OStatic

by oiaohm on Oct. 03, 2009

imaginary campaign? The most powerful marketing system is word of mouth.

If someone can design a good compaign it can be used. It was found that you could double the sales of windows copies of a game by supporting Linux. Yes they might not selling many Linux copies so direct sales don't recover the cost in most cases. But the total sales do cover the cost of Linux support.

Linux support is a very powerful marketing tool. Just need a campaign that exploits the existing Linux marketing system for Linux gain instead of for windows game sales.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

mmm imagine a world where linux rules the world suddenly, people would miss: support, office, ease of use on servers and OS management, the "just works" feeling would dissapear at the end the users that did that would miss the MS solutions, and the people who uses linux today will remain using it, there would be no change and a waste of money that would not ever come back because of course you CANOT SELL LINUX. simple common sense

by Tim Stapleton on Oct. 05, 2009

I love Linux and run several machines on it for various tasks, however I'm not convinced that a concerted marketing campaign would do much to change linux's position in the desktop market.

Want to play wmv movies? (a not unreasonable request) then you will need resort to rpm -i commands and yum and understand what a livna repository is.

Also support for web browsers, flash etc is quite simply poor. Firefox is way slower on linux and you can get into an endless loop on Adobes site trying to install flash support.

This simply won't work for a mass audience desktop OS no matter how much you promote it.

Say what you will about Windows or OSX, they have these kinks worked out.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

mmm imagine a world where linux rules the world suddenly, people would miss: support, office, ease of use on servers and OS management, the "just works" feeling would dissapear at the end the users that did that would miss the MS solutions, and the people who uses linux today will remain using it, there would be no change and a waste of money that would not ever come back because of course you CANOT SELL LINUX. simple common sense

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

Talking about browser plug-ins... Simply installing Java on Ubuntu Linux wouldn't allow to run Java applets in Firefox - you need to discover and install CoolIce.... Only to discover that that Java plug-in does not implement some interfaces, so Web pages where applets require access to the page would not work....

And Open Office produces documents that look ugly, compared to MS Office gives you out of (expensive) box.

Linux is still poorly served by development companies....

by ravi on Oct. 05, 2009

true, very true

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

I think the real issue is that Linux DOES have marketing - the very worst kind, as we have a horde of zealots ready to turn any discussion into an OS holy war, and put any reasonable person with with ideology.

Look at the response to Windows 7 - it's a damn good OS, and to be honest, given that Karmic has shipped in the same time frame, light years ahead of the FOSS world...

I would contend that what Linux really needs is not Marketing - it's some UX champions that will put the user at the absolute heart of things, rather than treating them as something unpure which ruins the OS...

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

Several years ago I decided to give Linux a go, after many years working with Windows based systems. I gave up after a few days hutning around the net to resolve annoying problems and canned the whole project.

Simply put, Linux doesn't have the polish and whistles of Windows, and whether its a "better" OS is superfluous if it takes too much effort to switch.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

'But Linux netbooks can be cheaper, boot faster, and reduce malware problems to near irrelevance compared to Windows 7 netbooks.'

Now there are a lot of assumptions.....

I think you're missing a few steps before your dream-campaign can start. First, Linux distros need to get together, decide on decent UI design (developed by UI design specialists, not developers) and consistency in that, in joining efforts for software distribution (not RPM versus DEB and all that BS, it should just work) and to solve the issues that normal users do encounter (for example, fix the sound mess, get working browser plugins, easy codec installations without "holier-than-thou-no-MP3" stuff and so on) - and then start campaigning. But do not try to tell the average user that an OS with inconstent UI (thanks to silly holy wars like Gnome versus KDE), in places shaky hardware support and with no support for the applications they already do know and use, is in any way better than the OS they already know with the applications they already now.

By the way, when the first netbooks launched with Linux, and shortly after with XP, and XP started to outsell the cheaper Linux netbooks 10 to 1, didn't that tell you anything?

by oiaohm on Oct. 05, 2009

Funny enough everyone quotes the 10 to 1 numbers. Simple fact Linux machines were not on the shelves to sell. There are countries around the world were 40 percent of desktop sales are Linux. So its not useless.

