighting the malware is an even larger cost. For the time being, GNU/Linux has a free ride on malware and in the end will do better against malware. Further, while TFA may be a great analysis of existing markets, the future is huge for small cheap computers which squeezes M$ out completely. They cannot put $200 licences on $100 netbooks. When a large part of the market will use such machines, M$ will lose share. Even today, “7″ is appearing on netbooks which sell for less than the licence for “7″. That means M$ is paying OEMs to install “7″ which is not a good long-range win for them. It is a delaying tactic. The next down-turn will end that practice and they will immediately lose a good share of production.
9451
8750
97
2
0
12800 
5758 
5722 
3886 
1628 
1548 
192 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
I’ve heard it is easier nowadays to deploy that newest Other OS to many PC’s with the wim images that for example keep all the drivers for all the machines but at the install they choose only the necessary ones. That makes it almost as easy to deploy as GNU/Linux but there is a catch in that almost
If i remember well you don’t even need to prepare in some special way GNU/Linux images and just use PXE to deploy it on thousands and more PC’s at once. Some distributions make it even easier to have “custom” apps like using jigdo in Fedora (other distros got some pretty similar tools so GNU/Linux is out there for businesses).
And i may be wrong but most overgrown companies become unmanageable due to fast growth (just like cancer
then they have troubles keeping track of everything and they naturally (in theory) have to grow what makes it more expensive to keep all that away from falling apart. M$ probably will be for some years to come but it will become harder and harder for them to convince others to buy newer version of their old system with some useless updates while GNU/Linux improves at a tremendous pace in most aspects.
I’d love to see GNU/Linux become mainstream so that everyone would see that a system that has the majority doesn’t have to be infested with malware and with some heave software to band aid weaknesses of the OS, GNU/Linux already has the tools to make that reality (SELinux, AppArmor, Tomoyo etc.).
Of course it isn’t perfect lacking in ease of use (though it is debatable what ease to use is for some people who were just used to using that Other OS). All that GNU/Linux needed was a push from some vendors like Canonical or Red Hat
And some day we will witness the real Year of the (GNU)Linux 
“Even today, “7″ is appearing on netbooks which sell for less than the licence for “7″. That means M$ is paying OEMs to install “7″ which is not a good long-range win for them”
I don’t see how you can keep coming to that wrong conclusion, Robert. I am beginning to think that you are prejudiced against Microsoft. License fees for OEMs are certainly not as high as you wish them to be. Rather, the fees have been set low enough to ensure that the benefits that accrue to the OEM who offers Windows pre-installed outweight the cost of the license involved. If the OEM needs a $15 price for Win7 to have a viable product, it gets a $15 price. That has been the history of the OEM market since its inception.
I don’t think they get those licenses so low, otherwise they would put so much crap and trialware to recoup money paid to M$. The higher the prices the more crap they need to put on the PC in order to have slightly bigger margins. If they would use GNU/Linux AND crap and trialware then imagine how much more they would earn
GNU/Linux has been mainstream for a long time. When I got on board in 2000, GNU/Linux already was mainstream on servers. Somewhere around 2005 installations of most distros were easy enough that anyone could have a reasonable chance of success. In the last few years installation has really become much easier than that other OS. The barrier at OEM/retail is quite artificial and full of holes. You can find GNU/Linux on desktops almost anywhere now. Some of IBM’s customers do not want IBM blabbing about it because they feel they have a competitive advantage. That will not stay hidden long. GNU/Linux succeeds everywhere.
A-C, do the maths. 300 million or so PCs for a gross take of 15 $billion means $50 per PC is M$’s average per-machine share. The OEM gets a similar amount. That’s about $100 per PC that a consumer spends above the price of the hardware. Do you or anyone think you can build a netbook that sells for $100 retail? The netbook costs about $100 to build and then there is shipping/middlemen/retail. M$ is subsidizing every netbook that bears its OS. It’s not a loss-leader either. It’s a barrier to competition. Netbooks are not dead/dying. Their share of PCs keeps growing and M$’s margins are squeezed by them.
“IDC also noted that mini-notebooks’ share of total notebook shipments in Russia increased from 17% in the second quarter of 2009 to 22.9% last quarter.”
see http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100831PR205.html
M$ is paying OEMs more than $1billion annually to install that other OS on netbooks. The only reason M$ does that is because otherwise GNU/Linux would be on 15% of new PCs (netbooks are 60%). M$ is using anti-competitive tactics to slow down adoption of GNU/Linux.
Maybe they don’t have to pay the OEM’s at all. I would suspect sneaky agreements that would leave OEM’s with no word to say. “You install XP on those netbooks or we revoke your license and you are finished” (since most of the world runs that Other OS).
I don’t think M$ can actually give up any of the top OEMs. That would be too large a market loss. Same goes for the OEMs. They cannot give up on M$ without at least a temporary drop in revenue while they establish new channels. It’s a stalemate. The OEMs and M$ depend on each other but neither is a true friend. The OEMs are in a better bargaining position all the time as GNU/Linux gets stronger.
M$ has agreed publicly to give up “exclusive dealing” but they are OK to provide “promotional incentives” and the like.
Maybe but i still see no choice which OS i want when i buy a PC/Notebook
The European Commission was fighting for a browser choice while being blind to a far greater monopoly abuse than preinstalled IE (even though they practically lost allowing to implement an “update” which introduces “choice” and M$ knows very well that most of the users are practically computer illiterate and won’t choose anything else than what they already know.
