What's The Fastest Growing Linux Distro?

darthcamaro writes "What's the fastest growing Linux distro? This really solid article on InternetNews.com contains interviews with the Debian Project leader, the founder of Mandrake, SuSe, Red Hat and TurboLinux to get their take on who's the biggest and who's the baddest on the distro block. Also includes some interesting insight into the next round of releases."

Comments

The fastest shrinking distro

[HuguesT]

Has got to be RedHat.

Re:The fastest shrinking distro

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually acording the the article RedHat added twice the number of installs over Debian. Percent growth is kind of a stupid number, since the "fastest growning" distribution could be one that went from 1 install to 2.

Re:The fastest shrinking distro

[Rotting]

Not trying to bash redhat but dropping support for = redhat 8 does not seem like a very wise decision. People got upset at the mention of MS dropping support for Win98 and that is 6 years old now.

Re:The fastest shrinking distro

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that they made it 10x more expensive, and they are still growing at all says quite a bit about RedHat's market position.

Re:The fastest shrinking distro

[NanoGator]

"People got upset at the mention of MS dropping support for Win98 and that is 6 years old now."

That had more to do with the who than the 'what they did'. Microsoft was bashed here both for discontinuing it, and then changing their mind and renewing it.

depends on what demographic

[pyros]

For commercial market share, Red Hat and Suse take the cake (and Red Hat gives the recipe for the icing). But there are a lot of people using Debian in a dizzying array of roles. You can't really measure the commercial rollout of Debian though. If you're just talking about home use, there's no way to tell.

Well yes, that kind of happens

[Anonymous Coward]

When you purposefully discontinue distribution to half of your customers!

Likewise, logically, from a purely differential standpoint, the fastest growing distribuion atm would have to be Fedora, since it gained (what?) half of Redhat's customers in the course of a single day (when Redhat told that half of its customer base, guess what, you're now a Fedora customer).

Re:Well yes, that kind of happens

[The Analog Kid]

I wouldn't consider half those people actual customers because they aren't buying anything. Sure there was a small amount buying the boxed set, but really it was pretty small compared to those just downloading it off the internet.

Re:Well yes, that kind of happens

[globalar]

I get your point, and from a business perspective this is right on. But the end users have their own perspective, and that controls what they buy and how they spend their money.

Linux is basically free. At a base price of nothing for the core components (and with alternative distros like Mandrake), it doesn't make sense to try to sell a distribution without allowing someone to preview it. What you are paying for is support (especially easy updates), to get hard copy documentation and media, as well as to support Linux in general. Note: I bet a lot of people (percentage-wise) bought Redhat to support Linux. Those users downloading the OS can translate into customers and at the very least may influence others (their employers and friends) to buy or use. The bigger the user base, the more influence you have, the more brand recognition, the more people will actually shell out cash.

Big point being that Redhat got its reputation with those freeloaders, some of which became into customers. The net gain was Redhat's growth and popularity, which somehow found a place in the business world with marketing direction. Basically, no one paid for the OS upfront, but rather tried it and then paid. So the customer pool comes from freeloaders, directly or indirectly that is why Redhat is purchased (because someone uses it for free to begin with).

Redhat wanted business contracts, because those are stable and there is a growing market (not to mention good money). Redhat took its good name, and now sells it to businesses. But that name became popular largely with the aid of freeloaders.

If you consider it a distro

[barenaked]

I think it has got to be Knoppix. I mean it is the best option for newbies and has inspired so many sping-off's. I think it definately qualifies as the fastest growing for that reason. It has introduced more people and is helping more people to come into the Linux World.

Debian based

[sanctimonius hypocrt]

Debian based distros seem to be generating a lot of buzz just now. Reviews of Lindows, Lycoris, Mepis, and all the Knoppix-varients seem like they`re everywhere.

Part of this I attribute to Redhat`s less-than graceful move away from the desktop (I know that`s an oversimplication...). Fedora is there, but I think Redhat made it too obvious that users would be leaving Redhat and moving to something else. People thought, "Well, if I`m leaving Redhat anyway, maybe this is a good time to try something else." The biggest "something else" to Redhat is Debian.

