From which browser to log in?
I was inspired by this habratopic to write this opus, in which I left a few, to put it mildly, incorrect comments, and as a result I was forced to chew on my own position in detail. I understand perfectly well that, in principle, it is not interesting to anyone, because in holy wars there simply isn’t the right position, however, I think it may be interesting for someone to see what else people think there, and therefore it is precisely such people and This post is intended.
Immediately warn you - I am not against Linux, God forbid. I never object to free software, free operating systems and free licenses, and I don’t consider Linux users to be a red-eyed school. And I don’t have anything against Mac Os, on the contrary - I’m entirely for Linux, customizable, cool and fast, Mac Os convenient and beautiful.
The problem is that the user does not need it.
')
Too many people, arguing about the dangers of OEM licenses for which the preinstalled Windows is supplied, allow themselves such extrapolations that they wonder how people who are able to think so can write coherent posts. However, unfortunately, the argument “I don’t need - it means no one needs it” has rather strong positions in our society.
Yes, I am ready to admit that monopolies are bad (which, in general, is just as wrong as the statement that democracy is good). To hell with him, albeit bad. If monopolies are bad, then we must fight them. How? Let us dwell on this issue in more detail.
For a start, a beautiful analogy. Here we should make a remark that the analogy is not a way of proving, but a way of explaining one’s own thoughts. And I use it exactly for the same purpose - to clarify the course of my own reasoning. God forbid you refute the analogy, it is meaningless.
Imagine that you are attacked by a multi-thousand army, well, for example, the Mongols. There are a lot of Mongols, but you are few, somewhere around 1% of the entire desktop market ... oh, it seems I am again in the wrong steppe. And these same Mongols all go and go, waving their swords. How to deal with them?
It would seem that the most logical decision is to start building your own army, gaining recruits in order to fight back the enemy. This is absolutely the right answer. The only question is what methods to recruit recruits.
And here, imagine, the thinking of some people fails. It seems to them that the most effective method is a ritual coming to the enemy’s camp, where Mongols are recruiting, setting up their tents, filing a complaint with unfair competition to an international court (evil Mongols have 90 tents on their territory, and we are only one), putting up leaflets with the contents of the form "user recruit, make the right choice!"
The problem is that the recruit does not want to choose. He is a Mongol, came to enroll in the Mongolian army, and does not know that there are other armies besides the Mongolian. Or he even give a damn about which army to serve in, just to get paid, while a friend goes to Mongolian, and his friend goes to Mongolian. Here it is - the right choice, we go with the herd - with the herd of cocoa.
Now, let's get to the point, namely, in response to the question - what will the user choose if given such a choice?
It seems to some that if the operating system is not installed on the laptops by default, or it is set by choice, then the majority (or at least a significant part) will choose Linux, because it is free, cool and not a B-awesome Windows. The point of view, to say the least, is strange. This would work if the shares of Windows and Linux were equivalent, but at present, with the total dominance of Microsoft, the share of Windows will decrease by fractions of a percent. And that's why.
The market, despite the dispelling of the myth of the "invisible hand" - not a fool. If there was a real large solvent group, the demand of which can be met within the paradigm of mass production - laptops with Linux would have stood on each shelf a long time ago. In reality, however, this does not happen. The thing is that users-geeks who are able to make a conscious choice of the OS are a separate, rather small party, which is also closed. Naturally, since the geeks rotate in their environment, which is somewhat isolated from the outside world, it begins to seem to them that everyone around them will wait for the grandiose Vendekapepez.
To some extent, I am also such a geek user, and there are enough Linux users around me. As a percentage - about 30, or even 40%. And for them it was a conscious choice. And these people are percentages, percentages of the total mass of consumers.
