Re: MS worried about the embedded space

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by impossible, Apr 19, 2008.

  1. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "... Microsoft Corp. today announced plans to rejigger and expand its
    > Windows Embedded family of operating systems in an attempt to enlist
    > developers of handhelds and other devices to help the software vendor
    > combat increasing competition from Linux....."
    >
    > ".......last October, VDC released the results of a survey (download PDF)
    > in which embedded developers overwhelmingly said that they planned to use
    > either free or licensed versions of Linux on their next projects instead
    > of proprietary operating systems. "Linux remains an attractive operating
    > system choice for a range of embedded development teams for a number of
    > reasons, including: royalty-free runtime costs, advanced networking
    > capabilities and technical features, [and] the large base of engineers
    > familiar with the Linux operating system," the research firm
    > said........."
    >
    > http://www.computerworld.com/action...Basic&taxonomyName=software&articleId=9077838
    >


    Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has 8%. I
    had no idea so many vendors were using Windows. And did you hear? IBM just
    switched from Suse to Windows for all its POS hardware? So that's an
    unexpected setback, eh?
    impossible, Apr 19, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. impossible

    Squiggle Guest

    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    > On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:12:09 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >
    >> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has 8%.

    >
    > What has the other 60%?
    >
    >


    Real embedded OSes. Vxworks, uC/OS ,ECOS etc.. Some may not even bother
    with anything that could realistically be called an OS.
    Squiggle, Apr 19, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:...
    > Squiggle wrote:
    >> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    >>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:12:09 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has
    >>>> 8%.
    >>>
    >>> What has the other 60%?
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Real embedded OSes. Vxworks, uC/OS ,ECOS etc.. Some may not even bother
    >> with anything that could realistically be called an OS.

    >
    > I don't believe Microsoft has anything like 32% of the number of embedded
    > operating systems in use on all the embedded CPUs, there are 10 billion
    > ARM processors sold so far and they comprise 75% of the 32 bit market


    Only a tiny fraction of all ARM processors are equipped with an embedded os.
    So what's your point?

    > In phones, Microsofts share is miniscule, in printers, routers,
    > appliances, industrial controllers, cars, gps, depth sounders, cameras,
    > dvrs, set-top boxes, av receivers, industrial robots, security systems,
    > serial converters etcetcetc ad infinitum nothing


    When you source some actual market-share numbers, we can discuss what -- if
    anything -- here is relevant. But it's clear from your laundry list that you
    really have no clue whatsoever about the market for embedded software at
    all. Phones are the single fastest growing market, and we know that Linux is
    getting beaten badly here by both Apple and Microsoft. But most of the
    devices you mention have no use for **any** os at all, so I don't no why you
    bother bringing them up. Many (especially those in the category of
    industrial controllers and robots) utilise software that is strictly
    proprietary to the hardware manufacturer. Others (especially those in the
    category of household appliances and consumer electronics) involve such
    simple, generic types of coding that it's hardly worth talking about this
    stuff as software at all. So sort out exactly what it is you'd like to
    discuss, do some research for a change that involves sourcing real data, and
    I'll be happy to compare notes with you.

    > They might claim that they make 32% of the revenue of embedded operating
    > systems in some arbitrarily defined segment who knows how they derive
    > these PR figures ?
    > But it isn't on 32% of the embedded cpus


    As I said, referencing the article Thingy cited, Microsoft has 32% of the
    embedded os market and Linux has 8%. If you find some evidence to contradict
    that statement, I'd love to see it.
    impossible, Apr 20, 2008
    #3
  4. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "ChrisOD" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 2008-04-19, impossible <> wrote:
    >> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> "... Microsoft Corp. today announced plans to rejigger and expand its
    >>> Windows Embedded family of operating systems in an attempt to enlist
    >>> developers of handhelds and other devices to help the software vendor
    >>> combat increasing competition from Linux....."
    >>>
    >>> ".......last October, VDC released the results of a survey (download
    >>> PDF)
    >>> in which embedded developers overwhelmingly said that they planned to
    >>> use
    >>> either free or licensed versions of Linux on their next projects instead
    >>> of proprietary operating systems. "Linux remains an attractive operating
    >>> system choice for a range of embedded development teams for a number of
    >>> reasons, including: royalty-free runtime costs, advanced networking
    >>> capabilities and technical features, [and] the large base of engineers
    >>> familiar with the Linux operating system," the research firm
    >>> said........."
    >>>
    >>> http://www.computerworld.com/action...Basic&taxonomyName=software&articleId=9077838
    >>>

    >>
    >> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has 8%.
    >> I
    >> had no idea so many vendors were using Windows. And did you hear? IBM
    >> just
    >> switched from Suse to Windows for all its POS hardware? So that's an
    >> unexpected setback, eh?
    >>
    >>

    > Well had in 2006, according to the article quoted in the CW article.
    > http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=202806015
    > Also mentioned in that art.
    > "About 47 percent of embedded developers currently say they use a
    > commercial
    > OS, 21 percent use a non-commercial open source OS, 20 percent use
    > homegrown
    > software and ten percent use a commercial Linux version"
    >
    > So 8% of rev from 10% of market for linux in 2006.
    >
    > But interestingly 21% Open Source non-commercial. Would give Linux
    > significantly more % usage than the 8% you quote or even the 10%.
    >
    > More recent data which seems to spark this article
    > http://www.vdc-corp.com/_documents/pressrelease/press-attachment-1394.pdf
    > shows current (Oct 2007) linux usage for embedded at 11% of commercial
    > usage (only up 1%) but 29% usage of non-commercial linux! and commercial
    > usage down to 38%.
    >


    Market share, measured in percentage of dollar income, is very different
    from usage share, measured in percentage of projects. I don't doubt that
    there are a lot of developers using non-commecial open-source development
    tools for their projects. And the number of projects these developers are
    involved in may very well be growing. However, the important question to me
    is not the popularity of any given development package but the size, scope,
    complexity, and (ultimately) profitability of the projects concerned.
    Unfortunately, the 2007 VDC survey you mention offers no information about
    that. If I were a developer, I'd much prefer to have one project worth $2
    million in the works than 50 projects worth $20,000. Wouldn't you? And
    that's where market share becomes a much more useful statistic than usage
    for tracking business trends.

    > And even scarier for commercial embedded vendors the next project planned
    > usage is down to 12% for commercial OSs.
    >


    If that's true, we're bound to see it reflected in some soon-to-be-released
    market share numbers. But I must say I'm doubtful. For years, we've all been
    reading reports predicting that "next year", "next time", "next project"
    will be the time for [name your favorite open-source distro/tool]. I'll
    believe it when I see it.

    > Yes agreed MS has managed to OWN the POS market by a well designed OS
    > directed at the needs of a specialised market. But can MS follow this
    > trend to diversify their offerings into every other specialised market?
    >


    No, but then Microsoft has always picked its spots. It's as likely to buy
    into some market via an acqusition as strike out on its own from scratch.
    impossible, Apr 20, 2008
    #4
  5. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC)" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 06:22:18 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >
    >> As I said, referencing the article Thingy cited, Microsoft has 32% of
    >> the embedded os market and Linux has 8%. If you find some evidence to
    >> contradict that statement, I'd love to see it.

