

Study explains how retailers stop Linux from entering the market - sciurus
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Study-explains-how-retailers-stop-Linux-from-entering-the-market-1564385.html

======
doktrin
If there really was a strong market demand (and supply!) for preinstalled
Linux laptops, why hasn't _any_ reseller stepped up to fill this gaping void?

If the conclusions drawn by this paper are true, this is a _massive_ business
opportunity. They practically go so far as to imply that close to 10% of the
laptop market is up for grabs _if only_ the pesky retail oligopoly would stop
sabotaging their own financial interests.

Does anyone believe this to be the case? I'll be frank : if I did, I would be
investing in a new venture instead of writing this.

~~~
wpietri
I doubt there's a strong demand for Linux laptops[1], but there's a fair bit
of demand for _cheap_ laptops, so a free OS should have an advantage there.

[1] I'm using one now, but even most of my nerdy friends just use Apple
laptops.

~~~
rfugger
As I understand it, manufacturers receive fees for packaging bloatware on
Windows machines, and so there's little to no savings to be had with
preinstalled Linux, at least until there's bloatware to package with Linux...

------
yardie
What Linux probably needs is to take a page from Apple and set up a brick and
mortar store where people can come in, try Linux, buy a PC, and get some
advice.

Does anyone remember how Macs were sold before the Apple store? You had the
mom and pop stores that had the expertise but not the volume to make an
impact. You had the online stores that had the volume but if you weren't
looking, specifically, for a Mac you wouldn't know there was an alternative.
And then you had the B&M stores like Sears, CompUSA, etc. They had Macs,
tucked away between the radar detectors and vacuum cleaners. Even if you knew
you wanted a Mac the sales staff would try to pass you on a Windows PC. With
"friends" like these who needed enemies.

Jobs knew he needed to switch things up so worked on retail store concept. Put
it in a place with a lot of foot traffic (mall, downtown store, etc.) and make
it easy. Want to check email, facebook, etc? Everyone knows you do it at the
Apple store, Starbucks wifi costs money. Now you've got everyone in your store
using your OS. They might not buy it right away but you've planted the bug in
their ear.

For retailers it's just business. No one demands a Linux laptop and the few
that due aren't a large enough market to keep them in stock and on the sales
floor. If desktop Linux wants to have an impact it's going to need a lot more
than a website with ISOs.

~~~
cookiecaper
I agree. Desktop Linux must have a patron that operates much like Apple if
anyone intends for it to get penetration. Canonical is the best candidate but
it's not in Shuttleworth's playbook as far as I know, which imo is a real
shame.

If you want to push an alternate OS, you can't bundle it like a normal PC and
sell it alongside Windows machines. You need to do what Apple did, and make it
its own thing: a "Mac" instead of a "PC". Someone needs to box up Ubuntu into
3-6 SKUs, slap some cohesive, trendy branding on it, and get it into sales
channels as a "penguin" or whatever and NOT a "PC".

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
We need "Ubuntu Store". I think it's the only Linux brand strong enough just
now to manage it.

------
lumberjack
Three years ago I was going through High School and as you can expect, every
single piece of software in the labs was Microsoft branded. Now, I'm with a
lot of the same people at University and despite what some people insist,
nobody has a problem using GNU/Linux. It is the only option in the labs, but
still many people got the hang of it within two to three days.

Although mine is just an anecdote it still follows, that both our educational
systems and our corporate environments play a big part (I'd even say a much
bigger part) in keeping the OS market share as it is.

------
atirip
No, retailers do not stop anything. 1) Nothing, absolutely nothing sells in
meaningful quantities for reatailer without marketing. 2) For unknown or new
products it is not in the retailers best interest to start create market for
somebody elses brand/product. There's nothing to gain. 3) The brand/product
must market themselves and as nobody owns Linux, nobody will do that, hence it
will not sell.

~~~
brudgers
_"nobody owns Linux"_

It's not just marketing, it's service and education, too.

Who trains the retailer's staff? What website do customers go to for support
(and how does it compare to Microsoft or Apple?

The business model for Linux is based on charging a premium for support rather
than rolling it into the retail price. There's a good reason that Redhat
stores don't exist. The Linux business is incompatible with consumer channels.

------
kevinchen
I don't think it's the retailers stopping Linux from entering the mainstream.
It's the users. A vast majority of people in the market for a new computer
will freak out when the see Linux, because they have no idea what it is and it
has no Start button.

~~~
rsanchez1
That doesn't explain all the people buying Macs. What it does explain is why
cheap Android tablets can't make a dent in the tablet market, while the iPad,
among the most expensive options, prints money for Apple every year. It's the
disproportionate importance of branding.

~~~
patricklynch
Not to mention how relatively easy Macs and iThings are to use. This is
subjective, but I think Apple's better than anyone at making computers that
"non computer people" can figure out.

~~~
werpon
I don't think OS X nor iOS are much easier to use than their free
counterparts, it's just that new users have at least two incentives to learn
them, and so they do, without thinking too much about it.

First, they have a positive reinforcement: Mac is "hip", so you'll look cool
by using their products (the fact that everybody and their mother owns one or
ten doesn't seem to diminish this perception), and also a negative
reinforcement because everybody knows "Apple makes easy-to-use products" so if
you don't learn to use them quickly you'll look bad.

I'm sure Linux and *BSD have earned more followers by looking different or
difficult than by trying to be "easy" (whatever that word means). But that's a
discussion for another day...

~~~
kevinchen
Apple operating systems (and Microsoft operating systems too) are absolutely
easier to use than Linux. For example, my Linux box regularly throws up dialog
boxes that are nothing more than rehashings of error messages printed out by
command-line utilities. My Mac computer and my Windows computer never do that.

------
bunderbunder
Not too long ago, Linux did enter the market. In a fairly big way. When the
netbook craze was really ramping up, around about 25% of units sold were
running Linux. That wouldn't have been possible if what the study says is
true.

But the Linux units saw a depressingly high return rate. MSI was reporting it
was _four times_ that of the Windows netbooks.

So retailers and manufacturers dropped Linux like a hot potato. Not because of
some perverse supply chain structure, but because consumers had clearly and
emphatically indicated that they were dissatisfied with the product.

~~~
mironathetin
Agreed. I used linux for 8 years on my main development notebook (a Thinkpad).
That was a lot of trouble compared to Mac OS now.

------
celticjames
Retailers and consumers love Linux! It has has 61% market share. (Source:
<http://tinyurl.com/ce6t8dk>).

Maybe people just don't like Gnome. (viz. <http://tinyurl.com/834bn2j>)