And what's the bottom line? And in the bottom line, we have small and medium-sized firms with a pirated (and more recently, more than OEM) Windows, because you can put 1C-enterprise on it. Firms of large hands, equipping jobs under Windows, simply because finding a normal user under Linux is quite problematic, despite all the exhortations of individuals. The housewives, who are turning white and bleating from the word “operating system” about the Internet, which has a VKontakte site, and they don’t need anything else. Teens who need cool games with 11 directories. In the end, people like me, who need the computer to just work, and so that I stumbled across something on the Internet, did not think that on YouTube, under Linux, the video slows down and buggy, and the cool .kkrieger will not run me even under Wine. And they constitute the bulk of users, and not geeks.
Of course, you can always put a Linux housewife, and she may not understand that she now has an explorer, but a Mozilla, but the housewife can never make a conscious choice. It will be something like this:
- I want this laptop.
- Well, what operating system to install?
- Oh, and what is it?
- Well ... * here, the boy-manager is scratching his turnips, because he himself doesn’t really know *, this is such a thing to run on the Internet and launch programs.
- Oh, put me this ... how is it ... Internet explorer.
Well, maybe not.
“Ah, I don’t know ... and which is the most popular?”
What will the manager answer? A manager knows that for the sale of a company with an OEM-Windows he will receive a percentage of the affiliate program with microsoft. And what will he get for selling a computer with free Linux?
Well, maybe he got conscious and offered to install Linux. And get a logical question:
- How much does it cost?
Do you really think that in a computer company they will install Linux for free? No, most likely, the OS installation will be a separate item in the price of the computer, and both Windows and Linux will be installed the same way - at the price of the Windows OEM license, only in the second case all the money will go into the company's pocket.
However, you say, in this case, companies will be interested in selling laptops with Linux. Yes, but the idyll will not last long - after all, it is so easy to dump the mark-up from scratch.
What's next? And further, the housewife will break the computer with Linux. And she will call a specialist boy from the neighbors that at the age of 14 heloworld already writes in BASIC. And the specialist boy, pushing his tongue to Linux, will carry him to hell and put the Windows, because now for every geek-Linux user who puts his mother ubuntu, there are a hundred professional boys who solve all the problems by reinstalling Windows.
Why am I doing this? And the fact that the problem of the dominance of Windows in the market is complex, and measures like “let the user choose” will not solve it. Now, if you give choose - users will choose Windows.
Or maybe there is no problem?
Immediately warn you - I am not against Linux, God forbid. I never object to free software, free operating systems and free licenses, and I don’t consider Linux users to be a red-eyed school. And I don’t have anything against Mac Os, on the contrary - I’m entirely for Linux, customizable, cool and fast, Mac Os convenient and beautiful.
The problem is that the user does not need it.
')
Too many people, arguing about the dangers of OEM licenses for which the preinstalled Windows is supplied, allow themselves such extrapolations that they wonder how people who are able to think so can write coherent posts. However, unfortunately, the argument “I don’t need - it means no one needs it” has rather strong positions in our society.
Yes, I am ready to admit that monopolies are bad (which, in general, is just as wrong as the statement that democracy is good). To hell with him, albeit bad. If monopolies are bad, then we must fight them. How? Let us dwell on this issue in more detail.
For a start, a beautiful analogy. Here we should make a remark that the analogy is not a way of proving, but a way of explaining one’s own thoughts. And I use it exactly for the same purpose - to clarify the course of my own reasoning. God forbid you refute the analogy, it is meaningless.
Imagine that you are attacked by a multi-thousand army, well, for example, the Mongols. There are a lot of Mongols, but you are few, somewhere around 1% of the entire desktop market ... oh, it seems I am again in the wrong steppe. And these same Mongols all go and go, waving their swords. How to deal with them?
It would seem that the most logical decision is to start building your own army, gaining recruits in order to fight back the enemy. This is absolutely the right answer. The only question is what methods to recruit recruits.