    >
    > You've conveniently not included the statistics for who has the other 60%
    > of the embedded OS market.
    >
    > Please include that data in order for comparisons to be accurately made.
    >
    > Please also include data for year on year comparisons over the last 5
    > years so that a historical trend can be seen.
    >
    > As you know, the historical trend for adoption of software is of more
    > interest than the snapshot of any one given year.
    >
    >
    > --


    The complete VDC report is available for purchase here ($US6250):

    http://www.vdc-corp.com/Purchase.asp?viewtype=detail&pagesection=esw&id=2085

    Expect to pay more for custom tabulations.
    impossible, Apr 20, 2008
    #5
  6. impossible

    sam Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "sam" <> wrote in message news:...
    >> Squiggle wrote:
    >>> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    >>>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:12:09 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has
    >>>>> 8%.
    >>>> What has the other 60%?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Real embedded OSes. Vxworks, uC/OS ,ECOS etc.. Some may not even bother
    >>> with anything that could realistically be called an OS.

    >> I don't believe Microsoft has anything like 32% of the number of embedded
    >> operating systems in use on all the embedded CPUs, there are 10 billion
    >> ARM processors sold so far and they comprise 75% of the 32 bit market

    >
    > Only a tiny fraction of all ARM processors are equipped with an embedded os.
    > So what's your point?
    >
    >> In phones, Microsofts share is miniscule, in printers, routers,
    >> appliances, industrial controllers, cars, gps, depth sounders, cameras,
    >> dvrs, set-top boxes, av receivers, industrial robots, security systems,
    >> serial converters etcetcetc ad infinitum nothing

    >
    > When you source some actual market-share numbers, we can discuss what -- if
    > anything -- here is relevant. But it's clear from your laundry list that you
    > really have no clue whatsoever about the market for embedded software at
    > all. Phones are the single fastest growing market, and we know that Linux is
    > getting beaten badly here by both Apple and Microsoft.


    You previously linked to a report prepared for Symbian that showed Linux
    was second only to Symbian in worldwide phone operating systems, Apple
    only figured in the US figures, where it was beating Microsoft and
    didn't rate worldwide. Microsoft was one of the also rans in every other
    market outside the US



    But most of the
    > devices you mention have no use for **any** os at all, so I don't no why you
    > bother bringing them up. Many (especially those in the category of
    > industrial controllers and robots) utilise software that is strictly
    > proprietary to the hardware manufacturer. Others (especially those in the
    > category of household appliances and consumer electronics) involve such
    > simple, generic types of coding that it's hardly worth talking about this
    > stuff as software at all. So sort out exactly what it is you'd like to
    > discuss, do some research for a change that involves sourcing real data, and
    > I'll be happy to compare notes with you.


    There are plenty of consumer dvrs for instance from the likes of
    Panasonic that are now using Linux, just like the TiVo.
    None of these figure as revenue in your Microsoft propaganda piece,
    because the software is free

    >
    >> They might claim that they make 32% of the revenue of embedded operating
    >> systems in some arbitrarily defined segment who knows how they derive
    >> these PR figures ?
    >> But it isn't on 32% of the embedded cpus

    >
    > As I said, referencing the article Thingy cited, Microsoft has 32% of the
    > embedded os market and Linux has 8%. If you find some evidence to contradict
    > that statement, I'd love to see it.
    >
    >

    Some consolation, comparing Windows CE license revenue to commercial
    revenue for small embedded linux vendors like Montavista, but they don't
    show the actual usage as well as this report.
    http://www.vdc-corp.com/_documents/pressrelease/press-attachment-1394.pdf

    Wintrolls love trying to confuse linux usage with linux sales revenue,

    There are more Linux embedded software users than the total of all
    commercial embedded OSs. The competitive advantage they have is that
    they don't have to buy it.
    sam, Apr 21, 2008
    #6
  7. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >
    > 8><----
    >
    >>> http://www.computerworld.com/action...Basic&taxonomyName=software&articleId=9077838
    >>>

    >>
    >> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has 8%.

    >
    > No, commercial versions of embedded Linux a total market share of 8%.
    >


    Market=commercial.

    > Cant get you facts straight can you....
    >


    My facts are **always** absolutely accurate and sourced. Yours?
    Non-existent.

    > So that's a paid for version as opposed to a downloaded and free used
    > version, which I think I read somewhere as in the 20~30% range....in which
    > case ALL Linux's share is near to or exceeds MS's share (28~38%)
    >


    Can't you keep your categories straight. There's no **market** for Linux
    giveaways. So feel free to make up any **usage** numbers you please --
    they're absolutely meaningless. Let's see....How many Linux developers does
    it take to........?....oh, well, there's a joke there somewhere.

    >> had no idea so many vendors were using Windows. And did you hear? IBM
    >> just switched from Suse to Windows for all its POS hardware? So that's an
    >> unexpected setback, eh?

    >
    > Why? did you read about Newham council? how MS has failed to deliver? now
    > that is a real set back. A flagship council that MS did a deal with so
    > open source did not go in, yet 4 years later MS has not performed.
    >


    Can't you keep your threads straight? We were talking about embedded
    operating systems here.

    Anyway....Newham....yes, congratulations. But beware what you wish for. It
    sounds like the Newham Council has decided to what IT its whipping boy. And
    we all know how badly performed the Linux project in Munich turned out to
    be.
    impossible, Apr 21, 2008
    #7
  8. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:fugtgk$j2a$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "sam" <> wrote in message news:...
    >>> Squiggle wrote:
    >>>> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    >>>>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:12:09 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has
    >>>>>> 8%.
    >>>>> What has the other 60%?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> Real embedded OSes. Vxworks, uC/OS ,ECOS etc.. Some may not even bother
    >>>> with anything that could realistically be called an OS.
    >>> I don't believe Microsoft has anything like 32% of the number of
    >>> embedded operating systems in use on all the embedded CPUs, there are 10
    >>> billion ARM processors sold so far and they comprise 75% of the 32 bit
    >>> market

    >>
    >> Only a tiny fraction of all ARM processors are equipped with an embedded
    >> os. So what's your point?
    >>
    >>> In phones, Microsofts share is miniscule, in printers, routers,
    >>> appliances, industrial controllers, cars, gps, depth sounders, cameras,
    >>> dvrs, set-top boxes, av receivers, industrial robots, security systems,
    >>> serial converters etcetcetc ad infinitum nothing

    >>
    >> When you source some actual market-share numbers, we can discuss what --
    >> if anything -- here is relevant. But it's clear from your laundry list
    >> that you really have no clue whatsoever about the market for embedded
    >> software at all. Phones are the single fastest growing market, and we
    >> know that Linux is getting beaten badly here by both Apple and Microsoft.

    >
    > You previously linked to a report prepared for Symbian that showed Linux
    > was second only to Symbian in worldwide phone operating systems, Apple
    > only figured in the US figures, where it was beating Microsoft and didn't
    > rate worldwide. Microsoft was one of the also rans in every other market
    > outside the US
    >


    Am I the only one around here who can read?

