...which explains why Linux has taken over the desktop market?
Seriously, Linux has had MAJOR advantages, people HATE M$ and the Mac has shown ZERO interest in taking over anything other than the elite market segment.
I tried using Linux for a while, and it is a major pain in the ass. I've been using a Mac for everything since 2009, and it is so much easier. I really miss some Windows apps, so I'm going to have to get another machine just to run those apps, and of course I will install Windows. But there are no killer apps for Linux on the desktop.
Running a server farm? Of course I'll use Linux. No point in using anything else. But on the desktop, what's the point?
If you use Linux, it's like tithing. It's free, but you have to give up 10% of your life just to get by. If you're a sysadmin, that IS your life, and you can kernel hack all day and night. This is why Linux controls the server market.
But Linus has no conception of what the average user wants and needs in an OS. For example: if I'm using Linux, I'd like to be able to seamlessly run lots of Windows software. Linux should have an executive suite for Wine.
The charitable interpretation of his antics is "Lilliputian victim". He sounds like a 13 year old.
On top of that, the vitriol is a waste of breath. The Mac broke binary compatibility two times - Motorolla to PPC and PPC to intel. There were VMs available and fat binary alternatives available for both changes, and Mac users and developers just rolled over.
Linus does some things very well, but I would not describe him as a model leader.
Your comment is a bizarre and rambling non-sequitur. What on earth gave you the idea that winning the desktop battle is Linus' measure of success or leadership? Why does Apple breaking binary compatibility imply that there is no cost in doing so? How can you say Apple is only targeting elite segments when you look at products like the iPad that are selling in incredible numbers and causing low-end market leaders like HP to drop out of the market?
It seems like you have some bone to pick with Linus, because there isn't any real criticism here. Binary compatibility is a very nice feature for Linux users, you haven't written a word about why that is not so.
Seriously, Linux has had MAJOR advantages, people HATE M$ and the Mac has shown ZERO interest in taking over anything other than the elite market segment.
I tried using Linux for a while, and it is a major pain in the ass. I've been using a Mac for everything since 2009, and it is so much easier. I really miss some Windows apps, so I'm going to have to get another machine just to run those apps, and of course I will install Windows. But there are no killer apps for Linux on the desktop.
Running a server farm? Of course I'll use Linux. No point in using anything else. But on the desktop, what's the point?
If you use Linux, it's like tithing. It's free, but you have to give up 10% of your life just to get by. If you're a sysadmin, that IS your life, and you can kernel hack all day and night. This is why Linux controls the server market.
But Linus has no conception of what the average user wants and needs in an OS. For example: if I'm using Linux, I'd like to be able to seamlessly run lots of Windows software. Linux should have an executive suite for Wine.
The charitable interpretation of his antics is "Lilliputian victim". He sounds like a 13 year old.
On top of that, the vitriol is a waste of breath. The Mac broke binary compatibility two times - Motorolla to PPC and PPC to intel. There were VMs available and fat binary alternatives available for both changes, and Mac users and developers just rolled over.
Linus does some things very well, but I would not describe him as a model leader.