And here, imagine, the thinking of some people fails. It seems to them that the most effective method is a ritual coming to the enemy’s camp, where Mongols are recruiting, setting up their tents, filing a complaint with unfair competition to an international court (evil Mongols have 90 tents on their territory, and we are only one), putting up leaflets with the contents of the form "
The problem is that the recruit does not want to choose. He is a Mongol, came to enroll in the Mongolian army, and does not know that there are other armies besides the Mongolian. Or he even give a damn about which army to serve in, just to get paid, while a friend goes to Mongolian, and his friend goes to Mongolian. Here it is - the right choice, we go with the herd - with the herd of cocoa.
Now, let's get to the point, namely, in response to the question - what will the user choose if given such a choice?
It seems to some that if the operating system is not installed on the laptops by default, or it is set by choice, then the majority (or at least a significant part) will choose Linux, because it is free, cool and not a B-awesome Windows. The point of view, to say the least, is strange. This would work if the shares of Windows and Linux were equivalent, but at present, with the total dominance of Microsoft, the share of Windows will decrease by fractions of a percent. And that's why.
The market, despite the dispelling of the myth of the "invisible hand" - not a fool. If there was a real large solvent group, the demand of which can be met within the paradigm of mass production - laptops with Linux would have stood on each shelf a long time ago. In reality, however, this does not happen. The thing is that users-geeks who are able to make a conscious choice of the OS are a separate, rather small party, which is also closed. Naturally, since the geeks rotate in their environment, which is somewhat isolated from the outside world, it begins to seem to them that everyone around them will wait for the grandiose Vendekapepez.
To some extent, I am also such a geek user, and there are enough Linux users around me. As a percentage - about 30, or even 40%. And for them it was a conscious choice. And these people are percentages, percentages of the total mass of consumers.
And what's the bottom line? And in the bottom line, we have small and medium-sized firms with a pirated (and more recently, more than OEM) Windows, because you can put 1C-enterprise on it. Firms of large hands, equipping jobs under Windows, simply because finding a normal user under Linux is quite problematic, despite all the exhortations of individuals. The housewives, who are turning white and bleating from the word “operating system” about the Internet, which has a VKontakte site, and they don’t need anything else. Teens who need cool games with 11 directories. In the end, people like me, who need the computer to just work, and so that I stumbled across something on the Internet, did not think that on YouTube, under Linux, the video slows down and buggy, and the cool .kkrieger will not run me even under Wine. And they constitute the bulk of users, and not geeks.
Of course, you can always put a Linux housewife, and she may not understand that she now has an explorer, but a Mozilla, but the housewife can never make a conscious choice. It will be something like this:
- I want this laptop.
- Well, what operating system to install?
- Oh, and what is it?
- Well ... * here, the boy-manager is scratching his turnips, because he himself doesn’t really know *, this is such a thing to run on the Internet and launch programs.
- Oh, put me this ... how is it ... Internet explorer.
Well, maybe not.
“Ah, I don’t know ... and which is the most popular?”
What will the manager answer? A manager knows that for the sale of a company with an OEM-Windows he will receive a percentage of the affiliate program with microsoft. And what will he get for selling a computer with free Linux?
Well, maybe he got conscious and offered to install Linux. And get a logical question:
- How much does it cost?
Do you really think that in a computer company they will install Linux for free? No, most likely, the OS installation will be a separate item in the price of the computer, and both Windows and Linux will be installed the same way - at the price of the Windows OEM license, only in the second case all the money will go into the company's pocket.
However, you say, in this case, companies will be interested in selling laptops with Linux. Yes, but the idyll will not last long - after all, it is so easy to dump the mark-up from scratch.
What's next? And further, the housewife will break the computer with Linux. And she will call a specialist boy from the neighbors that at the age of 14 heloworld already writes in BASIC. And the specialist boy, pushing his tongue to Linux, will carry him to hell and put the Windows, because now for every geek-Linux user who puts his mother ubuntu, there are a hundred professional boys who solve all the problems by reinstalling Windows.
Why am I doing this? And the fact that the problem of the dominance of Windows in the market is complex, and measures like “let the user choose” will not solve it. Now, if you give choose - users will choose Windows.
Or maybe there is no problem?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/66839/
All Articles