    US: "RIM won 42 percent market share, according to Canalys, compared to
    Apple at 27 percent, Windows Mobile at 21 percent, and Palm at a nine
    percent. Linux, apparently was so far behind it didn't even deserve a
    mention."

    Worldwide: "Symbian dominated with a 65 percent market share, compared to
    Microsoft's 12 percent, RIM's 11 percent, Apple's seven percent, and Linux's
    five percent.

    http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3506923462.html

    >
    > But most of the
    >> devices you mention have no use for **any** os at all, so I don't no why
    >> you bother bringing them up. Many (especially those in the category of
    >> industrial controllers and robots) utilise software that is strictly
    >> proprietary to the hardware manufacturer. Others (especially those in the
    >> category of household appliances and consumer electronics) involve such
    >> simple, generic types of coding that it's hardly worth talking about this
    >> stuff as software at all. So sort out exactly what it is you'd like to
    >> discuss, do some research for a change that involves sourcing real data,
    >> and I'll be happy to compare notes with you.

    >
    > There are plenty of consumer dvrs for instance from the likes of Panasonic
    > that are now using Linux, just like the TiVo.
    > None of these figure as revenue in your Microsoft propaganda piece,
    > because the software is free
    >


    The truth hurts, I know, but Linux has a teeny, tiny shae of the embedded
    market. Deal with it.

    >>
    >>> They might claim that they make 32% of the revenue of embedded operating
    >>> systems in some arbitrarily defined segment who knows how they derive
    >>> these PR figures ?
    >>> But it isn't on 32% of the embedded cpus

    >>
    >> As I said, referencing the article Thingy cited, Microsoft has 32% of
    >> the embedded os market and Linux has 8%. If you find some evidence to
    >> contradict that statement, I'd love to see it.

    > Some consolation, comparing Windows CE license revenue to commercial
    > revenue for small embedded linux vendors like Montavista, but they don't
    > show the actual usage as well as this report.
    > http://www.vdc-corp.com/_documents/pressrelease/press-attachment-1394.pdf
    >
    > Wintrolls love trying to confuse linux usage with linux sales revenue,
    >
    > There are more Linux embedded software users than the total of all
    > commercial embedded OSs. The competitive advantage they have is that they
    > don't have to buy it.


    COLA Trolls seems incapable of distinguishing between sales revenue and
    usage. If you're running a business -- as IBM, RedHat, and Novelll have
    discovered to your grief -- this difference is rather important. As I keep
    telling you -- feel free to make up any usage numbers you like. They are all
    wild guesstimates, and absolutely meaningless.
    impossible, Apr 21, 2008
    #8
  9. impossible

    sam Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "sam" <> wrote in message news:fugtgk$j2a$...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> "sam" <> wrote in message news:...
    >>>> Squiggle wrote:
    >>>>> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    >>>>>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:12:09 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has
    >>>>>>> 8%.
    >>>>>> What has the other 60%?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Real embedded OSes. Vxworks, uC/OS ,ECOS etc.. Some may not even bother
    >>>>> with anything that could realistically be called an OS.
    >>>> I don't believe Microsoft has anything like 32% of the number of
    >>>> embedded operating systems in use on all the embedded CPUs, there are 10
    >>>> billion ARM processors sold so far and they comprise 75% of the 32 bit
    >>>> market
    >>> Only a tiny fraction of all ARM processors are equipped with an embedded
    >>> os. So what's your point?
    >>>
    >>>> In phones, Microsofts share is miniscule, in printers, routers,
    >>>> appliances, industrial controllers, cars, gps, depth sounders, cameras,
    >>>> dvrs, set-top boxes, av receivers, industrial robots, security systems,
    >>>> serial converters etcetcetc ad infinitum nothing
    >>> When you source some actual market-share numbers, we can discuss what --
    >>> if anything -- here is relevant. But it's clear from your laundry list
    >>> that you really have no clue whatsoever about the market for embedded
    >>> software at all. Phones are the single fastest growing market, and we
    >>> know that Linux is getting beaten badly here by both Apple and Microsoft.

    >> You previously linked to a report prepared for Symbian that showed Linux
    >> was second only to Symbian in worldwide phone operating systems, Apple
    >> only figured in the US figures, where it was beating Microsoft and didn't
    >> rate worldwide. Microsoft was one of the also rans in every other market
    >> outside the US
    >>

    >
    > Am I the only one around here who can read?


    You don't have a shit show of understanding what you read, thats for sure.


    >
    > US: "RIM won 42 percent market share, according to Canalys, compared to
    > Apple at 27 percent, Windows Mobile at 21 percent, and Palm at a nine
    > percent. Linux, apparently was so far behind it didn't even deserve a
    > mention."
    >
    > Worldwide: "Symbian dominated with a 65 percent market share, compared to
    > Microsoft's 12 percent, RIM's 11 percent, Apple's seven percent, and Linux's
    > five percent.
    >
    > http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3506923462.html


    Just smartphones.

    Take it across all embedded phone operating systems and have a look at
    the actual Canalys report published by Symbian.




    >
    >> But most of the
    >>> devices you mention have no use for **any** os at all, so I don't no why
    >>> you bother bringing them up. Many (especially those in the category of
    >>> industrial controllers and robots) utilise software that is strictly
    >>> proprietary to the hardware manufacturer. Others (especially those in the
    >>> category of household appliances and consumer electronics) involve such
    >>> simple, generic types of coding that it's hardly worth talking about this
    >>> stuff as software at all. So sort out exactly what it is you'd like to
    >>> discuss, do some research for a change that involves sourcing real data,
    >>> and I'll be happy to compare notes with you.

    >> There are plenty of consumer dvrs for instance from the likes of Panasonic
    >> that are now using Linux, just like the TiVo.
    >> None of these figure as revenue in your Microsoft propaganda piece,
    >> because the software is free
    >>

    >
    > The truth hurts, I know, but Linux has a teeny, tiny shae of the embedded
    > market. Deal with it.


    Microsoft does offer a packaged solution, but embedded device
    manufacturers are developing the hardware anyway, building something
    better for their purposes with Linux is usually easier.

    >
    >>>> They might claim that they make 32% of the revenue of embedded operating
    >>>> systems in some arbitrarily defined segment who knows how they derive
    >>>> these PR figures ?
    >>>> But it isn't on 32% of the embedded cpus
    >>> As I said, referencing the article Thingy cited, Microsoft has 32% of
    >>> the embedded os market and Linux has 8%. If you find some evidence to
    >>> contradict that statement, I'd love to see it.

    >> Some consolation, comparing Windows CE license revenue to commercial
    >> revenue for small embedded linux vendors like Montavista, but they don't
    >> show the actual usage as well as this report.
    >> http://www.vdc-corp.com/_documents/pressrelease/press-attachment-1394.pdf
    >>
    >> Wintrolls love trying to confuse linux usage with linux sales revenue,
    >>
    >> There are more Linux embedded software users than the total of all
    >> commercial embedded OSs. The competitive advantage they have is that they
    >> don't have to buy it.