Thinking 1/3 of world governments have signed off on using ODF and OpenOffice.org its production cannot be that bad.

Lot of people say tried Linux years ago. Sorry in the years a lot has changed.

There is room for a marketing pack covering were Linux is good these days.

Lot of the faults don't effect everyone. Big one is Linux fast boot time. Before you say I suspend my laptop no boots required please read and watch http://citp.princeton.edu/memory/ . You cannot use suspend to ram with disk encryption or you might as well not use it because someone grabs a laptop with disk encryption and it suspend to ram you can rip the ram out and by pass the secuirty. TPM does not help you here they gutted the machine to get at the data. Restoring a large ram system from disk is far slower than booting fresh.

Other market is Linux as spare wheels to windows networks to allow users to remain at least somewhat functional on damaged machines.

There are a lot of markets Linux could be pushed into where its a far better fit than windows on the desktop. Thinking users in a business network don't install there software the issues you are talking about with codecs and the like are an admin problem there.

KDE and Gnome are less inconstant every year.

KDE is doing a project that will make moving across even less of a issue. User can swap over to KDE applications on windows so removing the blow of the change over from being instant.

No support for the applications they know is not exactly true. Now users who have chosen not to pay for large amounts of software and be legal moving across is not too hard.

There is more than enough room for a correctly created marketing paper work for people to use instead of making stuff up. The correct paperwork would make the conversion process less painful.

Items like the sound mess are a long term project you can only hurd cats so fast.

Even if they don't move cross to Linux they could still get cost savings from the correct marketing paperwork.

by Eric on Oct. 05, 2009

Someone: "I decided to give Linux a go, after many years working with Windows based systems. I gave up after a few days"

Mmh, how can you compare many years of Windows experience with a few days trial on linux?

Sure many years ago, as a newbie, you were also fighting problems on Windows.

Someone else: "By the way, when the first netbooks launched with Linux, and shortly after with XP, and XP started to outsell the cheaper Linux netbooks 10 to 1, didn't that tell you anything?"

yep, marketing. That's what we're talking about!

(plus MS deals with resellers and so on, as always)

This being said I agree Linux for the desktop still lacks GUI consistency and that this shouldn't be done by the developers themselves...

Anyway, I think people buy what make the most of buzz. I remember MS trumpeting during the release of Vista. People were all exited, saying "Oh, have you seen? The new MS marvelous Vista is coming!". It took some time before people realized that what they bought (or were forced to buy) was crap.

Vista was crap but it was popular. Marketing made MS selling millions of it anyway. Sure strong marketing à la MS would make people love Linux before even knowing what it is about. And the world would not be worse.

I use Windows (XP) and Linux indifferently. Well, with a slight preference to Windows for desktop work and to Linux where reliability is required and wherever it can do the work. Both have their pros and cons...

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

"Windows 7 has the potential to close the door on opportunities for Linux-based netbooks and shut a lot of people out of new opportunities to try open source applications."

7 eclipses Linux marketshare in the demographics that matter most to Linux. What remaining potential is there? Oh, by the way, 7 improves even further on Vista's power management, which improved upon XP's, which improved upon 2000's, and so on. Meanwhile, Linux on the laptop is reminiscent of running DOS with its putting the CPU at 100% no matter what the user did.

I like the sky-is-falling ploy that attempts to combine the future of open source applications with the fate of Linux, as if the eradication of Linux would somehow make Firefox and Apache cease to exist.

"I don't doubt that the hackers and crackers will be all over Windows 7"

You still don't get it. The people targeting mainstream platforms aren't 70s style "Captain Crunch" Berkeley hippies, they're highly motivated career criminals who also do business by skimming ATMs, cloning credit cards, and initiating fraudulent ACH bank transfers. They will target anything that yields money, and widespread Linux being used to hold bank info changes nothing.

"What if Linux had coordinated marketing behind it, and a targeted advertising campaign made the point that Linux-based netbooks can boot faster and are vastly more secure than Windows netbooks?"

Well, if you did that, you'd need the goods to back it up, which you don't have. See, opinion leaders won't be convinced by your biased Ubuntu Forum references, which are even worse than Microsoft's paid research. At least they're going to a third party.

