Nixie Pixel Goes on the Attack

Nixie Pixel has started a regular show, OS ALT, the first issue of which is below:

M$ is in trouble. Nixie had years of on-the-job training and has become quite skillfull and polished. I think it would be great for any business interested in pushing GNU/Linux to put her on the payroll… Nixie’s T-shirt:

Friends Help Friends Use Linux

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Nixie Pixel Goes on the Attack

  1. Ted wrote, “HP offer a few workstation models, no laptops. A link to a Linux-installed ProBook 404s. They certainly supply drivers for Linux and get their machines certified by the major distros, they just don’t seem to offer many machines already running it.”

    That’s right. OEMs don’t offer many machines but large organizations don’t shop at retail stores either, they put out “Request for Proposals” and agents of the OEMs bid on them. More and more organizations are demanding GNU/Linux and getting it. That still does not help individual consumers but it proves OEMs are not afraid to sell GNU/Linux as they were in the 1990s, with M$ threatening them with high prices or no licences. Many OEMs offer noOS systems but large organizations know it is more efficient to have the OEMs install the OS in the factory than unboxing and writing hard drives in offices. Just like consumers, most large organizations are not in the business of building PCs.

    The puff piece by Lenovo quoting Forrester’s opinion as “news” is not about consumers at all. Forrester follows the marketing of PCs to consumers as it is now, warped by Wintel.
    “Forrester works with professionals in 19 key roles at major companies providing proprietary research, customer insight, consulting, events, and peer-to-peer executive programs. For more than 28 years, Forrester has been making IT, marketing, and technology industry leaders successful every day.”

    If you or I go to a big box store in North America today, we could come to similar conclusions, but that is not reality. Reality is many millions of GNU/Linux systems being sold each year by all kinds of OEMs, system builders, and individuals, not just big box retailers. How many Fords do you see for sale at a Chevy dealership? Since Wintel has most retailers in North America tied to that brand, that’s what Forrester sees. They do not even bother with 20 businesses selling Debian GNU/Linux in North America. That business is completely under Forrester’s radar, yet those businesses exist and thrive, 77 of them. Many of them install the OS themselves but some get the OEMs to install in the factory. Brazil, Russia, India, China and Malaysia all have governments promoting GNU/Linux and producing a generation of students who will want GNU/Linux on retail shelves and they don’t give a damn about Forrester.

  2. Ted says:

    Gah. Apologies – the article is just over a year old. I’m still suffering from “New Year and still thinking it’s last year” syndrome.

  3. Ted says:

    “faith in M$’s invincibility”?

    No such thing, Mr. Pogson. Please tell me that you do not subscribe to the “Cult of Microsoft” nonsense that some of your other posters trot out.

    I simply state that claims of desktop Linux marketshare being 10% are unfounded. And provide evidence to back my position up.

    The figures you used to proclaim a frankly unrealistic 19% have been shown to be an invalid comparison, and skewed generously in your favour.

    Dell, Lenovo, HP and other OEMs are selling GNU/Linux PCs.

    Searches for “Linux” on each vendors site, and some cursory browsing…

    HP offer a few workstation models, no laptops. A link to a Linux-installed ProBook 404s. They certainly supply drivers for Linux and get their machines certified by the major distros, they just don’t seem to offer many machines already running it.

    Dell offer one series of desktop, one laptop and one notebook. The US website does not offer Linux on either the desktop or laptop in the configuration options or list it in the tech specs. (The reference to Linux is only in the search results and listed as “select countries”) It’s only actually offered on one netbook.

    Lenovo offer models with no OS (so much for Microsoft strong-arming) and two workstations.

    I can only surmise they aren’t selling very many.

    Any interesting find on Lenovo’s site;

    http://www.lenovo.com/articles/us/en/news/where-does-linux-go-from-here.html

    Note the Linux desktop marketshare number quoted by Forrester.

    That article is eight days old…

    They are just not very public about it.

    Because it’s going nowhere for them. It doesn’t help them shift boxes.
    They’re all quite happy to sell you a server with it on though. I do not dispute the server market, though. Only the desktop.

