So when somebody says "Linux reaches X market share", are they talking about the kernel? Why does it even matter how much the kernel is used? Would you count WSL?

▲

jraph a day ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure why you are asking me all this, this is beside my points.

> So

I reject the link here.

> when somebody says "Linux reaches X market share", are they talking about the kernel?

Likely not.

> Why does it even matter how much the kernel is used?

Why not? Depends what's your concern.

> Would you count WSL?

Depends what you want to evaluate.

▲

fsflover a day ago | parent [-]

> Depends what you want to evaluate.

This is exactly my question. You said the discussion's about the kernel. Why do you want to evaluate its usage? Which conclusions are you going to draw?

Because when talking about the OS, you can conclude that Windows and MacOS start falling behind the free software.

	▲	jraph a day ago \| parent [-]
		> Why do you want to evaluate its usage? I never implied this. This subthread is about countering your affirmation that Android being based on the linux kernel has no single meaningful implication. It's not anymore about evaluating usage and counting stuff. This all started with a commenter writing "Android systems don't even run the linux kernel in any real sense", which is wrong, or at least highly misleading and confusing (I do agree with this commenter about the fact that we are talking about forks that don't upstream their shit, which does have severe implications). You could say that Android systems usually don't run mainline Linux kernel. > you can conclude that Windows and MacOS start falling behind the free software. I wish :-) And I wouldn't generally include Android in the free software family, few people run Replicant or some Android flavor without the Google services, let alone without proprietary blobs. (I would count blob-free Android)