5 Percent? (Premium)

When Steve Jobs stepped onto the stage at the Bayside Expo in Boston in August 1997, Apple was in a precarious state, just months away from bankruptcy. But Jobs had a few tricks up his sleeve, the most momentous of which was a verbal agreement with Microsoft CEO Bill Gates to continue supporting the Mac with new versions of the crucial Office apps suite. Gates also agreed to invest $150 million in Apple in return for nonvoting shares, a necessary cash injection that would help keep that company afloat.

This moment is forever etched in time for all kinds of reasons–the Big Brother-like image of Gates looming over Jobs on a video screen, the boos as Jobs announced that Internet Explorer would be the default browser on the Mac, and so on–but my clearest memories of that day are of two Steve Jobs comments, one that’s stood the test of time and one which still reads as both audacious and deceptive.

“If we want to move forward and see Apple healthy again,” Jobs explained that day, “we have to let go of a few things here. We have to let go of this notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose.”

This still resonates today. To that moment, and in some ways through the early 2000s, Microsoft and Apple were direct competitors in some ways, with rival personal computer operating systems. But even in 1997, things were changing. Microsoft was moving into the business space with Office and a Windows that would soon be based on NT, and Apple was a smaller company that would shift its focus from creative professionals to consumers and see great success with devices. Today, the two companies are among the biggest in the world, and while the Mac and Windows still compete, this is much less of a concern for both and their biggest successes have collectively come from other markets.

“Sometimes points of view can really make you look at things differently,” he also said that day. “When I was looking at the statistics, it hit me that … Apple plus Microsoft equals 100 percent of the desktop computer market.”

The audience applauded here, apparently not understanding–or maybe just trying desperately to ignore–that approximately 93 to 95 percent of that market was controlled by Microsoft, not Apple. So, yes, the two together were essentially 100 percent. But Apple’s share of that market was miniscule and in danger of disappearing.

At the time, I found this comment to be clueless and even laughable.

Flash forward 28 years (!) and for obvious reasons, I was immediately reminded of that day in Boston when I saw headlines over the weekend about Linux surpassing 5 percent market share–really, usage share–for the first time ever. But I also understood without reading any of those articles that 2025 isn’t going to be like 1997, to channel a classic Apple marketing line.

First, the obvious caveat: When I finally did look at this story this morning, I found that the 5 percent Linux usage share figure, which comes from Statcounter, the last major company left standing that measures this sort of thing, is for the U.S. market only. According to Statcounter, Linux usage share worldwide is still only only 4.09 percent.

OK, whatever. These are still likely all-time highs, and while we’re still not in “year of desktop Linux” territory, a step forward is a step forward.

But the reason this milestone, whether it’s real or imagined, doesn’t really matter that much is that there’s no such thing as Linux, the OS. There is instead an almost uncountable number of Linux distributions, of varying levels of quality, from sources as diverse as IBM and some kid in his parent’s basement, each with different hardware compatibility, user interfaces, display technology, app package formats, and whatever else. Linux, put simply, is a mess, at least on the desktop.

The most popular Linux distribution on the desktop by all accounts is Ubuntu, and this is why I’m so keen to see Ubuntu’s maker, Canonical, get it working well on Snapdragon X-based Copilot+ PCs. But Ubuntu only controls approximately 20 percent of all Linux desktop usage. And 20 percent of 4.04 percent is what? Right. 0.8 percent. Or what we might call “zero,” statistically.

Maybe it’s better than that. Maybe Ubuntu represents 1 percent or more of all desktop computer usage. It doesn’t matter. Ubuntu is still one of dozens of solid Linux distribution choices alongside Mint, Fedora, Elementary, Zorin, Arch, Debian, and whatever else. And even Ubuntu itself isn’t a thing. Instead, there are a dozen-ish Ubuntu Linux “flavors,” each with its own focus. Or lack of focus, one might say.

What Linux needs, of course, is some form of standardization so that governments, corporations, and individuals can get a baseline of compatibility across both software and hardware support. A standard user interface, a standard programming model, a standard app packaging format. A standard that distributions could build from that’s higher in the stack than is the case today. And this is the right time for such an initiative, with the Little Tech backlash against Big Tech, all of which is based in the U.S. It’s what the governments of the EU need to finally wean themselves off Big Tech. Heck, it’s what China needs too. It is what many, many need.

I realize that the ridiculous levels of choice one gets with Linux is part of the appeal for some fans of this platform. I hear you. But because Linux is not a thing, not a single thing, it will never displace the Mac, let alone Windows, on the desktop. It will just be the basis for, the underpinnings of, other things. Like Android on mobile. Or platforms in the IoT and cloud computing markets. Which are all interesting on whatever levels. But do not in any way constitute a threat to the Mac or Windows on the desktop.

Imagine a future in which Google gets its act together, successfully blends ChromeOS and Android, and somehow gains traction in the desktop market. Just as we see today in mobile, Linux fans will delude themselves into believing that this is somehow a success for Linux. But Android is successful specifically because it’s not Linux, just as ChromeOS works because it hides everything that one might associate with Linux by default. These platforms are built on top of Linux, yes. But they are not Linux. And they work because each as a singular vision, not hundreds of different focuses, each for whatever niche.

Now imagine a future in which the leading Linux distributions partner to create a set of standards that are backed by a standards body. Standards upon which they can build their own distributions, each with whatever differentiations, and even some selection of “flavors” if needed. Standards that guarantee hardware and software compatibility while retaining a reasonable amount of choice. Linux becomes a thing, and not all these different things.

I love the idea of Linux. I may even just love Linux. But I also can’t use it, and for all kinds of reasons. And it requires a more cohesive front if it’s ever going to take on Big Tech on the desktop. Here we are, almost 25 years after its invention and first release, and it’s still an also-ran on its original hardware platform. And always will be. Unless something changes. Maybe then, 5 percent will matter. And then 10 percent. And then more. Who knows? But today, that’s just a dream.