-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
____/ -hh on Thursday 21 Jul 2011 19:00 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> ____/ -hh on Thursday 21 Jul 2011 12:58 : \____
>> > ...
>> > In my hopefully impartial view, Linux has been successful in that it
>> > has found a niche in appliances, server farms and feature phones. It
>> > has been a loser on the personal desktop and the fight for the
>> > smartphone+tablet market is ongoing and is going to be an interesting
>> > one. Presently, it appears to have a competitive marketshare in terms
>> > of units, but is clearly at a big disadvantage at the same marketshare
>> > when expressed in revenue and developmental ROI...if not for deep
>> > pockets provided by Google, the battle would already be over.
>> > But of course none of this really discusses the products on just their
>> > technical merits.
>> > Of course, that's also true for a healthy segment of the advocates,
>> > since all too often their perspective isn't about technical
>> > superiority at all: merely that it is cheap (free). Sure, "cost" is
>> > yet another dimension to the overall factors for a consumer to
>> > consider, but there is not utterly "right" or "wrong" formula for how
>> > the consumer is to weight together all of these various factors,
>> > regardless of how many flaming torches are being held up by the
>> > religiously intolerant to try to force it to be "their way" only.
>> I can think of only one person who adopted Linux because of cost.
> There very well could be only one person...but they then would happen
> to have lots of sockpuppets on COLA :-).
> More seriously, for which "Linux" market solution segment does this
> refer to? Just desktop? Or does it include servers, tablets,
> smartphones, appliances, etc ... too?
> I've adopted Linux for some things, tried & rejected it for some
> others, and probably have yet some others that I'll never even bother
> to consider it. We're probably all the same in this regards, and we
> can replace "Linux" with any number of other items, including
> (literally) Chocolate.
>> Many people just want something that works for them (Linux)
>> and also to escape what doesn't work (Windows) and what doesn't
>> comply with the law (Microsoft).
> It is rare for anything to be literally "one dimensionsional" (single
> issue): usually, there's going to be multiple factors / motivations /
> variables, which typically include cost, utility, availability,
> performance, maintainability, ease-of-use, social perceptions, etc,
> etc. Similarly, any decision can also very easily include negatives
> in the form of being a "Least of Evils", or at least of perceived
> wrongs (evils).
> The classic IT example of this is that someone chooses Apple or Linux
> regardless of if it is the best (or cheaper), but merely because they
> need something but refuse to give any money to Microsoft.
> Of course more pragmatically, one can also recognize that as merely
> one individual, giving an extra $100 to the Evil Empire is a mere drop
> in the bucket for its billionaire owner, and thus philisophically just
> hold one's nose but choose Windows anyway. Its all just many many
> shades of grey when it comes to the concepts of freedom of choice.
Linux is a freedom from proprietary software, Apple a freedom from Microsoft.
Linux is a freedom from monopolists, Apple makes monopoly.
~~ Best of wishes
Dr. Roy S. Schestowitz (Ph.D. Medical Biophysics), Imaging Researcher
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux administration | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Editor @ http://techrights.org & Broadcaster @ http://bytesmedia.co.uk/
GPL-licensed 3-D Othello @ http://othellomaster.com
Non-profit search engine proposal @ http://iuron.com
Contact E-mail address (direct): s at schestowitz dot com
Contact Internet phone (SIP): schestowitz@xxxxxxxxx (24/7)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----