[News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4% - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4% - Linux ; Mark Kent wrote: > Phil Da Lick! espoused: >> Mark Kent wrote: >> All very interesting but the desktop is going nowhere. Cloud-boners who >> believe indivisuals or companies will (a) allow other 3rd parties to >> host/control their data, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 84

Thread: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

  1. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    Mark Kent wrote:

    > Phil Da Lick! espoused:
    >> Mark Kent wrote:


    < snip >

    >> All very interesting but the desktop is going nowhere. Cloud-boners who
    >> believe indivisuals or companies will (a) allow other 3rd parties to
    >> host/control their data,

    >
    > How many people do you know who use google mail? Hosted Web services?
    > I think you're failing to face reality here.


    It is an entirely different matter if you trust a 3rd party with *data*

    >> and (b) move completely to a pay-as-you-go
    >> software model (which is the ultimate destination of the cloud model),
    >> are living in la-la land.

    >
    > The Daily Telegraph migrated to Google Office just a couple of weeks
    > ago. Sorry, but you're living in the past, this is already happening.


    It is *also* happening. I don't see that most people would trust 3rd parties
    with data. I know I *never* would. Not even as backup

    < snip >
    --
    "I don't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member."
    -- Groucho Marx


  2. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    * The Ghost In The Machine peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
    >
    > wrote
    > on Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:50:59 -0400
    > :
    >> * The Ghost In The Machine peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> The Samsung Instinct points to the future...

    >>
    >> I like it, but I'd like something a little more basic.

    >
    > I'll admit the Neo FreeRunner shows promise, though it's
    > not quite ready for general consumption yet.


    So far, nobody's gotten my joke.

    >>> The Samsung Instinct points to the future...

    >>
    >> I like it, but I'd like something a little more basic.


    --
    The only thing cheaper than hardware is talk.

  3. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    Mark Kent wrote:
    > These are all mission-critical things, and all made up of multiple
    > components from multiple organisations which work together. Should they
    > fail, disaster would surely ensue.
    >


    Immediately?

  4. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:45:05 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Phil Da Lick! espoused:
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:

    >
    > < snip >
    >
    >>> All very interesting but the desktop is going nowhere. Cloud-boners who
    >>> believe indivisuals or companies will (a) allow other 3rd parties to
    >>> host/control their data,

    >>
    >> How many people do you know who use google mail? Hosted Web services? I
    >> think you're failing to face reality here.

    >
    > It is an entirely different matter if you trust a 3rd party with *data*
    >
    >>> and (b) move completely to a pay-as-you-go software model (which is the
    >>> ultimate destination of the cloud model), are living in la-la land.

    >>
    >> The Daily Telegraph migrated to Google Office just a couple of weeks
    >> ago. Sorry, but you're living in the past, this is already happening.

    >
    > It is *also* happening. I don't see that most people would trust 3rd
    > parties with data. I know I *never* would. Not even as backup
    >
    > < snip >


    Nor will I. My data is on one of *my* machines,where I *know* it's safe.
    (One of them isn't even connected to the 'net)

    How about being "held to ransom" too, by third parties? They could up the
    price anytime they liked, & you'd *have* to pay to retrieve your *own*
    information? No thanks.

    As for laptops.... Well I'll only need one *if* I'm travelling, otherwise
    I much prefer a desktop, because I can build what *I* want, & update the
    HW. What do you do with a laptop in 3 years time, throw it away & buy
    another?

    --
    Screw that for a game.

  5. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    William Poaster wrote:
    > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:45:05 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>
    >>> Phil Da Lick! espoused:
    >>>> Mark Kent wrote:

    >> < snip >
    >>
    >>>> All very interesting but the desktop is going nowhere. Cloud-boners who
    >>>> believe indivisuals or companies will (a) allow other 3rd parties to
    >>>> host/control their data,
    >>> How many people do you know who use google mail? Hosted Web services? I
    >>> think you're failing to face reality here.

    >> It is an entirely different matter if you trust a 3rd party with *data*
    >>
    >>>> and (b) move completely to a pay-as-you-go software model (which is the
    >>>> ultimate destination of the cloud model), are living in la-la land.
    >>> The Daily Telegraph migrated to Google Office just a couple of weeks
    >>> ago. Sorry, but you're living in the past, this is already happening.

