The Linux desktop will never succeed as long as nobody can profit from it. As long as Microsoft prevents the distribution of Linux through tithes or threats of patent litigation, why would anyone spend a penny making the desktop look better?
> The Linux desktop will never succeed as long as nobody can profit from it.
There is a strong case for someone paying developers to create a free alternative to Windows to commoditize desktop operating systems, thereby attacking Microsoft's revenue stream.
The problem has been that it's been too difficult to produce something easy enough to transition away to from Windows and Windows apps for this to work.
>There is a strong case for someone paying developers to create a free alternative to Windows to commoditize desktop operating systems, thereby attacking Microsoft's revenue stream.
>The problem has been that it's been too difficult to produce something easy enough to transition away to from Windows and Windows apps for this to work.
Everytime a Linux distro is made one bit "easier" or simpler, the power users find it "dumbified" and quit that distro and move on.
>Those developers are very unlikely to find Gnome 3 or Unity too constraining for their tastes
The problem is that most of those developers have already left Linux and would be unwilling to switch either because of the hardware they like or the Mac app ecosystem or toolchain they use (for example iOS development). I doubt a significant percentage would come back even with a better Linux.
That's an extremely opinionated point and doesn't add to the discussion and comes off being on a witch hunt. MS couldn't stop Samsung, HTC, Lenovo etc. from shipping Android devices, nor all of them plus Acer, Dell, and hundred other OEMs etc. from shipping Android tablets. What about HP and WebOS? Dell still ships Ubuntu laptops. And almost all the big OEMs have a big Linux division beside their Windows server division on their server pages.
http://content.dell.com/us/en/enterprise/linux-servershttp://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/servers/byos/linuxservers...
Where are the lawsuits against System76? If there really was demand, you think a company wouldn't start up and offer Linux? In fact there have been OEMs shipping Linux, but stopped or hid their offerings after the high rate of returns from people buying and returning them. And the tech savvy people who are the real customers can buy ANY PC out there and throw Linux on it(or just get a Macbook Air). There's not much money in it for the OEMs except high support costs, return rates and a whole toolchain to get Linux images(hard on thin margins).
If there is real mass consumer demand, a company can ship Linux profitably, MS won't care about them till they start making hundreds of millions a quarter, at which point successfully fighting a lawsuit based on antitrust case precedent on PCs or paying a low amount per PC won't really hurt the manufacturer. So, stop painting MS as the bogeyman in this discussion, Windows' and Office dominance(due to Open/LibreOffice not being up to par due to various reasons including Office compatibility) is a well known reason.
1). Yes, companies ship Android devices, but if you read any of the articles you would have seen that those companies pay $8-15 for a Windows Mobile license for each phone.
2). You are right about Microsoft not trying to litigate for Linux servers, but I'd take a guess that is because most companies already have a heterogeneous environment, and if push came to shove I would assume that most companies would consider a full switch to Linux if Microsoft forced their hand.
4). Dell does not currently distribute any consumer laptop with Linux as an option, at least not when I tried the top 10 popular laptops on their site.
5). They don't profit from putting System76 out of business, and in fact would probably cause much more financial harm in terms of what it would do their image as picking on the little guy.
6). You are absolutely right about the low consumer demand. However, don't you think it's weird that NOBODY is pushing it? Not even as an experiment? No smartbook running Android? Why is the Asus Transformer the closest attack we see?
> Dell does not currently distribute any consumer laptop with Linux as an option,
>However, don't you think it's weird that NOBODY is pushing it? Not even as an experiment? No smartbook running Android?
Wrong. It's funny you're commenting on this so vehemently with so much anger against MS in this and previous threads and you haven't even heard of Dell's Sputnik?
Microsoft is plenty evil, but there's no need to make up things.
Edit: How many would buy Dell's laptop? Most devs would prefer their own choice, perhaps a Macbook Air or throw Linux on a Thinkpad. How does Dell get a leg up on Lenovo(with Windows) here without making 20 laptops with Linux?
Can you buy a Sputnik laptop? No, it's not for sale. Until you can, it's just another Linux laptop that gets press and mysteriously never gets released; see every smartbook (aside from the recent Chromebooks, which corps. still have to pay to suppress patent litigation) http://www.techradar.com/us/news/phone-and-communications/mo....
This strategy is very risky. Microsoft can litigate any OEM to the ground and the fees they extract from Android makers would eat away any profit margin in the x86 PC space. The fact they convinced Android OEMs to pay can be used to legitimize those patents on the PC space and many of their "licensees" already are PC makers (and thus will have a harder time litigating those patents).
Any shakedown by MS in the PC space extremely unlikely to fly given the terms of settlement in the antitrust case in both the US and EU and restrictions still in place in the EU on the browser choice screen, requiring network and document specs etc. Hell, B&N even tried the antitrust angle in the Android tablet patents cae.
I find this discussion increasingly irrelevant. It's hard to make the case that companies like Samsung or Dell are not pushing Linux more just because MS may increase their Android requirements.
Even a hint of any such thing will result in a multibillion dollar fine paid to the OEMs and injunction against MS in the courts. What about the fact that there is little interest in the general public for Linux(due to many reasons including Wintel and Office monopolies) and the OEMs are hampered more by that and the reasons in my OP above rather than your weak reasoning?
Have you seen how few Chromebooks have been sold? Do you really think MS hampered them with their patent licensing deals(there have been a couple) or do you think there are much bigger reasons that ChromeOS/Linux hasn't taken off ? What about new companies like System76? Why don't you start a new company that sells Linux PCs? Do you know how Dell or Compaq started? It was just one or two people in a garage assembling PCs and throwing DOS on them. The difference was that people bought a lot of them.
You argue there is no demand and I say that, even if there was a demand, the PC margins woulds not support the Microsoft taxes associated with Linux. You say Microsoft would not extort PC makers like they do with Android makers but there is no evidence for that. If you have any documents suggesting otherwise, it would be nice if you could produce them.
Besides, when all PC makers depend so much on Microsoft, there are many other creative ways to punish OEMs who want to be more independent without raising too many eyebrows.
>Microsoft would not extort PC makers like they do with Android makers but there is no evidence for that. If you have any documents suggesting otherwise, it would be nice if you could produce them.
>A. Microsoft shall not retaliate against an OEM by altering Microsoft's commercial relations with that OEM, or by withholding newly introduced forms of non-monetary Consideration (including but not limited to new versions of existing forms of non-monetary Consideration) from that OEM, because it is known to Microsoft that the OEM is or is contemplating:
developing, distributing, promoting, using, selling, or licensing any software that competes with Microsoft Platform Software or any product or service that distributes or promotes any Non-Microsoft Middleware;
shipping a Personal Computer that (a) includes both a Windows Operating System Product and a non-Microsoft Operating System, or (b) will boot with more than one Operating System; or
exercising any of the options or alternatives provided for under this Final Judgment.
>Besides, when all PC makers depend so much on Microsoft, there are many other creative ways to punish OEMs who want to be more independent without raising too many eyebrows
If an OEM can prove it, billions of dollars to them in court.
Maybe System76 can be the big Linux OEM, except that Linux folks buy Thinkpads or Macs.
edit: sources
http://www.informationweek.com/windows/microsoft-news/micros...
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090619161307529
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2331462,00.asp