Modify Colors
Shuttleworth Is Right – Apple is Linux's Main Competition
A lot of people view Windows as Linux’s main competition, largely because Microsoft has, by far, the majority of the market and is considered “the standard” by most people. Mark Shuttleworth and I disagree.
The Var Guy, and plenty of other people, are reporting that Mark Shuttleworth, founder of Canonical, said during his keynote at OSCON, that Linux must not just match but exceed Apple’s Mac OS X, strongly implying that Apple – not Microsoft – is Linux’s main competitor. I agree. Here is why:
First, Microsoft has not shown that is headed anywhere except down. Net Applications shows Windows taking a steady fall since 2006, which appears to be as far back as their data goes. Unless Microsoft really gets itself together, there is no reason why this should change.
Second, I honestly cannot come up with many arguments for Windows, but I can come up with some for the Mac, even if I don’t agree with them. Seriously, why choose Windows over Linux?
- It is the standard and everything is compatible with it.
- You prefer Windows’s way of installing software…?
I am sure I am missing something, but I really cannot figure out what. On the other hand, why choose the Mac over Linux?
- The closed system. Personally, I don’t think that is an advantage, but you could make the argument that things work better because Apple controls so much of the ecosystem. Let me put it this way, no one has proved that either the open approach or the closed approach is the “right” way.
- You prefer the Mac’s way of installing software…?
- You like the Mac interface better than any of the other options.
- I would guess that more (edit: I should add “external” here.) devices work under Mac OS X than under Linux.
Once again, I am sure I am missing some arguments here, but my main point is that, as a technical user, I can see the argument for the Mac, but the argument for Windows seems… weak.
Overall, it looks to me, and some would very much disagree with this, like the future is not going to be Windows, so why fight it?
Related posts:
- Linux's Chance to Leap Ahead of Apple And Microsoft Apple and Microsoft are both in a situation where they...
- Is All Lost For Apple? For those of you not following the Psystar and Apple...
- Could Psystar Defeating Apple Have Broader Consequences? Several months ago, a small company called Psystar began selling...
- Hardware DRM on the iPod Shuffle: Apple Oversteps the Line Edit: Since post, Apple has rejected claims of hardware DRM....
- Does Apple Face Any Serious Threat From Psystar? Psystar emerged a year ago as a small company trying...
Let’s not forget art. The GIMP is nice and getting better, Inkscape, Scribus, nice, and we all love Blender. But currently, I would say that the two biggest holes are Linux games and media production. Everything else I just trust will improve because we have so many brains hacking at it so often.
Mac does the media production very well, but I think more than that (since most people buying Macs don’t necessarily make media of any consequence), it’s sexy and it’s hip. If we could manage to make Linux not seem scary, but instead seem like the hip, visionary, revolution on your screen we all know it is, then we would probably pull a lot more people from Mac.
This is a big mistake.
Apple is the high end of the market. People that buy Apple aren’t worried about the price they want something that works perfectly and are willing to pay for it. The applications on it are beautiful in appearance and functionality (I am a Linux User).
I am sorry but Linux doesn’t have these beuatiful application and doesn’t need it at the moment.
Linux’s main advantage is the low price, and hence the low end of the market. This end of the market want something cheap and that mostly works.
So while Apple attacks the higher end of the market, Linux needs to attack the lower end of the market. Two pronged attack.
Say at current market share
MS – 90
Apple -8
Linux – 1
Even if Linux miraculously eats at Apple’s share MS will still be 90.
Most Software developers still won’t see it necessary to make applications for non MS OSes.
But if Apple continued to eat away at the high end of the market:
Apple – 16
Linux – 4
MS – 80
Then you will see software developers writing their applications with a flexible architecture so it can be ported to other OSes.
You need to wipe away MS Monopolistic advantage to have any chance of succeeding. Buy going after Apple you are only helping MS.
I totally agree with you and have been saying this exact thing for quite some time now
I agree regarding general external devices on Mac, a lot of vendors actually formally supports their devices on MacOS, whereas only a few exceptional companies does it for Linux. This is the “official” situation.
The “unofficial” situation is totally different, especially when if comes to USB devices that conforms to the very strict USB technical standards. People like Greg K-H helped a lot to ensure that Linux conforms rather anally to these standards, which is both a pain and an asset. It means that “proper” USB devices have a very good chance of being supported under Linux, whereas the other more shady type USB device will be rejected by the Linux kernel USB subsystem. Most USB and FireWire devices works out of the box, and you can get some more esoteric devices (e.g. my Creative ZEN media player) can be made to work with some help (in the ZEN’s case there is a FUSE plugin that supports MTP, or Multimedia Transfer Protocol, and makes it available as a file system).
There will always be external devices that is so closed down that it will never work in either Linux or OSX, simply due to the fact that the vendor(s) are not interested in that part of the market. They also tend to be a lot more niche than, say, USB pen drives as a category.
On the note of hardware support I’d like to mention that when installing OS X, if you customize the installation there is an option whether to install printer drivers or not, and those took 4.3 gb (or some similarly insane size, lots of drivers), however no mention of other drivers (perhaps just not optional).
And sound and wireless didn’t work (hackintosh, to try building a project on multiple platforms)
Wayne – When I and most people say “Linux” we mean “all the Linux distributions in general” not “a chunk of source code that forms the basis of a lot of operating systems.” Yes, you are technically correct, but I think most people understand Linux as “all the Linux distributions in general” (that is, if they “understand” Linux at all.)
For everyone talking about my statement that more devices and software support the Mac, I should have clarified myself. What I meant is that more external devices, such as MP3 players, random weird USB devices, and that sort of thing, support the Mac.
foo (who said windows games) – First, that is really just games support Windows, so see point #1. Second, I consider gaming a small niche market. I don’t have any numbers to back that up, but I don’t think the majority of people consider themselves PC gamers.
