Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Unix To Surpass Linux?

Filed under

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.


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., 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

Lumina Desktop 1.1 Released

The BSD-focused, Qt-powered Lumina Desktop Environment is out with its version 1.1 update. The developers behind the Lumina Desktop Environment consider it a "significant update" with both new and reworked utilities, infrastructure improvements, and other enhancements. Lumina 1.1 adds a pure Qt5 calculator, text editor improvements, the file manager has been completely overhauled, system application list management is much improved, and there is a range of other improvements. Read more

Radeon vs. Nouveau Open-Source Drivers On Mesa Git + Linux 4.9

For your viewing pleasure this Friday are some open-source AMD vs. NVIDIA numbers when using the latest open-source code on each side. Linux 4.9-rc1 was used while Ubuntu 16.10 paired with the Padoka PPA led to Mesa Git as of earlier this week plus LLVM 4.0 SVN. As covered recently, there are no Nouveau driver changes for Linux 4.9 while we had hoped the boost patches would land. Thus the re-clocking is still quite poor for this open-source NVIDIA driver stack. For the Nouveau tests I manually re-clocked each graphics card to the highest performance state (0f) after first re-clocking the cards to the 0a performance state for helping some of the GPUs that otherwise fail with memory re-clocking at 0f, as Nouveau developers have expressed this is the preferred approach for testing. Read more

Ubuntu MATE, Not Just a Whim

I've stated for years how much I dislike Ubuntu's Unity interface. Yes, it's become more polished through the years, but it's just not an interface that thinks the same way I do. That's likely because I'm old and inflexible, but nevertheless, I've done everything I could to avoid using Unity, which usually means switching to Xubuntu. I actually really like Xubuntu, and the Xfce interface is close enough to the GNOME 2 look, that I hardly miss the way my laptop used to look before Unity. I wasn't alone in my disdain for Ubuntu's flagship desktop manager switch, and many folks either switched to Xubuntu or moved to another Debian/Ubuntu-based distro like Linux Mint. The MATE desktop started as a hack, in fact, because GNOME 3 and Unity were such drastic changes. I never really got into MATE, however, because I thought it was going to be nothing more than a hack and eventually would be unusable due to old GNOME 2 libraries phasing out and so forth. Read more

EU-Fossa project submits results of code audits

The European Commission’s ‘EU Free and Open Source Software Auditing’ project (EU-Fossa) has sent its code review results to the developers of Apache HTTP server target and KeePass. The audit results are not yet made public, however, no critical vulnerabilities were found. Read more