    >> It is *also* happening. I don't see that most people would trust 3rd
    >> parties with data. I know I *never* would. Not even as backup
    >>
    >> < snip >

    >
    > Nor will I. My data is on one of *my* machines,where I *know* it's safe.
    > (One of them isn't even connected to the 'net)
    >
    > How about being "held to ransom" too, by third parties? They could up the
    > price anytime they liked, & you'd *have* to pay to retrieve your *own*
    > information? No thanks.
    >
    > As for laptops.... Well I'll only need one *if* I'm travelling, otherwise
    > I much prefer a desktop, because I can build what *I* want, & update the
    > HW. What do you do with a laptop in 3 years time, throw it away & buy
    > another?
    >


    I don't know where you're from dude, but here in the UK the crappy
    broadband network would never stand up to the strain of mainstream cloud
    computing for everyone, even in the unlikely event of it actually happening.

    And I agree with you that my data stays in my sphere of control. Not
    that I'm not online - I use snotmail - very handy for moving around. But
    then again, there's a big difference between my email and the rest of my
    data.

  6. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    Mark Kent wrote:

    >>>> The desktop is dead.
    >>>
    >>> Bull****

    >>
    >> It's a gradual thing and an overstatement, for sure.

    >
    >I don't agree that it's an overstatement.


    You are *still* spouting this idiocy? Nitwit. Keep quiest and stop
    making a fool of yourself on this issue.


  7. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    Mark Kent wrote:




    Your examples are all instances of a particular service or item becoming
    available online and demand for such increasing. OK fair enough but this
    is nothing new. More things have been going online for years and years
    now. Big deal.

    The desktop debate centers around whether your computer will run its
    software locally, or as part of the cloud computing paradigm. Believe
    me, the desktop is not dead and will not be for years and years to come.
    It is not about trust, it is about control and accountability. If
    everyone went cloud tomorrow, and a company used a tech company in say
    India for its remote computing needs, and an earthquake or power outage
    occured in India then every computing device in the company's building
    then becomes a glorified doorstop. Productivity goes down to zero. No
    output. No profits. Very angry MD and shareholders. This will not
    happen. Any successful business makes sure there is backup and
    redundancy where it can be got at very quickly indeed for the on-demand
    stuff.

    As for general computer users the debate is simply do you want local
    control of your programs and data or do you want to be at the mercy of
    some mega software company, or *shudder* the connectivity? I know which
    I'd choose.

  8. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    On 2008-08-12, Mark Kent wrote:
    > Phil Da Lick! espoused:
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>> Phil Da Lick! espoused:
    >>>> Mark Kent wrote:

    [deletia]
    >>> I'm not anti-desktop, I'm just facing the reality.

    >>
    >> All very interesting but the desktop is going nowhere. Cloud-boners who
    >> believe indivisuals or companies will (a) allow other 3rd parties to
    >> host/control their data,

    >
    > How many people do you know who use google mail? Hosted Web services?
    > I think you're failing to face reality here.


    Those are "expert" level services that most consumers are
    comfortable doing on their own. Google mail is hardly remarkable
    since such "outsourcing" has ALWAYS BEEN THE NORM for consumers.

    >
    >> and (b) move completely to a pay-as-you-go
    >> software model (which is the ultimate destination of the cloud model),
    >> are living in la-la land.

    >
    > The Daily Telegraph migrated to Google Office just a couple of weeks
    > ago. Sorry, but you're living in the past, this is already happening.


    A toe in the water. The consequences of this haven't even been felt
    yet. We have no way of knowing yet how long this will last or if
    they will rollback.

    They may find that it makes sense to "be their own google" and take
    the google concept and implement it locally.

    ....infact that sounds oddly familiar

    > Payment is a different issue, of course, but that's subject to the
    > normal rules of trading, ie., you need to set the price right.
    >
    >> Truth is client/server has been around for
    >> decades and we've all still got desktops.

    >
    > Few of my colleagues have desktops, in fact, I can't recall the last
    > time anyone was issued with anything other than a laptop or blackberry
    > or other mobile device. Desktops died out long ago... all the


    Get out more.

    Desktops are still quite plentiful. From a pure dollars and cents
    point of view they still make a remarkable amount of more sense
    then mobile machines.

