If linux is good why is it so irrelevant despite being free...

>android is not linux

Windows is superior

Google lead engineer said its not, his words means more than yours

Except it's not.

Irrelevant on the desktop maybe, but very heavily used in networking and appliances (SAN / NAS / Firewall / Router / Switch / etc)

>rip the entire system
>slap another name on it
>ITS DIFFERENT GUISE

Every linux is windows because linux uses electricity too

Here is your logic

You cant enter bash commands on windows

OSX and Android is GNU/Linux.
Windows is DOS

Android uses the Linux kernel. He can call it whatever he likes, that doesn't make it true. If Linus decided to come out and say Linux is nothing like UNIX that wouldn't make it true.

>Implying that if you throw everything in one repo like every distro does that would somehow fix the market share.
that's not what i said, and i'm struggling to imagine how you came to that interpretation. "crowdsourcing" disambiguates it; did you read the whole post as a coherent thought or did you think it was all just random?

linux distributions are crowd-driven projects, meaning that any random person can come and go, contribute, file bugs, and fork the project whenever they want. Linus is ultimately some sort of check at the very top level, but that's not enough organizational structure for a complex project. And he doesn't run Ubuntu, or Debian, or Fedora, or anything like that. Just the kernel (as far as i know).

open source projects have no clear high-level vision because everyone's scrambling to try and keep everyone from jumping ship in various ways (losing interest, forking the project, etc...). as a result, the ship just drifts in whatever direction people are interested in paddling, not in any appreciably worthwhile direction.

>Windows is widely used on srrvers too
I haven't seen any estimates of server operating system statistics that puts Windows above Linux. Of the top 1,000,000 public servers, ~97% of them are running Linux. Expand that to 1M+1 to 10M and things approach parity, but for reference Cred Forums is ranked like ~150,000 or something. It's so near the top (in the scale of millions) that you've almost certainly never heard of a single website ranked 900,000 through 100,000. if you can think of a criterion that describes relevance more concisely, i'm sure we can apply it, get a list of 1M sites, and get roughly the same results.

>android is not linux
can you elaborate on this? it's running the linux kernel, and i'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make if you make such an obnoxiously nebulous claim.

too complicated for normies

Linus uses Fedora.

>but that's not enough organizational structure for a complex project.

It's been developed for 25 years and dominates in all markets besides the desktop. Even ChromeOS is gaining market share. It is clearly "organized" enough to be trusted by so many users and corporate entities.

Also, saying crowd driven projects aren't organized is pretty ignorant to say when WikiMedia exists.

The question still up, why is linux irrelevant on the desktop os business when its free?

Extremely poor error resilience and management-- Anything that goes wrong will give you a kernel panic and require you to fuck around in grub and config files if not reinstall
Low quality, behind-the-times desktop environments
Poor and very limited hardware and software compatibility: Printers, scanners, webcams, most specialized devices, the Adobe Creative Suite, Visual Studio, Microsoft Office
Enforcement of FOSS on some major distros: RHEL, CentOS, Fedora and to an extent, Debian.
Maintenance requires expert computer skills and know-how
Configuration, maintenance and every day tasks require more CLI than should ever be necessary
Pointlessly big and confusing selection of distributions
Bad branding: Ugly logos, ugly-sounding names
Practically unusable to users who aren't on the sudoers list unless you just want a Facebook machine.
Lack of software that comes from advanced expensive research for other operating systems: Voice-activated assistants, handwriting, automatic backup and system recovery, etc.

Those are just off the top of my head.

>Linus uses Fedora.
i'm not saying he doesn't use a linux distribution; i'm saying that he's not leading the development of that distribution. again i feel like you're painfully misunderstanding what are otherwise clear statements. is this intentional? do you just want someone to talk to?

>It's been developed for over 25 years
i'm not sure if i honestly need to explain the difference between longevity and success. if you're the OP, you must appreciate that "irrelevant" implicitly means some amount of popularity. 5 people could be maintaining a project for 25 years, but that doesn't mean it's relevant. trim the fat from your arguments, because they make you seem stupid for conflating two obviously different things.

