Slashdot Mirror
Linux Server Sales to Reach $9.1 Billion by 2008
dunric writes "ZDNet is reporting that sales of servers using Linux will reach a whopping $9.1 billion by 2008. Annual revenue for Linux servers is expected to grow by a healthy 22.8 percent, compared to just 3.8 percent for the overall server market. Additionally, Linux servers will account for nearly 26% of all server shipments."
This board is borked
I would like to share my 2 cent concerning my experience in Linux mandrake recently.
The Linux operating system was born in 1991 and was created by one
man, a Finnish student named Linus Torvalds. Since
these humble beginnings, a multi-million dollar industry has sprung up
to exploit the commercial potential of Linux, but until recently Linux
has eluded mainstream acceptance. However, due to the recent economic
downturn together with uncertainty over changes to Microsoft's pricing
policy, Linux is now being touted as a serious contender to Microsoft
Windows.
While there are many other alternatives to Windows, including
BSD which is based on SUN's (Stanford University Network)
server-grade Solaris operating system, none have commanded the
same level of media attention as Linux. Linux Mandrake is just the
latest in a long line of quirkily christened versions of Linux.
Previous versions of Linux have been named Red Hat, Slack Ware, Storm
and Coral. In stark contrast to the mundane names such as 98, ME or NT
preferred by Microsoft, the crazy names of each Linux release hint
at its zany nature.
My foray into the world of Linux began by downloading a "CD image"
from the Mandrake-Linux web site. But don't worry,
this isn't software piracy, it's perfectly legal! Linux is shareware,
meaning that it can be freely redistributed without fear of a visit by
the Business Software Alliance. The free availability of Linux is a
major reason for its popularity among cash-strapped students and
self-styled anti-capitalist hackers.
Before installing new software, it is always advisable to read the
documentation. Unfortunately, an unpleasant surprise was in store for
me in the "required configuration" section of the hocked to learn that
Linux Mandrake only runs on Pentium processors, meaning that my hopes
of testing the water with my old Gateway 486 were dashed. Furthermore,
a whopping 32 megabytes of memory are required to run Linux! Although
the advocates of Linux self-righteously boast the efficiency of their
chosen operating system and deride the
"bloatware" produced by Microsoft, it appears that their claims are
blatantly incorrect.
Although my humble 486 will happily run Windows 95, it seems that
Linux requires far more powerful, and more expensive, computer
hardware. Is this really the sign of a lean, mean operating system?
Of course not.
Sadly, not even being able to install Linux is just the first of my
many complaints. A brief perusal of the features of Linux Mandrake
reveals that Linux is sorely lacking many crucial productivity
applications. For example, why isn't the industry standard web
browser, Internet Explorer, included with Linux? Despite the best
efforts of the experts at the Internet Engineering Task Force to
encourage adoption of the Internet Explorer standard, the creators of
Linux seem to think that they know better. By refusing to adhere to
recognised standards, Linux is simply undermining its own credibility.
Similarly, almost all of the world's most popular and widely used
software is completely incompatible with Linux! It may surprise you to
learn that your copy of Microsoft Office, Outlook Express, or Lotus
Notes will not work under Linux. Those who wish to use their computer
for recreational purposes are also out of luck, for almost all of the
most popular games are unavailable for Linux. Although a wide range of
software is freely available for Linux, these pitiful offerings are
mostly unfinished, unreliable and do not bear comparison to their
commercial counterparts.
Computer security is also an area that seems to have been overlooked
by the developers of Linux. In these times when hacking and viruses
are commonplace, it defies belief to learn that no anti-virus software
is available for Linux. To add insult to i
of a free program. From this we can conclude unit sales of Linux to be about Infinity Times 9.1. That's pretty good.
From those numbers, it seems like Linux is having its main growth because of it's price, rather than the OS itself. Numbers were ~50% of blades, ~20% of rack-mounts, and ~10% of free standing.
Ironic... since linux is free :)
I think that Microsoft will take a big blow from this news, since even though linux is free, it's raking in $9.1bn...
- dshaw
Well to know that the Internet is growing yet.
So more domains like fuck.me.uk will blink up.
Slashdot still runs on IIS.
i just wiped the last linux server in my shop. they're all running openbsd now, and all the new ones will too.
somehow i doubt there's that many people running obsd though, so there goes my fleeting idea of selling servers. oh well it's not like i've got any free time anyway right now. back to coding, *sigh*
As can be confirmed by simply going to Netcraft, Slashdot actually runs on the crushed hopes, dreams and spirits of thousands of self-proclaimed, social-anxiety-disorder-afflicted "nerds".
The Linux FAQ
:) This happens :)
Here's a list of some frequently asked and answered question here
and elsewhere that you may find useful in your quest to try linux.
Read these carefully before you decide to invest time in Linux, you
may find that you have better things you can do instead.
SECTION ONE - INSTALLATION
--
1.1 Q: I heard linux was easy to install, is it?
A: That depends on what distro you try. Most of them will have
trouble detecting all your hardware. Most new hardware devices
are not supported. If your lucky you might be able to find
something that someone threw together on the net. But that's
after spending a couple hours searching and probably won't take
advantage of your hardware to it's fullest capability.