    > big-selling stuff is mobility, appliances. Phones, laptops,
    > ultra-mobile web-tablets, GPS devices, etc. So, I, me personally, am
    > the only person I know who uses a desktop on a regular basis.
    >
    > Actually, thinking very carefully about this, of all the scores of
    > people I work with on a regular basis, I can only think of 1 who has a
    > desktop machine, and he also has a laptop too.
    >
    > Have you seen the latest Archos player? It includes, guess what? A
    > GPS! If I take a look around my house and see what's what in devices,
    > appliances and so on, I get the following list:


    [deletia]

    --
    Nothing quite gives you an understanding of Oracle's |||
    continued popularity as does an attempt to do some / | \
    simple date manipulations in postgres.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  9. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    On 2008-08-12, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Your examples are all instances of a particular service or item becoming
    > available online and demand for such increasing. OK fair enough but this
    > is nothing new. More things have been going online for years and years
    > now. Big deal.
    >
    > The desktop debate centers around whether your computer will run its
    > software locally, or as part of the cloud computing paradigm. Believe
    > me, the desktop is not dead and will not be for years and years to come.
    > It is not about trust, it is about control and accountability. If
    > everyone went cloud tomorrow, and a company used a tech company in say
    > India for its remote computing needs, and an earthquake or power outage
    > occured in India then every computing device in the company's building
    > then becomes a glorified doorstop. Productivity goes down to zero. No
    > output. No profits. Very angry MD and shareholders. This will not
    > happen. Any successful business makes sure there is backup and
    > redundancy where it can be got at very quickly indeed for the on-demand
    > stuff.
    >
    > As for general computer users the debate is simply do you want local
    > control of your programs and data or do you want to be at the mercy of
    > some mega software company, or *shudder* the connectivity? I know which
    > I'd choose.


    ....it would take exactly ONE network outtage to send users and
    companies running back to conventional desktops/laptops.

    --
    Nothing quite gives you an understanding of Oracle's |||
    continued popularity as does an attempt to do some / | \
    simple date manipulations in postgres.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  10. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:55:17 +0100, William Poaster wrote:


    > Nor will I. My data is on one of *my* machines,where I *know* it's safe.
    > (One of them isn't even connected to the 'net)
    >
    > How about being "held to ransom" too, by third parties? They could up
    > the price anytime they liked, & you'd *have* to pay to retrieve your
    > *own* information? No thanks.



    I'm sure there will be specialists who will migrate data from
    CloudVendorAlpha to CloudVendorBeta for a "small" fee

    It's a curious situation because, yes, it makes sense to put that data
    into a larger data center which has better economies of scale than a
    bunch of little data center's, but then what if you want to switch to
    another "cloud"?


    -Thufir

  11. Re: Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is4%

    On Aug 11, 1:06 pm, "Phil Da Lick!"
    wrote:
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > > | computers account for more than 90% of unit sales,
    > > |. Linux 4%, Gartner says.


    Keep in mind this is the "As Shipped" status.
    It makes no attempt to estimate what happens to machines initially
    sold with Windows that might have Linux installed by end users.

    > >http://ca.biz.yahoo.com/ibd/080807/tech.html?.v=1


    > Bound to be wrong. The mighty bbc says 0.8% so 0.8% it is.


    This is based on a server that only counts the IP addresses of
    machines that ONLY Run Linux, and will run ActiveX controls. Probably
    less than 1% of all Linux configurations have this capability (running
    Crossover, with ActiveX plug-in for FireFox).


  12. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    Mark Kent wrote:

    > Ah, the desktop died long ago.

    .....
    > Sorry Phil, but the desktop is very very dead.


    Yeah, and Microsoft is dead as well... and don't forget Linux won.

    Talk's cheap, and no single group of bozos produces more cheap software talk
    than Linux "advocates". And you wacks sling this cheap talk - lies and
    exaggerations and stupidity - around because you have no stake in those
    bogus words of yours.

    Meantime, tens of millions of desktops have been sold already this year.
    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/0...n-pc-sales-up/

    Vista continues its strong growth:
    http://marketshare.hitslink.com/repo...psp=97&qpnp=19

    Office 2007 continues to completely dominate its market: "responsible for
    2/3 of the growth in 2007 PC software sales:"
    http://www.microsoft-watch.com/conte...fice_2007.html

    Linux continues its deservedly weak market share:
    http://marketshare.hitslink.com/repo...psp=97&qpnp=19

    Ubuntu continues to freeze up and lose victims' work: "...since I installed
    the latest updates, the freezes have returned." #357 at
    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...freeze&page=36

    Distrowatch continues to - unbelievably - track 349 active crapware distros
    http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20080707

    And desktop Linux - and cola - continues to have no reason at all to exist.




