| Soleron said: Ubuntu is a viable replacement for over 50% of the PC market, which is the internet-and-office-only group that requires only an MS-Office-clone and a good web browser, as well as protection from viruses. Linux offers all of this, today, for free, on very old hardware at reasonable speed. However these people are the least likely to switch. Those most likely to are the informed and computer-literate, which usually include gamers (which Linux can't do no matter how good because developers refuse to port games*) and professionals (who use Adobe tools that again no one is willing to port but can't be replaced on Linux due to patent threats over the file formats and interfaces. *Look at UT3 - promised for Linux, the code works, the market exists, but no release due to (as far as I can tell from frequent Phoronix reports) general Linux apathy over at Epic. |
Linux has been a couple of years away from mass adoption for over a decade still. The market doesn't want an Office clone, they need to be able to use Microsoft Office and they changed the layout which essentially makes Open Office irrelevant for people who must learn it, which is most people who must use the software for whatever purpose.
Linux still costs more than Windows, if it was viable it would be viable. Theres no catch-22 here. The support costs are keeping Linux away from being viable with the OEMs and when you factor that into the equation it only makes sense for people who can support themselves, the minority.
Tease.







