Why Windows Is Not Ready For The Desktop
R. McDougall over at climbing-the-hill.blogspot.com was motivated recently to mock the "Linux is not ready for the desktop" articles that are written by people who he feels are "carrying around the self-serving assumption that their preferred OS embodies the only real way to organize a software ecosystem." See his "Why Windows Is Not Ready For The Desktop" post.
And to counter the arguments that Linux is irrelevant on the desktop, see Carla Schroder's post "1% Linux Market Share = 100% Dishonesty". Carla says, "If Linux is such a pipsqueak, why are there such relentless tides of propaganda and deception against it?"
She also references Matt Asay's article,
Linux spending set to boom by 21 percent in 2009
Matt Asay published an interesting analysis, with nice colored graphs, that incorporated a study by IDC that included unpaid deployments. Imagine that, someone finally tried to count unpaid Linux deployments, which it is safe to say are the majority across all market segments. We grouchy Linux geeks have been complaining for years how the analyst firms ignore unpaid deployments, probably on purpose. This report focuses more on the server and enterprise, rather than the consumer desktop space, but it has something that 99% of reports of Linux market share don't have: data.
IDC finds that 53 percent of enterprises it has surveyed are planning to increase adoption of Linux on the server and 48 percent expect to increase adoption of Linux on the client (desktop, laptop, etc.).