  4. Dell, Lenovo, HP and other OEMs are selling GNU/Linux PCs. They are just not very public about it. They sell in bulk to organizations and businesses who ask for it.

    e.g. 2012 – Lenovo secures big deal

    2011 – Dell sells Ubuntu/Linux in Chinese Retail Stores

    2011 – A few good old-fashioned migrations also occurred. Extremadura, Spain moves 40K additional PCs to GNU/Linux beyond the Health and Education PCs previously migrated. While the project was touted as $0, some purchases of hardware was likely.

    Thank you for your maths. M$ reports no pop in client licence revenue for 4Q11 (down 6%) whereas OEMs saw flat shipments (-0.17%).

    So, your faith in M$’s invincibility is unfounded.

  5. Somehow you ticked off the spam filter. I found your two posts in the spam department and resurrected them. Sorry about that.

  6. Ted says:

    Another disappeared comment…

    Maybe I should just resort to snarky one-liners.

  7. Ted says:

    As my original post seems to have vanished in the ether…

    OK. I’ll do the maths. You didn’t do a very good job. For one thing, your number for Windows licenses jumps from 50m to 55m within the same post. This does not imbue confidence in your skill with numbers.

    You don’t bother with a fair comparison; you compare an average for Windows with a single quarter, that just happened to be a record quarter for PC sales.

    Why not compare averaged out PC sales over the same period? Why not compare actual licenses sold in 4Q2011?

    Why not compare apples to apples? Because you’ll be proved wrong, maybe?

    Some slightly more realistic figures;

    PC Sales last year – 352m = 88m per quarter average.

    Windows 7 license sales upto end of April 2011 – 350m
    http://breakingnewsworld.net/2011/04/microsoft-sold-record-350-million-windows-7-licenses-so-far/
    Windows 7 sales to Jan 2012 – 550m (Your figure)

    Therefore; May 2011 to Jan 2012 = 200m Windows licenses

    May to Jan = 9 months. Per quarter = 66m. I’ll err on the side of caution – let’s call it 65m.

    So, per quarter, as averages where I provide the number. (Hey, you can use averages!)

    PC sales = 88m
    From which we subtract;
    Windows licenses = 66m
    “Illegals” = 13.5m (Your figure)
    Macs = 5.3m (Your figure)

    4.2m left over. 4.7%

    This is a far cry from your 19%.

    Even using your elevated figure for 4Q2011 PC sales or reducing the Windows licenses to 60m (only 5m from YOUR figure), you only hit 10%.

    Your figure for “illegals” is probably low too. It’s estimated that Windows piracy is over 15% in the US alone, and at about 60% in India and 80% in China. 20 to 25% globally is not unrealistic, given their populations.

    So in summary, your 17m/19% figure is quite frankly complete cloud-cuckoo land.

    One very pertinent question on the subject of these 17m PC sales; WHO IS SELLING THEM?

    Any vendor shifting that many boxes without paying MS for the OS would be screaming it from the rooftops.

    Remember, I’m not saying it’s 1% – I’m saying it’s not 10%.

  8. 75% of M$’s licences are sold to OEMs, not consumers. The OEM pays M$.

    The PCs are made in China and shipped to market. That takes months to create stocks for retailers.

  9. Clarence Moon says:

    “Does RTM mean anything to you, Clarence? OEMs pay M$ when the OS goes on, not when the consumer pays the retailer.”

    RTM means “Release to Manufacturing”, commonly referred to as “going gold”. It means that fulfillment groups can start packaging product for sale into distribution. The retail release date is when the product is available to the public and is the start of the accounting for units sold, Mr. Pogson, based on the context of the Microsoft press releases. If you use their numbers, you have to use their basis.

    As to when Microsoft gets paid, it seems to be the case where the OEM notifies them as to how many licenses were shipped in the previous period and payment occurs at the end of that period. I would expect that the period is set at 30 or perhaps 60 days. I do not know for certain and I do not see where it actually matters.

    Certainly there were not 55 million units “shipped” in the period between July, 22, 2009 and October 22, 2009. Nothing was in stores or could be purchased until the later date. Yet you want to use that 90 days to lower what you calculate as the average which you then assert as a fixed rate from day one until the present day. Surely you yourself can see the fallacy in that sort of model.

    You use it to come up with totally non-believable conclusions about the shipping mixture of PCs. At least you have come off of the 50 million figure, increasing it to 55 million. After a couple of more corrections, it will hopefully approach reality.

