Only remaining piece is the desktop segment
macOS has a unix environment, so it'll stay relevant (for how long?)
windows has WSL, it's slow, i don't see myself using it since the host OS is a giant piece of shitty crap
MS missed a chance with Win11, they could have went full steam ARM with a Linux Distro, 100% native Android support, 100% cloud native support, 100% unix support as a host OS, i wouldn't use it myself because i despise the company and its culture, but i can see potential, and i smell a huge missed opportunity
Amazon it getting it right, even thought it's exclusively targeting for cloud usages
Marketing wise it's great and consistent with their offering
The advantages of windows and mac these days are that a lot of stuff 'just works' and secondly that due to their 20-30 year history their desktop application ecosystem is much richer and also much more widely used. User interfaces are also more friendly in general.
There's no technical reason why these faults cannot be overcome, but there are significant hurdles in getting a third OS to gain major market share from the incumbents MS and Apple. The reason they have market share in servers is because the experience is better to develop on and it is free. The reason they have market share in mobile is that it was free and Google could build on top of it, and secondly that mobile was a brand new market so there were no incumbents with decades of history. I don't see those conditions replicated for desktop, especially when you consider that desktop is in decline and therefore less attractive to spend capital on.
If you want to make Ubuntu as nice as MacOS I think you need a private company willing to spend money and time in a concerted effort to get it to that point, which IMO won't happen.
Canonical employees would like a word with you.
It seems to underline the necessary financial backing. Canonical barely pulls in 100 million in earnings.
Why there isnt't billions of dollars available for Linux alone from governments worldwide for securing and improving Linux since it is currently becoming the backbone of the worldwide data processing and security infrastructure is mystifying.
Why NVidia, Nintendo, AMD, Intel, Sony, Samsung, all the Chinese handset makers, Compaq, Dell, and all of them don't provide a billion a year to linux desktop so they can have market leverage against Microsoft and/or enable them to push their hardware out to the OS for utilization by the public at large within months (as opposed to decades for Microsoft) is beyond me.
The funny thing with the M1 architecture and OSX: it highlights how the entire PC stack tying themselves to the Microsoft behemoth has them cornered. How do you move to a competitive PC ARM architecture without waiting for MS (even if it has an arm-compatible windows, let's face it it doesn't have the software support or organization behind it) to move it's bloated carcass in about 5 years to support it properly at the OS level.
Meanwhile, Linux can support an Arm arch right now with practically all the necessary software.
If someone smart was with Linux, they'd have long ago been coordinating a desktop alliance, secret or not, and selling it actively to the major powers who could fund it with chump change.
Intel makes 20 billion a quarter. AMD 4 billion. NVidia 7 billion.
And then there's the US military.
And then there's google compute, AWS, and all the other cloud wannabes besides Azure. Linux is the reason your platforms mint money. Wouldn't you like companies and people to move to cloud-based desktops?
Why the EU doesn't fund this for economic competition with american software mystifies me. Why Africa, Asia, and South America don't fund it for language support and an affordable computing ecosystem for their countries is beyond me.
I'm not a Torvalds hater, but a super-technical person leading Linux was fantastic for the first 10 years, but really the last 15 needed a different skillset.
Amazon should be interested in providing a great remote desktop solution. IMO that is a huge untapped market, especially in BYOD orgs: sure, bring your crap device, but you RDP in for anything you need business-wise that needs to be secure.
Microsoft are learning - try uninstalling the "Your Phone" application in Windows.
(Google it, paste the command into an Admin Powershell ...)
Linux now bundles NTFS.
What if a rescue distro, that erased \Windows, and ran all the applications under Wine or appropriate emulation, existed at that desupport date?
Microsoft's desktop dominance would be over on that date. They would cling to corporate desktops, but the general consumer market would be lost.
ReactOS is another wildcard for 2024.
microsoft lost the application war, everything is web based nowadays
developpers moved on linux to deploy their web apps / servers
what's left? people moved to smartphones, even for games, smartphone generates more revenue than both console / desktop combined
WASM even more showcase it, the present and future is web based interfaces
Some of them require Active Directory.
In the core of this, Windows is not going anywhere.
Linux could do it a LOT of damage, if this 2024 plan is executed.
Haha we said the same with Vista and some even for WindowsME...and nothing has and will happen.
Mmm No, not really, many small and medium businesses still have windows server + exchange + hyperV etc....
> Compared to Plan 9, Unix creaks and clanks and has obvious rust spots, but it gets the job done well enough to hold its position. There is a lesson here for ambitious system architects: the most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough.
Linux might be "better"; unfortunately Windows is just "good enough" for most people to not care.
There are literally millions of Windows workstations or laptops across corporate campuses in the US, because at the end of the day what 95% of white collar workers need to do their jobs is MS Office and *maybe* one industry-specific LoB app.
Yeah, on Windows Server WSL2 is explicitly made not accessible.