  13. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    bbgruff wrote:
    > Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> Netbooks A Linux Stronghold?
    >>>
    >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>> | For years, backers of open-source software have hoped to push Microsoft
    >>> | out of its dominant position in desktops and laptops. Windows-powered
    >>> | personal computers account for more than 90% of unit sales,. Linux 4%,
    >>> | Gartner says.
    >>> `----
    >>>
    >>> http://ca.biz.yahoo.com/ibd/080807/tech.html?.v=1

    >> Bound to be wrong. The mighty bbc says 0.8% so 0.8% it is.

    >
    > Sorry (well, not really!) to keep beating this drum, but it could well be that
    > BOTH figures are correct.
    >
    > The BBC figure was from a date prior to November last year. I don't know when
    > they actually did the survey, but at the time it was in their interest to
    > quote a lower figure rather than a higher one.
    > It measured % User Base, as measured by hits on the BBC web site, and they
    > quoted 0.8% of users.
    >
    > Now we read:-
    > "For years, backers of open-source software have hoped to push Microsoft out
    > of its dominant position in desktops and laptops. Windows-powered personal
    > computers account for more than 90% of unit sales,. Linux 4%, Gartner says."
    >
    > That it what is being SOLD, Market Share, NOW!
    >
    > It takes a long time for even a high market share to affect a huge installed
    > base.
    >



    Yes. Under certain assumptions, usage share is a moving average of
    market share.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_...moving_average

  14. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    On 2008-08-13, DFS wrote:
    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Ah, the desktop died long ago.

    > ....
    >> Sorry Phil, but the desktop is very very dead.

    >
    > Yeah, and Microsoft is dead as well... and don't forget Linux won.
    >
    > Talk's cheap, and no single group of bozos produces more cheap software talk
    > than Linux "advocates". And you wacks sling this cheap talk - lies and


    Them and the PC Enthusiast press...

    [deletia]

    --
    Linux: because everyone should get to drink the beer of their |||
    choice and not merely be limited to pretensious imports or hard cider. / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  15. Re: Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop Market Share is 4%

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    ____/ Rex Ballard on Wednesday 13 August 2008 00:31 : \____

    > On Aug 11, 1:06 pm, "Phil Da Lick!"
    > wrote:
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> > | computers account for more than 90% of unit sales,
    >> > |. Linux 4%, Gartner says.

    >
    > Keep in mind this is the "As Shipped" status.
    > It makes no attempt to estimate what happens to machines initially
    > sold with Windows that might have Linux installed by end users.


    When I bought my last PC, I didn't buy it with GNU/Linux. I guess it makes me
    not a Linux users, according to these experts.

    >> >http://ca.biz.yahoo.com/ibd/080807/tech.html?.v=1

    >
    >> Bound to be wrong. The mighty bbc says 0.8% so 0.8% it is.

    >
    > This is based on a server that only counts the IP addresses of
    > machines that ONLY Run Linux, and will run ActiveX controls. Probably
    > less than 1% of all Linux configurations have this capability (running
    > Crossover, with ActiveX plug-in for FireFox).


    Here's a new video (a series of them).

    http://www.archive.org/download/e-dv...ebeer_003.ogg/

    This systems admin from the Johnson County Community College in Kansas City
    says that 15% to 25% of all users at her college are Linux users, to quote the
    producer. She says it very confidently.

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    "One smaller motivation which, in part, stems from altruism is
    Microsoft-bashing."

    --Vinod Valloppillil, Microsoft
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkiijYgACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7p8gCfZD7OylUvtV WvKpsjG1/bf0eF
    wZYAnjQYwsrEzSbyiVUD5WDhL6YPQWWx
    =Qs3U
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  16. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    Phil Da Lick! espoused:
    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Your examples are all instances of a particular service or item becoming
    > available online and demand for such increasing.


    Err, some were. I also provided the dates at which mobile computing
    devices outsold desktop by £value (2003) and units (2005). These are
    also critical points.