    You have yet to offer an explanation as to how the industry watchers have failed to report on your notion that there are the 40 million or so non-Windows computers creeping into the environment each quarter.

  10. Ted says:

    Is my last comment in “moderation”, or am I suddenly persona non grata around here?

  11. Clarence Moon, ignoring that M$ taxes OEMs for putting that other OS on PCs, wrote, “or starters, Windows 7 was available on October 22, 2009 for retail purchase of systems or upgrades and that makes it more like 60 million per quarter”

    Does RTM mean anything to you, Clarence? OEMs pay M$ when the OS goes on, not when the consumer pays the retailer.

  12. Clarence Moon says:

    For starters, Windows 7 was available on October 22, 2009 for retail purchase of systems or upgrades and that makes it more like 60 million per quarter, if you postulate that it was a linear sort of thing, namely it went to full speed and continues until today. But that is not the case, since the rate has been gradually accelerating.

    It is easy to see where the current rate is probably close to 70 million per quarter, if not more than that since the number grew 25 million in the month between the MSFT press release and the Forbes estimate. Add that to Apple’s numbers and the 15% or so piracy rate and all the production is pretty much accounted for.

    The people who count the percentages, IDC and Gartner, do not ever seem to stumble across the vast river of PCs that you postulate must exist somewhere. Do you really believe that they are in the pay of Microsoft who, for some reason, wants to suppress that information?

    You have not done the math yourself, Mr. Pogson. Find those 40 million PCs!

  13. Ted says:

    Do the maths. I dare you.

    I have to ask why I should? You didn’t!

    You’re comparing one period of PC sales against an average sales number over two and a half years for Windows licenses? You compare apples to oranges. Do you not think the number of Windows licenses sold would have risen accordingly?

    Why do you compare an average to a period that would not only include a rise from Christmas sales, but was also a record quarter for PC sales?

    Why not compare an average of PCs sold over the same time-frame, or the actual licenses sold for 4Q2011?

    If those numbers match up with your 19% I’ll gladly concede the point. Otherwise, you’re just being dishonest.

    And 17 million Linux PCs sold in a quarter? BY WHOM? Any company shifting that many boxes without having to pay MS for the OS would be screaming it from the rooftops.

    Some more realistic figures;.

    PC Sales last year – 352m = 88m per quarter average

    Windows 7 sales upto April 2011 – 350m
    http://breakingnewsworld.net/2011/04/microsoft-sold-record-350-million-windows-7-licenses-so-far/
    Windows 7 sales to Jan 2012 – 550m (Your figure)

    May 2011 to Jan 2012 = 200m Windows licenses

    May to Jan = 9 months, three quarters = 66m. I’ll err on the side of caution – 65m.

    Per quarter, as averages per quarter where I provide the number. (Hey, you can use averages!)

    PC sales = 88m
    Windows licenses = 65m
    “Illegals” = 13.5m (Your figure – probably low, Windows piracy is claimed to be more than 15% in the US alone, upto 80% in China.)
    Macs = 5.3m (Your figure)

    So 4.2m left over. 4.7%

    This is a far cry from your 19%.

    Even allowing for your elevated figure for Q42011 PC sales, it’s still less than 10% – 8.2m.

    You’re still not even halfway there.

    Remember, I’m not saying it’s 1% – I’m saying it’s not 10%.

  14. Ted wrote, “People can’t afford the computers to run Windows on, so MS sell less licenses. Microsoft’s losses are not Linux’s gains.”

    M$ sells 50 million licences in a quarter where the world sells 90 million PCs, Ted. Sales of PCs are increasing much faster than sales of M$’s licences.

    see IDC.com
    “Worldwide PC shipments totaled 92.7 million in the fourth quarter of 2011 (4Q11)”

    Forbes – 2012-2-13: “Windows 7, which has sold around 550 million licenses to date”

    Do the maths. “7” was released to manufacturing on 2009-07-22. That’s 936 days of selling licences, 10 quarters, so, 55 million per quarter are being sold. What the Hell do you think is going on the other 40 million PCs being shipped each quarter? Even M$ does not claim that many illegal copies. They quote 10-15%, not 45%.