    >
    > COLA Trolls seems incapable of distinguishing between sales revenue and
    > usage. If you're running a business -- as IBM, RedHat, and Novelll have
    > discovered to your grief -- this difference is rather important. As I keep
    > telling you -- feel free to make up any usage numbers you like. They are all
    > wild guesstimates, and absolutely meaningless.
    >
    >


    If you are running a business selling phones or other embedded devices,
    there is no point paying IBM Redhat Novell or Microsoft for your
    opeating system if you can use an open source distribution like LiMo.
    Linux is an operating system, not a corporation.
    sam, Apr 21, 2008
    #9
  10. impossible

    sam Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>
    >> 8><----
    >>
    >>>> http://www.computerworld.com/action...Basic&taxonomyName=software&articleId=9077838
    >>>>
    >>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has 8%.

    >> No, commercial versions of embedded Linux a total market share of 8%.
    >>

    >
    > Market=commercial.
    >
    >> Cant get you facts straight can you....
    >>

    >
    > My facts are **always** absolutely accurate and sourced. Yours?
    > Non-existent.
    >
    >> So that's a paid for version as opposed to a downloaded and free used
    >> version, which I think I read somewhere as in the 20~30% range....in which
    >> case ALL Linux's share is near to or exceeds MS's share (28~38%)
    >>

    >
    > Can't you keep your categories straight. There's no **market** for Linux
    > giveaways. So feel free to make up any **usage** numbers you please --
    > they're absolutely meaningless.


    Except they supply the embedded device makers and reduce the demand for
    Windows.
    In the market for embedded devices Windows is on a very minor share of
    those devices.
    Saying that Windows makes more from sales than a free operating system
    might give them a nice warm feeling but thats as significant as it gets,
    its like saying that bottled water makes more money than rain.
    sam, Apr 21, 2008
    #10
  11. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:fuivmk$7du$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "sam" <> wrote in message news:fugtgk$j2a$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "sam" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> Squiggle wrote:
    >>>>>> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    >>>>>>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:12:09 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux
    >>>>>>>> has 8%.
    >>>>>>> What has the other 60%?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Real embedded OSes. Vxworks, uC/OS ,ECOS etc.. Some may not even
    >>>>>> bother with anything that could realistically be called an OS.
    >>>>> I don't believe Microsoft has anything like 32% of the number of
    >>>>> embedded operating systems in use on all the embedded CPUs, there are
    >>>>> 10 billion ARM processors sold so far and they comprise 75% of the 32
    >>>>> bit market
    >>>> Only a tiny fraction of all ARM processors are equipped with an
    >>>> embedded os. So what's your point?
    >>>>
    >>>>> In phones, Microsofts share is miniscule, in printers, routers,
    >>>>> appliances, industrial controllers, cars, gps, depth sounders,
    >>>>> cameras, dvrs, set-top boxes, av receivers, industrial robots,
    >>>>> security systems, serial converters etcetcetc ad infinitum nothing
    >>>> When you source some actual market-share numbers, we can discuss
    >>>> what -- if anything -- here is relevant. But it's clear from your
    >>>> laundry list that you really have no clue whatsoever about the market
    >>>> for embedded software at all. Phones are the single fastest growing
    >>>> market, and we know that Linux is getting beaten badly here by both
    >>>> Apple and Microsoft.
    >>>
    >>> You previously linked to a report prepared for Symbian that showed Linux
    >>> was second only to Symbian in worldwide phone operating systems, Apple
    >>> only figured in the US figures, where it was beating Microsoft and
    >>> didn't rate worldwide. Microsoft was one of the also rans in every other
    >>> market outside the US
    >>>

    >>
    >> Am I the only one around here who can read?

    >
    > You don't have a shit show of understanding what you read, thats for sure.
    >


    Oh, no. Are you going to make a complete fool of yourself again? Looks like
    it...


    >>
    >> US: "RIM won 42 percent market share, according to Canalys, compared to
    >> Apple at 27 percent, Windows Mobile at 21 percent, and Palm at a nine
    >> percent. Linux, apparently was so far behind it didn't even deserve a
    >> mention."
    >>
    >> Worldwide: "Symbian dominated with a 65 percent market share, compared to
    >> Microsoft's 12 percent, RIM's 11 percent, Apple's seven percent, and
    >> Linux's five percent.
    >>
    >> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3506923462.html

    >
    > Just smartphones.
    >


    No. Smartphones and other wireless handhelds that utilise mobile operating
    systems.

    "According to the market research firm, which looked at "converged devices,"
    **including both smartphones and wireless handhelds such as RIM's
    Blackberry**, the Blackberry took top honors in the U.S market in the fourth
    quarter. RIM won 42 percent market share, according to Canalys, compared to
    Apple at 27 percent, Windows Mobile at 21 percent, and Palm at a nine
    percent. Linux, apparently was so far behind it didn't even deserve a
    mention.

    "Linux did show up, however, in the worldwide report. Here, Symbian
    dominated with a 65 percent market share, compared to Microsoft's 12
    percent, RIM's 11 percent, Apple's seven percent, and Linux's five percent."

    http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3506923462.html

    Now say you're sorry and quit wasting everyone's time.

    > Take it across all embedded phone operating systems and have a look at the
    > actual Canalys report published by Symbian.
    >


    **All** phone operating systems? Including the stuff that just dials a
    number for you? You've got to be kidding!?! It's like the software for
    toasters, washing machines and dvd players's -- summer interns, and other
    low-level techs like yourself, produce most of that code, I'm sure. It's all
    generic stuff. If you want to claim that Linux dominates **that** market,
    such as it is, you're welcome to it. But do post a link with corroborating
    data. Your reference to a "Canalys report published by Symbian" is awfuly
    vague.

    If you're serious about showing where Linux has gained market acceptance,
    have the decency to rely on the existing data. You could pick the Japanese
    market, for instance, where Linux apparently has a 27% share -- that's
    impressive. Why do you always feel compelled to make things up? I don't
    really think there's all that much good news out there for you, but honestly
    I could do a much better job myself of documenting some reasonable cause for
    optimism about Linux's prospect's than you.


    >>> But most of the
    >>>> devices you mention have no use for **any** os at all, so I don't no
    >>>> why you bother bringing them up. Many (especially those in the category
    >>>> of industrial controllers and robots) utilise software that is strictly
    >>>> proprietary to the hardware manufacturer. Others (especially those in
    >>>> the category of household appliances and consumer electronics) involve
    >>>> such simple, generic types of coding that it's hardly worth talking
    >>>> about this stuff as software at all. So sort out exactly what it is
    >>>> you'd like to discuss, do some research for a change that involves
    >>>> sourcing real data, and I'll be happy to compare notes with you.
    >>> There are plenty of consumer dvrs for instance from the likes of
    >>> Panasonic that are now using Linux, just like the TiVo.
    >>> None of these figure as revenue in your Microsoft propaganda piece,
    >>> because the software is free
    >>>

    >>
    >> The truth hurts, I know, but Linux has a teeny, tiny shae of the embedded
    >> market. Deal with it.