I’d love to see M$ collapse and Bill Gates to be shown what he really is and how dirty was he playing to gain the position that M$ is in (yet).
“I don’t think they get those licenses so low, otherwise they would put so much crap and trialware to recoup money paid to M$”
You must not be thinking so clearly. Surely, if there is some money to be had by installing the trialware (and I don’t know that to be an actual fact) the OEMs would take it whether or not they might need it to boost margin due to the cost of a Windows license. That does not prove anything vis-a-vis license prices. What is fact, though, is that the OEMs selling Windows based netbooks and other computers are making a profit which proves that margins are sufficient regardless.
“A-C, do the maths. 300 million or so PCs for a gross take of 15 $billion means $50 per PC is M$’s average per-machine share. The OEM gets a similar amount. That’s about $100 per PC that a consumer spends above the price of the hardware.”
Fuzzy math on your part, Robert. You mix retail revenues, corporate license agreements, and numerous other deals, including OEM revenues and divide by some figure you pull out of thin air to arrive at a figure that you then simply double. It is a good thing for you that you are not running a business.
“M$ has agreed publicly to give up “exclusive dealing” ”
That is a complete misstatement, too, Robert. Where did you ever see such a thing? They cannot deal exclusively with more than 40% of the available market channels, but they never have done that.
“You install XP on those netbooks or we revoke your license and you are finished” (since most of the world runs that Other OS).”
My, my, Bender, how can you have such a low regard for the world’s business regulators? Corporations are screaming all the time about how they are overly constrained and here you seem to think that anything goes since for some unfathonable reason, Linux is not very popular.
In the USofA, MS would be in very hot water due to the Robinson-Patman Act from way back when that disallows any such thing. Other countries have similar legislation and laws. Be realistic.
Amicus_Curious wrote:”“M$ has agreed publicly to give up “exclusive dealing” ”
That is a complete misstatement, too, Robert. Where did you ever see such a thing?”
see http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f218300/218339.htm
“Microsoft shall not restrict by agreement any OEM licensee from exercising any of the following options or alternatives: …”
One of those options is installing a non-M$ OS.
Do the maths, A-C. What do you get? M$ has publicly stated their take is $50-$60 per PC in line with my estimate.
“Be realistic”
That’s why i am saying such thing, Microsoft knows that he has the best cards and that also Microsoft is the dealer. OEM’s agree to fuzzy agreements because they basically have no choice and don’t wave here with some law, where there is lots of there is no regard for law and you know and i know it because you or i would do the same. Of course they maybe are more subtle with the words but it still is the same situation, we go down you all go down.
If there would be a significant sum of money then you would do the same and as people are taught everywhere “business is business” and not some party at the family. Bill Gates had a powerful family of lawyers (father only but still) which taught him well on how to avoid paying excessive taxes and how to extort in the name of the law.
If their agreements would be alright then they would show them to the judges etc. yet they waive their “trade secret” flag…
Apparently you’ve drawn too much attention. I see you’ve been assigned a “handler”.
No matter what “Pompicus Pukeupticus” says Microsoft is engaged in stuffing the manufacturing channel with lower than normal cost OEM copies of Windows. This is in direct response to Linux and started with the release of the Xandros based netbook from Asus a few years ago. While this probably does affect the MS bottom line its hard to say how much given that Microsoft heavily inflates the cost of their OS product on the other end. That is the “privilege” a company can enjoy when they hold an obscene market monopoly with regulators not paying close enough attention.
During the Win98/NT period we had basically one consumer level version of Windows with everything included. Later, with WinXP, Microsoft began splitting Windows into different versions. Under the guise of “Home” and “Professional”, Microsoft removed some functionality from the so called home user version and left it intact in the “business” version. This was simply a move to increase profit margins and since they controlled a monopoly share of the market they got away with it. Vista and Win& have only gotten worse. Win98″Plus” was their early foray into this idea.
Were regulators, such as the FTC in the US, paying any attention to what Microsoft has been engaged in, and is still engaged in, they would have stepped in a long time ago. At this point Microsoft is still flying under the radar due to many other more pressing issues taking center stage in the political and legal arenas. For instance the world financial collapse, the various US wars, etc. It takes time for regulations to be crafted for industries. The computer/software business is still relatively young so very little attention has been directed their way. Microsoft has gotten away with their illegal actions for a while but there comes a time when the obvious negative effects of a too dominant player in a market becomes too clear to miss.
Microsoft has only so many tricky fingers to use in plugging the holes in the dikes. Eventually they will be forced to try to find a “final solution” to the oncoming competition that Linux based products bring to the marketplace. The longer Linux exists the more costly it becomes to them to keep plugging holes. We’re seeing the start of that with the illegal extortion tactics and patent threats. These WILL draw regulators attention and while Microsoft might get away with this….for a while. Ultimately their arrogance (and the arrogance of their obnoxious “handlers” posting around the web I might add) will push it too far. Eventually their greed and arrogant behavior will be their end. Eventually all those millions they are scamming from various companies with vague patent threats, the so called “Microsoft Tax”, will come back to bite them in the ass….HARD. If they push too hard with patent threats someone is going to call them to account for it. There are thousands of people who gave freely of their talents for Linux….not Microsoft. Microsoft does NOT own their efforts nor do they have the right to manipulate patent laws to gain revenue from those efforts. You’re right Robert, we’re watching a slow motion train wreck and M$ be its name.
“If their agreements would be alright then they would show them to the judges etc. yet they waive their “trade secret” flag…”
The judges may put the evidence under seal so that the public may not view it, but the judge, the lawyers on both sides, and the jury, if there is one, certainly see it all, Bender. Surely you must know this.