Another cause might be the brilliant success of Knoppix. It`s easy to try, and easy to like. Of course, it runs a little slowly from the CD, but a hard-drive install is easy. And what do you do after you install? Atpget update.

Of course, the commercial distros are actively working to get people to use and buy their product, but I`m not sure how much that really has to do with it. Right now these companies are benefiting from the Debian buzz, and they will contunue to benefit until they do something to antagonize their customers.

Either Mandrake or Gentoo

[LordK3nn3th]

Mandrake has always been very popular because of its ease of use.

But Gentoo has stepped out of the shadows and now is talk of the town among geeks (although it has yet to gain a lot of popularity under "Linux laymen".

I'd say it's a toss-up between Mandrake and Gentoo. RedHat IS shrinking, for obvious reasons, and Fedora just isn't that popular. Debian isn't as "big" as Mandrake, Slackware... I haven't heard much about that in a while... and SuSE, while up there, seems to have been more popular two years ago than it is now.

The fastest-growing LiveCD linux obviously is Knoppix, which really is its own class apart from the desktop/server environments.

The questions I would ask would be different

[cluge]

1. What is the best distro for servers?
a. ease of setup up
b. security
c. ease of upgrade
d. longevity of support
e. remote management ability

2. What is the best distro for the desktop
a. speed of setup
b. has the apps I need
c. ease of upgrade/patches
d. supports my hardware
e. ease of use for newbies

3. What is the best of both worlds (1 plus 2)

Just because something is the fastest growing doesn't mean it's the best. While I've read tons of reviews most have such a bias as to be laughable. I'll keep using my tried and true redhat/debian/mandrake/fedora box for now :)

AngryPeopleRule

BSD, etc.?

[read-only]

I've mentioned this before, but I'd sure like to know how other *nix variants (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc.) rate in terms of percent growth, not just market share. Example: if FreeBSD was found on 750 servers, and then n month later 1000 were found... 33% increase.

That is more interesting to me than market share, and I'd expect the BSD variants to be growing more raidly.

I have othing against Linux. I'm just an old Linux user (since 1994) who was recently won over by BSD.

Re:BSD, etc.?

[__past__]

Frankly, why do you care?

I'm a FreeBSD user as well, I use it both on servers and on my personal desktop, but it is clear that it is way less popular than Linux. And Linux is mostly irrelevant as a dektop OS.

It doesn't matter how many people besides you use the same OS, or how fast its adoption grows. Just use it as long as you personally feel that it is the best choice for you, and when you begin to think that another OS is better, switch to it and be happy because the usefullness of your system improved. The output of "uname" does not matter. Software is a tool, not a religion.

I agree

[sarastro_us]

Knoppix is what introduced me to Linux in the first place. And it's utility goes far beyond that of a simple "drop in and load" distro. The hd installer works quite well and it would allow anyone who can do so much as partition a hard drive to go from Windows to Debian based apt-getable goodness in one fell swoop. It is most certinally a distribution in its own right.

Re:From what I gather...

[NixLuver]

I started with Slack, years ago, then switched to RH when I started doing commercial Linux stuff (at approximately 5.2, around the libc5/6 controversy time); now I use Gentoo on my workstations, because it kinda brings back that old Slackware ("The distribution with attitude") feeling; it's the distro for ubergeeks or distro weenies that either like to get their hands dirty on the internals, or people who like to say they like to get their hands dirty on the internals.

I will tell you what; if you set up Gentoo a few times, you'll truly understand the Linux boot process and associated configuration.

Re:answers are all the same: OS X

[wildcard023]

First, I don't agree with the criteria here at all. I don't think any decient admin cares about speed of setup. How often do you set up machines as opposed to maintaining them.

Either way, I disagree about OSX for everything. See inline.

# Server:

#a. ease of setup up - OS X hands down.
Knoppix-Drop in a CD and it works. No setup necessary.

#b. security - check the stats, OS X hands down
OpenBSD-Say what you will about Theo, it's been the most secure since Apple was in it's OS# days.

#c. ease of upgrade - Once again, OS X no question
Debian-OS X is a close second, but so are a lot of others. Debian has a lot more options in it's upgradability.