"If you took the marketing budgets of all the Linux vendors combined, and then doubled that figure, and then added a zero, you might start approaching what Microsoft spends on marketing Windows."

This marketing includes pushing Windows at all levels, from embedded to heavy infrastructure. It only looks so intimidating because Linux refuses to divide and conquer, instead of deluding itself into believing that it is the best choice in every conceivable scenario.

"Windows 7 is gaining significant market share even before its official release, is exactly when Brockmeier's point is felt close to home."

What point? Windows 7 is/was marketed only to decision making technology people who are/were already conscious of the alternatives. These are the people you guys have claimed for years formed Linux's core group and that the "grandmas" of the world overran you. That an unreleased OS totally destroys you in usage kinda shoves an ICBM into that theory.

"But Linux netbooks can be cheaper..."

But aren't.

"...boot faster..."

But don't.

"and reduce malware problems to near irrelevance"

Which isn't nearly a concern compared to running productive applications.

"Many users of netbooks don't need, say, Microsoft's Office apps"

I'd say virtually every netbook user would elect to use Office if given the choice. Something else you don't get: there is no market clamoring for weaker computers that do less. Originally netbooks were a ploy to drive down prices to stimulate a stagnant market, but now that netbooks now reach cost parity with low end laptops people expect similar power and features.

It'd be nice if these guys could be honest once in a while. Yeah, there are no "I'm a Linux" commercials (anymore), but to say Linux has no marketing whatsoever is straight up lying. One only needs to visit the comments of any tech article (or even the article itself) to see Linux's marketing in full force. Linux even has quasi-cohesive branding with that fat, constipated penguin and receives recognition that many actual companies can only envy.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

--> "Windows 7 has the potential to close the door on opportunities for Linux-based netbooks, and shut a lot of people out of new opportunities to try open source applications."

This is a load of crap. Windows does NOT close the door on opportunites for Linux-based netbooks, nor does it shut people out of opportunities for OSS applications.

Linux closes the door on Linux through the glut of disparate distros and a lack of unified support. To keep your Linux box up to date you don't have to be a rocket scientist but you do need to be pretty decently trained on Linux. Windows has an automatic update option, *EVERY* Linux distro needs to have this for updates as well.

And the OSS community is what's closing the door for their apps and solutions to become mainstream. They bicker and fight, and again, come up with a variety of disparate solutions to do the same thing (Open Office vs Google Office for example, *both* trying to get desktop share from Microsoft Office, and neither quite up to the task). You can't just get close with an OSS solution, you have to first match and then exceed with functionality that Microsoft can't touch (through copyrighting, patenting or whatever).

Basically the OSS community needs to get it's act together and take a single, unified stance, present a united front and a single, fully functional, easy to use solution that kicks Microsoft's @ss or get off their high white horse and shut up.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

--> "Windows 7 has the potential to close the door on opportunities for Linux-based netbooks, and shut a lot of people out of new opportunities to try open source applications."

This is a load of crap. Windows does NOT close the door on opportunites for Linux-based netbooks, nor does it shut people out of opportunities for OSS applications.

Linux closes the door on Linux through the glut of disparate distros and a lack of unified support. To keep your Linux box up to date you don't have to be a rocket scientist but you do need to be pretty decently trained on Linux. Windows has an automatic update option, *EVERY* Linux distro needs to have this for updates as well.

And the OSS community is what's closing the door for their apps and solutions to become mainstream. They bicker and fight, and again, come up with a variety of disparate solutions to do the same thing (Open Office vs Google Office for example, *both* trying to get desktop share from Microsoft Office, and neither quite up to the task). You can't just get close with an OSS solution, you have to first match and then exceed with functionality that Microsoft can't touch (through copyrighting, patenting or whatever).

Basically the OSS community needs to get it's act together and take a single, unified stance, present a united front and a single, fully functional, easy to use solution that kicks Microsoft's @ss or get off their high white horse and shut up.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

sorry for the dupe, stupid user error...

by oiaohm on Oct. 05, 2009

Of course Linux distributions current day don't boot faster. Ubuntu next release is 5 secs on solid state and under 20 secs on harddrive.

Next version after that is 10 secs on hard drive.

Issue here you are compare to released products. Normally you start marketing future products as well.