As of the DOJ vs Microsoft case, there are two seperate overview panels charged with and authorized to view each and every contract entered into by Microsoft to ensure that there is nothing that violates the antitrust laws or the agreed to settlements. There is no way for Microsoft to hide any such thing. If your theories require these cabals and conspiracies, you should note that you are dead wrong. Linux is ignored because the people who purchase such things choose to ignore it, not because they are forced to do so.
@lpbbear
You know what, when reading your post it reminded me of another worldwide monopoly, Monsanto. In india they were advertising their GMO seeds as the best seed that will allow farmers to grow enormous amounts of crops (of course it is more expensive than normal seeds which were almost nonexistent after few weeks of that company on the market), turned out harvests were VERY small and the farmers didn’t have any money to pay back the loans they had to take to buy those seeds nor had they any money to buy new seeds and that’s basically what Monsanto told them after they complained about poor harvests that they should buy new seeds, they had basically only one choice, to kill themselves. Now how does it relate to M$? M$ admitted that Vista was a failure and Windows 7 was the bomb yet people didn’t get free Windows 7 updates despite M$ stance towards Vista
In other words, you don’t like Vista? Buy Windows 7. What you say? You paid for Vista? Tough luck, that money is ours and now go and buy our newest product because this time it is better 
Quoting “Pompicus Upchuckticus”
“Linux is ignored because the people who purchase such things choose to ignore it, not because they are forced to do so.”
Quite to the contrary. Linux is NOT “ignored because the people who purchase such things choose to ignore it”.
For Linux to even be “ignored” it would have to be sitting on the retailers shelf right next to traditional PC products using Microsoft Windows. Linux is not on retail store shelves in the form of traditional PC’s so the only product people are “forced” to in the retail sector by lack of any other choice is Microsoft Windows.
When Linux has been there, such as many of the early “netbooks”, sales were reported to be quite decent…..that was until Microsoft rigged the system in their favor by stuffing the OEM channel with lower than normal cost WindowsXP licenses thus once again removing any choice for consumers. Keep in mind this was long after Microsoft had hoped the public would be falling all over themselves for Vista. The public was falling alright….all over each other running away from Vista because it was such an incredible piece of s**t.
As well Linux, in many other forms, is currently all over store shelves. Cameras, TV’s, electronics, flash zip drives, phones, appliances, toys, and many other consumer devices ARE running Linux AND beating the pants off of Microsoft who is nowhere to be found in this marketplace……other than in the background scamming money out of honest companies with their extortion patent scheme. In this area, where the buying public DOES have a choice they are clearly choosing to NOT ignore Linux…..in droves which is proving to be very profitable for the companies smart enough to use Linux in their products.
Eventually the only remaining sector left to Microsoft, that of the traditional PC, will begin to erode away from them.
“One of those options is installing a non-M$ OS.”
For one thing, none of those options is installing a non-MS OS, it goes without saying. The language of that section is mostly in regard to OEM modifications of Windows initial presentations. The important element is stated as:
“Nothing in this provision shall prohibit Microsoft from providing Consideration to any OEM with respect to any Microsoft product or service where that Consideration is commensurate with the absolute level or amount of that OEM’s development, distribution, promotion, or licensing of that Microsoft product or service”
People are NOT choosing Linux. They are purchasing Linux based devices for what functions they have, not by what OS might be running inside. You want to believe they are because having other people follow your own decisions makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Indirectly, when a consumer chooses a device with a lower price/higher reliability, they may be choosing GNU/Linux even without realizing that OS is inside. An OEM can skip a licensing fee to M$ and offer the product to consumers at a lower price. That is clear in netbooks where prices are as low as $100 from the smaller OEMs. The big guys were selling netbooks with GNU/Linux for the same price as with XP so XP was either subsidized or the OEM was pocketing a much higher profit with GNU/Linux.
“They are purchasing Linux based devices for what functions they have, not by what OS might be running inside.”
BINGO! EXACTLY!
Thanks for stepping into that one so nicely.
(give that shill a penguin!)
When given the choice it turns out that consumers “are purchasing Linux based devices for what functions they have, not by what OS might be running inside” which means that were they given the same choice in the traditional computer marketplace between Windows based systems and Linux based systems a percentage of them would also do the same exact thing as they are doing in the device marketplace because consumers are really more interested in function, features, and price than they are in brands. I look forward to seeing consumers have that chance.
‘Mr Handler’ there really has all the usual points down pat, “you have a bias against Microsoft, cabals, conspiracies.”
Next theyre supposed to say Santa Claus or the bogeyman to infer mental problems on your part.
See it enough time and the pattern and buzz words are easy to spot.
Bravo Pog, youve caught someone’s eye.
I think its your cool sig file at the bottom: “ONe man, closing all the windows”.
My son invented that logo. It fits. He also designed the graphic at the top of the page. When there is a party and I approached some of his friends and ask them to defend their use of that other OS he used to be embarrassed. Now he is a fan of GNU/Linux too. The domain is his and he set up the blog for me. When I started we got only a few hits per day; now there are hundreds.
I doubt M$ cares two cents about me. They just fear my message will catch on. I think that is happening. In the last three or four years acceptance of my offer to install GNU/Linux has increased greatly. I used to get funny looks. Now people walk up to me and ask me to “fix” their PC. Around here, folks used to either buy a new PC or ship theirs out for repair almost yearly. It was insane. GNU/Linux makes sense to people. It makes their PCs work the way they want, as appliances, not houses of cards.
