* PC buyers swap Linux for pirate Windows, Gartner says
endif; ?>A recent report from Gartner throws some cold water on recent gains Linux has made in desktop PC shipments. The research firms says that many of the Linux-based PCs that are being shipped to emerging markets in Asia and Latin American will end up running pirated versions of Microsoft Windows.
A recent report from Gartner throws some cold water on recent gains Linux has made in desktop PC shipments. The research firms says that many of the Linux-based PCs that are being shipped to emerging markets in Asia and Latin American will end up running pirated versions of Microsoft Windows.
The research firm estimates that Linux will account for about 5% of all PC shipments worldwide this year. But those numbers jump into the 10% to 12% range in markets such as Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Eastern Europe. But Garter isn’t saying that this has to do with the love of Linux. Because Microsoft operating systems remain so high, the report says, companies in these markets plan to buy lower-cost PCs that ship with Linux, and then reinstall illegal copies of Windows on them for production use, or for resale. The report says PC makers in Asia, for example have seen the cost of adding Windows to their products rise from 6% of the PC’s cost in 1996 to 15% of the cost of the PC in 2004.
The report also goes on to say that many of the planned Linux desktop deployments in foreign markets are actually attempts to get Microsoft to lower its prices rather than actually strategies for running Linux on desktops. This is because these organizations prefer Windows because it is cheaper to maintain and manage, and interoperates with more applications, Gartner says.
Regarding the Linux/pirated-Windows issue, it is unclear whether the Gartner report is based on conjecture and assumptions about how PC vendors in emerging markets operate, or actual reports of foreign companies observed to be re-installing pirated Windows software over Linux-based PCs. The Gartner report seems to be long on statements and predictions, but short on sources.