1. I’m a huge supporter of FOSS so I won’t discuss this point.
2. There’s no better way of installing software than Debian packages (IMHO).
3. Kwin or Metacity (just to quote two WM) can be customized to look like OS X. Also KDE can be heavily customized, to perfectly fit the user’s needs and greatly increase his experience.
4. I don’t know if it’s true, since MacOS is primarily designed to run on Apple hardware, while GNU/Linux has always been designed to run on a lot of different architectures and, as the time goes by, supports more and more devices.
The only thing that’s missing to Linux is support from manufacturers (free drivers) and easy-to-use desktop applications (there are already some of them, but I think there’s still a huge lack here).
(4) I would guess to be the opposite actually. Apple has a tight control over their hardware so I believe Macs only work for a small subset of hardware then what linux does. Doing that however allows Apple (in my opinion) to put the rest of their focus elsewhere. Hence going back to number (1).
It does not make sense to refer to “Linux” as being in “competition” with either Apple’s OSX or Microsoft’s Windows operating systems. “Linux” is a trademarked name for a free and open-source operating system kernel. The Linux project is supported completely by donations and contributions, it’s survival is not dependent on people’s choice to pay for a license to use it, whereas both Microsoft’s Windows and Apple’s OSX are completely dependent on people paying money for the license to use them. It’s similar as claiming that a public highway is in “competition” with a toll road.
What Mark Shuttleworth is really saying (IMHO) is that Canonical’s Ubuntu software product is in competition with both, Apple’s OSX and Microsoft’s Windows, software products and he believes that new customers (or users) of Ubuntu will more likely come from people choosing between OSX and Ubuntu rather people choosing between Windows and Ubuntu. That is, the potential growth in customer base for both, Ubuntu and OSX, is from defecting Windows users who are “fed up” with Windows and looking at other options.
This is only the opinion of a person with limited real knowledge of the industry, but on gut feeling I would agree with Shuttleworth’s claim. It seems to me that people who are satisfied with using Microsoft’s Windows are not interested in “Linux” (few even know what a “Ubuntu” is…) and generally consider Apple or “Mac” users as some kind of strange, but harmless, cult. It’s the Windows users that have grown weary of the Microsoft OS and the computers it runs on (and this seems to be a growing number), and are looking for alternatives to do the things they feel they need a personal computer for, who are the potential new “marketshare” for both, OSX and Ubuntu (and other similar software products based on Linux and FSF software). So, what will be more appealing to most of these “Windows deserters”, an Apple Mac or a “PC” with Ubuntu or similar Linux-based system installed?
You have completely missed the point because Shuttleworth is not saying Apple is the biggest competitor, he is saying Apple is the bench mark Ubuntu needs to aspire for. Shuttleworth has mentioned many times his admiration for OSX and how he thinks it is the best OS out there (yes, even better than Ubuntu). His point is Ubuntu should be aiming to be on a par or better than OSX rather than aiming to be better than Windows which isnt even the best OS out there.
Aside from the fact Ubuntu and OSX are both alternatives to Windows they have very little direct competition. People buy Macs because they want an all in one hardware and software solution, Ubuntu do not offer this. Apple will grow their market share, but not at the expense of Linux growing theirs.
You may be right – Mac hardware and OS are both sexy, Linux is free-as-in-liberty, and Windows is… zzzzzzz.
The idea that “more devices work under Mac OS X than under Linux” is widespread and pernicious – though I’ve had few issues with hardware support in (extensive) practice.
If I were more entrepreneurial, I’d start a company manufacturing $100 Ubuntu Linux-based computers, and pre-package and sell a line of *guaranteed compatible* hardware (printers, scanners, cameras, etc.) to share the shelf space. My favorite name was Personal Linux Ultimate Machine (Plum Computers), but that’s just the geek in me. The best approach would probably be to market in flashy boxes via a big box store – Target, Walmart, or the like.
Vista is too bloated to play in this market (and Microsoft killed XP except on UMPCs), and Macs start at $500, so this theoretical company would have this niche to itself until it proved successful. It might replicate the eeePC scenario on desktops, and turn a nice profit.
Just dreaming.
Not entirely correct. Apple is Linux’s biggest competitor for unhappy Windows users. Here is a pretty good analysis: http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/world-domination/world-domination-201.html#id287020
“I would guess that more devices work under Mac OS X than under Linux.”
I would say the opposite personally
Your point on windows ‘everything is compatible with it’ is the only real reason for windows imo. regular gamers and people with specialised software are really the only people who can’t do what they want in linux so stick with windows.
On the OS X side – well it has a number of the attractive points of linux doesn’t it? It is also by far the best OS to use for anything audio. It mostly ‘just works’ due to apple making both hardware and software, and it is very robust, stable, attractive and quick, something that linux normally is (okay attractive is a point of view), but not always.
If we can make Linux more like OS X, then we have already overtaken it in terms of quality because of the other benefits that Linux has (cost, flexibility, free/opensource software, etc).
I think you are spot on with your assessment of how Linux should be positioned. Windows is THE standard, like it or not, so trying to bring down Windows is going to take a herculean effort. Why not let MS continue to alienate their own customers and position Linux, rather than Mac, as the viable alternative. If you can show Linux is every bit as friendly as OSX (from install through daily use), has more software, and more hardware compatibility what’s to stop Linux from being the preferred alternative?
Ubuntu is about as close to that as I have seen so far. Unfortunately, I still do not think Linux is there on the easy side. Unlike OSX, and Windows, not everything “just works” quite yet. Perhaps this is a side-effect of the “all-encompassing” kernel or just the sheer volume of packages out there for Debian, but we still have a little ways to go.
windows games