To understand the markets you have to know something about magicians, and how they work.
The magician will typically flourish something or gesture expansively with his right hand, while surreptitiously moving his left hand inside his jacket to remove or hide the next object to be palmed, so the trick with magicians is never look at what they want you to look at, and all of a sudden everything becomes quite clear, it is not magic, it is pop psychology, body language and misdirection.
You have to do the same thing with Linux on the desktop, comparing Open Office to MS Office is like watching the hand that the magician wants you to watch, you'll never get the trick and most importantly you'll never grok that the trick is social engineering, not magic.
I'll cite a case in point.
A few weeks ago a co-worker expressed an interest in buying a computer, going on the internet, etc.
As you do, I politely offered to help out.
I have enough bits lying around to have built him a pretty decent computer, around the 2.5 GHz CPU mark, none of it proprietary components, and I could have installed Linux (prolly Mepis, my personal favourite) or a warezed copy of XP+SP2 if he wanted to play games, maybe even dual boot.
Given current exchange rates I could have done this for about 100 US bucks, maybe 200 if we threw in a new fast hard disk and some new RAM, was he interested? no...
What he was interested in, and what he did, was go to Pissy World, and take out a credit agreement on an in-house branded piece of overpriced junk, which naturally enough came preinstalled with windows and and bunch of other rubbish.
If you think this was about buying a computer, or choosing between Operating Systems, then like the OLPC crowd, you are watching the magicians wrong hand...
This is about MONEY, more specifically debt, which is just another way of saying "power" and "influence" and "control"
The actual money doesn't matter, the money is just a vehicle, and what that vehicle provides is another individual with another lieu to big business, in addition to his rolling mobile phone contract and so on, he now has become entwined into a credit contract for some hardware and software which itself becomes a rolling upgrade contract cycle.
In this scenario where the actual money doesn't matter, all you need to do is ensure that the ticket price is high enough that the preferred method of entry is through the preferred turnstile, eg engaging in said rolling contractual relationships.
0.00 US$ Linux distros don't cut it, there is no "leverage" to be used there against the consumer, free as in beer or free as in speech discussions still don't really address this issue, they are still watching the magicians wrong hand.
For linux to enter the year of the linux desktop that we have all been waiting for, linux will have to be transformed, from free beer / speech into something that can be leveraged into a price point where the customer ostenibly has a choice between paying the ticket price in cash, but is penalised for this and encouraged to enter instead into the rolling contractual relationship.
The "free" computers idea that gets resurrected every now and again is an example of why linux fails, the idea there was that the users eyeballs would pay for and leverage the component cost of the equipment, it never stood a chance, because it was competing against a model where everything else, and I mean EVERYTHING from banks through credit card companies through insurance / warranty deals through hardware and microsoft all played the consumer into "voluntarily" signing up for the rolling contractual relationship business model, in which they become an asset which is tracked and analysed and traded and manipulated.
Linux will make it to the desktop along with the free PC and DN Forever, eg never.
Having said that, Linux adoption will continue, just as people like myself who have no mortgage, no overdraft, no hire purchase, no credit card debt, and no other rolling contract debts, like using linux wherever possible, because it is free not as in beer or speech, but free as in not leveraged against me, there will always be a core of people who feel this way, linux becomes what Karl Marx would have described as a "Political" choice, the workers control the means of production.
Microsoft et al like to stylise Linux and open source as a dangerous virus, we are talking about a subversive communist operating system and software, not a good old american capitalist one (capitalist doesn't mean monetary profit, capitalism means using monetary profit to leverage control, the money is the magicians right hand, control is his left, the one palming the cards) which means free software is dangerous, the enemy, a disease that in itself has no power, but which if it was allowed to eat into market share could sap the power and leverage of the incumbent market choices...
