Linux, Windows, Mac

There has been an operating system battle going on for around two decades. There have been many shifts and changes in the battle that no one foresaw and each has adapted to for better or worse.

I've used all three and like all three. I'm not one of those fanatics who thinks you have to use the operating system I like and I don't object to companies competing and making money. In fact, that is what has spurred innovation. Linux has been innovating precisely because of capitalism and market forces. No matter what Richard Stallman had hoped.

Mac

Mac has always had a small following. I remember the version 8 and 9 days. Not much there but also technology hadn't developed enough to have much to compete against. With version 10 being based on Unix, Apple hoped to win over BSD and Linux developers to helped them fight the "evil empire". I don't think Steve Jobs realized that the open source advocates saw him in the same way as they do Bill Gates. But Jobs could buy people with jobs (pun intended).

OS X is a great system. Of course there are two major issues. The first is price. Why buy a Mac even though Unix is more stable when the cost is so high. Most people will never see a reason and there is no reason they should. Second is software. Why buy a Mac and run Windows software on it anyway? How many advocates use Microsoft Word on their Mac?

Windows

We all know what Windows is and have varying opinions of it's versions. ME still makes me shudder. I didn't like any of the products between 3.1 and XP. There have been multitudes rail on Vista but I love it.

Windows 7 is a major milestone and I think will spur Windows continues dominance of the desktop.

Linux

I have used Linux since 1999 when I installed Red Hat 5. At home, I used Linux exclusively for four years until I was assigned a Windows XP laptop in 2006 to work from home. I love Linux. However, as technology has become more and more sophisticated, Linux can't prosper as a volunteer operating system. Indeed it hasn't. The Linux creator and copyright holder, Linux Torvalds, went to work for several corporations that have paid him to run the development of Linux. Red Hat Software, by far the most used Linux distribution, incorporated and pays developers.

My point is many Linux enthusiasts thought they could continue developing the OS without corporate support. Small companies can use Linux quite well for jobs such as web hosting. But for larger projects, this argument turned out wrong and not just because of the need for money.

Software has become complicated. Different applications have to work together with the operating system and hardware for optimal performance. This is why the corporation Red Hat is leading in the Linux arena on the server level. They work closely with hardware and software vendors such as HP and Oracle. Programming has been added to better utilize hardware and application resources. This wouldn't have been accomplished if it wasn't for Red Hat. Companies like to work with other companies. They need deals and assurances. Red Hat made deals and gave assurances to the point where Red Hat and Linux are synonymous in the business world. And Red Hat Linux is dominate in the server world.

I remember a decade ago when all the talk was "when" Linux was going to win the desktop war. Linux IS a great desktop operating system but Linux lost in the desktop arena. The interest by hardware and software vendors just wasn't there. On the desktop front, there were too many hardware vendors with too many specs. It takes programmers to make hardware work with an operating system. Companies were paying for Windows to work. Why pay additional personnel to duplicate the job for Linux? Couple that with the fact that some vendors had a reason to keep their code proprietary.

There is still hope for Linux but that hope will come from a totally unexpected source and an area that is not the desktop. It actually started with Apple and there development of the product that is keeping the company afloat - the iPhone.

Linux has been used as a phone OS for a long time. But phone manufacturers have been innovating and have developed what are referred to as smart phones - basically miniature computers used for talk, text, email, web browsing, listen to music, watch videos, etc. Apple, Microsoft and Linux are used extensively in this arena. This was in my opinion unexpected not long ago. Devices such as the iPod and iTouch dominated Apple's lineup and Microsoft countered with the Zune. Both are outdated today since what they do is only a small subset of what smart phones do.

Like the desktop arena, Apple limits itself to a product which it manufactures both the hardware and software. Both Windows Mobile and Linux run on multiple devices but Windows has been slow to be upgraded. The current version is 6.5 and version 7 is not expected out until sometime next year.

Linux has had two benefactors in the phone market: Palm and Google. Palm's WebOS is based on Linux and the Palm Pre phone has many innovative features including multitasking.

Google jumped into the arena with the Linux based Android OS. Version two has just come out. Manufacturers have picked it up and ran with it. As far as the sheer number of phones, Android will certainly dominate. Apple and Windows continue to compete. I look forward to see the new innovations because innovation is good for us all.