    I'll add another fact to this - ARM are now selling 3 US billion
    processors (under licence) *annually*. Consider how few of these devices
    are desktop, in fact, in the case of ARM, almost none of them are.

    Think about 3bn for a minute. This means that, at the current rate,
    every two years, enough ARM processors are sold to provide every person
    in the world with a mobile device.

    > OK fair enough but this
    > is nothing new. More things have been going online for years and years
    > now. Big deal.


    I'm not really talking about "online" things, I'm talking about how
    *people* are doing things. You keep thinking about the machines, I'm
    talking about the *people* and their behaviour.

    >
    > The desktop debate centers around whether your computer will run its
    > software locally, or as part of the cloud computing paradigm.



    This is quite incorrect. If you'd taken a look at the examples I
    mentioned, particularly the "scheduleworld" example, what you'll see
    is that there is no longer a concept of a "master server". Same thing
    with eg., IM clients, and all the different services I mentioned.
    What /people/ are *actually doing* is splitting their information across
    multiple systems, some of which are in their hands, some are elsewhere.

    The desktop concept of a single, central, repository of data is long
    dead - people are not working that way any more. This was and is my
    point.

    Cloud computing is an utterly different thing, and is only really of
    interest to a tiny minority of network users - what I'm talking about is
    much much bigger than that, and is already underway.

    Clayton Christensen, in his book on disruptive technologies, mentions
    that companies often fail to spot the disruption even when its under
    their noses. I suspect you might be suffering from this problem.
    You keep talking about "cloud computing" which is reasonably irrelevant
    to this point about desktop versus mobility, so I don't think you've
    really recognised the point I'm trying to make.

    So think again - where do most people keep their phone book? Ans: in
    their mobile phone. Their IM buddy list? Ans: on the server. Their
    email? At googlemail or Yahoomail etc.

    Average people are not interested in physically where some data is
    stored, but they do want their machines to work together. And they
    are absolutely not chained to desks any more. They are mobile, they
    move around, and they are expecting their technology to move with them.
    As I've mentioned many times, this means that they are buying things
    which are portable, and have been for many years. The days of desktop
    computers as we know them now are numbered, because that's not what
    average consumers want.

    So, again, consider the numbers: there are already 2.1 USbn phones *in
    use* in the world now.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._phones_in_use

    The number of computers in use is expected to reach 2 USbn by 2014,
    according to Gartner:
    http://english.pravda.ru/science/tec...68-computers-0
    The article also notes that the rate of churn in the PC market is huge.
    Clearly, this is not long-term sustainable.

    Of those computers, by the time we reach 2014, the number of desktop
    machines, assuming the rate doesn't change, will be down to perhaps 20% or
    fewer of total numbers sold, and perhaps 10% or less of value. At this
    point, what happens to the perhipheral manufacturers? Their market
    has collapsed, so they will simply no longer manufacture the cards for
    the machines. This will accelerate the decline of PCI etc. cards.

    Don't forget that the economy, fundamentally, is driven by the behaviour
    of its consumers, not by idealised views of how technologies ought to
    develop. We are in the hands of the consumer, and the consumer has made
    it clear that he (and she) wants mobility.

    So, let me restate, this is not about local versus cloud computing
    hosting, this is about fixed data and network access versus mobile
    data access for ordinary consumers.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  17. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    JEDIDIAH espoused:
    > On 2008-08-12, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Your examples are all instances of a particular service or item becoming
    >> available online and demand for such increasing.


    No, they weren't all.

    > OK fair enough but this
    >> is nothing new. More things have been going online for years and years
    >> now. Big deal.
    >>
    >> The desktop debate centers around whether your computer will run its
    >> software locally, or as part of the cloud computing paradigm. Believe
    >> me, the desktop is not dead and will not be for years and years to come.
    >> It is not about trust, it is about control and accountability. If
    >> everyone went cloud tomorrow, and a company used a tech company in say
    >> India for its remote computing needs, and an earthquake or power outage
    >> occured in India then every computing device in the company's building
    >> then becomes a glorified doorstop. Productivity goes down to zero. No
    >> output. No profits. Very angry MD and shareholders. This will not
    >> happen. Any successful business makes sure there is backup and
    >> redundancy where it can be got at very quickly indeed for the on-demand
    >> stuff.
    >>
    >> As for general computer users the debate is simply do you want local
    >> control of your programs and data or do you want to be at the mercy of
    >> some mega software company, or *shudder* the connectivity? I know which
    >> I'd choose.

