> It's the thing that came out in the anti-trust trial.
The one from 2001? I thought we were talking about the conditions today.
> If demand is low then why does Linux market share keep growing despite the low level of promotion or retail availability?
Because it counts Chromebooks, Android, and Steam OS. Which is fair, those count as wins for Linux, but those also aren't what OP is asking about when they say that they can't find Linux machines. The only kind of Linux machine they can't find is the kind that comes with a distro that is built for power users.
> The one from 2001? I thought we were talking about the conditions today.
They arrived at a weak settlement in that case and have been largely ignored since. Why would they have stopped instead of just being more subtle about it?
Also, if they weren't still doing it then why don't major Windows OEMs also promote Linux machines when non-Windows OEMs do? Specialization doesn't really explain this; they sell Linux machines but don't promote them, so whatever fixed costs they have to pay to do that, they're already paying.
> Because it counts Chromebooks, Android, and Steam OS.
It doesn't. Android has basically zero PC market share, ChromeOS is almost 2% by itself, but regular old desktop Linux is up from ~1% to ~4.5% over the last few years (and it's 6% if you count ChromeOS).
Steam OS is a pretty decent proportion of Linux gaming systems, but most Linux PCs aren't gaming PCs.
The one from 2001? I thought we were talking about the conditions today.
> If demand is low then why does Linux market share keep growing despite the low level of promotion or retail availability?
Because it counts Chromebooks, Android, and Steam OS. Which is fair, those count as wins for Linux, but those also aren't what OP is asking about when they say that they can't find Linux machines. The only kind of Linux machine they can't find is the kind that comes with a distro that is built for power users.