    >
    > Microsoft does offer a packaged solution, but embedded device
    > manufacturers are developing the hardware anyway, building something
    > better for their purposes with Linux is usually easier.
    >


    Could be. If only you had some data to back that claim.

    >>
    >>>>> They might claim that they make 32% of the revenue of embedded
    >>>>> operating systems in some arbitrarily defined segment who knows how
    >>>>> they derive these PR figures ?
    >>>>> But it isn't on 32% of the embedded cpus
    >>>> As I said, referencing the article Thingy cited, Microsoft has 32% of
    >>>> the embedded os market and Linux has 8%. If you find some evidence to
    >>>> contradict that statement, I'd love to see it.
    >>> Some consolation, comparing Windows CE license revenue to commercial
    >>> revenue for small embedded linux vendors like Montavista, but they don't
    >>> show the actual usage as well as this report.
    >>> http://www.vdc-corp.com/_documents/pressrelease/press-attachment-1394.pdf
    >>>
    >>> Wintrolls love trying to confuse linux usage with linux sales revenue,
    >>>
    >>> There are more Linux embedded software users than the total of all
    >>> commercial embedded OSs. The competitive advantage they have is that
    >>> they don't have to buy it.

    >>
    >> COLA Trolls seems incapable of distinguishing between sales revenue and
    >> usage. If you're running a business -- as IBM, RedHat, and Novelll have
    >> discovered to your grief -- this difference is rather important. As I
    >> keep telling you -- feel free to make up any usage numbers you like. They
    >> are all wild guesstimates, and absolutely meaningless.

    >
    > If you are running a business selling phones or other embedded devices,
    > there is no point paying IBM Redhat Novell or Microsoft for your opeating
    > system if you can use an open source distribution like LiMo.
    > Linux is an operating system, not a corporation.
    >


    Amortized over 118 million units, which is the number of
    smartphone/handhelds shipped in 2007, the cost of an operating system is
    miniscule, as in $0.001. So bottom-feeding makes no sense. Either Linux
    developers can deliver the software that consumers want or manufacturers
    will look elsewhere -- it's as simple as that.
    impossible, Apr 21, 2008
    #11
  12. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:fuj0c5$a7k$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>> 8><----
    >>>
    >>>>> http://www.computerworld.com/action...Basic&taxonomyName=software&articleId=9077838
    >>>>>
    >>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has
    >>>> 8%.
    >>> No, commercial versions of embedded Linux a total market share of 8%.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Market=commercial.
    >>
    >>> Cant get you facts straight can you....
    >>>

    >>
    >> My facts are **always** absolutely accurate and sourced. Yours?
    >> Non-existent.
    >>
    >>> So that's a paid for version as opposed to a downloaded and free used
    >>> version, which I think I read somewhere as in the 20~30% range....in
    >>> which case ALL Linux's share is near to or exceeds MS's share (28~38%)
    >>>

    >>
    >> Can't you keep your categories straight. There's no **market** for Linux
    >> giveaways. So feel free to make up any **usage** numbers you please --
    >> they're absolutely meaningless.

    >
    > Except they supply the embedded device makers and reduce the demand for
    > Windows.
    > In the market for embedded devices Windows is on a very minor share of
    > those devices.
    > Saying that Windows makes more from sales than a free operating system
    > might give them a nice warm feeling but thats as significant as it gets,
    > its like saying that bottled water makes more money than rain.
    >


    Hmmm....Bottled water does make more money than rain. Windows does make more
    money than Linux. I'm willing to suspend judgment for a moment while you
    regroup, but this argument of yours does not so far seem to be getting you
    anywhere.
    impossible, Apr 21, 2008
    #12
  13. In article <>, sam <> wrote:
    >impossible wrote:
    >> "sam" <> wrote in message news:fuj0c5$a7k$...

    >
    >>> Except they supply the embedded device makers and reduce the demand for
    >>> Windows.
    >>> In the market for embedded devices Windows is on a very minor share of
    >>> those devices.
    >>> Saying that Windows makes more from sales than a free operating system
    >>> might give them a nice warm feeling but thats as significant as it gets,
    >>> its like saying that bottled water makes more money than rain.


    ... but only idiots or travellers would pay for bottled water. :)

    >It makes more money for bottled water companies, not for farmers and
    >horticulturists.


    ... and again, only idiots would buy bottled water in NZ.
    Bruce Sinclair, Apr 22, 2008
    #13
  14. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:480d17a2$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "sam" <> wrote in message news:fuivmk$7du$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "sam" <> wrote in message news:fugtgk$j2a$...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>> "sam" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> Squiggle wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:12:09 +0000, impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux
    >>>>>>>>>> has 8%.
    >>>>>>>>> What has the other 60%?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Real embedded OSes. Vxworks, uC/OS ,ECOS etc.. Some may not even
    >>>>>>>> bother with anything that could realistically be called an OS.
    >>>>>>> I don't believe Microsoft has anything like 32% of the number of
    >>>>>>> embedded operating systems in use on all the embedded CPUs, there
    >>>>>>> are 10 billion ARM processors sold so far and they comprise 75% of
    >>>>>>> the 32 bit market
    >>>>>> Only a tiny fraction of all ARM processors are equipped with an
    >>>>>> embedded os. So what's your point?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> In phones, Microsofts share is miniscule, in printers, routers,
    >>>>>>> appliances, industrial controllers, cars, gps, depth sounders,
    >>>>>>> cameras, dvrs, set-top boxes, av receivers, industrial robots,
    >>>>>>> security systems, serial converters etcetcetc ad infinitum nothing
    >>>>>> When you source some actual market-share numbers, we can discuss
    >>>>>> what -- if anything -- here is relevant. But it's clear from your
    >>>>>> laundry list that you really have no clue whatsoever about the market
    >>>>>> for embedded software at all. Phones are the single fastest growing
    >>>>>> market, and we know that Linux is getting beaten badly here by both
    >>>>>> Apple and Microsoft.
    >>>>> You previously linked to a report prepared for Symbian that showed
    >>>>> Linux was second only to Symbian in worldwide phone operating systems,
    >>>>> Apple only figured in the US figures, where it was beating Microsoft
    >>>>> and didn't rate worldwide. Microsoft was one of the also rans in every
    >>>>> other market outside the US
    >>>>>
    >>>> Am I the only one around here who can read?
    >>> You don't have a shit show of understanding what you read, thats for
    >>> sure.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Oh, no. Are you going to make a complete fool of yourself again? Looks
    >> like it...
    >>
    >>
    >>>> US: "RIM won 42 percent market share, according to Canalys, compared to
    >>>> Apple at 27 percent, Windows Mobile at 21 percent, and Palm at a nine
    >>>> percent. Linux, apparently was so far behind it didn't even deserve a
    >>>> mention."
    >>>>
    >>>> Worldwide: "Symbian dominated with a 65 percent market share, compared
    >>>> to Microsoft's 12 percent, RIM's 11 percent, Apple's seven percent, and
    >>>> Linux's five percent.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3506923462.html
    >>> Just smartphones.
    >>>