    90 million PCs – 55 million legal “7” – 13.5 million illegal “7”/XP/etc – 5.3 million OS/X = 17 million GNU/Linux PCs, 19%. That’s been going on for a few years, creating a huge installed base for GNU/Linux PCs, probably 10% of working units.

    Do the maths. I dare you.

  15. Clarence Moon says:

    See this? It’s a legal document…

    Do you accept those figures as gospel, Mr. Pogson? Microsoft probably spent a lot of money to get them and they were obtained, presumably, from reliable sources via dependable means.

    While they show some concern on the part of Microsoft that Linux use in businesses will increase in some markets, they also show an overall lack of actual market penetration by Linux, matching to some degree the web stats showing general population figures.

    One item I found sort of amusing on that grid sheet was the notations where they identify Linux growth as up arrow(s) and parenthetically have to add “Bad for MS” to ensure that the execs viewing it get the message. It seems you can’t leave anything to chance anymore! 🙂

    How the hell do you think M$ are down to 50 million licences per quarter if people are not using GNU/Linux?

    I think that you are using outdated information, Mr. Pogson. From the latest quarterly report,

    Microsoft has sold over 525 million Windows 7 licenses since launch

    for what would be a 25 month period and other press releases show their shipping rate is accelerating. If it were just flat, that would mean over 20 million per month and with some acceleration assumed, it would be even higher. So the shipping rate is more like 70 or so million per quarter.

    Coupled with the known piracy rates for Windows in Asian markets and increased sales for Apple’s Macintosh lines, pretty much all the world’s production is accounted for between Apple and Microsoft for OS purposes, leaving a percent or two for Linux based PCs.

  16. Clarence Moon says:

    FLOSS is in the market whether or not money is collected per copy, hour, year, etc.

    It has user share to some degree in various situations, Mr. Pogson. That is not the same as “being in the market”. Perhaps an analogy would help your thinking on this matter.

    Consider the market for bottled water. There are a number of companies selling bottled water at various price points and they clearly compete with one another geographically or globally. In the USA alone, that market is around $20B per year from various reports.

    Even so, much more tap water is consumed annually than bottled water. Since the same thirst is being slaked by both products, are they competitors? In your sense of the thing, they probably are, but in a commercial setting they are not. Bottled water companies are not selling the survival aspect of their water as its being necessary for life.

    Rather, they are selling the product appeal in terms of freshness, cleanliness, and convenience. Bottled water drinkers are not customers of the competition, but are part of a large unsold mass of consumers who could be sold bottled water in the future.

    The bottled water market grows when more consumers consume it and that is what the bottlers want to see. The same holds for Microsoft in that there are new consumers added to the world constantly and they need to be sold on the advantages of Windows. If some remain unsold or else decide to use tap water Linux instead of the bottled Windows, that is merely a problem for the Windows marketers to fix.

    The analogy can be extended to show where carbonated beverage suppliers also drain customers from the bottled water potential market and similarly need to be educated in regard to bottled water’s advantages. Think of those Coke and Pepsi drinkers as Android users.

  17. Ted says:

    You selectively quote me again to get an sound-bite you can nit-pick, Mr Pogson.

    “To get to the golden 10% mark […] then over EIGHTY PERCENT, that’s FOUR in FIVE of Linux users reported by most web-counters are changing their User-Agent strings in their browsers. Really? I somehow think not. ”

    Eighty percent, Mr Pogson. Four in five. This is in no way, shape or form realistic.

    All well over 1% by M$’s estimate

    “Over 1%” is still not 10% and this was only an estimate.

    The numbers considering deploying GNU/Linux are as high as 32% in Germany.

    Note the word “considering”, Mr Pogson. They are not actually deploying it. The numbers actually deploying it are probably way less.

    I would guess a sizeable proportion “considering to deploy Linux” are just trying to negotiate a bigger discount from MS.

    They had USA PCs planning to change to GNU/Linux as 8%.

    While Linux no longer shows up on most web-counters when only accounting for North America. It’s finally dropped into “other”

    How the hell do you think M$ are down to 50 million licences per quarter if people are not using GNU/Linux?

    You may have noticed there’s bit of a global recession going on. People can’t afford the computers to run Windows on, so MS sell less licenses. Microsoft’s losses are not Linux’s gains.