I am a little negative and will try to post some more useful things as soon as I have the school working again. We disassembled everything for annual cleaning. Just today, the server came out of storage along with the new PCs. I will be able to set up virtual machines and demonstrate stuff like Nixie Pixel does. I still get a steady stream of visits from people to articles I wrote years ago about how to do stuff. I hope to continue writing and consulting after I retire. It is important to have something that makes one get out of bed every day.
“I doubt M$ cares two cents about me. They just fear my message will catch on. I think that is happening.”
No, they care. That is why guys like “Pantsloadicus Craptalkticus” started showing up. I’m sure they (them, whoever) combs through the Internet looking for Linux friendly blogs and sites. When they see one rising above the usual noise level they begin to target the site. Perhaps they are directly paid by M$ as an employee, maybe they work for some off shoot contractor that handles PR or gets a major portion of their revenue from an association with M$. Maybe they are just a shareholder who wants to see if they can pump their stock prices by attacking perceived competition. Maybe they work as a IT support person and their only narrow minded ability is in supporting Windows. Or….even more remotely they are a 13 year old who thinks they know everything and use biiiiig words like…oh…lets say “blatent” (snick LOL snick snick)
Whatever or whoever they are you have to wonder why anyone but the lowest form of infected ass pimple on the butt cheeks of mankind would bother supporting a corrupt corporation like M$ by wasting their time trying to ridicule an relatively little known Linux oriented blogger like yourself? I guess you’ve hit the big leagues to warrant such attention.
I’ve been quietly following and enjoying your comments for quite a while. I normally would have nothing to add since I basically agree with your comments. I just noticed you had been targeted by a few “ass pimples” so I thought I would jump in.
I’m curious, Robert, do you like the idea that Mr. Bear is on your side? Do you consider him to be a credit to the cause?
It is well known that M$ has a deliberate campaign to discredit other technologies and to promote their own. They go to great lengths to do that. The continuous support of M$’s cause by Amicus_Curious raises the question whether or not he/she is a “technological evangelist” from M$. IPBear’s post is probably assuming that to be the case. I find his position logically defensible. His language would not be my first choice. It takes all kinds to run the world. I teach students who use the “f-word” like punctuation. One copes.
I am more concerned that people throw off the yoke of slavery that M$ supplies. I don’t care that much how they do it. GNU/Linux would be a good start.
The good news is that I am installing GNU/Linux on the fourth machine here even before school starts. I hope no more roll in this weekend because I must prepare for my day job. I just put the server back in order. It’s humming like a Swiss watch. Now my installs will be faster because the server has caches of .deb packages and is a proxy for the mirrors on the web. We are missing a few machines but the storage room where they may be has not been opened yet.
“The continuous support of M$’s cause by Amicus_Curious raises the question whether or not he/she is a “technological evangelist” from M$.”
I wish that I were, Robert, but, alas, I am not. Those fellas get paid a lot for doing something that they enjoy. That, of course, raises the question as to whether you yourself are being paid by Microsoft competitors to continuously shill about Linux and publish these innuendos and half-truths, raking up ancient history and adding commentary to spin Microsoft’s achievements in an evil light. Or are you just stating your own opinion?
I am paid by my employer as a teacher. “Other duties as assigned” include taking care of IT around here.
I do not have to dig for dirt on M$. It is piled so high on US DOJ v M$ and Comes v M$ and SCOG v World that it keeps sliding downhill on top of me. I dig to get out of the pile…
I have an opinion on lots of things. I like IT that works and keeps working for the user. That other OS does not. One machine after another is brought to me that no longer boots or has slowed down to the point of unusability. I had nothing to do with that. M$ made their own bed, giving priority to marketing/abusing the market rather than IT. I give priority to getting the job done. Since I converted most of the machines here to GNU/Linux none of them has quit. They just keep working.
“I’m curious, Robert, do you like the idea that Mr. Bear is on your side? Do you consider him to be a credit to the cause?”
Eeeeeuwwwww! I don’t know whether to reach for the barf bag or just sit and shudder in my absolute disgust. That is classic shill.
There is absolutely nothing lower in this world than a person who would shill for a person like Bill Gates and a corporation like Microsoft. We have gotten used to the idea that our politicians might do this kind of thing by taking “donations” from big corporations who want to pollute the environment or do away with Net Neutrality or do some other to the public good in the pursuit of money. Thats bad but what is worse is a person who would turn his back on the obvious, as Pog said “dirt on M$. It is piled so high on US DOJ v M$ and Comes v M$ and SCOG v World that it keeps sliding downhill on top of me. I dig to get out of the pile…” for a few bucks.
There is not a bit of doubt that Microsoft has acted in an illegal manner time after time…..none. Its clear and even though they try to bury the evidence through trial settlement after trial settlement the truth is out there. People like Pogson, Techrights, and many others are fighting for a fair marketplace for all computer/software consumers. One that is not perversely dominated by single company. One that follows universal standards. One that does not allow a single company to lock the consumer into overpriced and under quality products with no other choice.
“I wish that I were, Robert, but, alas, I am not. Those fellas get paid a lot for doing something that they enjoy. That, of course, raises the question as to whether you yourself are being paid by Microsoft competitors to continuously shill about Linux and publish these innuendos and half-truths, raking up ancient history and adding commentary to spin Microsoft’s achievements in an evil light.”
Just a nice guy supporting a corrupt corporation for free……riiiight.
Yep, hes “yer good buddy” Robert. Just ignore all the “you’re a naive country bumpkin” who has no idea of life in the “big city” insults he constantly posts.
