Hacker News Reader

Comment by bee_rider | Hacker News Reader

I am pointing out that Windows is not the most common OS, and Android is.

The original comment was saying that Google is able to perform anti-competitively because they control the most popular browser.

The followup (which I responded to) is saying that the existence of Windows as the most popular OS, and Microsoft’s control over the default browser there, mitigates this anti-competitive potential.

The fact that Windows is not the most popular OS (and that, in fact, the most popular OS is controlled by Google) undermines that argument.

Linux is not the most popular OS in any context that includes doing searches with the thing, unless you include Android, but Android just uses Linux for the kernel mostly, and an OS is more than a kernel.

View on HN

It's the most common desktop OS. No one was confused by what the parent meant since Windows is not a mobile operating system and doesn't compete in that market.

Bing and Google are competing in the market of search engines, not some device specific search engine market.

I think it's fair for them to point out (however snarkily) that Windows is not the most popular OS. In the context of the discussion, I think it matters that there is another OS, Android, that is more popular.

I think their point is that you can't just say "most popular" without more context because not only is it often subjective, but it can also be interpreted in different ways. Most popular by type of device? number of total users worldwide? etc.

Every Linux distro just uses Linux for the kernel, right? What else is there? Init system and user space stuff isn’t Linux in any Linux distro either, because Linux is a kernel. The real thing that might make Android not a normal Linux distro is the heavy modification of the Kernel.

A Linux distro uses the Linux kernel by definition, I guess, so I think you are right about that. We could talk about distros in general, maybe Homebrew and Cygwin, if we didn’t want to define a distro as being a Linux distro. But I’m not sure what the point is.

I’m not clear on what they meant by Linux. But if we use a definition of “Linux OS” that includes Android and is restricted to devices which people typically use to perform searches (aka consumer devices) (since that was the original topic), then Linux is mostly Android and it is a kind of pointless distinction to make.

If we want to use some definition of Linux that precludes Android, and covers all devices that use the Linux kernel, then we have a bunch of servers, streaming boxes, smart lightbulbs, whatever.

If we want to use a definition which is, like, what I think everyone means when they say Linux in the context of market share: GNU/Linux or BusyBox/other/Linux (I was hoping to avoid the GNU/Linux meme, but here we are), then that doesn’t have much market share.

Even with Android, Linux is not the most popular OS, it's MINIX: https://www.networkworld.com/article/964650/minix-the-most-p...

There is much more Android phones, tablets, TVs, Linux routers and other gear sold every year than Intel-based PCs with ME, so the articles' claim may need narrowing to "OS used in PCs" and even that has a chance of being wrong, given how AMD is doing these years.

If you're going that direction, the largest Android install base is in China, which quite notably does not have Google services.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com