Why don't the better operating systems win?
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
We respect your right to privacy. You can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Your cookie preferences will apply across our website.
Why don't the better operating systems win?
They relatively did in the 80s and early 90s. It's 2016 and they are irrelevant now. Get the fuck over it or go to the same internet ageism circlejerk and waste another few decades.
>>>/vr/
because your criteria for "better" is autistic.
They did; Windows has over 85% market share.
>XP share is higher than W8
Posted from glorious XP master race.
>>54367890
Amiga took the same path Apple did with 68k to PPC. It would have had to be completely rewritten to run on x86.
>>54368004
XP is insecure and no longer supported by Microsoft
>better
>spinnan balls - the operating system
seriously?
Amiga was a great multimedia OS, but Apple eventually caught up with its media productivity. Microsoft took over the business market with its networking and management features.
BeOS didn't make it
/thread
>>54367890
They don't come preinstalled
>>54368004
>Windows has over 85% market share
Which means the better operating systems only have <15%
>XP
Install POSReady 2009.
XP a shit
>>54368322
>no longer supported by Microsoft
No shit, fucktard.
>XP is insecure
No it isn't, fucktard.
>>54367890
Because "good enough" often wins.
>>54367890
They do, where it matters. In areas like web servers, data centers, supercomputers, and space stations, Linux and BSD fucking dominate.
Normies have no need for Linux. iOS is all they'll ever need. At least it's a Unix system with good encryption, Right? Better than Microshit anyways. Android can be thought of as the ultimate success for mass market commercial Linux adoption.