Simple problem here Linux kernel does not get a power management core until 2.6.32 that is not released yet. So next 12 months the power difference will close funny enough 2.6.32 design will most likely lead to better power management in Linux than windows. One big reason almost all drivers for Linux are in one place so can be altered to use the power management perfectly.

Important fact here you don't need power management core with arm chips. Since power management is hard wired. Arm chips are cheaper than X86.

What dell did was wise they covered Linux code weakness by running it on hardware that did not need it yet windows will not run on arm with the broad range of applications.

Lack of particular applications in the FOSS world track to lack of users in that field providing feed back and lack of commercial usage of those applications. Numbers game.

"highly motivated career criminals" all ready attack Linux did you not see the SSH attacks. By breaking into Linux servers you can attack more windows machines faster. So getting far higher return on attack ie profit. Main reason Linux gets left alone so much it is not as soft as windows in it default settings and can be particularly nasty to an attacker if its been hardened. Like sending attacker to a honey pot for recording of attack and prevention development..

With MS Office as more places switch to ODF the importance of having MS Office drops. So numbers using openoffice and koffice grow.

by oiaohm on Oct. 05, 2009

Of course Linux distributions current day don't boot faster. Ubuntu next release is 5 secs on solid state and under 20 secs on harddrive.

Next version after that is 10 secs on hard drive.

Issue here you are compare to released products. Normally you start marketing future products as well.

Simple problem here Linux kernel does not get a power management core until 2.6.32 that is not released yet. So next 12 months the power difference will close funny enough 2.6.32 design will most likely lead to better power management in Linux than windows. One big reason almost all drivers for Linux are in one place so can be altered to use the power management perfectly.

Important fact here you don't need power management core with arm chips. Since power management is hard wired. Arm chips are cheaper than X86.

What dell did was wise they covered Linux code weakness by running it on hardware that did not need it yet windows will not run on arm with the broad range of applications.

Lack of particular applications in the FOSS world track to lack of users in that field providing feed back and lack of commercial usage of those applications. Numbers game.

"highly motivated career criminals" all ready attack Linux did you not see the SSH attacks. By breaking into Linux servers you can attack more windows machines faster. So getting far higher return on attack ie profit. Main reason Linux gets left alone so much it is not as soft as windows in it default settings and can be particularly nasty to an attacker if its been hardened. Like sending attacker to a honey pot for recording of attack and prevention development..

With MS Office as more places switch to ODF the importance of having MS Office drops. So numbers using openoffice and koffice grow.

by oiaohm on Oct. 05, 2009

Of course Linux distributions current day don't boot faster. Ubuntu next release is 5 secs on solid state and under 20 secs on harddrive.

Next version after that is 10 secs on hard drive.

Issue here you are compare to released products. Normally you start marketing future products as well.

Simple problem here Linux kernel does not get a power management core until 2.6.32 that is not released yet. So next 12 months the power difference will close funny enough 2.6.32 design will most likely lead to better power management in Linux than windows. One big reason almost all drivers for Linux are in one place so can be altered to use the power management perfectly.

Important fact here you don't need power management core with arm chips. Since power management is hard wired. Arm chips are cheaper than X86.

What dell did was wise they covered Linux code weakness by running it on hardware that did not need it yet windows will not run on arm with the broad range of applications.

Lack of particular applications in the FOSS world track to lack of users in that field providing feed back and lack of commercial usage of those applications. Numbers game.

"highly motivated career criminals" all ready attack Linux did you not see the SSH attacks. By breaking into Linux servers you can attack more windows machines faster. So getting far higher return on attack ie profit. Main reason Linux gets left alone so much it is not as soft as windows in it default settings and can be particularly nasty to an attacker if its been hardened. Like sending attacker to a honey pot for recording of attack and prevention development..

With MS Office as more places switch to ODF the importance of having MS Office drops. So numbers using openoffice and koffice grow.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

Linux already has the most powerful "word of mouth" campaign. When's the last time anyone heard someone say, "Man, you should switch to Windows. It's so awesome and likable."

by Tim Stapleton on Oct. 05, 2009

I love Linux and run several machines on it for various tasks, however I'm not convinced that a concerted marketing campaign would do much to change linux's position in the desktop market.