    >>
    >> No. Smartphones and other wireless handhelds that utilise mobile
    >> operating systems.
    >>
    >> "According to the market research firm, which looked at "converged
    >> devices," **including both smartphones and wireless handhelds such as
    >> RIM's Blackberry**, the Blackberry took top honors in the U.S market in
    >> the fourth quarter. RIM won 42 percent market share, according to
    >> Canalys, compared to Apple at 27 percent, Windows Mobile at 21 percent,
    >> and Palm at a nine percent. Linux, apparently was so far behind it didn't
    >> even deserve a mention.
    >>
    >> "Linux did show up, however, in the worldwide report. Here, Symbian
    >> dominated with a 65 percent market share, compared to Microsoft's 12
    >> percent, RIM's 11 percent, Apple's seven percent, and Linux's five
    >> percent."
    >>
    >> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3506923462.html
    >>
    >> Now say you're sorry and quit wasting everyone's time.
    >>
    >>> Take it across all embedded phone operating systems and have a look at
    >>> the actual Canalys report published by Symbian.
    >>>

    >>
    >> **All** phone operating systems? Including the stuff that just dials a
    >> number for you? You've got to be kidding!?! It's like the software for
    >> toasters, washing machines and dvd players's -- summer interns, and other
    >> low-level techs like yourself, produce most of that code, I'm sure. It's
    >> all generic stuff. If you want to claim that Linux dominates **that**
    >> market, such as it is, you're welcome to it. But do post a link with
    >> corroborating data. Your reference to a "Canalys report published by
    >> Symbian" is awfuly vague.
    >>
    >> If you're serious about showing where Linux has gained market acceptance,
    >> have the decency to rely on the existing data. You could pick the
    >> Japanese market, for instance, where Linux apparently has a 27% share --
    >> that's impressive. Why do you always feel compelled to make things up? I
    >> don't really think there's all that much good news out there for you, but
    >> honestly I could do a much better job myself of documenting some
    >> reasonable cause for optimism about Linux's prospect's than you.
    >>
    >>
    >>>>> But most of the
    >>>>>> devices you mention have no use for **any** os at all, so I don't no
    >>>>>> why you bother bringing them up. Many (especially those in the
    >>>>>> category of industrial controllers and robots) utilise software that
    >>>>>> is strictly proprietary to the hardware manufacturer. Others
    >>>>>> (especially those in the category of household appliances and
    >>>>>> consumer electronics) involve such simple, generic types of coding
    >>>>>> that it's hardly worth talking about this stuff as software at all.
    >>>>>> So sort out exactly what it is you'd like to discuss, do some
    >>>>>> research for a change that involves sourcing real data, and I'll be
    >>>>>> happy to compare notes with you.
    >>>>> There are plenty of consumer dvrs for instance from the likes of
    >>>>> Panasonic that are now using Linux, just like the TiVo.
    >>>>> None of these figure as revenue in your Microsoft propaganda piece,
    >>>>> because the software is free
    >>>>>
    >>>> The truth hurts, I know, but Linux has a teeny, tiny shae of the
    >>>> embedded market. Deal with it.
    >>> Microsoft does offer a packaged solution, but embedded device
    >>> manufacturers are developing the hardware anyway, building something
    >>> better for their purposes with Linux is usually easier.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Could be. If only you had some data to back that claim.
    >>
    >>>>>>> They might claim that they make 32% of the revenue of embedded
    >>>>>>> operating systems in some arbitrarily defined segment who knows how
    >>>>>>> they derive these PR figures ?
    >>>>>>> But it isn't on 32% of the embedded cpus
    >>>>>> As I said, referencing the article Thingy cited, Microsoft has 32%
    >>>>>> of the embedded os market and Linux has 8%. If you find some evidence
    >>>>>> to contradict that statement, I'd love to see it.
    >>>>> Some consolation, comparing Windows CE license revenue to commercial
    >>>>> revenue for small embedded linux vendors like Montavista, but they
    >>>>> don't show the actual usage as well as this report.
    >>>>> http://www.vdc-corp.com/_documents/pressrelease/press-attachment-1394.pdf
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Wintrolls love trying to confuse linux usage with linux sales revenue,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> There are more Linux embedded software users than the total of all
    >>>>> commercial embedded OSs. The competitive advantage they have is that
    >>>>> they don't have to buy it.
    >>>> COLA Trolls seems incapable of distinguishing between sales revenue and
    >>>> usage. If you're running a business -- as IBM, RedHat, and Novelll have
    >>>> discovered to your grief -- this difference is rather important. As I
    >>>> keep telling you -- feel free to make up any usage numbers you like.
    >>>> They are all wild guesstimates, and absolutely meaningless.
    >>> If you are running a business selling phones or other embedded devices,
    >>> there is no point paying IBM Redhat Novell or Microsoft for your
    >>> opeating system if you can use an open source distribution like LiMo.
    >>> Linux is an operating system, not a corporation.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Amortized over 118 million units, which is the number of
    >> smartphone/handhelds shipped in 2007, the cost of an operating system is
    >> miniscule, as in $0.001. So bottom-feeding makes no sense. Either Linux
    >> developers can deliver the software that consumers want or manufacturers
    >> will look elsewhere -- it's as simple as that.

    >
    > Here you are, have a good read, look at the graph of worldwide unit sales
    > by operating system, its easy to find.
    > The orange is symbian, the red is linux, the green if you can find it is
    > Microsoft.
    > http://developer.symbian.com/main/g...dUp/SymbianMarketRound-UpIssue2Oct07FINAL.pdf


    Just as I thought. This is smartphone sales data -- same stuff I
    referencvd, just 1 Quarter older. We've been through ity all before.

    http://groups.google.co.nz/group/nz.comp/msg/5b695bc053d33778
    impossible, Apr 22, 2008
    #14
  15. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:480d2748$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >
    >>>

    >>
    >> **All** phone operating systems? Including the stuff that just dials a
    >> number for you? You've got to be kidding!?! It's like the software for
    >> toasters, washing machines and dvd players's -- summer interns, and other
    >> low-level techs like yourself, produce most of that code, I'm sure. It's
    >> all generic stuff. If you want to claim that Linux dominates **that**
    >> market, such as it is, you're welcome to it. But do post a link with
    >> corroborating data. Your reference to a "Canalys report published by
    >> Symbian" is awfuly vague.
    >>

    >
    > Just about all phones have mp3 players, games, cameras, picture viewers,
    > recorders, address books, email, browsers, bluetooth etc, .
    >
    > Microsoft don't make any software that is any better at that than anyone
    > elses, no one cares about exchange clients.
    >


    Like I said, the functions on these generic phones are all every generic, so
    you're right -- no one in their right mind would order up a smart phone
    equipped with Windows Mobile to handle such things. In most major markets
    these kind of phones are giveaways, and so the software that supports them
    isn't likely to rise above that level of sophistiucation because there's
    really no point. .But if you're a business person who wants seamless
    interoperability with Microsoft Office, then you'll gladly pay a premium to
    get that. Similarly, the iPhone attracts a special sort of customer willing
    to pay a premium for a very sleek software/hardware package with a
    non-business focus. Are these high-end markets -- which happen to be the
    fastest growing of all phone markets -- out of the reach of open-source
    developers? I wouldn't think so, even if you tend to be thoroughly
    dismissive. Perhaps with the fine-tuning of the new OXML document standard,
    open-source developers will seize the opportunity to tap into the demand for
    MS Office and build a better software tool for the mobile business market.
    Alternatively, they could build something altogether different that hooks
    into Google's online new apps. Then you'd really have something to crow
    about -- and for people to pay good money to use.
    impossible, Apr 22, 2008
    #15
  16. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "sam" <> wrote in message news:fuj0c5$a7k$...