>dominates in all markets besides the desktop
okay? i caveated earlier that i was only talking about desktops. i don't know what else to say.

WikiMedia has a clearly established hierarchy consisting of an elected board, people who are employed (you can apply for a job[0]).

if you're talking about wikipedia and other wikis as being accessible to outsiders, i'm sorry but you're mistaken. I can point you to half a dozen academic papers describing this observation - that new users try to get involved and get rebuffed almost like it's built into the system. probably the most famous paper on this topic is [1], although [2] might be more readable. there are some papers that try to intervene and influence user attrition, but it's not a totally solved problem by any stretch of the imagination.

0: wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Work_with_us#Wikimedia_Careers
1: pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3e87/da50eb306ed6dc8326b2fd63c75aaf523c80.pdf
2: research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/connect/CSCW_10/docs/p131.pdf

Because the average computer user has trouble understanding directory structures and you expect then to be able to make an informed choice?

i love cock

More than 2% can use computers on a higher level but they still choose windows...

>OSX is GNU/Linux
>Android is GNU/Linux
>Windows is DOS

Holy shit, I hope you're trolling

Sorry, by "run" I assumed you meant use. Didn't read it right. That was my first reply to you BTW.

.>i'm not sure if i honestly need to explain the difference between longevity and success.
>okay? i caveated earlier that i was only talking about desktops. i don't know what else to say.

So because it does not have dominant market share on the desktop alone, it is unorganized? I really don't get how you can imply that it can be organized enough for all those other use cases but is unorganized for desktop. Organization is clearly not the problem.

>if you're talking about wikipedia and other wikis as being accessible to outsiders, i'm sorry but you're mistaken.

What does "outsiders" mean in this case? It is quite clearly a crowd sourced project - Wikimedia employees represent a miniscule amount of edits. I don't see how "new" users matter in this case, I'm sure the majority of major Linux contributors have contributed for a while. Regardless, the top 10,000 editors on Wikipedia only make up about 33% of non-vandalism edits. The point is that Wikipedia is very well organized despite the fact that the vast, vast majority of its contributors are volunteers, AKA a "crowd sourced" project.

There's multiple layers of hierarchy in the management of the Linux kernel, you imply it's a mess because everyone can contribute but their organization works and it works well.

The problem is not lack of vision or lack of centralization. The "problem" of market share is that GNU/Linux is not a commercial organization. It's not an enterprise that will push expensive videos of parents embracing their babies to make their OS popular, GNU/Linux doesn't have the market share to force manufacturers to get GNU/Linux certified, but if they had they wouldn't do it because the well being of the user is their goal, not making money.

How did Windows get popular?
False advertising.

How did Apple get popular?
False advertising.

OP is a phaggot.

Only reason why not everybody use GNU/Linux is because it has less "common user programs". And because my grandma (And people like her) have never heard of it due to lack of advertising.

Also I hope you are aware of that the Android OS is running on top of the Linux kernel. So people do use it.....

Blabla

Compelling argument.

Same as yours

It's Linux alright. Android/Linux not GNU/Linux, but still Linux.

The simple answer is usually correct.

Linux isn't good.

>android is not linux

"Android is a mobile operating system developed by Google, based on the Linux kernel "

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)

>he thinks irrelevancy = the os is bad
>he's using dog pictures

It's literally everywhere, you just use your dumb windows terminal to access Facebook all day so you don't notice

Congrats, you're a pleb

Exactly

Androis is a mobile os BASED on lonix, so its not lonix, its android

And you are an autist

Linux is non-commercial.

>the poo-in-loo returns from his slumber to shitpost about his failed abortion of an os
>inb4 i get called x buzzword

"A Linux distribution (often abbreviated as distro) is an operating system made from a software collection, which is based upon the Linux kernel "

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution

Android literally is Linux.