Want to play wmv movies? (a not unreasonable request) then you will need resort to rpm -i commands and yum and understand what a livna repository is.

Also support for web browsers, flash etc is quite simply poor. Firefox is way slower on linux and you can get into an endless loop on Adobes site trying to install flash support.

This simply won't work for a mass audience desktop OS no matter how much you promote it.

Say what you will about Windows or OSX, they have these kinks worked out.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

Micro$oft has the general public brainwashed. Overall, Windows is easy to use, but is a bloated OS loaded with security flaws. I credit MS for trying to make Windows more secure, but the OS is only as secure as its users allow it to be. In Microsoft's quest for ease of use and marketshare, they have allowed the common uniformed operator to remain uninformed. MS has made it very easy for the common point-and-click user to foolishly browse websites and contract the latest and greatest virus - and then they go and unknowingly spread it!. To top it off, Windows doesn't do a good job with memory and hardware management.

Linux forces its users to educate themselves and actually learn how to properly configure and secure an OS. I've been working with Linux (tested well over 50 distros) for 8 years now. When I first started working with the OS, I dove in and immediately starting learning how to configure hardware, compile kernels, and secure the system. I can admit that it is not the easiest task and takes some dedication, but over the past 5 years, the process has become much easier. I must admit that Ubuntu probably has one of the best distros available for new Linux users. It gives a user an easy to use interface and provides access to the Debian repositories (largest software repository in the world).

Linux does a better job than Windows at memory and hardware management. My company developed a program for the government that specifically listens to multicast network traffic in order to free critical resources on the main server. If the data is relevant to the server that it supports, it is forwarded to the server. This listener application was originally built for Windows. The network card and CPU couldn't handle the load properly and the application would commonly crash. As a result, we ported the application to Linux. We wiped the PC that the listener was orignally running on and installed Red Hat. The hardware did not change a single bit. When the listener was launched in Linux, it was stable and did not crash. This is why so many enterprises choose Unix/Linux to host critical processes. It is much more stable and uses its hardware resources more efficiently than any Windows version ever will.

As a home wireless user, you will find that it is impossible to install Windows on your wireless router. You can, however, install Linux on your wireless router and have more control over it than with the original factory firmware. For instance, I've installed DD-WRT on my Linksys WRT54G and have unlocked a plethora of new capabilities.

So far all of the point-and-click users out there, if you want to continue to blindly navigate your PC, continue using Windows. I'm sure all of the folks working in IT security secretly thank you everyday for keeping them employed.

P.S. This was sent from my Windows XP laptop! The company I work for doesn't believe in hiring a well qualified IT staff and they've done a poor job at maintaining control with Active Directory. I guess they're trying to accomodate all of the point-and-click employees they've hired!

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

Micro$oft has the general public brainwashed. Overall, Windows is easy to use, but is a bloated OS loaded with security flaws. I credit MS for trying to make Windows more secure, but the OS is only as secure as its users allow it to be. In Microsoft's quest for ease of use and marketshare, they have allowed the common uniformed operator to remain uninformed. MS has made it very easy for the common point-and-click user to foolishly browse websites and contract the latest and greatest virus - and then they go and unknowingly spread it!. To top it off, Windows doesn't do a good job with memory and hardware management.

Linux forces its users to educate themselves and actually learn how to properly configure and secure an OS. I've been working with Linux (tested well over 50 distros) for 8 years now. When I first started working with the OS, I dove in and immediately starting learning how to configure hardware, compile kernels, and secure the system. I can admit that it is not the easiest task and takes some dedication, but over the past 5 years, the process has become much easier. I must admit that Ubuntu probably has one of the best distros available for new Linux users. It gives a user an easy to use interface and provides access to the Debian repositories (largest software repository in the world).

Linux does a better job than Windows at memory and hardware management. My company developed a program for the government that specifically listens to multicast network traffic in order to free critical resources on the main server. If the data is relevant to the server that it supports, it is forwarded to the server. This listener application was originally built for Windows. The network card and CPU couldn't handle the load properly and the application would commonly crash. As a result, we ported the application to Linux. We wiped the PC that the listener was orignally running on and installed Red Hat. The hardware did not change a single bit. When the listener was launched in Linux, it was stable and did not crash. This is why so many enterprises choose Unix/Linux to host critical processes. It is much more stable and uses its hardware resources more efficiently than any Windows version ever will.

