3 ms·

>I have always wondered if Linus was a bit for friendly, would the Linux community have gotten a lot more mainstream faster? I don't think it would have made a

by zxcvcxz 11y ago

>I have always wondered if Linus was a bit for friendly, would the Linux community have gotten a lot more mainstream faster? I don't think it would have made a difference. *BSD has never really become mainstream unless you count Apple, which I don't. I think the main barrier to Linux success on the desktop is the fact that in my life I've rarely seen advertisements for Linux, while Apple and Microsoft seem to be everywhere. I think if a Linux distro had a huge advertising campaign it could actually snag a sizable portion of the desktop market.

dredmorbius 11y ago
FreeBSD powered both Yahoo and Hotmail initially, though both have largely replaced it (I don't know that they've completely done so). BSD's networking stack offered genuine advantages at the time.
- sbuk 11y ago
  It still does, since Linux, OSX and Windows' stacks are all based on it!
slgeorge 11y ago
To be clear you're describing advertising to the mass-market "general users", rather than developers. Actually, there is quite a bit of advertising, particularly in BRIC countries to that segment. It works as well. In many cases you're talking to people who are buying their first or second PC - but even here you'd be surprised by the market perceptions you have to overcome: people believe they can "get a job" if they know Windows, and that Mac's are stylish (aka a status symbol), and that Linux is too hard or for geeks only. A lot of general users are surprised when you should them that Linux can do everything that a 'normal user' wants their computer to do - quickly and easily - at a price that is way better than the other options. No command lines involved. In the spirit of root cause analysis you might ask, 'why there is no advertising?' at the level you're talking about. And the basic answer is that Linux is a difficult proposition for the hardware OEMS: it's a cost to them, and the users perceive it as 'free' so hard to pass that onto them. Whereas, Windows is margin to them, and obviously Apple makes most of it's margin on hardware sales. If you go a step further back then the underlying issue is that the client PC sector doesn't make a lot of money - all the large manufacturers struggle. So it's a pretty conservative segment. It's a low margin market that demands a lot of volume: the equivalent dynamic to supermarkets. That's why RedHat said it wasn't a segment for them, and why Ubuntu/Canonical puts a lot of energy into shipping volume in developing markets. Ultimately, I think user networks are far more important than traditional distribution. Advocates and friendly support networks work. That's why it's much more important to convince others to use Linux, and to greet all Linux users as part of the same family - rather than fighting over whatever flavour of <init/desktop env/editor/etc> is the "true way"!

by zxcvcxz 11y ago

dredmorbius 11y ago

FreeBSD powered both Yahoo and Hotmail initially, though both have largely replaced it (I don't know that they've completely done so). BSD's networking stack offered genuine advantages at the time.

sbuk 11y ago
It still does, since Linux, OSX and Windows' stacks are all based on it!

slgeorge 11y ago

To be clear you're describing advertising to the mass-market "general users", rather than developers. Actually, there is quite a bit of advertising, particularly in BRIC countries to that segment. It works as well. In many cases you're talking to people who are buying their first or second PC - but even here you'd be surprised by the market perceptions you have to overcome: people believe they can "get a job" if they know Windows, and that Mac's are stylish (aka a status symbol), and that Linux is too hard or for geeks only. A lot of general users are surprised when you should them that Linux can do everything that a 'normal user' wants their computer to do - quickly and easily - at a price that is way better than the other options. No command lines involved. In the spirit of root cause analysis you might ask, 'why there is no advertising?' at the level you're talking about. And the basic answer is that Linux is a difficult proposition for the hardware OEMS: it's a cost to them, and the users perceive it as 'free' so hard to pass that onto them. Whereas, Windows is margin to them, and obviously Apple makes most of it's margin on hardware sales. If you go a step further back then the underlying issue is that the client PC sector doesn't make a lot of money - all the large manufacturers struggle. So it's a pretty conservative segment. It's a low margin market that demands a lot of volume: the equivalent dynamic to supermarkets. That's why RedHat said it wasn't a segment for them, and why Ubuntu/Canonical puts a lot of energy into shipping volume in developing markets. Ultimately, I think user networks are far more important than traditional distribution. Advocates and friendly support networks work. That's why it's much more important to convince others to use Linux, and to greet all Linux users as part of the same family - rather than fighting over whatever flavour of <init/desktop env/editor/etc> is the "true way"!