Linux is fairly safe and "benign", only those with market leverage and power can bring it to a point where it seriously impacts the incumbents, and by exercising that leverage you are by definition depleting your leverage and transferring all your power back to the individuals... not going to happen, not while there are capitalists in the same market to feed upon the prey.
Windows is a capitalist OS.
Linux is a anarcho syndicalist OS.
Mac is a communist OS.(chairman jobs' little red book)
but there are Linux solutions with recurring revenue deals and even with particular distro lock-in for the average joe (Dell, HP, Oracle Linux etc.). old news in the server realm, about a year in the desktop realm and let's see how these internet appliances with their subscriptions do...
Linus T. supports all those political-economic models
spend $350,000 for your fully hardware and software certified/supported server loaded with Redhat and Oracle connected to your SAN attached devices with certified drivers, fulfilling half a dozen certification matrices so your support contracts stay valid, that's what it looks like.
my brain was in "work mode" when I made that reply, but in "home mode" there are examples at the low end of a particular flavor or build of Linux being "locked in" with a hardware purchase. sure, I could change it, but lose some support or maintenance agreement. Really low end would be my $40 Linksys wireless "router" which runs Linux and I could have altered it but then warranty would have been kaput (not that it would matter much).
Anarcho syndicalist. I like that. Different projects doing their own thing under their own terms, still driven by profit (or desire for better software), voluntarily coming together to make a complete OS with the recognition that cooperation is better than not.
it's an old and valid intellectual excercise, pick a subject and then define it in terms not native to it, quite often you get valuable insights and perspectives for free.
it's a bit like the old one about harvesting ova from (female) aborted fetuses, the whole idea was progressing nicely until a reporter asked "what will you say when the child asks you why you murdered its mother?"
As I get older and more experienced in human nature I come to understand ever more why Marx claimed that everything had a political aspect to it, he was right, everything that involves human beings will have some political aspect, because we are political animals.
Science fiction portrays us as warlike, blah blah blah, but the outstanding trait of the human race is the propensity to invoke politics whenever possible.
(by politics I do not mean democrat/republican etc)
As I get older and more experienced in human nature I come to understand ever more why Marx claimed that everything had a political aspect to it, he was right, everything that involves human beings will have some political aspect, because we are political animals.
Well, that's because his collectivist ideals couldn't stand up to economic scrutiny so he conveniently did away with that part of his theory and made the claim you cite.
Frame it as 'us against them' and you totally change the nature of the debate. Then you can appeal to emotions instead of logic and push ideas that don't necessarily have to fit into reality.
How does your friend going into debt relate to the Linux market share? You point to a lot of stuff but seem to say absolutely nothing that makes a very cohesive statement that ties it all together.
My sister bought a Gateway PC without consulting me first.
Linux is a smaller player in the OS distribution market.
Some people lie.
To sell the Linux desktop, you need to leverage the retail stores and not the end user.
The problem is, Linux is pushed as free-as-in-beer. Unfortunately, damn near EVERYTHING is free with Linux -- kernel and software. This creates two problems.
Hop on over to a Best Buy, Fry's, PC World or other major computer store and look at all the packaged software aisles. Hundreds of titles that the store will never sell to a person with a Linux computer, so they will never make a dime on that. Selling Linux PCs would be slitting their own throats.
Users see all that wonderful software in the aisles, but can pretty much never use any of it since it isn't for their Linux machine. The fact that a lot of it is available online is only now starting to have an impact.
There are markets for selling Linux and related software. I'd have happily paid $20 for a version of Kubuntu that had legal, configured support for DVD playback, MP3s, WMV, Real Media and the rest. Figuring out all the little places to enable that is a pain.
Amarok won't play MP3? Load this package. Oh, TunePimp won't fingerprint MP3s, well load this package. Wait, K3B won't decode or encode MP3s or WMAs? That is a different package. A half-hour worth of annoying because I didn't know all the places to do this until I bumped into them.
I'd also happily pay retail cost for good speech recognition software, as well as a dozen of other packages. Stores need to be able to sell software, so the development and delivery infrastructure can be maintained.