As a home wireless user, you will find that it is impossible to install Windows on your wireless router. You can, however, install Linux on your wireless router and have more control over it than with the original factory firmware. For instance, I've installed DD-WRT on my Linksys WRT54G and have unlocked a plethora of new capabilities.

So far all of the point-and-click users out there, if you want to continue to blindly navigate your PC, continue using Windows. I'm sure all of the folks working in IT security secretly thank you everyday for keeping them employed.

P.S. This was sent from my Windows XP laptop! The company I work for doesn't believe in hiring a well qualified IT staff and they've done a poor job at maintaining control with Active Directory. I guess they're trying to accomodate all of the point-and-click employees they've hired!

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

IMHO, the issue of an OS is far deeper than the UI presented, or the

"apps". The issue is how suitable is it to write programs for and

where is the documentation for programmer users?

(see "How to write computer programs" at www.civilized.com)

Linux is far more rationally designed than Windows - due to its Unix

pedigree, but it is getting harder to code for every day. - And neither

has good easy-to-access documentation - (I prefer real well-structured covering-the-subject-completely books presented as plain text files or pdf files). [Not man pages, although they are better than nothing and

they could be made a lot better with a little more concern for the

potential reader.]

These days writing a program involves a host of ancillary issues

like how to get an icon file constructed, where to put it, and

how to associate a "short-cut" file or directory with your

program. (Windows keeps changing where the so-called

program-group directory goes for example.) Where is

the essay that describes all this (including file-formats)

from the beginning to the end?

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

Looks like the FOSStards are at it again. Making excuses. We've heard them all; "Linux is for Smart People because it makes you learn computers".

If microsoft really DID have the market brainwashed, how do you explain OSX? Its considered even easier to use than Windows. Did microsoft somehow brainwash them into using OSX?

Get real. A computer is an appliance. I don't have to "learn" how to use my washing machine, I just press "wash" and it does its job. No understanding how the motors work, how fast they spin, the flow rate of the water, etc. This is what a computer is, an appliance. Not some God machine that we have to treat with respect; its out bitch and we tell it what we want it to do and it better do it, otherwise we get rid of it for a system that DOES work.

Stop acting like you're an elite genius because you know a few CLI commands and read man pages.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

"(Windows keeps changing where the so-called program-group directory goes for example.) Where is the essay that describes all this (including file-formats) from the beginning to the end?"

Microsoft has MSDN. Probably the most complete, well structured resource a programmer could ask for when developing for Windows or other Microsoft technologies.

And if, as a developer, you haven't figure out the well documented installation routines and %PROGRAMFILES% environment paths, you're not a very well read developer.

by oiaohm on Oct. 05, 2009

Funny enough I find Linux better for the dumb people. The ones that will kinda install every thing. There machines operational time from infection is normally under 15 mins.

Smart people are more likely to be using some odd program to do something than the dumb ones as well.

If they install everything from the distribution repo system will work but be slow and not be infecting everyone else machines.

That is part of the problem. It not just the smart it is the dumb as well.

From the Just wash comment. When it comes to installing and straight up using Linux is more Just wash than Windows. Yes both OS's have areas that need major improvements.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

I think Linux is a great OS, although it does lack on the GUI that Windows has. I think it would have more appeal to the main stream if the game industry would give better support. This will never happen though, since the name of the game is money. Open Source = free and companies are looking for a profit, not a tax right off.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

I think Linux is a great OS, although it does lack on the GUI that Windows has. I think it would have more appeal to the main stream if the game industry would give better support. This will never happen though, since the name of the game is money. Open Source = free and companies are looking for a profit, not a tax right off.

by oiaohm on Oct. 05, 2009

Got it wrong. You don't see how Open Source model works.

I am doing a task that needs software. Open Source gives it to you for nothing. In time company with the software gets bigger need X feature so instead of paying for closed source pays for some one to add feature.

