Evolution of Operating Systems usage

I needed this statistics and I'm sure they're somewhere, but I don't know where. So, I went to Wikipedia which has the updated numbers but not something showing the progress. Fortunately, wiki's have revision history, so it was fairly easy to compile what I wanted. Here it is, for the sake of others (or me) not needing to go to the same hassle again.

Wikipedia page used as a source (by using several different revisions of this document)

Q4   2004 - Windows 96.34%; Apple  3.25%; Linux 0.29%
Q1   2005 - Windows 96.21%; Apple  3.40%; Linux 0.29%
Q2   2005 - Windows 96.10%; Apple  3.50%; Linux 0.31%
Q3   2005 - Windows 96.03%; Apple  3.55%; Linux 0.32%
Q4   2005 - Windows 95.50%; Apple  4.11%; Linux 0.30%
Q1   2006 - Windows 95.29%; Apple  4.30%; Linux 0.31%
Q2   2006 - Windows 95.08%; Apple  4.40%; Linux 0.41%
Q3   2006 - Windows 95.01%; Apple  4.45%; Linux 0.44%
Q4   2006 - Windows 94.10%; Apple  5.41%; Linux 0.38%
Q1   2007 - Windows 93.17%; Apple  6.22%; Linux 0.45%
Q2   2007 - Windows 92.78%; Apple  6.23%; Linux 0.74%
Sep. 2007 - Windows 89.10%; Apple  4.00%; Linux 0.81%
Oct. 2007 - Windows 91.76%; Apple  4.46%; Linux 0.81%
Nov. 2007 - Windows 91.45%; Apple  4.48%; Linux 0.81%
Dec. 2007 - Windows 92.88%; Apple  4.32%; Linux 0.88%
Jan. 2008 - Windows 91.79%; Apple  4.12%; Linux 0.76%
Feb. 2008 - Windows 92.13%; Apple  4.34%; Linux 0.77%
Apr. 2008 - Windows 93.94%; Apple  4.47%; Linux 0.81%
May  2008 - Windows 93.98%; Apple  4.39%; Linux 0.83%
Jun. 2008 - Windows 94.06%; Apple  4.33%; Linux 0.89%
Jul. 2008 - Windows 93.64%; Apple  4.31%; Linux 0.90%
Aug. 2008 - Windows 91.95%; Apple  4.49%; Linux 0.96%
Sep. 2008 - Windows 93.61%; Apple  4.86%; Linux 1.04%
Oct. 2008 - Windows 90.40%; Apple  5.50%; Linux 1.16%
Nov. 2008 - Windows 90.50%; Apple  5.41%; Linux 1.16%
Dec. 2008 - Windows 90.50%; Apple  5.24%; Linux 1.16%
Jan. 2009 - Windows 91.10%; Apple  4.81%; Linux 1.02%
Feb. 2009 - Windows 91.03%; Apple  4.77%; Linux 1.04%
Mar. 2009 - Windows 90.99%; Apple  4.81%; Linux 1.05%
Apr. 2009 - Windows 91.22%; Apple  4.95%; Linux 1.13%
May  2009 - Windows 91.30%; Apple  5.01%; Linux 1.12%
Jun. 2009 - Windows 91.24%; Apple  5.06%; Linux 1.12%
Jul. 2009 - Windows 93.18%; Apple  4.59%; Linux 1.05%
Aug. 2009 - Windows 93.06%; Apple  4.59%; Linux 0.94%
Sep. 2009 - Windows 92.77%; Apple  4.59%; Linux 0.95%
Oct. 2009 - Windows 92.52%; Apple  5.87%; Linux 0.96%
Nov. 2009 - Windows 90.52%; Apple  6.48%; Linux 1.00%
Dec. 2009 - Windows 90.22%; Apple  6.57%; Linux 1.04%
Jan. 2010 - Windows 92.02%; Apple  5.79%; Linux 1.08%
Feb. 2010 - Windows 91.60%; Apple  6.58%; Linux 1.12%
Mar. 2010 - Windows 91.34%; Apple  6.63%; Linux 1.14%
Apr. 2010 - Windows 90.95%; Apple  6.61%; Linux 1.15%
May  2010 - Windows 90.88%; Apple  6.67%; Linux 1.22%
Jun. 2010 - Windows 89.53%; Apple  6.93%; Linux 1.31%
Aug. 2010 - Windows 88.92%; Apple  7.72%; Linux 1.33%
Sep. 2010 - Windows 88.66%; Apple  7.82%; Linux 1.34%