More classic shill.
I think I need a shower…..
“I do not have to dig for dirt on M$. It is piled so high on US DOJ v M$ and Comes v M$ and SCOG v World that it keeps sliding downhill on top of me. I dig to get out of the pile…”
So you consider these civil cases as “dirt”? You are hopelessly biased, Robert. The SCO suits are not even a part of Microsoft, but your bias blinds you to the facts.
I think it was obvious that my suggestion that you were a paid shill was farce, so there was no need to protest. But why, if you are willing to spend so much time for a lost cause, do you think that others are not also willing to do the same for their beliefs? You have not yet answered that question.
“I think I need a shower…..”
Doubtless that is true, Mr. Bear, and I congratulate you on throttling back the potty mouth. Did Robert’s “His language would not be my first choice…” put you on notice or did you finally come to the realization yourself?
I honour those who believe in something but I do not honour those who think they are so superior they have the right/duty to attack others ad hominem. That is a sure sign that their position is weak. It is totally unnecessary if the basis of their beliefs is factual.
All can have different viewpoints but a discussion goes nowhere when the participants deny facts presented by others and then denounce the character of the others. We do not know each other here so declaring something is fact without evidence is not accomplishing much.
Do you mean facts like “The ones selling ARM+GNU/Linux are doing better than the ones selling x86+”7″ in terms of margin.” when there are actually no companies selling netbooks based on ARM and Linux? Or facts such as “Microsoft is behind SCO” or facts such as being found liable for damages is akin to slavery?
Where on Earth do you get the idea that no companies sell netbooks with GNU/Linux? They are sold all over the world, just not much in the USA. M$ gave SCOG millions of dollars to continue its SCOG v World suits. They called it a licence fee but SCOG had no right to sell what the licences covered.
“All can have different viewpoints but a discussion goes nowhere when the participants deny facts presented by others and then denounce the character of the others.”
Robert, you’re a very decent guy. That is obvious from your blog and the content of your posts but……this guy is NOT here to participate in a discussion. He has no facts and in fact when presented with them does EXACTLY what you just mentioned a post before by denying “facts presented by others and then denounce the character of the others.”
Robert, you cannot reason with a shill. This guy IS a shill. The only solution to a guy like that is to ban him. He is NOT here for discussion, he is here to disrupt and ridicule. That is his purpose. That is what he is paid to do.
I know you mean well but unfortunately Microsoft has a long history of taking advantage of those who mean well. That is what going on here Robert and that is why I began to post.
“Where on Earth do you get the idea that no companies sell netbooks with GNU/Linux?”
First, just to find Linux you have to dig around the surplus market in China or have you found a more local outlet? Second, the claim was ARM based Linux and there doesn’t seem to be any ARM based Linux notebooks actually for sale anywhere, much less with a history to prove the product viability.
“M$ gave SCOG millions of dollars to continue its SCOG v World suits”
MS and Sun both purchase licenses from SCO, which was authorized to sell them, for Unix System V, IIRC. The paranoid folk in the Linux club has chosen to assume that any money that SCO came by in the course of their normal business was just under the table financing off the SCO vs IBM lawsuit. That seems rather silly to me, but obviously not to you. In any case there is no actual evidence of that being the case.
“Robert, you cannot reason with a shill. This guy IS a shill. The only solution to a guy like that is to ban him. He is NOT here for discussion, he is here to disrupt and ridicule. That is his purpose. That is what he is paid to do”
Mr. Bear, I am getting rather tired of your pointless tirades. You seem to be just another one of the helpless computer wannabes that hang around Linux because they think it makes them look technically sophisticated. You cringe whenever anything logical is presented that you cannot dismiss with your sneers and jibes. I consider it a real victory to note that you have abandoned the potty talk since you do seem to understand how it was showing you to be just another noisy no-nothing.
Up until my retirement, I was a principal developer/software engineer for a very large software company that is a significant competitor to Microsoft in several product areas. I have also worked on projects where we were in cooperation with Microsoft. I am definitely not paid to post my opinions and assessments here.
I am amused by the typical reaction of you folk to any criticism at all, watching you run about and shout “Shill!”, “Astroturfer”, and similar epithets, “plonking” and banning participation of such things that are outside your ability to cope. With your head constantly in the sand, your image should be that of an ostrich rather than a penguine.
The APA for the sell of the business to Caldera included restrictions on changing anything to do with existing licencees. SCOG ignored that when selling a licence to SUN and M$. The court ordered some of the money collected refunded to Novell. Novell still has not settled with SUN/Oracle or M$ over the matter. They do not have valide licences for some of the stuff unless they make a deal with Novell. That could have been part of M$ + Novell deal.
You must have missed this link. 94 articles on a ton of devices from many suppliers. They sell them elsewhere, not in North American big box retailers.
The best way to assess the presence of GNU/Linux on web clients is by a scientific survey rather than web stats from unknown servers or single sites (both cannot be assumed to represent the universe). IDC does that and have the numbers. Just pay them $4500… They did state that GNU/Linux was at 3% many years ago so the 1% number could only be true if there was a serious decline in usage. I have not seen that. Have you?