    >
    >>> Except they supply the embedded device makers and reduce the demand for
    >>> Windows.
    >>> In the market for embedded devices Windows is on a very minor share of
    >>> those devices.
    >>> Saying that Windows makes more from sales than a free operating system
    >>> might give them a nice warm feeling but thats as significant as it gets,
    >>> its like saying that bottled water makes more money than rain.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Hmmm....Bottled water does make more money than rain. Windows does make
    >> more money than Linux. I'm willing to suspend judgment for a moment while
    >> you regroup, but this argument of yours does not so far seem to be
    >> getting you anywhere.

    >
    > It makes more money for bottled water companies, not for farmers and
    > horticulturists.
    >


    Farmers and horticulturists are way ahead of you. They've known for 20 years
    or more that competing on price is a losing strategy. You either add value
    to your products or you die -- it's as simple as that --because there's
    always someone, somewhere in a position to produce the generic stuff cheaper
    than you.

    > You really should be able to work it out.
    > In unit sales, manufacturers who use linux on their phones sell far more
    > phones than manufacturers with Windows on their phones.


    You have yet to produce any data to support that pipedream of yours. Does
    any exist, or this just more wishful thinking.

    > Their share of phone sales is increasing, and more major manufacturers are
    > joining the Linux Mobile industry group LiMo foundation which includes LG,
    > Samsung, NTT/Docomo, Panasonic, Motorola, NEC, Ericcson and Huawei\


    You have yet to produce any data to support that pipedream of yours. Does
    any exist, or this just more wishful thinking.

    > The current growth is in China Korea and Japan with Linux on NEC and
    > Panasonic phones. Thats where they make phones.


    YES!! Hurray!!! Good for you!

    > The US is saturated.


    With cheap products, yes -- in the phone market these are simply loss-leader
    giveaways. Don't bother tyring to sell in the US unless you have something
    special to offer. A la iPhones, Blackberries, other smartphones. Margins
    are high there because plenty of people have plenty to spend.

    > http://developer.symbian.com/main/g...dUp/SymbianMarketRound-UpIssue2Oct07FINAL.pdf



    You really need to stop referencing that Symbian link, which is not at all
    flattering to Linux. Among the problems with Linux that are cited there:

    -- Fragmentation: lack of 3rd party developer native API, and rival factions
    -- Incompleteness
    -- Viral effect of GPL leeches IP
    -- 'Wait or Branch' development model - leads to cost for people who need
    mobile specific development
    -- Operators are concerned about security.
    -- Contributing parts of mobile SW stack lowers barrier to entry.
    -- Low relative profitability and high relative costs.
    -- Recent patent infringement assertions from Microsoft: Linux, in its
    generic form, infringes upon 235 of its patents?!
    -- Lack of visibility of kernel roadmaps.
    -- Although the Linux Kernel has support for SMP, taking full advantage of
    SMP requires co-ordination with other OS services (some services need to be
    SMP safe, others tuned to take advantage of running different threads on
    different processors) which may be difficult to pull-off in a distributed
    Linux ecosystem.
    -- Polling and monolithic kernel design.
    -- Linux "doesn't mind" breaking the compatibility of internal kernel APIs,
    data structures and HAIs: adversely affecting hardware vendors and device
    creators.
    -- Lack of standard cellular telephony abstraction.
    -- Linux-based phone developers have to develop their own equivalent to
    DevSound A3F in their platform or integrated into the application (similar
    to RTOS)

    Anyway, this is old smartphone data -- overall the Linux growth pattern from
    2006-2007 is flat, and for 2007 in total the Linux share amounted to that
    mighty 5% I referenced long ago.

    http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3506923462.html
    impossible, Apr 22, 2008
    #16
  17. In article <>, sam <> wrote:
    >Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >> In article <>, sam <> wrote:
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "sam" <> wrote in message news:fuj0c5$a7k$...
    >>>>> Except they supply the embedded device makers and reduce the demand for
    >>>>> Windows.
    >>>>> In the market for embedded devices Windows is on a very minor share of
    >>>>> those devices.
    >>>>> Saying that Windows makes more from sales than a free operating system
    >>>>> might give them a nice warm feeling but thats as significant as it gets,
    >>>>> its like saying that bottled water makes more money than rain.

    >>
    >> .. but only idiots or travellers would pay for bottled water. :)
    >>
    >>> It makes more money for bottled water companies, not for farmers and
    >>> horticulturists.

    >>
    >> .. and again, only idiots would buy bottled water in NZ.


    >Certainly not manufacturers ;-)


    No one ever lost money banking on the stupidity of customers. Examples
    abound ... bottled water being only one. :)
    Bruce Sinclair, Apr 22, 2008
    #17
  18. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "sam" <> wrote in message news:fuj0c5$a7k$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 8><----
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> http://www.computerworld.com/action...Basic&taxonomyName=software&articleId=9077838
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has
    >>>>>> 8%.
    >>>>> No, commercial versions of embedded Linux a total market share of 8%.
    >>>>>
    >>>> Market=commercial.
    >>>>
    >>>>> Cant get you facts straight can you....
    >>>>>
    >>>> My facts are **always** absolutely accurate and sourced. Yours?
    >>>> Non-existent.
    >>>>
    >>>>> So that's a paid for version as opposed to a downloaded and free used
    >>>>> version, which I think I read somewhere as in the 20~30% range....in
    >>>>> which case ALL Linux's share is near to or exceeds MS's share (28~38%)
    >>>>>
    >>>> Can't you keep your categories straight. There's no **market** for
    >>>> Linux giveaways. So feel free to make up any **usage** numbers you
    >>>> please -- they're absolutely meaningless.
    >>> Except they supply the embedded device makers and reduce the demand for
    >>> Windows.
    >>> In the market for embedded devices Windows is on a very minor share of
    >>> those devices.
    >>> Saying that Windows makes more from sales than a free operating system
    >>> might give them a nice warm feeling but thats as significant as it gets,
    >>> its like saying that bottled water makes more money than rain.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Hmmm....Bottled water does make more money than rain. Windows does make
    >> more money than Linux. I'm willing to suspend judgment for a moment while
    >> you regroup, but this argument of yours does not so far seem to be
    >> getting you anywhere.

    >
    > makes more money for whom?