  18. Ted wrote, “Have they paid this even a second’s thought? Have they done the maths?”

    There are countries like Brazil where changing the User-Agent string is quite common to fool IE-only websites. You can tell that because the strings are not the M$-usual.

    See this? It’s a legal document from the World v M$ cases.

    Russia

    Brazil

    India

    France

    Germany

    All well over 1% GNU/Linux by M$’s estimate in 2003. The numbers considering deploying GNU/Linux are as high as 32% in Germany. They had USA PCs planning to change to GNU/Linux as 8%. How the hell do you think M$ are down to 50 million licences per quarter if people are not using GNU/Linux?

    That’s from Plaintiff’s Exhibit 9445 in Comes v M$ and it’s marked “highly confidential”. It’s an internal document obtained from M$ during discovery.

  19. Ted says:

    It was that very article, Robert. A lot of wishful thinking, guesswork, some unwarranted assumptions, selective reporting of results, and a strong dose of denial, also citing other people’s wishful thinking and guesswork.

    It’s simple selection bias. She only sees the evidence that Linux has much greater marketshare than it does because that’s what she wants to believe. Any dissenting view is ignored or denounced as propaganda, distortions or lies.

    There are other articles that have claimed Linux is under-reported in web-counters because of people changing user-agent strings. Have they paid this even a second’s thought? Have they done the maths? To get to the golden 10% mark (Which would now just about equal Vista, which the Penguinistas call a “failure” but which once had nearly a quarter of the deskopt market.) then over EIGHTY PERCENT, that’s FOUR in FIVE of Linux users reported by most web-counters are changing their User-Agent strings in their browsers. Really? I somehow think not.

    Like I said – “It’s 10% because I want it to be 10%. It has to be 10% because I say it is. Anyone who disagrees with me is wrong. Any proof to the contrary is lies.”

    From the article;

    “There’s nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.” –William James”

    I prefer this one…

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” – Paul Joseph Goebbels [emphasis mine]

    “Linux has 10% marketshare”
    “Linux has 10% marketshare”
    “Linux has 10% marketshare”
    “Linux has 10% marketshare”
    “Linux has 10% marketshare”

    Nope.

    http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-200807-201202

  20. Ted revise history with “I’ve read a claim before now that Linux has 10% of the desktop that was purely wishful thinking; the article could be summed up by “It’s 10% because I want it to be 10%. It has to be 10% because i say it is. Anyone who disagrees with me is wrong. Any proof to the contrary is lies.””

    See for example, Debunking the 1% Myth

    GNU/Linux at 3% of the desktop tied with Apple back in 2003 and GNU/Linux has not slowed down with major migrations in the news ever since.

  21. Ted says:

    @Pogson

    In what market has GNU/Linux 1%?

    The home and corporate desktop. The biggest markets for computers by a long way.

    10% of the thick client PC market

    I’ve read a claim before now that Linux has 10% of the desktop that was purely wishful thinking; the article could be summed up by “It’s 10% because I want it to be 10%. It has to be 10% because i say it is. Anyone who disagrees with me is wrong. Any proof to the contrary is lies.”

    Web servers, I’ll grant you, but web-serving is not all uses for servers in a business. What about the ones that aren’t web-facing? And if the other 40% are IIS, that’s not bad going either. Linux claiming 40% of any market would be lauded as a great victory, but it’s somehow a failure for Microsoft?

    HPC? A fig for it. Linux owns a huge slice of an insignificantly tiny pie. So what?

    1%, 1.56% or 10% is still less than the 15% share of PC gamers, that you describe as a “niche”. So what does that make Linux?

    The lowest statistic anywhere for GNU/Linux is 1.56% on NetApplications, which gets everything wrong.

    But any counter that shows it higher is of course holy gospel truth.

    Even M$ says GNU/Linux has a much higher share and has had for a decade.

    Where? And please do not quote that highly stylized slide with no numbers on it that Ballmer once showed. Usually the zealots would accuse Ballmer of lying if he told them the sky was blue; why is he suddenly telling the truth in this case?

  22. Clarence Moon, expressing a childish need to be in charge, wrote, “Anything that is not competing for that money is not in the “market” by definition.”

