Roy Schestowitz wrote:
Mark Kent on Tuesday :
Matt espoused:
High Plains Thumper wrote:
Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
Linux is less than 1 percent after 15 years of being
free.....
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
In July, W3Schools had Linux hits at 3.6%, now shows 3.8%, in
March 2002 was 2.2%. So much for the 1% theory.
Discounting Linux browsing the Internet cloaked as Windows/IE
to view Microsoft mandated software content,
I can't believe many people are doing that anymore. Do you do
that? I don't remember the last time a website turned me away
for not using Windows.
Most corporate systems were built for IE-only usage, as an example.
Look at Accenture's outsourced HR offerings, say.
I'd estimate that the vast majority of workers in major corporates
are stuck with internal systems which have been designed for IE and
don't work well, if at all, with anything else. Part of the
problem is that there is no simple business case to make the
change, whereas for general consumer stuff, the case is very strong
indeed.
I hear that about 8% of the people in Brazil use GNU/Linux and that's
even /before/ they deploy it in /all/ the schools.
Found an hour ago:
"For, example, according to this report, there are now 12 million
users in Brazil, representing fully 25% of the entire office market
there. "
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=1369&blogid=14
As I stated previously and to the chagrin of the Wintrolls, Linux has a
greater presence outside US borders. Linux is lighter weight and by
properly selecting the right kernel, can optimally run on much lighter
hardware than Vista. Considering cash flow issues with poorer countries
and cash strapped companies and governments, lighter hardware is a cost
savings in addition to software costs.
There is only so much yarn that can be spun with FUD.
--
HPT
Quando omni flunkus moritati
(If all else fails, play dead)
- "Red" Green
|
|