All that being said, eventually Linux will rule the known computing universe and Windows and Mac will disappear. As software moves to a commodity, it becomes a prime target for FOSS. It is long past time for the OS (and basic Office software) to move to FOSS, so companies can focus their energies on improving and innovating on applications.
Imagine what the likes of Apple and Microsoft could do if all the resources now dedicated to making their respective OS went into application software and services.
I'd have happily paid $20 for a version of Kubuntu that had legal, configured support for DVD playback, MP3s, WMV, Real Media and the rest. Figuring out all the little places to enable that is a pain.
Yes, what a terrible pain. *cough*Medibuntu*cough*
Don't take this as overly aggressive or anything, but who gives a shit about stores being able to sell software? Personally, I don't like going to computer stores because there's always some geek with an overdeveloped sense of self-importance trying to tell me what I need when I've given him the specs and want him to tell me what he has that matches those specs, then taking what I've had to arm wrestle from the guy to a bored-as-piss cashier who's going through the "Do you want a credit card?" script, and finally having some person at the door thinking that my presence in the store gives him the right to search my person for stolen shit. Should I really care if that store needs to sell software?
What they need to do is give a shit about their customers. There are many viable economic models for all sorts of technology that are available to companies who give a shit about their customers. I'm getting tired of all these self-absorbed MBAs demanding a business model from us. They've got the MBAs, why can't they come up with the business model? We're just programmers....
Guy, that was a very interesting article to read. It flowed nicely, and wasn't terribly short. :) Thank you. I think you hit upon the larger problem but didn't go into it. Why do people need to be in debt to feel valued? Is there another way? Can we sell large masses of people on it?
I won't take it the wrong way. I once felt the same way. Then I worked in retail and support and learned the truth.
You and I are in the minority. The vast majority of people who use computers are clueless about how things work and need stores. They need a place to go where they can be told what to buy. Lots of people are not interested in details, reasons or exercising their brains at all. They just want someone to tell them "do this" and "buy this".
It'll take a generation before the majority of people are comfortable with online advise and online software sales.
Corny as it is, this sums it up nicely.
"The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."
Classic concern troll argument, complete with the singular anecdote to prove a general point.
The problem is that the basic argument is based on a product with a price point which requires rotating credit.
But when the price of a product drops below the impulse buy point an inversion occurs. Slashing prices and deriving revenue streams from other sources becomes the order of the day.
When a "good enough" PC or Laptop drops to sub $200 levels as the Wallmart PC or the 2G version EEE laptop things change. Tech support and repair becomes a silly proposition. Even a $50 OS is a ridiculous proposition.
The trick when we hit this point is to make the units "practically" disposable. The first company/retailer to offer a "recycling" service which combines a guaranteed wipe of all personal information, proper recycling/disposal of the associated batteries and donation of the "recycled" laptops to charity (schoolchildren, the third world, or goodwill stores), will make a fortune. At that point fixing your laptop will consist of removing your personal info via the removable SD card or NAS backup, and exchanging it at the local retailer.
Consider if Costco followed this tactic w/ ASUS or VIA. In exchange for a laptop grade membership you get an EEE grade laptop (w/ a Costco.com link in the middle of the desktop) w/ guaranteed replacement within reason and cheap upgrades. Toss in discounted internet service and a FON style wireless sharing deal. Add special offers on bags, accessories and software services. Of course, you have to maintain your membership, and visit the stores to buy accessories and do recycles. Sounds like a massive revenue stream to me. Hell, with a storage cage Starbucks could follow the same model.
Linux will make it to the desktop along with the free PC and DN Forever, eg never.
And yet in 2007 Technocrat has run 4 articles about OEMs selling Linux preloaded and offering support. So I suppose Linux may never have the market share of other operating systems, or perhaps it will not make it to the Big Box retailers, but if so, it seems best to define your argument in those terms. Linux is on the desktop.
