4 ms·

I think the general fallacy of Linux Desktop is that there needs to be some sort of tangible market share to make using it tangible. That’s never been the truth

I think the general fallacy of Linux Desktop is that there needs to be some sort of tangible market share to make using it tangible. That’s never been the truth though, perhaps for Ubuntu, but most Linux distributions are made by people trying to escape the market share people.

edg5000 1y ago
> but most Linux distributions are made by people trying to escape the market share people I never thought about it like that, but it makes sense in a lot of ways! PS Linux desktop has reached 5% I believe.
- coldpie 1y ago
  > > but most Linux distributions are made by people trying to escape the market share people > I never thought about it like that, but it makes sense in a lot of ways! Yeah. I developed Linux/open-source software for more than a decade, and the point was never to gain marketshare for Linux. The point was to develop good software that people would want to use. I don't care what software other people use, so long as it doesn't impact what software I can use. We would occasionally get suggestions from particularly enthusiastic users to make the experience worse(!) for Windows users, because it would promote the Linux experience. Just completely missing the point.
Hilift 1y ago
Hard to get to tangible with an ecosystem that is fragmented. There are products that support two or three distros but if you have something else it could be a deal breaker. We had some oddball distro for special devices that was imperfect in almost every way. That alone was infuriating, but the real fun came when evaluating third party products. We also had people that refused to upgrade from RHEL6.
- lenerdenator 1y ago
  I saw a meme the other day about what Jigsaw would set up as a torture for a Linux developer in the Saw movies. It would be to have them sitting in a room, in front of a Linux laptop with a perfectly usable userland utility and expecting them to not reinvent the wheel. The door would be unlocked and the developer would be free to leave at any time.
jm4 1y ago
I think market share is important to the extent that the OS receives enough developer support to be easy to use. What I mean by easy to use is you can generally find good software and you don't find it difficult being a user of a niche OS in a world where most people use something else. Linux on the desktop feels about the same as Mac OS X back in the early 2000's. It hasn't quite taken off yet, but it's past the point where you can be a user and generally expect things to work well. Overall, I'm very happy with where Linux on the desktop is these days.
DrBazza 1y ago
Another 'problem' with the Linux desktop was that it was entrepreneur hostile due to the culture. The kind of folks that YC might have funded a decade ago.. Pre-mobile, pre-'fast internet', there wasn't really a home in Linux land for paid-for apps, there were a few, but not many. And devs flocked to Windows, and to a lesser extent Macs. Fortunately, in 2025, people are developing software as a service, and that can be successfully achieved using Linux as your buyers aren't other Linux users. Paid-for (native/desktop) apps are still a rarity and probably will continue to be.
- spauldo 1y ago
  I suspect this was a minor issue. Sure, Linux users are generally more open to using free software, but in cases where there is no free alternative you still didn't see many companies targeting Linux. Most of the software used in my field (industrial automation) is commercial. Our engineers use AutoCAD. I use Control Expert, Kepware, and Aveva System Platform. Our techs use software that's specifically designed to interface with field equipment, such as flow computers, VFDs, and valve actuators. There are no real alternatives to these; we'd use them regardless of what OS they run on. They're all Windows-only because all the other industrial software is Windows-only. It's a massive chicken-and-egg problem. (And before someone brings up FreeCAD and the like - no, those aren't real alternatives for an existing engineering company. We have lots of stuff we've developed for the tools we have. We're locked in.)
slightwinder 1y ago
The simple reason is to get access to the same software/hardware that people on Windows can use. And for this, you need to have a selling point for the companies building those toys, which is the market share, because it's a universally working argument with companies.

edg5000 1y ago

> but most Linux distributions are made by people trying to escape the market share people I never thought about it like that, but it makes sense in a lot of ways! PS Linux desktop has reached 5% I believe.

coldpie 1y ago
> > but most Linux distributions are made by people trying to escape the market share people > I never thought about it like that, but it makes sense in a lot of ways! Yeah. I developed Linux/open-source software for more than a decade, and the point was never to gain marketshare for Linux. The point was to develop good software that people would want to use. I don't care what software other people use, so long as it doesn't impact what software I can use. We would occasionally get suggestions from particularly enthusiastic users to make the experience worse(!) for Windows users, because it would promote the Linux experience. Just completely missing the point.

Hilift 1y ago

Hard to get to tangible with an ecosystem that is fragmented. There are products that support two or three distros but if you have something else it could be a deal breaker. We had some oddball distro for special devices that was imperfect in almost every way. That alone was infuriating, but the real fun came when evaluating third party products. We also had people that refused to upgrade from RHEL6.

lenerdenator 1y ago
I saw a meme the other day about what Jigsaw would set up as a torture for a Linux developer in the Saw movies. It would be to have them sitting in a room, in front of a Linux laptop with a perfectly usable userland utility and expecting them to not reinvent the wheel. The door would be unlocked and the developer would be free to leave at any time.

jm4 1y ago

I think market share is important to the extent that the OS receives enough developer support to be easy to use. What I mean by easy to use is you can generally find good software and you don't find it difficult being a user of a niche OS in a world where most people use something else. Linux on the desktop feels about the same as Mac OS X back in the early 2000's. It hasn't quite taken off yet, but it's past the point where you can be a user and generally expect things to work well. Overall, I'm very happy with where Linux on the desktop is these days.

DrBazza 1y ago

Another 'problem' with the Linux desktop was that it was entrepreneur hostile due to the culture. The kind of folks that YC might have funded a decade ago.. Pre-mobile, pre-'fast internet', there wasn't really a home in Linux land for paid-for apps, there were a few, but not many. And devs flocked to Windows, and to a lesser extent Macs. Fortunately, in 2025, people are developing software as a service, and that can be successfully achieved using Linux as your buyers aren't other Linux users. Paid-for (native/desktop) apps are still a rarity and probably will continue to be.

spauldo 1y ago
I suspect this was a minor issue. Sure, Linux users are generally more open to using free software, but in cases where there is no free alternative you still didn't see many companies targeting Linux. Most of the software used in my field (industrial automation) is commercial. Our engineers use AutoCAD. I use Control Expert, Kepware, and Aveva System Platform. Our techs use software that's specifically designed to interface with field equipment, such as flow computers, VFDs, and valve actuators. There are no real alternatives to these; we'd use them regardless of what OS they run on. They're all Windows-only because all the other industrial software is Windows-only. It's a massive chicken-and-egg problem. (And before someone brings up FreeCAD and the like - no, those aren't real alternatives for an existing engineering company. We have lots of stuff we've developed for the tools we have. We're locked in.)

slightwinder 1y ago

The simple reason is to get access to the same software/hardware that people on Windows can use. And for this, you need to have a selling point for the companies building those toys, which is the market share, because it's a universally working argument with companies.