Microsoft has around 90% of the desktop market share, and this is important to note because frankly, they are doing something right. As a Linux user, and a believer in Free software, I think it’s important to see why they maintain the market dominance, even in the face of an abysmal failure like Vista.

Personally, I like Vista better than XP, but the numbers speak for themselves. Apple has taken most of Microsoft’s loss over the last year or two, and Linux and Apple share the roughly 12% of the market that Windows doesn’t hold, with a 3:1 ratio between Apple : Linux.

So why is this? Well, there’s a few things that Microsoft and Apple are certainly doing right that Linux is not.

First let’s look at what Apple has done recently to steal market share from Windows. The most obvious attacks are image, and these work to some extent. Obviously we have the “Get a Mac,” commercials and this is what they want you to see:

mac-pc-commercial

Gamers know just how ironic those commercials are.

And this works, to a large extent, especially with new college students. The MacBook’s sales are soaring and it’s for the same reason as Obama’s popularity: image. If you have a Mac, you’re a rebel. You’re cool. And you’re not supporting the evil Microsoft empire. However the ads are fraught with lies and the commercials have recently boiled down to the PC making a fool of himself and the Mac being a tool about it. And Microsoft has realized this and put out the “I’m a PC” commercials which capitalize on exactly this mistake that Apple has made.

But I digress. What it comes down to is usability, and price. Mac still hovers at 6%-7% market share for two reasons:

  1. Macs are expensive
  2. People are apprehensive to leave Windows in fear of compatibility and usability issues

Mac OS X works only on Mac computers, and Mac computers will cost you a pretty penny for all of their beautify industrial design and overpriced specs. I can’t tell you how many Thinkpads I’ve seen with an Apple sticker on them. People want to join the Mac cult but the Mac cult is expensive. The cheapest MacBook will run you $1000 and can’t even play modern games. For $1000 you can buy an EeePC and build a desktop that can play modern games. And then you have TWO COMPUTERS, each more useful than the MacBook.

Windows can run on any piece of crap computer you’ve scrapped together. Not so much Vista, but XP is what people love anyway. Windows is comfortable, Windows is familiar, and Windows isn’t going anywhere.

So why haven’t people flocked to Linux in the flailing of Vista and simply begrudgingly accepted Vista and bitched about it? This image that floats around the Internet sums it up pretty nicely:

It's about image.

It's about image.

Linux, even though it has matured and my computer-illiterate mother can use it to some degree (as much as she can use Windows, anyway) is still perceived as being “for geeks.” Admittedly, geeks love their Linux. Nothing is cooler than whipping open the terminal and cranking out some indecipherable gobbledegook and having your computer do something that you want it to do. I, for one, love the ability to ssh into my machine and blah blah blah blah blah. You get the idea.

So here’s the thing: Linux is for geeks. But it’s for everyone else, too. So what can Linux do?

The answer is Canonical. Canonical needs to develop a business plan, and advertise Linux. First of all, Linux is spreading almost purely by spread of mouth now. If Canonical offers support for Ubuntu — yes, paid support, and advertises it, we will see an uptick in adoption, and with it the number one thing missing from Linux: games! And yes! Games are missing! Yes I know about PPRacer and Tremulous and Urban Terror etc etc etc and they are fun but they are no substitute for Fallout 3 and Mirror’s Edge and the list goes on and on. Of course, we’d also see growth in vendor support, maybe Linux Photoshop and Linux SolidWorks. These are the stumbling blocks to Linux adoption, not Linux itself. If Linux is what people use at home, businesses will want to switch to keep employees comfortable, and software vendors like Adobe will be more than willing to recompile their software as a .deb.

The final point is that “familiar is better,” is a common feeling for Linux newbies. They want their Start button (or dock) and .exe “go to the site and download it” method. However, the answer is not “emulate Windows.” I’m looking at you, Linspire.

Linux is not cheap Windows. Linux has much more to offer than Windows, and does things differently. There is a “Linux mindset” specifically for installing software which is mind-blowingly amazing in Linux but a very difficult concept to grasp for new Windows/Mac users. Most of it is “it’s this simple?!”

There are stumbling blocks, and I’ll talk about them, probably in a post called “What Linux Does Wrong,” but the biggest issue, I believe, is image. We aren’t trying to copy Windows or Mac but provide a viable alternative. And on the desktop front, a boxed Ubuntu at Best Buy and a friendly instruction manual might be the first step down the long road to real desktop adoption.

Hell, even a $50 price tag might help because I’ve heard more than once from people unversed in Linux who dismiss it as “freeware,” because “if it’s free (as in beer) it can’t possibly be that good.” Come on Canonical, it’s time to sell support and make some money.