As for market share, I of late have been feeling particularly snarky towards those who still choose Windows: Let them eat cake.
Another point on market share: until just a few years ago, the conventional wisdom was that Apple was doomed because it didn't have the market share of its rivals. This despite the fact that all of its old rivals have long since been bought out or gone bankrupt. Think IBM (nee Lenovo), Compaq, and Tandy. HP has sold and re-formed its PC business at least once.
Turns out that staying power had more to do with net profit than market share. Having the highest market share is worth nothing if you don't have the funding to sustain it.
In the open source world, funding/sponsorship is analagous to profit. In either case you need good leadership, and mindshare counts for a lot too. I am confident that Linux will outlast Windows, because the latter has more fragile sponsorship. If Microsoft goes under or abandons Windows, only Microsoft can bring it back. If 99% of Linux's developers go away, the remaining 1% can keep it going. And even if it is completely abandoned for a while, it has the potential to come back. Think of Mozilla, which went away long enough for IE to almost completely take over, but because of the Mozilla Foundation, had enough funding to launch a modern browser and a decent PR campaign.
Needless to say, I'm talking in terms of decades, not the latest Vista-vs.-Windows horse race.
No, Linux won't catch on for mass-market desktops because deep down, it just doesn't belong there.
Good server, though.
Stores just reflect marketplace reality. The price of the OS isnt't what throws them off. There is paid-for software for Linux, but there aren't enough desktops to makt it profitable to sell at retail.
In a nutshell, Linux won't hack it on the mass-market desktop because it's Unix. And that was never meant for mere muggles. Unix was created by Bell Labs scientists, back when a job at Bell Labs carried incredible prestige, for their own use. It tricked down to MIT and other 31337 engineering schools, and thence into the world of professional computer programmers. In the 1980s, if you really enjoyed writing code, you were probably into Unix. Now you can have Unix as Linux. But if you don't get your jollies writing in K&R -style syntax, fuggedaboutit.
The average Linux advocate remembers MS-DOS and Windows 3.0, and jokes about BSOD. Okay, Windows ME and the brand new ME-2 (Vista) are jokes too. But that's just a quality control issue. Windows XP is really very stable, if you don't push on things like 3D drivers (oops, in the kernel) or bad vendor-written wireless drivers (had that one too). But then Linux has drivers in the kernel too.
I've tried to live with Linux on the desktop. I'm also not a programmer -- I did a little fun coding in my youth, but that was FORTRAN and the like, pre-C days. Hell, COBOL is major fun by comparison. Nowadays I use Office tools (Access and Excel) to crunch data. I never learned to be a Unix sysadmin. So the perfectly natural, of course you do this, sorts of things that Linux developers always leave behind are just not obvious to me, and certainly not to the ordinary user. If something doesn't install right the first time, I'm generally stuck -- a guru or sysadmin might know how to add something like " -fW 3e8 31337 -jj 377" after a command, but not a normal desktop user.
And while I'm ranting, let me rant about drivers. Now there's a disaster. Remember, the primary purpose of Linux is to give Linux Torvalds access to lots of source code that he can hack. Life is about source code, not running code, right? Thus the most evil word in their dictionary is BLOB, a binary driver. In order to kill the blob monster, Linus routinely, gratuitously, changes the binary interfaces, so a compiled driver won't work with new kernels. This is supposed to force vendors to submit driver sources to him, so the kernel can accrete new driver sources like a black hole, growing ever more massive.