Don't bother with him, he won't listen to facts, you might as well be arguing with a single-digit IQ chimpanzee.

Android is based on Linux the same way Ubuntu is based on Linux, as in they both use the Linux kernel as their base. The only difference is that Android heavily modifies the kernel, understandably, compared to Ubuntu.

Idk my company uses linux workstations and servers as well as android phones. I have linux and android at home. Linux seems pretty popular and growing to me. Dog bless redhat and canonical for making this possible and Google for making it happen on mobile.

Ur opinion is irrelevant like lonix, pajeet

Nope

Lincuck angri

Ubuntuos {which failed miserably} is a linux phone os, android is not

@56807109
>he says that my opinion is irrelevant
>the pot calling the kettle black
Please repeat that once you demonstrate coherent reading comprehension, Pajeet.

No u pajeet

@56807529
I think you need to learn something, lad.
lmgtfy.com/?q=how to learn english and how not to be a street shitter

>something could possibly be inferior to windows.

I think you need to learn something, lad.
lmgtfy.com/?q=how to learn english and how not to be a street shitter

pretty sure that the majority of computer based infrastructure is born out of linux

like the framework for stock markets and the networks CERN use at the LHC are all built from linux systems

its the technological pipework for really specific industry use

@56807716
>he tries to use my exact response against me
>he's stooped this low in desperation
Keep on giving me (You)s, you just keep on killing my sides. :^)

>he tries to use my exact response against me
>he's stooped this low in desperation
Keep on giving me (You)s, you just keep on killing my sides. :^)

no software. (no, not just games, find a dwg viewer for linux, no search for windows... do this for every piece of software you need and cry)

Nope, it isn't popular because no money is spent on marketing

runs 67% of smartphones and tablets
runs 36% of public-facing servers
runs 99% of supercomputeres
runs 30% of embedded systems

absolutely positively the most popular kernel in existence, by a landslide. possibly the most popular computer program also.

to answer your question in the desktop context, it's not "good". it's a crappy desktop experience for 80% of people and a passable one for most of the remainder

for certain users, it is unparalleled, due to the things it allows that windows and os x don't. but you're not one of them, you're a Cred Forums gamer shit. there is zero incentive for you to be on linux. if there was, you would be on linux already.

but as it stands, you have zero standards, zero convictions and zero computer skills. windows is for you.

Pretty much, if it's not working after clicking on it twice, most people are going to give up

Try doing any enthusiast activity on windows other than gaming. It's a small club and should stay that way

>Google lead engineer said its not
he was not wrong. android is a java runtime and a bunch of other assorted shit.

the android package and experience have little to do with linux beyond the fact that almost all android machines run on it. hence why most of its users have literally zero clue of this.

however, this doesn't invalidate the fact that millions of users run linux machines on a daily basis and it works perfectly well. if anything, this further proves the point that it's the software that runs on top of it that matters most, and in the case of the linux desktop, that's what needs to be improved urgently.

>Is it because its simply inferior to windows?

This one.

linux is only irrelevant for two kinds of people: tech illiterates and richfags who just don't give a fuck. you don't need to be an autistic neckbeard to understand windows' flaws.

> 35% server market (windows is 30%)

> literally every supercomputer on earth

> irrelevant

Just because gaymurr kids care about the latest cowadoody instead of stability doesn't mean Linux is irrelevant, boy.

Sleep tight, pupper. Also windows "won" the market by coming, you know, preinstalled on computers

IQ correlation with OS

Really makes you think

Telling lies is the part of MS shill's damage controll?

derstandard.at/1308186313932/Interview-Google-Android-is-the-Linux-desktop-dream-come-true

If windows is so good why is it irrelevant everywhere except the dying desktop market segment?
>ftfy

he was not wrong. GNU is C, Lisp and a bunch of other assorted shit.

the GNU package and experience have little to do with linux beyond the fact that almost all GNU machines run on it. hence why most of its users have literally zero clue of this.

however, this doesn't invalidate the fact that millions of users run linux machines on a daily basis and it works perfectly well. if anything, this further proves the point that it's the software that runs on top of it that matters most, and in the case of the linux desktop, that's what needs to be improved urgently.

