Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Unix To Surpass Linux?

Filed under
OS

Tom Yager dusted off his crystal ball this morning in order to answer the question "where will Linux thrive?" He also made a prediction regarding the effect of Apple's Unix on the future of Linux.

The answer to the first question, however, is that Linux will become "the de facto choice for embedded solutions," according to Yager's article. "I believe Big Software vendors such as IBM and Oracle will use Linux to give unwieldy enterprise solutions the George Jetson treatment: Push a button, you've got an enterprise database, configured, loaded with sample data and listening for connections."

That makes it sound like Linux has a fairly bright future ahead of it. Another forecast within the same article made things sound less certain, though. "Apple's Unix - or who knows what it'll be called by then - will overtake commercial Linux in rate of revenue growth by the end of 2007," Yager wrote.

Full Story.

Similar article on LinuxInsider.

MacOS X is not Unix.

UNIX (the correct term is Unix) is a trademark of The Open Group and MacOS X is in fact based on FreeBSD and the Mach kernel. I think the author has got it a bit wrong as it's MS Windows it will surpass, not GNU/Linux (we're working with them, remember?) Yes, it's the worst thing that could ever happen for the suits in Redmond. Apple regaining the position as the leading company would be the ultimate revenge over the people that once stole their ideas (which Apple got from the tour at Xerox PARC.)

Vendor lock in

So long as Apple force their hardware on consumers in order to run their OS they will limit their own success. Cheap commodity hardware (cheap because of competition) and easy hardware customization and serviceability is one of the greatest things about windows / linux. Not long ago people would harp on Microsoft for imposing "their way or the highway" but whose OS is the only one that runs on their own hardware.... Apple. Heck I can run Windows on a Mac and we all know linux runs on everything including the iPod.

True.

Large GNU/Linux vendors, Sun Microsystems, Microsoft and others offer their systems bundled with hardware or as a standalone product. Apple would benefit greatly if they released the system independently too.

re: True

First off, it's amusing to read all the armchair-ceo's out there that think they can analyze Apple's business model better then the hoard of MBA's that Apple has on staff (you can just see the bunch of them in a meeting smacking their foreheads going "why didn't we think of that?").

Second, Apple locks their OS to their overpriced hardware for two reasons, profit (hence the over-prices under-spec'd hardware) and support. There's no profitable way for Apple to support all the possible hardware combinations and still keep Apples counted on "it just works" integration.

Also, if any old thing can run OSX they lose their "snob factor", which is a major component in all of Apples marketing schemes.

The snob factor.

Hehe, yes it is really true.

Second off, you've just put

Second off, you've just put in your two cents about why Apple does what it does so why can't I make my armchair comments? Third off perhaps I should have said that Apple will limit their adoption beyond their current 4% market share rather than saying they will limit their success... I never said they weren't profitable. And I can say with certainty that I won't buy Apple hardware to run OSX .... I don't care how many MBA's are working at Apple they fail to get my business. All I'm saying is that I'll bet their are many like me out there.

Uh...no

Uh...no, I'm just regurgitating what both Apple and WallStreet are saying (althought they probably didn't use the word "overpriced") about Apples business model, not speculating on why they should or shouldn't do something.

As to market share, that's closely connected to their profit. It's unlikely (which is just my guess, but probably pretty accurate) that they would be able to remain profitable AND have a much larger market share without radically changing their business model. Something which their board and stock holders are adverse to letting them do.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More in Tux Machines

Sean Michael Kerner on OpenStack

Xubuntu 15.04 Vivid Vervet - Fabulous

I have to say, Xubuntu 15.04 Vivid Vervet shattered my expectations. Obliterated them. Overall, I was expecting a distro that would be about as good as its parent. Instead, I got this fine piece of digital machinery, which purrs and meows and growls like a turbo-charged tiger, if this silly metaphor makes any sense. Or is it an analogy? Now, one tiny software glitch, plus one big regression that affects the entire family. That's the sum of my complains. On the plus side, Xubuntu fully supports the hardware, including the tricky UEFI stuff, it's fast, robust, elegant, rich in software and features, simple and fun to use, and it works well with anything I've thrown at it. By far the best distro of this year. I don't give out 10/10 lightly, but I'm inclined to do that right now, even though the few tiny problems we've had prevent me from doing that. However, the whole package reminds me of Fuduntu, really. Pure and simple and just good. 9.99999/10. Try it, you won't be disappointed. We're done here. Read more

Akanda Pledges to Keep SDN Tech for OpenStack Open-Source

Rosendahl emphasized that Akanda was born as open-source software and will remain open-source. From a commercial perspective what Akanda provides to enterprises is support and professional services. Read more

A New Firefox OS phone

Last Monday, I bought the phone anyway. I must say that I am very pleased by its performance and very cheap price. One can swap the SIM card to use the phone with another carrier here, too. Read more