But it doesn't work. Not only are some drivers not available, but those that are don't always work. Take the blessed holy Ubuntu, "Linux for Humanoids". I spent two days torrenting-down the latest release 7.10. I burned the DVD and booted up my desktop PC, a bog-standard late-2005 Athlon with nVidia (6150/430) motherboard video, sound and Ethernet. Results? No sound, no Ethernet! Useless. Even t though older distros have worked in the same machine. I also have a purchased Mandriva 2008 Powerpack. I put it into my son's nVidia-based machine. Perfect -- Sound, Ethernet, 3D acceleration (proprietary!). But I installed it on my Intel Core 2 Duo/950 laptop and the sound's broken, Ethernet doesn't work, and the Wireless doesn't work. Plus the picture's off. Even though a few other distros have worked on it. You see, with Linux, to update a driver, you need a new kernel, which usually means a new release of the distro (unless you're a guru -- and btw I personally have built a lot of kernels over the years). And the new release breaks something else. Regression? Nope, haven't heard of it.
I'm frankly tired of the mess. I wish MINIX3 could be built into a real distro -- it puts kernels into userland. BSD and Solaris? Still Unix. Still designed for professional programmers. Oh the Mac! Sure, if you have good hand-eye coordination and want to buy Designer hardware. But I like to gradually update commodity hardware, not the Mac's forte for sure. So Windows XP is still the best choice. I stay away from its security disasters (LookOut Distress! and Internet Exploder), stay behind a NAT, and don't click on unknown attachments. And it works. I feel a little dirty using it but at least I get my work done.
"Unix was created by Bell Labs scientists, ... for their own use."
If this were true, then why did management only allow developing the system in exchange for the Troff and word processing system for generation of reports by office typists. This led to the creation of awk for data analysis by clerks, all the rest of the data processing tools and the shell. Subsequently, the "learn" system made it really easy for clerical users to use this self paced system to learn the basics of data processing and reporting.
So much for scientist's own use. The engineers also got their own tools like "dd" for acquiring chunks of communications systems data, "plot" for visual charting.
The power clerks got a whole lot of text based database tools like "join, split, sort, grep and refer" for bibliography.
And they all had "S" for statistical analysis.
By far the largest group of users at Bell Labs were the support clerks, without which, any group of scientists and engineers is doomed to spend the majority of their time, analysing, charting and documenting their results and conclusions, not researching and designing.
Any discerning user of Linux will find that all of these clerical tools are still available, many installed by default, and the others like the writers workbench, and "R" son of "S", available for download.
Thinking that the current fad of packaged GUI applications on a client/server node is the final personal computing milestone of what started at Bell Labs is a very narrow, dare I say MS centric, view point.
This attitude tends to make users lazy and not prone to developing innovative ideas and solutions within their own sphere of work.
Linux with its inclusion of all development paradigms, encourages the user to start thinking for themselves again, and its philosophy of continual development is restarting a stalled computing development process.
It is disruptive, and is creating the mess you complain about, but the idea is to move past the long out of date PC WIMP phase, and on to the all talking, all seeing, all reading, global grid computer with a proper ease of use human interface. MS is intent on throttling the future of computing for their own monetary gain. Your support is helping them do it.
I'd say that the anonymous coward's rant is pretty self-explanatory.
Let's get rid of GUIs; it's a Microsoft phase. Let's throw away MS Office and go to awk, sed, grep, and other Real Man tools, which a real man's Clerk can use!
And while we're at it, let's do away with CRT displays and PCs, and go back to punch cards. With awls as punches, cuneiform style. Or maybe machine-language programming with sense switches on the front of the CPU. Like real men.
Mr. AC, you may have worked at Bell Labs, but you didn't get a prize for user interface design.
I don't know why I'm an AC isdrip, my sign on is stomfi.
I think you missed my point. I did not say get rid of the GUI. I said that clerical tools were available to Bell Labs staff before the GUI or even the CRT (The teletypewriter (tty) was the interface). I also used the XEROX WIMP in 1976, and various UNIX clone GUIs in the 80s. These were fast even compared with today's Intel offerings. Use was also better in my opinion as icons were used as application elements and functions, and menus were pop up and pinnable on a 19 inch portrait screen.