This is what IDC reported in 2007 at LinuxWorld: CAGR 17% and share was 3.8 million paid licences shipped, compared to 126.5 million for that other OS (these are paid new licence shipments). That’s 3% in 2005. They show 17% p.a. growth for GNU/Linux compared to 12% growth for that other OS. That completely ignores the non-paid. Non-paid, for FLOSS is huge. I would say it is much larger than paid for GNU/Linux. Those projections, which are only three years old and done by world-class experts come to 15 million paid licence shipments today (2010, 4.3% of shipped PCs). While people are retiring that other OS after a few years. I would bet most GNU/Linux machines last twice as long just because the OS is not bloated. BTW, that chart on the fifth page shows that other OS shipping 202 (corrected from 248, thanks to Amicus_Curious) million licences.70% of 350 is 245, so they were reasonably close all those years ago (3). Ballmer says non-paid that other OS is there largest competitor. I would say GNU/Linux is doing well.
Now we can argue about paid/non-paid. Ballmer says they sell about 70 licences for 25 illegal copies so about 3:1 exists. I would bet GNU/Linux is much higher than 3:1 because it is perfectly legal and encouraged to copy (GPL: four freedoms – use, copy, examine and modify). I know non-geeks usually do not even attempt to install an OS but geeks often install on PCs not their own, so it may be a wash. If we use 3:1 then 45 million non-paid licences of GNU/Linux will be used in 2010 for a total of 60 million new installations. 60/350X100= 17% share of new machines. Since they last longer, the actual share could be double.
There you have it, my latest analysis. If anyone wants to buy IDC’s latest analysis, please sneak us some details…
Lpbbear, immature and wrong as ever, you twisted my words around to mean what you wanted to read, but not what I actually wrote. A pattern that is unlikely to be broken, but I enjoy the challenge.
Try to read this slowly. People are purchasing devices that run Linux completely by accident with zero concept of what OS the device actually uses or what it does in the background. Now read that sentence again, four more times. They aren’t choosing Linux. If the device is running Linux, it’s entirely hidden to them behind a custom interface that they wouldn’t even remotely equate with a computer operating system. Linux isn’t even doing anything except creating a low cost platform to run a client application on top. It’s that client application that does the work of making the device do what the customer wants.
For your idiotic scenario to play out, people would actually have to pick up a box and see the word “Linux” and then make the choice to purchase said device based on this reason. Newsflash: They aren’t.
“You must have missed this link. 94 articles on a ton of devices from many suppliers. They sell them elsewhere, not in North American big box retailers”
We need to settle on some terms and define a few things, Robert. It seems we are not always talking about the same thing. Take, for instance, the lead item in your cite. It reads:
“This is probably so far the coolest looking ARM Powered laptop to be released broadly on the market. The first ARM Cortex A9 based laptop. Runs an optimized Android OS with custom web browser from Opera Mobile and I am guessing, the full Chrome browser for ARM may be able to run on this eventually as well. This laptop is being released right now for around 299€ or $299 with WiFi and a bit more for the version with built-in 3G modem”
For one thing, it is newly released, within the past month or so and is not in wide distribution. Second, it is priced above the low priced products in the netbook line, so there is not any price advantage to offset the low performance. It is a netbook, though, and it is a fair go to see how it does in competition with the rest.
Most of the other items relate to smartbooks or the Citrix terminals that I do not really think are competitors in the netbook or laptop product markets. In those areas, the platform used by the device is not a significant element of the product image and so there is no Windows vs Linux issue there to begin with. If you want to say that these companies are making a profit from selling devices with Linux embedded inside, go ahead. I agree with you that they are. That has no bearing on the Windows vs Linux situation, though.
“There you have it, my latest analysis. If anyone wants to buy IDC’s latest analysis, please sneak us some details…”
Well, Robert, that would violate the IDC terms and conditions and would open the violator to being sued. IDC has made a lot of predictions in the last 20 years or so regarding Linux growth and not much has come to fruition, so believe what you will. I am somewhat curious to know just who is paying for the Linux licenses and who is being paid?
“Those projections, which are only three years old and done by world-class experts come to 15 million paid licence shipments today (2010, 4.3% of shipped PCs). ”
Somehow I do not see any numbers here, just some graphs. Did you simply scale the drawing with a ruler? I would question the validity of that.
Regardless of the accuracy of the base numbers, you are misapplying the factors. If the base was 3.8 as you suggest, with the CAGR of 17% that IDC claims, then the total today would be about 7.1 million, not 15. Of course the whole thing is suspect based on the questionable values take initially.
“BTW, that chart on the fifth page shows that other OS shipping 248 million licences.70% of 350 is 245, so they were reasonably close all those years ago ”
Your ruler must have slipped here, Robert. Without even using a ruler, I can tell that, from the chart, the IDC projection for Windows in 2010 is 200 million, not 248, and where are you picking up the “70% of 350″ factor? You are trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat, I think.
The rest of your “analysis” consists of such rapid handwaving that it is not even worth pointing out how vaporous your arguments have become.
“People are purchasing devices that run Linux completely by accident with zero concept of what OS the device actually uses or what it does in the background.”
Which is another way of saying that the OS under the hood is not an important factor in the product marketing of whatever is at issue. I, of course, completely agree with that. One of my marketing classes was on the concept of “advantage” in the sense of what can you use to best promote your product in a market. There are two kinds of such advantages. The first is what is called “participative” advantage which means the set of features, functions, and benefits that you must have to even participate in the market. Basically your product has to meet minimum performance expectations. The second is what is called “comparative” advantage which means the characteristics of your product that differentiate it positively from your competitor’s product and would cause your target customer to buy your product instead of the other.
They likened participative advantage to the tableware used in a restaurant. You have to have knives, forks, spoons, dishes, etc., in order to serve a meal. Without these, you are at a disadvantage, of course, but you cannot gain much of an advantage regardless of the quality of these items. If you are serving steak dinners and you use aged beef, you have a comparative advantage over a competitor with tougher meat to cook. It is an expense, but it gives you an edge.