    Nope. Definitely not true. Ask any business whether a sale not made because someone shared or provided a freebie or sold below cost matters and they will tell you, “yes”. Ask IBM whether microprocessors that were not in the mainframe market mattered. Ask M$ if free copies of that other OS matter. There are lots of things in a market that are not competing for money and they matter, whether or not you define them to matter.

    Look, Clarence. FLOSS is in the market whether or not money is collected per copy, hour, year, etc. FLOSS has displaced $billions of sales by M$ and others. Only a few years ago, M$ had 95% of PCs. Now they have 55-75% depending on who’s counting. They have lost 20% share, something like $1billion per quarter for several years now and their share is decreasing. None of the Android OEMs are paying Google a penny for licences so Google is not in the market to sell licences yet they are displacing hundreds of millions of licences by non-free suppliers like M$ and Apple in that market.

    LAMP collects not a penny for web-serving and yet it has tens of millions of installations. LAMP is in the market for web-serving. Same for desktops and GNU/Linux.

  23. Clarence Moon says:

    First of all, Mr. Pogson, the market is comprised of the totality of things sold for money. Anything that is not competing for that money is not in the “market” by definition. We can also talk about user share, which is a measure of what is being used for some particular purpose, such as internet surfing. Various organizations, NetApplications being one of the foremost, publish statistics garnered from some source that may or may not be accurately depicting what you want to investigate.

    For NetApplications, that is a sort of general interest internet site collection of mostly commercial sites that pay NetApplications to gather usage statistics for their site. It ignores things like Google, Facebook, and major gateway sites such as CNN, MSN, Yahoo, and such who do not pay for a third party to keep their statistics.

    In any case, I think that the only thing that commercial companies, such as Intel or Microsoft, care about is where the available money is going. They also care about whether or not the available money is increasing or decreasing, but that is a secondary concern that they often have little control over. All they can do is compete for what is available and Windows gets the Lion’s share of what Apple doesn’t get with their own, exclusive OS.

    Certainly there are the small, independent OEMs who market Linux based computers, such as System 76. Others have gone down that road in the past and have eventually gone out of business due to lack of demand.

    Believe what you want about Linux chances in the future, Mr. Pogson, but the Linux vendors would be ecstatic to have 1.5% of the total market and would go insane to have 15%. 15% is hardly a “niche” and you well know that Linux does not come within a mile of that much uptake.

  24. Clarence Moon wrote, “1% of that same market is not a niche?”

    Defend 1% on any market for GNU/Linux. GNU/Linux has more like 10% of the thick client PC market, 90% of HPC, 60% of web servers. In what market has GNU/Linux 1%? The lowest statistic anywhere for GNU/Linux is 1.56% on NetApplications, which gets everything wrong. Even M$ says GNU/Linux has a much higher share and has had for a decade.

    Wikipedia which is mostly USA in hits shows 4.44% Linux including 2.87% Android/Linux so that leaves 1.57% GNU/Linux. Mountainview, California shows 88% GNU/Linux on NetApplications. That’s a city of 74K people. Cupertino has 8% GNU/Linux. That’s a city of 58K. Brasilia has 5%.

  25. Clarence Moon says:

    Let’s see here…

    15% of the total computer market in terms of units shipped is a niche, whereas less than 1% of that same market is not a niche? That is an unconventional notion of “niche”, Mr. Pogson.

  26. If you look at the gaming market, it’s of the order of 10-15% of units shipped. It’s a niche. It’s not mainstream in that every age group, sex and social class are into it. It’s mostly a young man’s thing and they grow out of it when confronted with work, family and reality. The world can live without them.

    OTOH, GNU/Linux is mainstream on cloud, server, network infrastructure, gadgets and desktop/notebook/thin client/tablet/smartphone. It’s not a niche.

  27. Ivan says:

    Yes, gaming is such a small niche that companies are willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to create these entirely unimportant games.

    Clearly, things like Facebook, Twitter, Google searches, and content creating tools are clearly more important even though they work just nicely on Microsoft Windows and Apple’s Mac OS X.

    It’s one thing to live in a software slum/cave of your own choice, it’s another thing to claim that just because you do not want these things in your slum/cave, they are unimportant.