    In the case of water, it's the bottlers, the wholesale distributors, and the
    retailers. And in the case of software, it's the developers and hardware
    manufacturers.

    > So MS makes money off a handset (assuming it selsls an OS)....the handset
    > company makes less....if you are a seller of OSes to handheld
    > manufacturers I guess the data is meaningful...to the handheld makers what
    > counts is their profit and not someone elses.
    >


    You know absolutely nothing about buisness, do you? If there is demand for
    Windows Mobile, or Symbian, or or the iPhone, people will pay.
    Manufacturers make **much more money** selling these products than they do
    the generics.
    impossible, Apr 22, 2008
    #18
  19. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>> 8><----
    >>>
    >>>>> http://www.computerworld.com/action...Basic&taxonomyName=software&articleId=9077838
    >>>>>
    >>>> Hmmm....so Microsoft has 32% of the embedded os market and Linux has
    >>>> 8%.
    >>> No, commercial versions of embedded Linux a total market share of 8%.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Market=commercial.

    >
    > Nope, market !=commercial, there are lots of makers using a free version
    > of linux, they are still in the market.
    >


    If they get it for free, no, they are NOT in the market for embedded
    software.

    >>
    >>> Cant get you facts straight can you....
    >>>

    >>
    >> My facts are **always** absolutely accurate and sourced. Yours?
    >> Non-existent.

    >
    > No they are not, yours are cherry picked and mis-leading, every time I go
    > to your sources or consult others I can see that you have provided maybe
    > half the info if that much.
    >


    If that were true, you could easily reference the data that you think I've
    missed. But you NEVER, EVER do, because of course it doesn't exist. Don't
    think you can come in here and spin yarns based on wishful thinking. Put up
    or shut up!

    >>> So that's a paid for version as opposed to a downloaded and free used
    >>> version, which I think I read somewhere as in the 20~30% range....in
    >>> which case ALL Linux's share is near to or exceeds MS's share (28~38%)
    >>>

    >>
    >> Can't you keep your categories straight. There's no **market** for Linux
    >> giveaways.

    >
    > Only if you are ****selling**** an OS into the embedded space...the
    > reality is what is being sold is a device that is the ****real****
    > product. So a manufacturer using a free Linux can make more per item than
    > if they used an MS OS or a commercial linux OS...
    >
    > So feel free to make up any **usage** numbers you please --
    >> they're absolutely meaningless. Let's see....How many Linux developers
    >> does it take to........?....oh, well, there's a joke there somewhere.
    >>
    >>>> had no idea so many vendors were using Windows. And did you hear? IBM
    >>>> just switched from Suse to Windows for all its POS hardware? So that's
    >>>> an unexpected setback, eh?
    >>> Why? did you read about Newham council? how MS has failed to deliver?
    >>> now that is a real set back. A flagship council that MS did a deal with
    >>> so open source did not go in, yet 4 years later MS has not performed.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Can't you keep your threads straight? We were talking about embedded
    >> operating systems here.
    >>
    >> Anyway....Newham....yes, congratulations. But beware what you wish for.
    >> It sounds like the Newham Council has decided to what IT its whipping
    >> boy. And we all know how badly performed the Linux project in Munich
    >> turned out to be.

    >
    > yeah right. Ms failed to perform....
    >
    impossible, Apr 22, 2008
    #19
  20. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "sam" <> wrote in message news:480d5fb4$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "sam" <> wrote in message
    >> news:480d2748$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> **All** phone operating systems? Including the stuff that just dials a
    >>>> number for you? You've got to be kidding!?! It's like the software for
    >>>> toasters, washing machines and dvd players's -- summer interns, and
    >>>> other low-level techs like yourself, produce most of that code, I'm
    >>>> sure. It's all generic stuff. If you want to claim that Linux dominates
    >>>> **that** market, such as it is, you're welcome to it. But do post a
    >>>> link with corroborating data. Your reference to a "Canalys report
    >>>> published by Symbian" is awfuly vague.
    >>>>
    >>> Just about all phones have mp3 players, games, cameras, picture viewers,
    >>> recorders, address books, email, browsers, bluetooth etc, .
    >>>
    >>> Microsoft don't make any software that is any better at that than anyone
    >>> elses, no one cares about exchange clients.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Like I said, the functions on these generic phones are all every generic,
    >> so you're right -- no one in their right mind would order up a smart
    >> phone equipped with Windows Mobile to handle such things. In most major
    >> markets these kind of phones are giveaways, and so the software that
    >> supports them isn't likely to rise above that level of sophistiucation
    >> because there's really no point. .But if you're a business person who
    >> wants seamless interoperability with Microsoft Office, then you'll gladly
    >> pay a premium to get that. Similarly, the iPhone attracts a special sort
    >> of customer willing to pay a premium for a very sleek software/hardware
    >> package with a non-business focus. Are these high-end markets -- which
    >> happen to be the fastest growing of all phone markets -- out of the reach
    >> of open-source developers? I wouldn't think so, even if you tend to be
    >> thoroughly dismissive. Perhaps with the fine-tuning of the new OXML
    >> document standard, open-source developers will seize the opportunity to
    >> tap into the demand for MS Office and build a better software tool for
    >> the mobile business market. Alternatively, they could build something
    >> altogether different that hooks into Google's online new apps. Then you'd
    >> really have something to crow about -- and for people to pay good money
    >> to use.

    > That approach condemns Microsoft to a diminishing market share
    > The most sophisticated phones at the moment are running Symbian, not
    > Windows Mobile. Thats because of Nokias stake in Symbian.
    > Its really up to the manufacturers what operating system they use, and
    > their objective is to optimize the bill of materials.


    No, you're wrong. Customers have shown that they are perfectly willing to
    pay for more power, greater speed, and better features. That's why the
    smartphone sector is the fastest growing phone sector. Manufacturers make
    **much more money** from Symbian, Microsoft, and Apple products than from
    the generics. That's why these embedded operating systems are increasing
    market share, while the Linux share remains flat.

    > 3G phones want video telephony, music, photos, broadband internet browser
    > mail chat etc. All as you say generic, and all well suited to linux. But
    > ultimately capable of supporting any level of sophistication. Free. Easily
    > funded by usage.
    > The ball is in Google's court right now, with Android. What would be
    > sensible is for Microsoft to forget about mobile operating systems and
    > start developing cross platform mobile applications and services that
    > connect to their desktop business.
    impossible, Apr 22, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    18,658
    Leonidas Jones
    Dec 11, 2004
  2. douglas w scott

    worried about cisco pix

    douglas w scott, Nov 6, 2004, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    446
    Walter Roberson
    Nov 6, 2004
  3. fitwell

    Re: Worried, constant blocks of PINGS on ZA.

    fitwell, Aug 22, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    422
    Santiago Zawojski
    Sep 6, 2003
  4. °Mike°

    Re: Worried, constant blocks of PINGS on ZA.

    °Mike°, Aug 22, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    377
    longshotjohn7
    Aug 23, 2003
  5. David J Taylor
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    602
Loading...

Share This Page