Windows on a new laptop, notebook, or desktop computer is a strong participative advantage in the broad PC market. Comparative advantages come mostly from the package hardware in terms of speed, capacity, and styling and everyone uses the same “forks”, i.e. Windows. Apple tries to one-up the Wintel suppliers with enhanced styling and panache and has succeeded in many cases. The Mac OS is part of that image.
Linux suffers substantially in competition as a sort of Apple antithesis. They only have the cost of forks to set them apart and have garnered a loser sort of image from previous attempts to sell Linux computers below prices for Windows computers as a sort of entry level thing. While that may appeal to a techophobe, i.e. more bang for a buck, it registers as “low price, low quality” on most other people. If a computer doesn’t have Windows and has Linux instead, people are suspicious and feel they are being shorted.
The world is producing 350 million PCs and that other OS runs on so many. Ballmer’s chart shows 70% run paid licences.
You are correct, I should have written 202 (200+50-48, I measured from the wrong end…). The conclusion is still correct. IDC knows what it does.
IDC put a kink in the curve at 2006. I did not. I think that shows their data-points, 2004 and 2006.
If you know IDC’s NDA, then have you paid the money and read their report? Yes, or no, does IDC think GNU/Linux is growing rapidly?
Amicus_Curious wrote, “If a computer doesn’t have Windows and has Linux instead, people are suspicious and feel they are being shorted.”
ROFL! I have introduced thousands of people to GNU/Linux and only one person ever suggested such a thing. “Why are you pushing Linux? You seem to have an agenda!”, he said rather abruptly. I replied, “That’s what the contract calls for.” That startled him but he understood and became one of my power users. He got me to install a laser printer on his thin client and hook up his wife’s notebook to the system so she could be his secretary. She used Word and he used OpenOffice.org. They both found the system fast and productive. He was one of several people who told me how amazing visitors to the school found the IT system. That system is still running smoothly years later.
Where I live, almost everyone cares about price. My wife travelled 700 miles to another city to buy a car once, just because it was cheaper there. It was a Lexus, not some cheap junk. I buy in bulk and ship food North. No one here laughs. They all do it one way or another. In Winnipeg are many big box retailers whose chief advantage over competition is the ability to sell profitably at a lower price. No one thinks their products are of a lower quality for being less expensive.
In IT, particularly, since OEMs are in China or nearby and there are many modes of shipping, importers and many retail chains, it is not unusual to find widely varying prices in a particular product at any instant. IT moves so rapidly that it is hard to be instantly at a lower price than a competitor. One of my favourite suppliers has a policy, inform them of a lower regular advertised price and they will match it. That way, their customers do not have to have so much overhead searching, travelling, visiting. They have a one-stop supplier. It is not unusual to save 10-15% on total shopping list that way. On individual items, I have been able to save up to 50% by comparing prices. http://www.pricegrabber.ca is one of my favourite sites. You can even shop for XP there but GNU/Linux always wins. Prices range from $85 to $2941 for XP but I usually pay $0 for Debian GNU/Linux. Why do they still offer that ten-year-old stuff?
“Mr. Bear, I am getting rather tired of your pointless tirades.”
Like I really give a (insert your favorite 4 letter nasty here)!
“Up until my retirement, I was a principal developer/software engineer for a very large software company that is a significant competitor to Microsoft in several product areas. I have also worked on projects where we were in cooperation with Microsoft. I am definitely not paid to post my opinions and assessments here.”
I figured you would eventually have to reveal some of your background if I kept pushing. So you’re a retired “principal developer/software engineer” that not only worked with a company “that is a significant competitor to Microsoft” but you and perhaps your company worked “on projects where we were in cooperation with Microsoft” which means you worked as a Microsoft contractor or partner.
This DOES make you a shill because your past income AND likely current retirement income was and is tied to the fortunes of Microsoft. Perhaps you have options or some other retirement income generating revenue that depends upon the success of Microsoft or the company you worked for in the past also depends upon the survival of Microsoft.
As I mentioned before a shill is a person who is “directly paid by M$ as an employee, maybe they work for some off shoot contractor that handles PR or gets a major portion of their revenue from an association with M$. Maybe they are just a shareholder who wants to see if they can pump their stock prices by attacking perceived competition. Maybe they work as a IT support person and their only narrow minded ability is in supporting Windows. Or….even more remotely they are a 13 year old who thinks they know everything”.
One of those is you…..to a tee.
Now were I retired I think I could find much better uses of my time than wasting it posting on Windows blogs. Apparently you have nothing better to do than spend your time uploading to a Linux blog vacuous non factual posts permeated with a noticeable arrogant condescending tone that likely mirrors your actual personality in real life. I’m sure there was a DLTDHYITA party when you retired.
You’re a shill. Not a single doubt about it.
Enough mud slinging! Let’s enjoy the day and or discuss information technology etc.
This morning when I sat down at this PC, I saw a tiny spider had spun a huge web that glistened in the sunlight streaming in the window. It was such a beautiful web, I left it alone with that tiny spider sitting in the middle waiting for a fly that did not come. After a few hours I observed the spider eating the web to recycle. When he was done, I scooped him up on a piece of paper and took him to a pile of boxes in the corner. There he could find some little creatures to eat eventually. Good luck to him.
I also gathered some ripe dandelion seed to plant in a pot. I love dandelion greens in the winter.
Lunch was pea soup with carrots and onions. It is a great big sunny day here.