Later on in my comment I include all paradigms. This includes the GUI, and I like to use the runrev IDE with it's own high level scripting language in combination with the shell, to create solutions that GUI users can use, yet can be changed by office workers simply by modifying the shell scripts.
My final point was that the WIMP is old, and the planned development, before MS hijacked all the money by selling cheap clones of the 80's GUI milestone over and over, was to have a computer grid of nodes connected to human interface devices.
Development funds were to be spent on making devices that humans could interact with as they would another human through voice, 3D recognition, and writing, getting rid of the antiquated keyboard and not so old mouse. The CPU was supposed to have been 128bits by '95 and 256 by 2000 so that microcode instructions could be long enough to handle the complexities.
But not the GUI.
One can see a lot of this delayed development taking place today on Cell architecture.
I'm not looking to argue about UI paradigms. I was very comfortable with the VMS command line. DECwindows was nice because it let me have multiple windows, each a VT220 emulator, running at once, and I'm a multitasking person. It also supported X Windows GUI apps, but that wasn't hugely appealing except for things that needed it, like document layout. (Yeah, the hard core guys used TeX or LaTeX, but I liked WYSIWYG DTP.)
What I'm really objecting to in Linux is not that it supports a command line, but that it's all intentionally cryptic. Some commands still want permissions displayed as an octal representation of a bitmask, fer cripes ache. In VMS, it was (W:R,G:RWE,U:RWED) -- a lot more mnemonic. Yeah, some Linux cases now are similar, but not always. As a command line system, Linux in 2007 is still harder to use than TENEX was in 1975 or VMS in 1978. It carries that Unix "boy's club" mentality.
That's not something inherent in the kernel, of course -- it's the whole Unix ecosystem that Linux includes. I think the essential APIs could be kept without the style; witness MacOS X. (I'm not a Mac lover though. Just not my personal style.) It's just too easy to prototype an app using a bitmask in the command line, so the programmer can test it without writing a good UI, and then leave it there.
What is interesting, is that it's easier to lock-in Linux then Windows. Simply by doing it the right way. For a monthly fee, they supply the hardware and software, if you want something upgraded, you take the computer back to the vendor, they install the upgrade, which may or may not change the monthly fee. What they don't give the end user is the root password, adding new software is done over the Internet, and you can only add what the vendor makes available, the installer scripts know the root password, so the user never needs it.
Thing is, 99.9999% of computer users would be happy with this arrangement, especially if the fee is low enough, say $24.95 a month. They would not care if they need to go back to the vendor, especially if the vendor was large enough, that the vendor has stores in most cities.
I don't think you should blame the magicians for doing the tricks, only the audience for not being able to see around them.
I don't see the correlation between debt and MS. That's a totally different topic, tangential at best.
Microsoft is where it is because society has let it become so. People like flashy logo's; they trust them. If you ask someone for a quarter with nothing in your hand, it's human nature to deny that person because it seems that the person is of lower value. You take the same person and stick a 100 dollar bill in his hand and suddenly people are more inclined to stop and give the person a quarter, simply because the person is now seemed to have higher value.
Perception of value and actual value are not a direct relationship. Put aside all the Linux technical barriers, if you stick MS in a box and sell it for 100-200 and stick a linux distro in a box and charge 20-30 bucks for it, place them side by side and suddenly MS will win every time. Why? Because people automatically assume that if something costs more, its worth more. Its human nature
Perhaps Linux simply needs a great PR department. A group that markets and sells Linux distros for a higher price, the extra money going into the services they provide; not the actual software. They need to combat the preception that free is lower value.
The truth about the linux desktop market share
To understand the markets you have to know something about magicians, and how they work.
The magician will typically flourish something or gesture expansively with his right hand, while surreptitiously moving his left hand inside his jacket to remove or hide the next object to be palmed, so the trick with magicians is never look at what they want you to look at, and all of a sudden everything becomes quite clear, it is not magic, it is pop psychology, body language and misdirection.