Open Source avoids the direct payment model. It is how blender and the Linux kernel work. Everyone is making profit form using the programs so has no question about kicking some money back in to development to increase the profit they can make from it.

Name of gave is not only profit but stay alive. If you profit streams are tight spending on software is not an option. Open source is aware of this no point selling software if the cost of software will send your users out of business. If user stays in business in time they will help based on need.

GUI is point of view I like kde 4.3 more than windows.

by an anonymous user on Oct. 05, 2009

Very good point oiaohm. I can't argue with that logic. However, I think that's why linux is not "main stream". People use it to develope, then "skip town", so to speak. The modules that are created are great, if your a programer. But, if your an average user they are a wits end of how to impliment all the small parts into a mature OS. Let me give an example: Try to configure a multi functional printer/fax/scanner on a linux system. The manifacture of that device isn't going to create a linux driver, it's just not cost effective. Now I'm not stating there isn't support for printers in Linux, just limeted compaired to Windows OS's. Same with games and other things people take for granted in a Windows environment. I'm not a Windows promoter, point in fact I love Linux and I'm glad it's not main stream. Maybe I'm pionting out the obvious, but.... Cheers.

by Penguin Pete on Oct. 05, 2009

You're not going to believe this. Sit down for some stunning news.

Marketing does not cure cancer. Marketing does not cure AIDS. Marketing does not solve world hunger or stop wars or reconcile divided nations. Marketing does not explore space or research neuroscience. Marketing does not solve complex mathematic problems or solve ancient riddles of history.

I would try to explain that having a mass adoption of Linux would require (a) the complete razing of American culture, (b) an absolute revolution in all desktop computer users, (c) a spontaneous gain of about 50 IQ points per user to understand why their operating system is important, and (d) the spontaneous appearance of a thousand teachers who will patiently teach the masses how to USE Linux. I said all that in my epic series of essays, You Can Hack an OS, But You Can't Hack People.

But I've been trying to explain all that for ten years, and like Michael Moore has recently said, I'm tired of trying to do it all myself. My voice is lost in the jungle of shit-flinging howler monkeys who only know one word: MARKETING! Like a South Seas cargo cult, they will ignore science in favor of building props out of coconut shells and palm fronds, hoping that the volcano gods will be fooled into liking them instead.

Have fun worshiping your stone heads.

by oiaohm on Oct. 05, 2009

Read my note about games sales. Supporting Linux doubles sales in most cases. Part Linux people advertisement.

Open source projects mature or die based on users. If users pay no interest in the program it dies.

Lot of printer makers provide Linux drivers because large businesses want both linux and windows. The effect of not making Linux drivers is lower profit. Just like the game makers found out provide Linux support you can double you sales on everything else. People have not noticed that more and more printer makers provide Linux drivers. Reason is profit.

Marketing will not cure everything. But marketing key projects to get users providing information what they want will solve lots of problems.

Both Linux kernel and Blender have cross the threshold. There is now enough money being made by people using both to pay full time people in large companies to take care of the program they are using to make profit.

With support and usage more and more programs can cross the threshold of having enough users in large companies to fund full time developers so curing the appear and disappear developers.

Lack of feedback and requests equals developers not knowing what people truly want so end result is programs that don't do what people want.

Also marketing to explain that software development is not instant magic. Items like Blender and the Linux kernel don't appear instantly. So requests take time.

ID also found in games supporting Linux gets you more online game servers running for free. Most games provide a Linux game server even if they don't provide anything else. Now if Linux admins started being picky and only running games that provided Linux graphical we could have a lot of games for Linux quickly. People are not going to buy games they don't have a working game server for. Proft.

Open Source world is all about indirect profit. Its a very strange system to wrap head around that there is tones of profit to be made from a free item.

Open Source over 80 percent of coders are paid to do it because there is money to be gained from open source. There is a major myth that most Open Source coders do it for nothing.

The simple fact the more desktop users Linux gets the closer the Linux desktop gets to crossing the threshold. Applications for the desktop on linux the same more users closer to threshold. Once that magical point is cross they development of the projects speed up by almost a factor of 10.

If marketing can push just 1 or 2 more projects across the threshold the gain long term will be massive.

by tmaslecoo on Oct. 09, 2009

just see