“If you know IDC’s NDA, then have you paid the money and read their report? Yes, or no, does IDC think GNU/Linux is growing rapidly?”
AFAIK, IDC has projected gains for Linux, but they focus on servers and that is where all the action is vis-a-vis Linux. The company that I worked for has Linux products and even set up development centers in China to work with the Red Star stuff. We also have major product lines for the several major unix strains and, of course, Windows Server versions.
I have seen some of the IDC reports and I also know that the survey information that is actually used for business decisions is much more expensive than theirs. IDC is kind of a popular press in terms of broad market surveys. When you want detailed, hard info, you commission a specific study and that goes for 6 to 7 figures. I think that financial analysts and such are the main targets for IDC, not manufacturing companies.
The one other thing that is important to mention is that market success is considered to be tremendous when your business is twice or more as large as your biggest competitor. In regard to Linux, the ratio is off the scale and whether Linux has 1% or 5% or even 10% does not matter at all in terms of business strategy. After all, if your strategy is giving you a 90% share, are you going to lose confidence in it if it sinks to 89%?
That is not the issue. Linux actually represents a potential market erosion for Microsoft and could limit the rate that the PC business is growing for them or even cause it to decline. The things that are taught in business schools say that a product producer has to increase the value of their product to offset such things that might cause a market to stagnate or even decline. People pay for value and so you beat “free” by offering something that has a perceived value to the buyer that is greater than its price. You do not seem to understand that.
“ROFL! I have introduced thousands of people to GNU/Linux and only one person ever suggested such a thing.”
Well, consider that you are on the spot, selling them what you think are the advantages of Linux and probably attacking Windows at the same time. That will work, one on one, but it will take a very long time to touch a few hundred million people. When the buyer is standing in front of the product display, all they have to read is what the manufacturer presents, which in the past has been nothing at all for Linux.
Excellent post, except for that stuff at the end…
The fact that the share of that other OS is shrinking and the share of GNU/Linux is growing means something else is happening in spite of little/no shelf-space for GNU/Linux. It could be a couple of things:
I think M$ cannot herd cats once the number and kind gets over some threshold. IT changes and M$ cannot control all of it. M$ is so large and complex and its products so complex that they cannot serve all needs. I don’t know anyone who wants one more feature on any product of M$. They are sort of comfortable with XP warts and all and have rejected Vista and now “7″. M$ is going to have to deal with shrinking share. What the end-point will be, I know not but the world would be a better place if they had 1/N share where N was some small integer like 3 or 4. They would have to compete on price/performance like everyone else.
Well, Microsoft has perhaps the smallest non-zero integer there is already. I guess you would prefer a larger integer?
Another B-School maxim is the notion of maturing product markets. The PC is giving way on the bottom to smart phones and appliance devices like smart books that satisfy some people’s entire need for computing capability. On the upper end, it really has nothing left to conquer in that it can play, in the highest definition, intricate video games, simulations, and motion pictures and televison shows while at the same time handling VOIP phone systems and doing the kid’s homework. There is certainly the prospect of market saturation looming in Microsoft’s future and that is why they are taking positions in so many different areas such as video games and even MP3 players. Even telephones. You can criticize their success in those areas and many of their initiatives turn to dust, but they remain as the standard by which all others are measured in the personal computer platform product space. The laws of marketing science say that is not going to change. Ever.
“The PC is giving way on the bottom to smart phones and appliance devices like smart books that satisfy some people’s entire need for computing capability. On the upper end, it really has nothing left to conquer in that it can play, in the highest definition, intricate video games, simulations, and motion pictures and televison shows while at the same time handling VOIP phone systems and doing the kid’s homework.”
Wow, something I agree with you on! (Bear looks out the window to see if the ground is shaking and the sky is falling)
I think this something Robert thinks as well as evidenced by his posts about Arm in the marketplace. My (our) generation is “used” to the PC style of computing but the newer generations are used to the “game console” way of doing things. They grew up using little computing devices so things like smart phones, web pads etc. seem normal to them. Microsoft is not in position to handle this well and many of their attempts so far have blown up in their face.
“There is certainly the prospect of market saturation looming in Microsoft’s future and that is why they are taking positions in so many different areas such as video games and even MP3 players. Even telephones.”
Actually I think its not a future thing for Microsoft, its here. Vista bombed big time. Win7/Vista2 is only serving to replace failed systems. The ribbon interface in MS Office is mostly despised. Many users are completely happy with WinXP. A portion of those failed older Windows systems are moving to Apple and Linux. Microsoft has saturated the US/Euro market with older versions of Windows. The new markets are the areas where money is much tighter. These markets are just as likely to go for Linux as they are Windows so market penetration and dominance is going to be more uphill for Microsoft than they are used to. As well the same device thing you mentioned is happening in these countries also so its not like the Win95 Dot Com heyday for Microsoft where its all PCs with no smart devices competing with them. Microsoft is increasingly finding itself trapped by its own PC monopoly. They would love to slide out from under it and have tried with products like the XBox, KIN, Zune etc. but they are running into very well established competitors who have had those markets for a long time. They can’t bully companies like Sony, Nintendo etc. like they were used to doing in the young PC market. Things are changing and the traditional PC market is eroding out from under Microsoft. Sure, they will do their usual dirty PC period tactics like bribe some slimeball phony consumer advocate group to go after Google here, or try to buy out another competitor there but all of that is diluting their energy from their main strength in the PC market.
Its inevitable, they will eventually fail because their own monopoly doomed them to fail.