Oct. 2010 - Windows 88.40%; Apple  8.22%; Linux 1.50%
Nov. 2010 - Windows 88.01%; Apple  8.48%; Linux 1.53%
Dec. 2010 - Windows 87.82%; Apple  8.87%; Linux 1.58%
Jan. 2011 - Windows 87.54%; Apple  8.97%; Linux 1.64%
Feb. 2011 - Windows 87.36%; Apple  9.27%; Linux 1.66%
Mar. 2011 - Windows 87.15%; Apple  9.27%; Linux 1.82%
Apr. 2011 - Windows 87.00%; Apple 10.44%; Linux 1.88%
May  2011 - Windows 86.58%; Apple 10.34%; Linux 1.95%
Jun. 2011 - Windows 86.00%; Apple 10.05%; Linux 2.15%
Jul. 2011 - Windows 83.30%; Apple 10.26%; Linux 2.07%
Aug. 2011 - Windows 82.58%; Apple 10.91%; Linux 2.25%
Sep. 2011 - Windows 82.41%; Apple 11.10%; Linux 2.41%
Oct. 2011 - Windows 86.15%; Apple 10.37%; Linux 2.53%
Nov. 2011 - Windows 85.8%;  Apple 10.7%;  Linux 3.0% 
Dec. 2011 - Windows 80.83%; Apple 11.20%; Linux 3.00%
Jan. 2012 - Windows 78.66%; Apple 13.28%; Linux 3.90%
Feb. 2012 - Windows 82.11%; Apple 10.61%; Linux 2.82%
Mar. 2012 - Windows 73.38%; Apple 15.87%; Linux 5.05%
Apr. 2012 - Windows 82.21%; Apple  9.89%; Linux 3.05%
May  2012 - Windows 83.07%; Apple 12.28%; Linux 3.60%
Jun. 2012 - Windows 78.89%; Apple 15.47%; Linux 3.95%
Jul. 2012 - Windows 79.88%; Apple 13.99%; Linux 4.05%
Aug. 2012 - Windows 79.21%; Apple 14.55%; Linux 3.90%
Set. 2012 - Windows 75.88%; Apple 14.87%; Linux 3.81%
Oct. 2012 - Windows 82.76%; Apple 12.58%; Linux 4.13%
Nov. 2012 - Windows 81.74%; Apple 12.55%; Linux 3.93%
Dec. 2012 - Windows 81.54%; Apple 12.56%; Linux 3.92%
Jan. 2013 - Windows 80.84%; Apple 13.41%; Linux 3.97%
Feb. 2013 - Windows 75.89%; Apple 15.99%; Linux 5.47%
Mar. 2013 - Windows 78.85%; Apple 14.81%; Linux 4.59%
Apr. 2013 - Windows 79.01%; Apple 14.25%; Linux 4.66%
May  2013 - Windows 80.34%; Apple 12.89%; Linux 5.29%
June 2013 - Windows 73.49%; Apple 17.27%; Linux 6.68%
July 2013 - Windows 75.67%; Apple 16.05%; Linux 5.57%
Aug. 2013 - Windows 74.97%; Apple 16.12%; Linux 6.65%
Sep. 2013 - Windows 72.32%; Apple 15.69%; Linux 6.80%
Oct. 2013 - Windows 72.02%; Apple 15.85%; Linux 7.06%
Nov. 2013 - Windows 77.90%; Apple 12.96%; Linux 5.35%
Feb. 2015 - Windows 60.27%; Apple 17.70%; Linux 15.05%
Jun. 2015 - Windows 41.48%; Apple 35.75%; Linux 16.19%
Dec. 2015 - Windows 48.70%; Apple 16.33%; Linux 28.40%
May  2016 - Windows 45.00%; Apple 16.43%; Linux 33.15%
Dec. 2016 - Windows 38.31%; Apple 17.63%; Linux 39.38% 

(I intend to update this article from time to time - hopefully at least once per month.)

Google Knol - Wikipedia and Wikia killer?

From http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/encouraging-people-to-contribute.html:

Earlier this week, we started inviting a selected group of people to try a new, free tool that we are calling "knol", which stands for a unit of knowledge. Our goal is to encourage people who know a particular subject to write an authoritative article about it. The tool is still in development and this is just the first phase of testing. For now, using it is by invitation only.

