| |||||||||||||
The Future of Linux is Google (PCWorld)The Future of Linux is Google (PCWorld)Posted Nov 18, 2009 6:02 UTC (Wed) by set (guest, #4788)In reply to: The Future of Linux is Google (PCWorld) by mikov Parent article: The Future of Linux is Google (PCWorld)
Well, Im not sure any statistical 'facts' have emerged in this thread, but I could offer up an anecdote. Of the 10 or so people I know personally that have Linux installed on computers/laptops in their home, 7 of them use it exactly as a desktop. ie. their primary or only OS for everyday computing. Ive been using it that way for 15 years now. I *am* a hobbiest, but my hobby computers are legacy unix machines, like DEC, HP, Apollo, Sun, SGI, etc.
Now, none of these people have ever purchased the Linux they run, so they are hard to count. Their ages span a range from 40 something *cough* to gradeschool, and they all live in midwestern US states.
(Log in to post comments)
The Future of Linux is Google (PCWorld) Posted Nov 18, 2009 9:32 UTC (Wed) by dmk (subscriber, #50141) [Link]
linux on the desktop has a future. or at least the possibility of a future outside the niche.
in my opinion, the adoption of the linux desktop is hindered atm because of the peer-to-peer support thingy. people want to talk in their coffee-breaks about there problems with the machine. and they need their co-workers to give them tip's like: "when my machine stutters i just wiggle the mouse two times left and then two times right and all's well...
the typical desktop user at the moment (those which have, for example, problems of grasping the simplest concepts, like "programs"... yes, there a different entities on that screen!) is getting more and more replaced by a generation that is used to computers and internet.
for those it will be more natural to get support on the internet via mail, web-search and social-networks. this will benefit the linux-desktop.
on the same time, software development in one firm has serious scalability problems. look at how big ms is. this is not sound. they are bound to have overhead-issues and inefficencies.
|
|||||||||||||