Slashdot Mirror


Gartner: Linux Servers Booming

Tarantolato writes "According to a recent Gartner report, low-end Linux server shipments grew significantly in the first quarter of 2004. Part of this may be due to the comeback of the relational database market in 2003, where Linux growth was especially strong, while Windows growth was weaker. There is mixed news for Sun, who saw growing shipments but declining revenues in Q1 of 2004."

21 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. Keep the noise down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Linux servers are booming, Windows servers are bombing and crashing. It's hard to get caught up on my sleep!

  2. Oracle versus SQL Server by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This isn't Linux versus Windows -- it's SQL Server versus Oracle. Shops are choosing Oracle and then choosing Linux as the platform (given that it's largely irrelevant what platform it runs on). The submission implies that it was a toss up between Windows and Linux, and after choosing Linux they started looking around for a RDBMS.

    1. Re:Oracle versus SQL Server by flinxmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wish my company would do this. They chose Oracle on Linux a couple years back with a single (mediocre at best) developer as the admin. The resulting and expected crappy experience resulted in a decision to go with Sun.

      But instead of going with serious Sun hardware we now have a whole slew of entry level sun servers that routinely sweat under even moderate loads. Even then, they just incrementally buy small servers for *every* function. (It's like NT shops used to be, except twice as expensive).

      The server admins have, at this point, kind of a glazed humorous look in their eyes. If we'd made an intelligent choice between Linux and Solaris (even if it resulted in a hybrid situation), we could have saved thousands and thousands of dollars and have a managable situation. Instead, it's insanity.

      Word to the wise: Don't believe the hype and TEST THE SETUP WITH COMPETENT ENGINEERS!. You'd think this would be common sense...but alas...we seem to be made to suffer. It's our lot in life.

    2. Re:Oracle versus SQL Server by iabervon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It doesn't matter to most customers. Most customers don't plan to interact much with the OS on their database servers, and want to use whatever Oracle says will be best. They just want the best-supported configuration, which means that they'll use exactly what Oracle installs (or has Red Hat install), and won't change anything. Of course, it's a significant milestone therefore that Oracle is pushing Linux (and moving to it internally), because that means that it actually has the best TCO for that kind of system, because Oracle knows that they get all the money that doesn't go into the customer's TCO on the database.

    3. Re:Oracle versus SQL Server by kfg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oracle has little interst in the TCO of its customers, except insofar as it can promote it to its customers.

      Oracle is interested in Oracle. It is not in Oracle's interests to have its fortunes tied entirely to single propriatary OS whose owners can dictate Oracle's business to Oracle.

      There is, of course, a cautionary tale to be found here by Oracle's customers as well, and TCO is not the be all and end all of the matter. It is often worth paying more to achieve some desirable end, say, independence from a single monolithic supplier.

      And if Microsoft's products were truely and clearly superior you can be sure that instead of touting a lower TCO they'd be perfectly happy to tout the fact that they're a bit more expensive, but worth it.

      In fact, when the whole fallacy of their TCO argument blows up in their face this rather the tack I expect they will shift to.

      They may find, however, that the time has finally come when they must come about and run before the wind rather than beating into it.

      Which brings us right back to my original premise.

      KFG

  3. Mod Parent Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    He speaketh against our penguin overlord. Without Tux what will we worship? CowboyNeals nutsack?

  4. Re:Meh, statistics by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder what sort of increase the MacOS server market showed? It also means little if servers are being shipped with XP or even no OS, and being loaded with Debian after delivery. I doubt it takes into account systems built in-house either. Statistics show only what gatherer wants them to show.

    --
    Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
  5. Re:Great news, but is there a typo? by j0hndoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Regardless this is fantastic news, it's been a many, many years since we've seen genuine competition in the OS market.

    Really? I've been reading articles for YEARS about how Linux was Microsoft's biggest threat. Starting with those insane "Linux IPOs" in 1999/2000. And Microsoft pointed at Linux in the anti-trust trial. (ok, that was self-serving, but it ended up being true anyway). This isn't really anything new at this point. The numbers are just confirming it.

  6. What was Microsoft's server growth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just for a point of comparison, I'd like to know. Linux grew 57 percent, Unix was down 2 percent, what about MS? (I'd just like concrete confirmation of Linux kicking Microsoft's fanny, OK?)

  7. not consistant by networkGhettoWhore · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am not trying to undermine Gartner, but this poll seems to be inconsistant with the recent netDeck poll which stated linux hardware rose 31% as opposed to the stated 57% here.

    --
    Natural Selection: self-destruction of the poor and lazy
  8. In Related News... by k4_pacific · · Score: 5, Funny

    A Microsoft representative made the following statement at a press conference today:

    "Where are you going? Come back! You'll all be doomed, DOOMED if you use Linux. DOOMED! After all, our studies, err, I mean independent studies have shown that Windows has a lower overall total cost of ownership. I mean, c'mon, Longhorn's coming soon. It will be better, we promise. It has Pallad-- err, Trusted Computing. Doesn't that sound nice? Trust? Can you trust Linux? You can? Fine! Be that way. We have FIFTY BILLION DOLLARS. We can by and sell your ass. Hmmppphhh!"