...

At the discretion of the author, a knol may include ads. If an author chooses to include ads, Google will provide the author with substantial revenue share from the proceeds of those ads.

From http://www.micropersuasion.com/2007/12/wikipedia-and-w.html:

Still, with this move Google is clearly targeting Wikipedia (which is perhaps their biggest rival) and quite possibly is trying to ensure that Jimmy Wales' forthcoming social search engine, Wikia, is dead on arrival. Consider the timing of this announcement.

From http://www.asourceofinspiration.com/2007/12/14/do-you-knols/:

authors have earned their recognition as the most important source of knowledge, and if they choose to abandon the academic walled gardens, then Google will be one step closer to “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful“.

From http://coolmel.zaadz.com/blog/2007/12/integral_knol:

This is Google’s direct assault at the “walled garden” of knowledge like Wikipedia, Wikia, and Squidoo. Knol will attempt to solve the problem of chaotic collective anonymous editing (and vandalizing) of wikis and its unfriendly user interface by providing a more user-friendly editing tool for knowledgeable authors “who will put their reputation on the line.”

From http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2007/12/google_knol_tak.php:

The big distinction with Wikipedia is that Knol relies on individual authors rather than "the crowd." Each article, or "knol," will be signed and owned by the person who writes it, and articles on the same subject will compete with one another for viewer's eyes. In contrast, Wikipedia builds a single version of each article in a communal way with many edits by anonymous contributors.

Finaly, my favourite, from http://www.stoweboyd.com/message/2007/12/google-attacks.html:

There is a large web world out here, with gazillions of people -- like me -- who are disinclined to play in the Wikipedia sandpile. While I agree that things can be messy, I don't think that the messiness of our understanding of the world is an implediment to Google's idea here. All that is necessary is people willing to author snippets within knol, and for others to read and rate them. That's the core dynamic of all social media-based activities on the web. Google is the just the first to be in a position to be able to make a credible effort to blogify human knowledge, just as Wikipedia has been working to wikify it.

I vote for blogifying, instead of wikifying.

I don't know how to you feel about this, but I do think there are wikipeople and blogopeople, and if for ones wikipedia is better, for the others Knol is going to be better. I think that they'll cohexist, but in the long term I think that Knol is going to "win". Not that it matters, tho, what's important is to have more and better data, and Knol is even helping improve Wikipedia's quality on the long term. I, for one, am going to be a Knol writter for sure, and my (few) contributions to wikipedia are going to keep diminishing.

How History is re-written

I wrote this article countless times for the last fre weeks. I wrote and re-wrote, cited some books, gave some examples, and got more and more pissed off and frustrated while trying to write it.

So, I quit. I won't give examples. I'll just state it: while Internet, Wikipedia and all the new age of information and user generated content is great, it makes me angry every time I see one of its consequences in effect: History is getting distorted and even re-written more and faster.

I wonder than this global state of wiki-style "let's rewrite history" isn't getting too close to what was done in the novel 1984... But the small group of people doing that is those interested in "writting history", which could be anyone.

It scares me.

The Geekness of Wikipedia

This is something commonly known, and often talked about: Wikipedia isn't really Encyclopedia-like because its articles have a great "geek factor" - meaning, for instance, that some Star Trek characters have longer Wikipedia entries than personalities that will allways remain in History.

But I've just stumbled upon one of those weird cases, and so I felt I should share this experience with you... Augusto Hilário is the name of someone that is commonly known as just "Hilário": a great musician and an essencial piece of the evolution of Fado - a Portuguese musical style. To help you to understand his importance, Fado is the musical style that usually is used to define Portugal, and is a part of the Portuguese identity. Now, there are two major "Fado styles": Lisbon's Fado and Coimbra's Fado. Hilário was one of those guys that defined the characteristic style of Coimbra's Fado, and thus is a really important person in Fado's history and for Portugal. So, I went to http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilário... And was redirected to Henrique Hilário's profile. Who's that? A Portuguese soccer player that, by the description they have there, didn't achieve anything of revelence to grant him an entry into an Encyclopedia... Specially not overtaking "Hilário"'s entry.

BTW, more info about Fado's Hilário can be found here, or here (links in Portuguese).