The EE Times recently ran an article on how Linux will never move beyond single digits in market share for desktop use. I don't think he's right, and this is why.

Linux has, as the author noted, been a great success in the server market. Market forces are, more and more, ensuring this. Companies that transition their servers to Linux save millions of dollars on licensing fees. People that argue against server adoption of Linux say that this isn't really free as there are costs of maintenance, but, uh, duh. It's not like Windows is maintenance-free as anybody who has ever used the OS knows.

The author goes through seven arguments which he believes make "an airtight case" that greater adoption of Linux on the desktop isn't going to happen. So, let's go through them.

Argument 1: Prohibitive application porting costs
IBM's recent support of OpenOffice is an obvious and clear step towards getting strong open source business software ready for enterprise use (though many people would say that it already is there). Second, many of these major programs already work on OS X, which means that much of the hard work in porting is already done. There is still a lot to go, but it isn't prohibitively expensive, and certainly not when a major company is backing them. The problem here is not an issue with cost, it's an issue with mindset.

Argument 2: The Fanboy alienation factor, or how Linux's biggest supporters drive away potential new users
Nobody, NOBODY is more annoying than Mac fanboys (as somebody who is kind of one, I an attest this from personal experience) and yet that's not deterring anybody. Does anybody actually think that this is an issue?

Argument 3: You can't make money on the operating system
Lots of companies make money off of *nix. They either provide support for their own distributions or just specialize in general Linux support. And we're not just talking servers here, either. The idea that you can't make money off of something that's free is outdated. That's like thinking that the internet will never be relevant compared to main stream media. Pull your head out of 1994's ass.

Argument 4: Resistance from average users
Average users use what they use at work. When schools first adopted personal computers they, like most everything else, used Apple. Then, businesses adopted x86-based machines and the schools realized that they had to switch. If they continued to teach on Apple machines then nobody would be prepared for 'the real world' when they graduated. Computer use always follows what people use at work. Does anybody think that if Apple had maintained the business market 15 years ago that they would still be behind Microsoft today?

Argument 5: Linux is "simple"; Windows "just works"
And OS X "just works" way better than Windows. And, guess what, OS X is built on top of *nix. OS X is backed by a large corporation; Linux is more and more these days. Just look at the smashing success of Ubuntu (and yes, it has been a success). It's waaaay easier to install than Windows and it's getting easier to use every day. Windows in many respects does not "just work." Are you really making that claim?

Argument 6: There are way too many Linux distros
It's a new market and one without a massive monopoly that's kicking everybody else's ass out. Anybody with basic instruction in economics will see this and understand that market forces will eventually dictate that the successful distributions will win out and eventually solidify the market in general. This is already happening on the server side with RedHat's Enterprise Linux and on the desktop side with Ubuntu. Large commercial Linux suppliers will be eventually bought and they'll create a hegemony.

Argument 7: No powerful evangelist for Linux comparable to Bill Gates or Steve Jobs
This has nothing to do with corporate adoption and you know it. Get real.

Corporate adoption of Linux on the desktop will come, but it will come after the Vista cycle. Most companies have preexisting agreements with Microsoft to upgrade to 2007 and Vista. Many will switch by the 2013 cycle and by 2020 it will be a powerful force to compete with. True, the people who say that it will happen 'this year' are wrong, but this article is just a bunch of very short-sighted FUD. It completely doesn't take into account what companies stand to gain by switching to Linux. It doesn't even mention how much companies already have made by switching to Linux servers.

10 years ago, Solaris was a huge contender for the server market. Now, it's all but dead. The same thing is starting to happen to Microsoft.

Linux on the desktop is coming. Get used to it.