[CLUG] Desktop Linux Share Overtaking Macintosh

[Mark Twomey]

On Feb 14, 2004, at 10:09 PM, Adam Beecher wrote:

> Interestingly, the word "all" doesn't appear in any of my messages on 
> this
> topic.

You're right it doesn't you use the term most "most" but you're 
definition of most as in..

> some might say most of America

appears to mean less than 50-60%
Which really isn't most, defined as a large indefinite number, at all 
now is it?

>  Which is a rather amusing irony, since your use of false statistics
> seems to demonstrate that you feel the need to spin to prove your 
> point.

Hold on a sec do you think they are false or do you know that they are 
false? If so how?

> Which kind of proves mine. Well done!

Oh feel free to declare victory at whatever you want, if it helps get 
you through the day then it can't be all that bad.

Later Peter wrote:

> I think the important bit is that it ought to make it marginally
> easier to persuade authors of software currently only available
> for Windows and Mac to port it to Linux, or companies currently
> supplying drivers for Mac or Windows to supply them for Linux too.

True but, I'm really not even sure if the Macintosh is a factor to 
Linux support, Linux having it's overall volume on x86. If anything I'd 
imagine it's probably harder to justify getting people to port to the 
PPC ISA and OS X from Windows since there was a time not so long ago 
that Mac market share collapsed. Years of "macintosh-is-dying", which 
was the tagline in the slashdot article posted at the start of this 
thread, has negatively impacted the idea of the Mac as a sustainable 
market while the perception at the moment is that Linux is growing at 
some phenomenal rate so there's bound to be money there. Of course if 
there's money actually there or not is another question, Linux has a 
culture of free, even as in beer , so being asked to cough up for a 
commercial program might not go down so well with you're target user 
base.

Then Adam wrote:

> Not my cup of tea, but still. I think Apple's decision to go the 
> FreeBSD
> route made a fair contribution to decisions likes this too. It all 
> adds up.

Perhaps for somethings, but not for this one. It doesn't say anywhere 
that you need Darwin installed to run this demo. It's a Carbonised app 
which uses OpenGL, nothing overly BSDly about that. But yeah having 
Darwin opens the Mac up to a whole world of software it wouldn't have 
without it.

Followed by Ruairí who wrote:

> Though not necessarily under a Free or Open Source license
> unfortunately.

Well if you look at EPIC's business model you see a massive multi-year 
development overhead offset by games sales and technology licensing.
I don't see why they should be expected to Free or Open Source the 
technology right out of the gate, when it's that technology which is 
what pay's the bills and allows them to continue working.

If the Open Source community really has a problem with there not being 
an open high performance 3D game engine, then let them do what they've 
always done.. let them develop their own. A good open source engine 
would probably help game developers no end as not only would it drive 
costs down but they can use the community process to drive the 
technology forward and spend their time working on making their game 
fun & unique. Of course the reason we haven't seen a high volume engine 
like this so far is that game engine development is ugly as hell and is 
so complex that only a handful of people are any good at it.

>  If a proliferation of commercial closed-source Linux
> software and drivers becomes available, you will eventually see the gap
> between the free-for-download Linux, and the boxed-set Linux distros
> widen in terms of functionality.

Yup. We're starting to see this already. Sun's Java Desktop System 
coming out of the box with stuff that isn't free and some high end 
hardware vendors shipping proprietary drivers with their kit. It's 
getting more common and it's moving down stream.

>  It just
> will not be feasible for companies targeting home users / small
> businesses to open source.

Pretty much. If it comes down to paid support or the mail list people 
at home will usually go for the mail list. Assuming the mail list is 
any good that is. In a corporate environment people like having paid 
support as it helps cover their ass if everything goes wrong.

> Given this situation and human nature, I wonder how long it will take
> before Linux developers become disillusioned enough to switch to the
> (less functional, but more Free) *BSD communities?

You know this influx of proprietary stuff is going to happen, indeed 
it's already started but regardless of how it turns out I don't think 
people will switch. You'll always have some distro(s) that will be free 
from top to bottom, and instead of jumping to BSD they'll just hang out 
there instead.

Mark.