Gservo
23rd January 2003, 03:41 AM
http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/20535.html
We all know who makes the world's most popular desktop OS. With a greater than 90 percent market share, Microsoft's status is clear. But what's not so clear is: Who's number two? Of the contenders, Mac OS and Linux, which one is leading?
Until recently, this question made no sense. Macintosh was inarguably number two. Does Linux have hundreds of retail outlets dedicated to selling its OS? Has Linux ever been promoted with a Super Bowl ad? (No, but I'd like to see a Linux Super Bowl ad, perhaps featuring Linus Torvalds and Eminem rapping together.)
In 2003, though, you can feel the two systems' momentum shifting fast. Every week brings new headlines trumpeting Linux' ascendance. Yes, it has a paltry 2 percent desktop share, but it's now mass marketed through Wal-Mart.
And Macintosh? Once in the double digits, Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) market share has fallen to a tiny 3.5 percent. The company just released a new browser, Safari, that only runs on Macs with OS X, or about 0.6 percent of all Internet-connected computers.
When a major computer maker releases a browser intended for 0.6 percent of users, it's not a good sign.
So that's the scene at the moment: Linux in ascendance, Macintosh fading. At this point, they're fighting for the number two spot almost as equals. Long term, who will win? Let's take a look.
Round One: Ease of Use
Nobody beats Macintosh for ease of use. Apple pioneered the consumer-friendly GUI, and Microsoft copied it, never matching its elegance and common sense. Now the Linux desktop programs appear to be copying Windows, with mixed results.
Linux has never had a reputation for ease of use. For example, when you install drivers on some Linux desktops, you may need to "recompile the kernel" to get your hardware working. That's frightening.
Score one for Macintosh.
Round Two: Hardware
Hardware is always the millstone that sinks Macintosh. Someone decided that if you want Macintosh, you have to buy an expensive Apple computer. It may have been the single worst business decision in tech history (closely followed by the merger of AOL and Time Warner).
But Linux works on any old box. And all those old PCs that people leave laying around after they've bought a newer, faster one? "Hey, let's try this new Linux thing on that Dell in the basement."
Score one for Linux.
Round Three: Applications
Okay, we're going to work together on a project. You have Mac and I have Windows, but that's no problem because we both have Word and Excel and Photoshop.
Oh, you have Linux? Hmmmm. This is going to be difficult.
Open source software's lack of industry-standard applications is a mega hurdle. And I don't see Microsoft welcoming Linux into the fold by releasing Word for Linux. That's like Rome welcoming the barbarians.
Score one for Macintosh.
Round Four: Corporations
Software salespeople get really excited when they approach corporate clients. Corporate buyers are the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And plenty of enterprises are unhappy with Microsoft. Many companies are willing to look at alternatives.
Linux is a viable alternative. It's cheap, and since the user interface is Windows-like, office workers could probably cope.
Apple will never be embraced by the corporate desktop market. It's not cost effective (see hardware section).
Score one for Linux.
Final Score
Although both OSes have pluses, some pluses are more important than others. Microsoft is the big dog because it understood that cost is king. Its OS can be used on any number of PCs, so it's a lot cheaper than Apple's.
Linux is not hampered by this. So while Mac is currently the number two desktop OS, Linux will take its place -- probably within the next two years.
But before Linux surpasses Mac OS, someone will need to create a Linux desktop that tech reviewers describe as "blindingly easy to use, and really no different than Windows." Considering the size of the market, there's considerable incentive to do so
We all know who makes the world's most popular desktop OS. With a greater than 90 percent market share, Microsoft's status is clear. But what's not so clear is: Who's number two? Of the contenders, Mac OS and Linux, which one is leading?
Until recently, this question made no sense. Macintosh was inarguably number two. Does Linux have hundreds of retail outlets dedicated to selling its OS? Has Linux ever been promoted with a Super Bowl ad? (No, but I'd like to see a Linux Super Bowl ad, perhaps featuring Linus Torvalds and Eminem rapping together.)
In 2003, though, you can feel the two systems' momentum shifting fast. Every week brings new headlines trumpeting Linux' ascendance. Yes, it has a paltry 2 percent desktop share, but it's now mass marketed through Wal-Mart.
And Macintosh? Once in the double digits, Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) market share has fallen to a tiny 3.5 percent. The company just released a new browser, Safari, that only runs on Macs with OS X, or about 0.6 percent of all Internet-connected computers.
When a major computer maker releases a browser intended for 0.6 percent of users, it's not a good sign.
So that's the scene at the moment: Linux in ascendance, Macintosh fading. At this point, they're fighting for the number two spot almost as equals. Long term, who will win? Let's take a look.
Round One: Ease of Use
Nobody beats Macintosh for ease of use. Apple pioneered the consumer-friendly GUI, and Microsoft copied it, never matching its elegance and common sense. Now the Linux desktop programs appear to be copying Windows, with mixed results.
Linux has never had a reputation for ease of use. For example, when you install drivers on some Linux desktops, you may need to "recompile the kernel" to get your hardware working. That's frightening.
Score one for Macintosh.
Round Two: Hardware
Hardware is always the millstone that sinks Macintosh. Someone decided that if you want Macintosh, you have to buy an expensive Apple computer. It may have been the single worst business decision in tech history (closely followed by the merger of AOL and Time Warner).
But Linux works on any old box. And all those old PCs that people leave laying around after they've bought a newer, faster one? "Hey, let's try this new Linux thing on that Dell in the basement."
Score one for Linux.
Round Three: Applications
Okay, we're going to work together on a project. You have Mac and I have Windows, but that's no problem because we both have Word and Excel and Photoshop.
Oh, you have Linux? Hmmmm. This is going to be difficult.
Open source software's lack of industry-standard applications is a mega hurdle. And I don't see Microsoft welcoming Linux into the fold by releasing Word for Linux. That's like Rome welcoming the barbarians.
Score one for Macintosh.
Round Four: Corporations
Software salespeople get really excited when they approach corporate clients. Corporate buyers are the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And plenty of enterprises are unhappy with Microsoft. Many companies are willing to look at alternatives.
Linux is a viable alternative. It's cheap, and since the user interface is Windows-like, office workers could probably cope.
Apple will never be embraced by the corporate desktop market. It's not cost effective (see hardware section).
Score one for Linux.
Final Score
Although both OSes have pluses, some pluses are more important than others. Microsoft is the big dog because it understood that cost is king. Its OS can be used on any number of PCs, so it's a lot cheaper than Apple's.
Linux is not hampered by this. So while Mac is currently the number two desktop OS, Linux will take its place -- probably within the next two years.
But before Linux surpasses Mac OS, someone will need to create a Linux desktop that tech reviewers describe as "blindingly easy to use, and really no different than Windows." Considering the size of the market, there's considerable incentive to do so