#d. longevity of support - Apple's been around far longer than any Linux company. OS X again.
Debian-Yes, Apple's been around for longer, but it doesnt' supports OS2 anymore. Debian, on the other hand, still seems to support (and provide) packages that were written in the mid 1950's. Ok, maybe that's an exaggeration, but so of the packages in Debian stable go back -quite- a while.

#e. remote management ability - Has all the best open source tools (X, ssh, etc) plus all of Apple's brilliant ones not available for Linux - OS X again.
I think this is too close to call. It really comes down to administrator preference. Personally, I don't like Apple's remote admin features. I'd rather have ssh which is available on almost anything these days.

Ok, here's will Apple will really shine.

#Desktop:

#a. speed of setup - OS X installs and runs flawlessly on all Apple hardware. OS X wins.

Knoppix-Just boot. There's no way you can compare anything that needs to be copied to a disk.

#b. has the apps I need - OS X has thousands of commercial apps not available for Linux and can run all open source apps that Linux has. OS X again.

This completely depends on your Application. OSX does very well, but doesn't support "all open source apps that Linux has". And for the ones that can be built for it, often packages aren't available. Against, the comes down to end user needs.

#c. ease of upgrade/patches - Do you even need to ask? OS X again.

Debian-See above.

#d. supports my hardware - OS X supports all modern Apple hardware perfectly. OS X again.

OSX hands down. Exactly as you say.

#e. ease of use for newbies - Pfft. This one's a given. Anyone who has used OS X for any length of time would probably feel sea sick using Linux afterwards. OS X wins again

OSX again. This is the place where Apple really shines. Their usability is amazing. It's years ahead of anything else on the market. Except for the Dock. I hate taskbars.

--
Mike

And I thought I was so cool

[stylee]

In the very begining of the article the author states that gentoo is the 3rd fastest growing distro at 19%. Then they never mention gentoo again. I found that really interesting since, like other have mentioned, I have always seen gentoo as a niche distro. I only recently installed it at home to play around with it. I thought I was all cool and cutting edge but now I read this and find out I am just one of a huge herd of sheep.

What's the big deal?

[Jay9333]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the big difference between a Fedora customer and a Red Hat customer, except the name? What are people so excited about? From what I can tell both RH 9 and Fedora are still free (as in beer) and all still get security updates (now from a corporation supported community instead of just a corporation). Red Hat is still pouring a lot of effort and money into the community. Are people upset because they don't get phone support any more or something like that? Seriously, what makes people feel sold out?

I personally am excited that a OSS-based company is starting to succeed and is creating a winning business model in the market place. OSS helps the market by increasing competition. I'd better get used to OSS companies needing to make money somewhere, if I want to see them take market share from proprietary companies. It seems such corporations make in-roads into the market more easily then a less organized community. Red Hat's success, its relationship with IBM, and IBM's increasing dependency on OSS is a great thing, IMHO.

Fastest growing, or most popular web server

[buchanmilne]

While I don't contest the stats in the article, I just wonder if web server stats are valid for "Fastest Growing Linux Distro", even if they are valid for "Fastest Growing Apache platform".

Unless you assume every corporate/SME file/print/authentication server and all desktops run publicly accessible webservers, this is a really bad metric ...

IDC stats aren't much better either ...

Of the > 30 machines running Mandrake that I have installed (ranging from corporate authentication servers to firewalls to laptops), only one has a publicly accessible web server.

Re:I agree to a point

[nutznboltz]

What distros are people putting in their (Beowulf ;) ) clusters in their companies? [...] I think Knoppix will be hard pressed to compete there.

GUESS AGAIN! http://bofh.be/clusterknoppix/

Boxed sets in University bookstores

[SgtChaireBourne]

Sometimes it was simply faster to walk down to the campus book store grab a boxed set and put it on a purchase order than it was to download and burn the otherwise free ISOs. This applies even to impulse purchases -- "I wonder what ____ distro is like?"

Any of the large distros which wish to gain further market share could benefit by ensuring that at least one boxed set is on the shelf of the university book store. This is especially important in areas with poor connectivity or with out ethernet in the dorms.