Slashdot Mirror
New Numbers on Linux Market Share Soon
prostoalex writes "New numbers on Linux market share are due this week. As far as global PC market is concerned, Gartner claims 5% of all PCs shipped this year ran Linux OS, although by the time the PCs were actually on the user's desk, only 2% of them run Linux. In the server world IDC estimates that Linux-powered servers comprise 28.3% of all server sales in 2004."
I'd think that the percentage of computers that actually run Linux would be higher, not lower, than the % that ship with it... my family has three, one (soon to be two) exclusively Linux.
And how many people buy PCs with Windows on them, and immediately format the disk(s) and install Linux?
I mean, really, what evidence do they have that hordes of people are buying machines with Linux pre-installed just to go through the pain of installing XP in order to save, what, $40?
Granted, a lot of machines shipped with Linux aren't running the version of Linux they shipped with, but I find their statement hard to believe.
And here goes the danger of thinking that your family if somewhat representative. Or the slashdot community for that matter.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
What the hell? As long as Linux doesn't support NX, which *will be* supported in the *upcoming* SP2, it will be seen as deficient in comparision? Okay, ignore the fact that they themselves state there are already patches for Redhat, while SP2 hasn't actually shipped. I'm just wondering what the fascination with NX is. I mean, it's a nifty idea, but I can't imagine anyone getting down the wire of choosing between XP or Linux as the right tool for a job, and deciding on XP because of NX. I mean, come-on. This is just idiocy. Not that I had any respect for Gartner to lose, but if I did, there it went... There are plenty of differences, strengths and weaknessess on both sides, to differentiate between XP and Linux. Supporting the NX bit is not one of them at this time.
Well, yeah. I know that. But I'd think the number of people adding linux would be greater than the number who buy linux boxes and format them, just because there are so few linux boxes sold.
Given that less than 5% of the current CPUs sold support that feature, what difference will this make?
Write boring code, not shiny code!
Yea, because no one is going to buy a low cost Linux computer at Walmart and slap a pirate version of Windows on it. Nope. Never gona happen.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Legal issues aside, most of us do not use Linux because it is cheaper, we use it because it is a superior operating system. Hell I already have the Windows OS that came with my PC (so it might as well be free for me as well). The fallacy that people only use Linux because they are cheap unemployed hackers is just that, a fallacy.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Linux users need to decide what their operating system is all about. Is it about freedom and doing it your way, or is it all about sales and making money?
I'm sorry, but the two are not compatible. Once your focus becomes "market share" (shouldn't that be "market selfish"?) then you start in with the competition and copyrighting and everything that goes with it.
It would be a shame to see the creativity and individualism that spurred the Linux revolution denatured and dilluted, like so many other initally promising social trends, by the invisible hand of the "almighty greenback".
...and no one is ever going to buy a windows computer and slap linux on it...nope, never going to happen.
Time makes more converts than reason
They're a pet peeve of mine. It seems like what they do is interview CIO types about their opinions on various technologies and then turn that information into speculation about where the industry is going.
The result is a bunch of very credible sounding propoganda that reflects all the biases prevalent among their target audience: CIOs who need backing for their opinions. The CIOs naturally buy the reports and use them to pursuade other people in the company that the CIO's favourite pet project or technology is "industry best practices".
Gartner reports tell a lot about what people who worked in technology ten years ago (and have since moved to management) think. They consistently overlook trends that are bubbling under the surface, obvious practitioners, but not yet noticed by management.
If you want to know what your boss thinks about the industry, read Gartner. If you want to know about what's really happening, read the Usenet group that deals with the specific technology you're interested in.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
I'd think that the percentage of computers that actually run Linux would be higher...
not only that, but how the heck can they possibly know how many people are running linux or not running it?
I understand they can count the number of linux pc's going out the door, but how do they know people are installing winxp or not?
also, how do they know how many linux desktops are out there? are they just counting how many copies of mandrake were bought at CompUSA?
And that makes you spend more maintenance costs and troubleshooting time than using Linux.
I'm so delighted to be able to say this:
Windows XP is only free if your time is worth nothing.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Something like ten million OEM Windows systems ship each month. Most people simply don't want to be drawn into a hobbyist project when they can order a customized system from Dell that is guaranteed to work out of the box.
I would be happy to bet that I could count on my fingers the number of people here that have BOUGHT a piece of software that runs on linux. I can proudly say that I have (Matlab), but then again I don't use the fact that a distro is free as an advantage over windows. I think the programmers should be compensated...I don't like being dependent on them without anything in return.
I have bought several programs that run on Linux only. Also, you can spend tens of thousands of dollars or more to run Oracle and any middleware program, SAP, or thousands of other apps. Most of the apps for pay are enterprise apps at this point, but there are many out there. This is increasing all the time.
My attraction to Linux is NOT cost of the distro, I have PAID for RH, Mandrake, and other distros for years, happily. I like the freedom, the ease of maintaining many different systems from one desktop (via ssh and scripts) and the robustness of the OS.
As a side note, what will happen if Linux becomes ultra popular? More programmers will be needed, all working for free? Its not going to happen!
There is no reason you can't sell apps for Linux, the same as for Windows. This is a big misconception. If you take GPL code of someone else and build on that, then you have to release your code as GPL, but any project from scratch that doesn't use GPL libs (LGPL is ok) isn't subject to the GPL at all.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!