  28. Fortunately gaming is a small niche in IT. There are more important things for most people to do with PCs like communicating, finding information, creating stuff etc. and for none of those do we need that other OS to allow us to use our hardware.

  29. Ray says:

    Personally, I’ll wait until Starcraft is ported to Linux

  30. Ivan says:

    “Actually there quite a large and growing number of decent games for Linux.”

    Oh, please.

    Linux has a large number of games that are clones of ’80’s arcade games, poorly executed hobbyist projects, and a few games that the studio was no longer making money from so they released them as free downloads.

    If it weren’t for the few games available in humble bundles, linux users wouldn’t be able to buy recent commercial games. Not that it really matters as all of those games are available on Mac and Windows (with fewer problems, of course).

    But do be a dear and let us know when the Source Engine Games, Skyrim, Rage, Fallout: New Vegas, Grand Theft Auto IV, everything using UE3, and Saints Row the Third get ported, will you?

  31. Conzo says:

    Kozmcrae – Fearless Hunter of Clarences and Knight Protector in the order of Saint Quixote, we thank you for standing firm.

  32. Kozmcrae says:

    Clarence and his Ego said: “Mr. Koz seems to always focus on the poster.”

    It’s your Ego Clarence. It won’t be denied. It demands attention.

  33. Kozmcrae says:

    It’s the same dull routine. No creativity at all in their game.

  34. oe says:

    Agreed with lpbbear…some of the Linux games are really pretty amazing; some of the OpenGL 3-D shooters are pretty amazing. The debian repos have a lot of good games from classic text console stuff, (hunt the wumpus, moria, empire, the bsdgames collection)up to the latest immersive 3-D shooters and flight sims , free and paid. Whats in those repositories is pretty amazing. Our jaded 20 year stepson, who has both the testosterone consoles, is pretty impressed. Me, I’m glad Stella comes in the repos, Linux works well with oldshcool joysticks, and atari 2600 games play well (easier to setup than in Windows for sure)

  35. Clarence Moon says:

    I am commenting on the post. Mr. Koz seems to always focus on the poster. He is just an attitude in search of an idea.

    “6K people have Nixie Pixel in their Circles…”

    That seems rather light, even for Linux user numbers, Mr. Pogson, since they presumably number in the tens of millions. Do any of Nixie Pixel’s fans not use Linux already?

  36. oldman says:

    “It’s the same dull routine. No creativity at all in their game.”

    Or in yours either…

  37. kozmcrae says:

    “If you have to be a Linux fan to know about it, whatever ability it has to convince people to try Linux seems wasted along the lines of “preaching to the the choir”.”

    Clarence is an idiot. He is attempting to say that no one outside of the Linux choir will come to know about this video. But where did the members of the choir come from?

    As usual the Cult of Microsoft relies on twisted logic, opinion as fact and writing their adversary’s comments for them to suit their own needs.

    It’s the same dull routine. No creativity at all in their game.

  38. lpbbear says:

    Actually there quite a large and growing number of decent games for Linux. The myth that Linux can’t do games died years ago. If you are a Windows user you play Windows games, if you are a Linux user you play Linux games. Expecting every Windows game to be available in Linux is not the fault of Linux if they are absent, its the fault of the game software companies.

  39. 6K people have Nixie Pixel in their Circles and Google+ is searchable from Google and YouTube. No subscription required. Also, Google can find her site: http://www.nixiepixel.com

  40. Clarence Moon says:

    “The link came from Google+”

    How does that happen? You seem far too old and grumpy to tolerate spam from any source, even Google. You must have subscribed in some way.

  41. Clarence Moon wrote, “So just how did you stumble across this clip, Mr. Pogson?”

    Google is my friend. The link came from Google+. She’s a member.

    One does not need to know anything at all about GNU/Linux to find Nixie Pixel. Some fanbois of that other OS watch her just for fun. She’s been around for years and just keeps getting better. She’s still young and into gaming on PCs. I expect she will mature and move more to social networking and other more productive activities.

  42. Clarence Moon says:

    So just how did you stumble across this clip, Mr. Pogson? She seems to have her own web site, but how do people come to be there?

    If you have to be a Linux fan to know about it, whatever ability it has to convince people to try Linux seems wasted along the lines of “preaching to the the choir”.

Leave a Reply