    >
    > ...it would take exactly ONE network outtage to send users and
    > companies running back to conventional desktops/laptops.
    >


    Wrong end of the stick. My point is about mobility, not about "cloud
    computing" which is a different thing. Nevertheless, skype had a 1 week
    outage recently, but it didn't stop people using it. Google mail was
    out for several hours this week, and it hasn't stopped people using it.

    People have been moving to mobility for years as per the information I
    provided above which was snipped. Shame you weren't able to see it.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  18. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    thufir espoused:
    > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:55:17 +0100, William Poaster wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Nor will I. My data is on one of *my* machines,where I *know* it's safe.
    >> (One of them isn't even connected to the 'net)
    >>
    >> How about being "held to ransom" too, by third parties? They could up
    >> the price anytime they liked, & you'd *have* to pay to retrieve your
    >> *own* information? No thanks.

    >
    >
    > I'm sure there will be specialists who will migrate data from
    > CloudVendorAlpha to CloudVendorBeta for a "small" fee
    >
    > It's a curious situation because, yes, it makes sense to put that data
    > into a larger data center which has better economies of scale than a
    > bunch of little data center's, but then what if you want to switch to
    > another "cloud"?
    >


    The cloud computing is a different issue to the one I was talking about,
    but in itself, it's quite interesting. Several companies have been
    offering virtual machines with a linux instance on them, so your data
    and machine are whatever you want them to be.

    Or there are these kinds of solutions:
    http://www.rackspace.co.uk/managedhosting/linux/

    It's just a linux machine, hosted by someone else. There's no lock-in,
    unless you do it to yourself.

    In any case, this is not related to mobility versus the death of the
    desktop.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  19. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    Mark Kent wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH espoused:
    >> On 2008-08-12, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Your examples are all instances of a particular service or item becoming
    >>> available online and demand for such increasing.

    >
    > No, they weren't all.
    >
    >> OK fair enough but this
    >>> is nothing new. More things have been going online for years and years
    >>> now. Big deal.
    >>>
    >>> The desktop debate centers around whether your computer will run its
    >>> software locally, or as part of the cloud computing paradigm. Believe
    >>> me, the desktop is not dead and will not be for years and years to come.
    >>> It is not about trust, it is about control and accountability. If
    >>> everyone went cloud tomorrow, and a company used a tech company in say
    >>> India for its remote computing needs, and an earthquake or power outage
    >>> occured in India then every computing device in the company's building
    >>> then becomes a glorified doorstop. Productivity goes down to zero. No
    >>> output. No profits. Very angry MD and shareholders. This will not
    >>> happen. Any successful business makes sure there is backup and
    >>> redundancy where it can be got at very quickly indeed for the on-demand
    >>> stuff.
    >>>
    >>> As for general computer users the debate is simply do you want local
    >>> control of your programs and data or do you want to be at the mercy of
    >>> some mega software company, or *shudder* the connectivity? I know which
    >>> I'd choose.

    >> ...it would take exactly ONE network outtage to send users and
    >> companies running back to conventional desktops/laptops.
    >>

    >
    > Wrong end of the stick. My point is about mobility, not about "cloud
    > computing" which is a different thing. Nevertheless, skype had a 1 week
    > outage recently, but it didn't stop people using it. Google mail was
    > out for several hours this week, and it hasn't stopped people using it.
    >
    > People have been moving to mobility for years as per the information I
    > provided above which was snipped. Shame you weren't able to see it.
    >


    Then you need to look at your definition of "desktop". Most discussions
    where it is stated the "desktop is dead" are about cloud computing.

  20. Re: [News] Microsoft's Partner Group Says GNU/Linux' Desktop MarketShare is 4%

    Mark Kent wrote:
    > The desktop concept of a single, central, repository of data is long
    > dead - people are not working that way any more. This was and is my
    > point.
    >
    > Cloud computing is an utterly different thing, and is only really of
    > interest to a tiny minority of network users - what I'm talking about is
    > much much bigger than that, and is already underway.


    No, it isn't. The "desktop is dead" debate is about cloud computing. You
    are talking about something completely different.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast