According to Statcounter, which should be taken with a pinch of salt of course like any sampling, the Linux share on the desktop hit nearly 4% in December 2023. Last month was a record too and a clear trend over time, as going back a couple of years, it was rarely coming close to 2% but now it's repeatedly nearing 4% so it's quite a good sign overall.
The latest from Statcounter shows for all of 2023 below:
- January - 2.91%
- February - 2.94%
- March - 2.85%
- April - 2.83%
- May - 2.7%
- June - 3.07%
- July - 3.12%
- August - 3.18%
- September - 3.02%
- October - 2.92%
- November - 3.22%
- December - 3.82%
Looking at December it shows Windows rising too, with macOS dropping down. If we actually take ChromeOS directly into the Linux numbers for December 2023 the overall number would actually be 6.24% (ChromeOS is Linux after all).
Here's how just Linux looks over time on Statcounter since early 2009 until now:
Seems like a pretty clear trend over time don't you think? Nice to see this happening elsewhere, just like we've seen over years with the Steam Survey.
You can see their stats over here.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
Quoting: CatKillerOh? Fascinating, when did Windows attain this functionality, back in the day, BlueStacks was the way (which I would not say is out of the box or different than Waydroid). Not sure how ChromeOS does it without a container thoughQuoting: JordanPlayz158Where did you get this info, wasn't difficult to get waydroid installed and working on my linux distro?Waydroid boots up Android in a container, and needs to be installed separately. As I understand it, neither of those are true for ChromeOS or Windows - they can run Android applications out of the box.
0 Likes
Anyway, nearly 4%. I've never seen a number that high for Linux desktop use. And while OK, the latest month was a big jump, that general trend looks really nice. Not only is it an upward slope, but it seems to me that it's slightly upward curving. We are starting to get into traditional MacOS territory; one or two more percentage points and Linux becomes something general software companies may start paying some attention to.
4 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Purple Library GuyA bit, yes, although not entirely. And your point is?ChromeOS isn't really that different from other modern immutable Linux distributions whose main purpose is to run containerized software.
0 Likes
Quoting: JordanPlayz158I was asked to look into this a while back. Windows 11's WSA (Windows Subsystem for Android) obviously makes use of virtualization, and it's not quite an out-of-the-box experience. It's not installed by default for starters. Secondly, you can only install apps from the Amazon Appstore unless you want to sideload them using the Android SDK. Oh and the Amazon Appstore is only available in a limited set of countries so sideloading might be your only option.Quoting: CatKillerOh? Fascinating, when did Windows attain this functionality, back in the day, BlueStacks was the way (which I would not say is out of the box or different than Waydroid). Not sure how ChromeOS does it without a container thoughQuoting: JordanPlayz158Where did you get this info, wasn't difficult to get waydroid installed and working on my linux distro?Waydroid boots up Android in a container, and needs to be installed separately. As I understand it, neither of those are true for ChromeOS or Windows - they can run Android applications out of the box.
Doesn't sound much nicer to use than Waydroid to be honest.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: pleasereadthemanualRight, so native applications for ChromeOS can run on Linux, because native applications for ChromeOS are written for Linux, meant to be used in containers.
Well, I guess ChromeOS is a Linux distribution then.
Yes, ChromeOS is Linux. See the documentation here.
It seems like Google has done something similar to Valve(Valve followed Google I mean) with the Steam Deck Big Picture UI. The way I understand it, they have a custom Window Manager that just opens 1 Window to draw Big Picture. And Google has made a custom Window Manager as well and it originally only loaded Chrome (from what I understand).
I haven't taken a look at ChromeOS at all, but I'm sure the Window Manager is just a Wayland compositor. The difference here is that Valve also packages a Desktop Environment and sticks with a more stock distribution. Google could have done the same but their whole marketing plan is "security" which is why you are reading about everything being containerized. You could get a similar experience with distrobox on your Linux Desktop. I have distrobox loaded on my Steam Deck with an Ubuntu container, when I'm in desktop mode, I just run everything from the Ubuntu container. You can map the applications in the container so they appear as if they were installed by the host OS, gui applications and all.
You can ignore this rant part.
Spoiler, click me
<rant>
If Google started with a stock Linux distribution from the start, the devices would get repudiated for not running Windows applications. Which is the same excuse people use for not switching to Linux now. Instead they sell low cost devices and people buy a ChromeOS device with the idea in mind that they will only do ChromeOS things on it. Which is how new comers to Linux should approach Linux. Instead we get crocodile tears about Office and Adobe and "they should make a more friendly desktop for Windows users". You don't hear people crying about ChromeOS being unfriendly and different do you?</rant>
Google has also been very careful not to allow hackers to run away with their devices. Any normal dev will just wax ChromeOS and load Ubuntu onto the device without a second of hesitation. Instead they control how you get access to the linux side of things; see Crostini. To me it looks like Google wants to sell devices at a loss so they can saturate the market and out compete on price. Mean while make their money harvesting data and delivering ads. "You're getting a device with security in mind. *wink*"
ChromeOS is Linux. Whether ChromeOS is Desktop Linux and does it have or make a compatible userland available to the user is really the question. It for sure looks like it's going that way. ChromeOS + a Steam ready container with Proton? sounds like a slam dunk for Google.
3 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje Jan 3
Quoting: HighballThe most amusing thing to me is that when Windows 7 released, all I could think of was 'wow, they almost 1:1 copied KDE's initial look / feel. About the only big difference is the control panel and settings in KDE needs a massive clean up, and Wine to be better.' Imagine now, with Wine / Proton being so good at compatibility, releasing a cleaned up KDE themed to look like Windows 7, with all the 'ownership' that operating system had, continual updates being made available and all those grognards accepting that is their future so they don't have to go onto Win 8,10,11, where you are losing more and more of that ownership...Quoting: pleasereadthemanualRight, so native applications for ChromeOS can run on Linux, because native applications for ChromeOS are written for Linux, meant to be used in containers.
Well, I guess ChromeOS is a Linux distribution then.
Yes, ChromeOS is Linux. See the documentation here.
It seems like Google has done something similar to Valve(Valve followed Google I mean) with the Steam Deck Big Picture UI. The way I understand it, they have a custom Window Manager that just opens 1 Window to draw Big Picture. And Google has made a custom Window Manager as well and it originally only loaded Chrome (from what I understand).
I haven't taken a look at ChromeOS at all, but I'm sure the Window Manager is just a Wayland compositor. The difference here is that Valve also packages a Desktop Environment and sticks with a more stock distribution. Google could have done the same but their whole marketing plan is "security" which is why you are reading about everything being containerized. You could get a similar experience with distrobox on your Linux Desktop. I have distrobox loaded on my Steam Deck with an Ubuntu container, when I'm in desktop mode, I just run everything from the Ubuntu container. You can map the applications in the container so they appear as if they were installed by the host OS, gui applications and all.
You can ignore this rant part.
Spoiler, click me
<rant>
If Google started with a stock Linux distribution from the start, the devices would get repudiated for not running Windows applications. Which is the same excuse people use for not switching to Linux now. Instead they sell low cost devices and people buy a ChromeOS device with the idea in mind that they will only do ChromeOS things on it. Which is how new comers to Linux should approach Linux. Instead we get crocodile tears about Office and Adobe and "they should make a more friendly desktop for Windows users". You don't hear people crying about ChromeOS being unfriendly and different do you?</rant>
Google has also been very careful not to allow hackers to run away with their devices. Any normal dev will just wax ChromeOS and load Ubuntu onto the device without a second of hesitation. Instead they control how you get access to the linux side of things; see Crostini. To me it looks like Google wants to sell devices at a loss so they can saturate the market and out compete on price. Mean while make their money harvesting data and delivering ads. "You're getting a device with security in mind. *wink*"
ChromeOS is Linux. Whether ChromeOS is Desktop Linux and does it have or make a compatible userland available to the user is really the question. It for sure looks like it's going that way. ChromeOS + a Steam ready container with Proton? sounds like a slam dunk for Google.
Conspiracy Mode; Have you ever wondered if one of the main reasons Office and it's ilk are moving to cloud based systems is due to Linux finally getting to the point where it can run stand alone Office? I'm pretty sure the latest version runs fine there now... (I still don't know why macOS got a port of Office, and Linux never did. You'd think MS would want Office on all the platforms they could to make more money... but then again, they figure they can force people to also buy Windows... greedy Mofos).
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: HighballUn-ignoring the rant part for a moment, I'd like to note something: There are pretty much no "ChromeOS things" to "only do" on a Chromebook. My wife has a Chromebook, and it certainly looks as if their marketing plan is not "security". It is "Get everyone to use Google Docs and put all their files on our cloud". Their UI is quite easy to work with, but gets mysteriously complex and recalcitrant the moment you want to save a file locally. You can do it, but it takes some figuring out, and next time you start working with the file, by say clicking on the file, it will not save the changes to the file it will put it back on their cloud.Quoting: pleasereadthemanualRight, so native applications for ChromeOS can run on Linux, because native applications for ChromeOS are written for Linux, meant to be used in containers.
Well, I guess ChromeOS is a Linux distribution then.
Yes, ChromeOS is Linux. See the documentation here.
It seems like Google has done something similar to Valve(Valve followed Google I mean) with the Steam Deck Big Picture UI. The way I understand it, they have a custom Window Manager that just opens 1 Window to draw Big Picture. And Google has made a custom Window Manager as well and it originally only loaded Chrome (from what I understand).
I haven't taken a look at ChromeOS at all, but I'm sure the Window Manager is just a Wayland compositor. The difference here is that Valve also packages a Desktop Environment and sticks with a more stock distribution. Google could have done the same but their whole marketing plan is "security" which is why you are reading about everything being containerized. You could get a similar experience with distrobox on your Linux Desktop. I have distrobox loaded on my Steam Deck with an Ubuntu container, when I'm in desktop mode, I just run everything from the Ubuntu container. You can map the applications in the container so they appear as if they were installed by the host OS, gui applications and all.
You can ignore this rant part.
Spoiler, click me
<rant>
If Google started with a stock Linux distribution from the start, the devices would get repudiated for not running Windows applications. Which is the same excuse people use for not switching to Linux now. Instead they sell low cost devices and people buy a ChromeOS device with the idea in mind that they will only do ChromeOS things on it. Which is how new comers to Linux should approach Linux. Instead we get crocodile tears about Office and Adobe and "they should make a more friendly desktop for Windows users". You don't hear people crying about ChromeOS being unfriendly and different do you?</rant>
Google has also been very careful not to allow hackers to run away with their devices. Any normal dev will just wax ChromeOS and load Ubuntu onto the device without a second of hesitation. Instead they control how you get access to the linux side of things; see Crostini. To me it looks like Google wants to sell devices at a loss so they can saturate the market and out compete on price. Mean while make their money harvesting data and delivering ads. "You're getting a device with security in mind. *wink*"
ChromeOS is Linux. Whether ChromeOS is Desktop Linux and does it have or make a compatible userland available to the user is really the question. It for sure looks like it's going that way. ChromeOS + a Steam ready container with Proton? sounds like a slam dunk for Google.
Don't get me wrong, I don't actually hate ChromeOS. It has served my wife pretty well most of the time, as her computing needs are very simple, and so an amazingly simple, locked down OS which lets you do hardly anything doesn't actually cause her many problems. Note though that I say not "many" problems, rather than not "any" problems. Even someone with really very simple computing needs will occasionally run up against the edges of what ChromeOS wants you to do, and the fact that with enough magic some of those can be bypassed does not change this for a normal user.
It should be acknowledged that for practical purposes for an ordinary user, it does not let you run software. Period. It is not the same as a typical "immutable OS" version of Linux, I really don't give a goddamn what the theory might claim. If you'd tried using it, ideally without doing any amazing stuff that only a serious Arch-user type would be able to figure out how to do, you'd understand.
Maybe they have plans to let people run software in the future. Or maybe just Steam and Steam games. But that becomes worth talking about when they actually do it.
5 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me