>now you are right

Outdated.

Amerifat

There's nothing wrong or lacking in the Linux desktop world. My wacom tablet, HP printer, and mobile device all sync effortlessly with my Ubuntu-based system.

I have my sister (who isn't tech savvy at all) running xubuntu and she fucking loves it. Netflix, facebook, and skype all work perfectly fine.

As a programmer, there's no better environment than a Linux machine (i.e. desktop). Hundreds of free compilers, interpreters, and libraries at my fingertips. Emacs.

Just because Linux machines don't run all the latest AAA videogame time-wasting toys for teenagers doesn't mean that the desktop experience is shit. It means you all need to re-evaluate your priorities.

You're advertising your argument.
I'm not buying it.
Thus disproved.

So's air. Have you stopped using it in favor of the bottled oxygen industry?

UNIX -> FreeBSD -> DARWIN -> OSX
osx is not gnu/linux at all
MS-DOS -> win1-3 -> Windows9x
OS/2 -> NT -> ... -> all windowses after 2000

>runs 36% of public-facing servers
where is that number from
from what i've seen it's ~60% of public facing web servers (which should be the majority of public-facing servers).
which was

If android isn't linux then windows server isn't windows server either, ergo 0% of servers run windows :^)

>if you can think of a criterion that describes relevance more concisely
go into your history, scroll down a lot, then stop immediately. this will give you a random page from your history. Now, how likely is it that that server was running linux? 95%+

Or consider the following, how much of HTTP traffic involves a linux host? 96%+

>but that's not enough organizational structure for a complex project.
any sane company uses git or something similiar which tells you enough about the capability of open source to organize itself i'd say

nice try shill

>dominates in all markets besides the desktop.
that's a ridiculous statement. It's THE most relevant OS(even moreso than windows), sure, but there are a lot of different markets, some of which have very specific needs, which a general purpose OS can't really satisfy.
Examples include Mainframes, which is dominated by z/OS, the requirement here is ridiculous backwards compatibility 30-40 years.
Another Example are Real-Time Operating Systems(RTOS).
The requirement for RTOS is Guaranteed Response in x seconds(or ms or ns or whatever). Now, these are theoretical guarantees, practical guarantees(i tested it 10 million times and it was always below x) are easy, theoretical guarantees are what's the worst case for everything involved. Most RTOS are very small kernels so analysing them is easy. Analysing the worst case for the linux kernel is virtually impossible due to how complex it is.
Areas in which RTOS matter are computers that control industrial machines, trains etc.
And no, people aren't going to take "it's fast enough" when being too slow could get dozens of people killed in a train crash.

>if you're talking about wikipedia and other wikis as being accessible to outsiders, i'm sorry but you're mistaken.
>go to edit page
>edit typo
seems pretty easy to me.
of course you don't get to make important decisions, when does a new member ever?

he didn't, he merely presented it.
false advertising implies consciously lying.

Companies use it because it's free, and they would have to do little work to get it running, not because it's good

>nice try shill
I can foresee Linux becoming better and turning into the most used desktop OSes thanks to idiots like you dismissing all criticism as shilling and pretending that your unstable hobbyist OS is perfect the way it is and users just don't get it.

I'm going to stick with windows 7 until microsoft learns their lesson, or until you can make a linux distribution that functions and looks exactly like windows 7 from the user's perspective.

>If windows is so good why is it irrelevant everywhere except the dying desktop market segment?
Because microsoft ruined windows, and then tried to salvage the situation by turning it into ransomware.
When windows ditches all forced/default touch support and keeps it isolated in a separate mobile os, and makes windows great again, their sales will be fine.

>most used OS in the world[1]
>hobbyist
nice try shill
[1]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems

normies are retards who dont even know what an os is