    A followup press release attributed the remarks to an overly tight necktie.

    --
    Unknown host pong.
  9. Gartner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So do we like Gartner today?

  10. SCOIX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well this is bad news for innovation and copyright. Linux on the rise == Piracy on the rise. This is a sad day for us all. I hope this "rise" of Linux servers means people are buying the correct LICENSE from SCO to run Linux. Otherwise, we're all in trouble. SCO has given the world so much, when they invented Linux, and now nobody wants to pay for it and pretend its free. Nothing is free folks. Get on over to SCO and buy a license and sleep better tonight.

    You're all a bunch of smelly ass hippies, and have no business using a computer if you don't want to pay for the OS!

  11. MIcrosoft already knew it. by Stonent1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I worked there, there were posters saying that if each MS employee converted 5 linux servers to 5 windows servers that MS could finally outsell linux in the server market. I SO wanted to take a picture of it but I didn't want to get caught.

  12. Linux Servers Booming by frfriel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The bottom line is this. The number of servers sold with Linux preinstalled is increasing. The sales of Linux built for multiprocessing is increasing. But, is it increasing enough to become a true competitor in the market. To say that sales are up 57% by revenue is mileading. Especially if revenue previously was crap. I could say my income increased 600% if I got a raise to about 12,000 a month. But there are tons of people who make 12,000 a month. Linux sales don't even scratch the big guys (or guy). If the revenue (and/or # of servers shipped with Linux) continues to increase at a 57% clip, then we will soon be seeing some drama in the market. May the penguins day come, and it's sun shine bright enough to blind the other guy.

  13. Much better write-up of same data by ToLu+the+Happy+Furby · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's a much more detailed summary of the Gartner report up at com.com. The overall numbers are thus:

    Total WW Q1 server revenue: $11.81 billion, +9.3% quarter-on-quarter*

    That breaks down into:
    Windows: $4.13 billion, +19.5%
    Proprietary Unix: $4.02 billion, -2%
    Mainframe: $1.7 billion, +12%
    Linux: $1.02 billion, +57.3%

    That leaves $.94 billion unaccounted for; I was thinking this chunk could be VMS and NSK revenues, but that makes it difficult to fit HP's 32.5% share of x86 revenues into the $.94 billion left over when you subtract it plus HP's $1.17 billion in proprietary Unix sales from HP's $3.07 billion total sales. (And that's ignoring HP's Q1 IA64 sales, which were very substantial.)

    Of course all these questions are surely answered in the report itself, but I'm not gonna pay 95 bucks to find out.

    *How do I know the figures in the com.com article are QoQ and not YoY? Because the Gartner summary (linked above) puts overall YoY revenue growth at 24.1%, not the 9.3% reported in the article. Which makes both the 57.3% Linux growth and the 12.5% Sun decline even more stunning.

  14. Re:What is the total number of units shipped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Numbers of units really are better than dollar sales. You really can outfit 4 or 5 Linux servers for the cost of outfitting 1 Microsoft server. Every thousand dollars RedHat makes means a loss to Microsoft of about one million, so dollars to dollars comparisons mean little. A few years ago, Linux servers had about 12% of the market. If they are up 57%, they should now have about 19% (or if you do the math, 18.84%). Most pundits will say 'see, Microsoft is still winning, nothing has changed'. But, if the 57% increase happens next year too, and the year after that, then Linux will have 46.43% of the server market. One year after that, 72.9. Just more numbers to throw about.

  15. Re:Great news, but is there a typo? by Galvatron · · Score: 5, Informative
    I can only assume the article contains a mistake since it claims 57.3 percent revenue growth for linux-based servers over the first quarter which means "in three months"

    When they say things like this, they usually mean "relative to the first quarter of last year." So if all four quarters show a 50% rate of growth, the growth rate for the year would be 50%, not over 400% (1.5^4-1). They do things this way because the season can make a big difference in puchases, and so they don't want to muddle things by comparing different months or different quarters. The same thing happens for big tetail chains (Walgreens generally reports sales growth on the order of 14% each month, but they mean relative to the same month last year, not the month immediately prior).

    --
    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  16. Re:zeitgeist by Gheesh · · Score: 5, Informative

    nice to see it's growing, zeitgeist [google.com] still shows a pitiful 1% though

    On the other hand, the Netcraft Web Server Survey shows 67% of the machines running Apache, and most of them run Linux or FreeBSD

  17. Changing attitudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    At my university where I work in the IT department, if you would suggest a Windows server for anything today they'd have your head examined. Linux has become the defacto web and database server around here. It's not just that it's cheaper, it's better and you don't have to manage licenses which is a huge deal in a place like this where we can barely keep track of all the new machines that are constantly coming in.

    I'm also very happy to see that when we place the order for personal computers for post graduate students, about 1 in 5 actually specifically requests a Linux workstation these days. That would have been unheard of just a few years ago.

  18. Re:Meh, statistics by Vengeful+weenie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You really haven't seen much if you think that all data is housed only on enterprise class servers. I often have the distinct impression that most data is stored on old dekstop machines that never get backed up, and rarely get patched.