You have to do the same thing with Linux on the desktop, comparing Open Office to MS Office is like watching the hand that the magician wants you to watch, you'll never get the trick and most importantly you'll never grok that the trick is social engineering, not magic.
I'll cite a case in point.
A few weeks ago a co-worker expressed an interest in buying a computer, going on the internet, etc.
As you do, I politely offered to help out.
I have enough bits lying around to have built him a pretty decent computer, around the 2.5 GHz CPU mark, none of it proprietary components, and I could have installed Linux (prolly Mepis, my personal favourite) or a warezed copy of XP+SP2 if he wanted to play games, maybe even dual boot.
Given current exchange rates I could have done this for about 100 US bucks, maybe 200 if we threw in a new fast hard disk and some new RAM, was he interested? no...
What he was interested in, and what he did, was go to Pissy World, and take out a credit agreement on an in-house branded piece of overpriced junk, which naturally enough came preinstalled with windows and and bunch of other rubbish.
If you think this was about buying a computer, or choosing between Operating Systems, then like the OLPC crowd, you are watching the magicians wrong hand...
This is about MONEY, more specifically debt, which is just another way of saying "power" and "influence" and "control"
The actual money doesn't matter, the money is just a vehicle, and what that vehicle provides is another individual with another lieu to big business, in addition to his rolling mobile phone contract and so on, he now has become entwined into a credit contract for some hardware and software which itself becomes a rolling upgrade contract cycle.
In this scenario where the actual money doesn't matter, all you need to do is ensure that the ticket price is high enough that the preferred method of entry is through the preferred turnstile, eg engaging in said rolling contractual relationships.
0.00 US$ Linux distros don't cut it, there is no "leverage" to be used there against the consumer, free as in beer or free as in speech discussions still don't really address this issue, they are still watching the magicians wrong hand.
For linux to enter the year of the linux desktop that we have all been waiting for, linux will have to be transformed, from free beer / speech into something that can be leveraged into a price point where the customer ostenibly has a choice between paying the ticket price in cash, but is penalised for this and encouraged to enter instead into the rolling contractual relationship.
The "free" computers idea that gets resurrected every now and again is an example of why linux fails, the idea there was that the users eyeballs would pay for and leverage the component cost of the equipment, it never stood a chance, because it was competing against a model where everything else, and I mean EVERYTHING from banks through credit card companies through insurance / warranty deals through hardware and microsoft all played the consumer into "voluntarily" signing up for the rolling contractual relationship business model, in which they become an asset which is tracked and analysed and traded and manipulated.
Linux will make it to the desktop along with the free PC and DN Forever, eg never.
Having said that, Linux adoption will continue, just as people like myself who have no mortgage, no overdraft, no hire purchase, no credit card debt, and no other rolling contract debts, like using linux wherever possible, because it is free not as in beer or speech, but free as in not leveraged against me, there will always be a core of people who feel this way, linux becomes what Karl Marx would have described as a "Political" choice, the workers control the means of production.
Microsoft et al like to stylise Linux and open source as a dangerous virus, we are talking about a subversive communist operating system and software, not a good old american capitalist one (capitalist doesn't mean monetary profit, capitalism means using monetary profit to leverage control, the money is the magicians right hand, control is his left, the one palming the cards) which means free software is dangerous, the enemy, a disease that in itself has no power, but which if it was allowed to eat into market share could sap the power and leverage of the incumbent market choices...
Linux is fairly safe and "benign", only those with market leverage and power can bring it to a point where it seriously impacts the incumbents, and by exercising that leverage you are by definition depleting your leverage and transferring all your power back to the individuals... not going to happen, not while there are capitalists in the same market to feed upon the prey.
Windows is a capitalist OS.
Linux is a anarcho syndicalist OS.
Mac is a communist OS.(chairman jobs' little red book)
PS3 etc is socialist.
comments on a postcard...