3 ms·

I think the 'failure' of the commercial Linux desktop can mostly be attributed to economics. Most importantly, consumers do not want to pay for a desktop operat

I think the 'failure' of the commercial Linux desktop can mostly be attributed to economics. Most importantly, consumers do not want to pay for a desktop operating system (even if it were proprietary). Microsoft effectively shut down the alternative market by making Windows-hardware coupling mandatory for large hardware vendors. This gives the perception (through scale and coupling) that Windows is nearly free. So, why would one spend money on an alternative operating system? Then, there are social factors. A vocal minority of the Linux community is outright hostile towards proprietary software or even towards any form of capitalism. It is not a very attractive market to operate in - one misstep, and elaborate PR campaigns are set up.

ColdAsIce 15y ago
"Microsoft effectively shut down the alternative market by making Windows-hardware coupling mandatory for large hardware vendors." How did they do that, how?! That is exactly why GNU/Linux on the desktop isnt used by more people.
- toyg 15y ago
  monopolistic behaviour and a solid, conservative set of well-documented APIs.
  - ColdAsIce 15y ago
    Why would a hardware vendor care about APIs or monopolistic behaviour? Why would a hardware vendor make a deal which said vendor can only use this software on the hardware they make but not other?
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - nate_meurer 15y ago
      Unless I am misunderstanding you, your second question makes it appear that you didn't read the material cited in spot's response to your earlier post. If I'm wrong, could you perhaps rephrase your question?
- spot 15y ago
  from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Licensing_agreements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Licensin... The Findings of Fact in the United States Microsoft antitrust case established that "One of the ways Microsoft combats piracy is by advising OEMs that they will be charged a higher price for Windows unless they drastically limit the number of PCs that they sell without an operating system pre-installed. In 1998, all major OEMs agreed to this restriction."[30] This has been called the "Windows tax" or "Microsoft tax".[31][32]

ColdAsIce 15y ago

"Microsoft effectively shut down the alternative market by making Windows-hardware coupling mandatory for large hardware vendors." How did they do that, how?! That is exactly why GNU/Linux on the desktop isnt used by more people.

toyg 15y ago
monopolistic behaviour and a solid, conservative set of well-documented APIs.
- ColdAsIce 15y ago
  Why would a hardware vendor care about APIs or monopolistic behaviour? Why would a hardware vendor make a deal which said vendor can only use this software on the hardware they make but not other?
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - nate_meurer 15y ago
    Unless I am misunderstanding you, your second question makes it appear that you didn't read the material cited in spot's response to your earlier post. If I'm wrong, could you perhaps rephrase your question?
spot 15y ago
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Licensing_agreements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Licensin... The Findings of Fact in the United States Microsoft antitrust case established that "One of the ways Microsoft combats piracy is by advising OEMs that they will be charged a higher price for Windows unless they drastically limit the number of PCs that they sell without an operating system pre-installed. In 1998, all major OEMs agreed to this restriction."[30] This has been called the "Windows tax" or "Microsoft tax".[31][32]