1.2 Q: Once I get it installed, then what?
A: Then you get the joy of making sure everything is configured
right. Plan on a minimum of two hours per device to get it to
work. That's if the device is even supported.
1.3 Q: What happens if I'm in the middle of an install and the
installation freezes or just stops?
A: You get to reboot and start all over again.
every so often with Linux. It seems like it's buggy install
routines or something. Ain't Linux grand?
1.4 Q: What's the deal?! I installed Linux and it took up almost 2GB
hard drive space!
A: The Linux distros usually install a LOT of never-used programs
on the default install. You can pick and choose what you want,
but good luck figuring out what programs are needed and what is
useless, obscure tools. Linux usually installs stuff like 10
different editors, 12 different mail clients, and so on.
(more to come...)
SECTION TWO - CONFIGURATION
--
2.1 Q: What's with all these cryptic files?
A: All of Linux is configured with cryptic text files. Some of
the more user-friendly distros have configuration utilities
that claim to do it for you, but success with these works
sometimes and other times don't, so sometimes you have to
edit them by hand. With Linux's spotty reliability in UI
programming, you might as well get used to it.
2.2 Q: What is killall, HUP, ls, cat, rm, which, etc and why are
these programs telling me to do them? Arggg!!
A: These are command line programs that do things within the
system. It's what makes Linux a powerful OS for those that
are experienced with it. But it's also what makes it a pain
in the arse to use and inefficient as a desktop system. Who
wants to type all the time when they can just click?!
(more to come...)
SECTION THREE - APPLICATIONS
--
3.1 Q: Where can I get some programs to run on linux?
A: Good question. Because Linux doesn't have a large user base
on the desktop,(I think it's about 0.24%, less than 1%)
companies that make software won't write their programs for
Linux. There's a lot of community created programs out there,
and some are fairly good, but those are few and far between.
Most of the Linux software that tries to mimic it's windows
counterpart is substandard. It's usually slow and buggy and
early in development.
3.2 Q: I tried to install an RPM but I got 'failed dependencies', what
is that?
A: That's Linux's version of DLL hell. Different versions and
distros use different libraries. So unlike windows where
programs will run on many different versions, Linux programs
will fail if they're not made for your specific version.
3.3 Q: What is compiling and configure, make and make install? And
what is a makefile?
A: Th
Just wait for more FUD coming from MS in response to this.. any bets.. hours, days, weeks?
Methinks ZDnet published this prediction simply to exploit the predictable slashdot-effect response to such a story. I am projecting a 22% increase in ad revenues from their banner ads featured with this story at the tail end of 2004.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Additionally, Linux servers will account for nearly 26% of all server shipments.
To old Koreans.
In Japan.
This news is interesting but what would be interesting to see is which markets Linux servers are eating up. People of /. are going to assume "FINALLY THE DOWN FALL OF MICROSOFT!". But the truth of the matter is Linux is probably eating up the markets of AIX, HP-UX, SunOS, Alpha, etc. Look at Sun's stock.... Down over 30% from last year? Even if this statistic is true I don't think Microsoft is probably losing any business but rather our fellow UNIX brothers. Go Linux!?
"After a double-digit decline in worldwide factory revenue in 2002, to $44.3 billion in server sales, the server market has stabilized, and preliminary 2003 results show the server market growing 2.2% to $45.3 billion," said Lloyd Cohen, research director of IDC's Global Enterprise Server Solutions group. "Much of the excess server inventory generated by the thousands of dot-coms going out of business has been absorbed, and the demand for additional IT equipment has returned." -from http://www.mindbranch.com/listing/product/R104-145 56.html
So in essence, people got smart. Linux servers cut costs. Companies need to keep costs down to prevent themselves from imploding, as they all did in the boom. So, with the industry back on the upswing, they choose the cheaper and wiser option.
The last eight Intel servers I installed were all assembled from good quality motherboards, fans and better quality ATX power supplies into run of the mill whitebox full/mid tower cases.
If space is not an issue then I find that taking time to assemble a well laid out PC case delivers better reliability than Intel based 1U or 2U rackmounted servers.
"A whooping $9.1 billion by 2008", or so it is reported.
But what about the Windoze servers ?
"A whimper $18.2 billion by 2008" ?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Seriously, saying "Linux Server" to a CEO has one of two effects. One, they glaze over and continue using their familiar "Windows Server". Two, they think you're really smart and give you lots of money. Sure, there's the rare third case where they'll realize "Linux = OS, Server = Hardware", but chances are they're the CIO.
Does this mean I should open a "Servers The Run Linux" eBusiness? Amazonux.com, perhaps?
UTF-8: There and Back Again
I am still trying to figure out why my wife likes Linux more than Windows and after many years of using it, I don't. Funny that, she is non-technical and does not give a rat's ass about Linux, could not tell you who Linus is, but she prefers it to Windows.
I used linux from way back, and now only toy with it for specific tasks, spending about 98% of my time in Win2K.
Linux never did take me where I wanted to go, I would rather play safe with Windows than toy about with linux trying to replace my windows apps. It still feels like a hobby OS, things still do not work as they should, and I really wish I could afford a Mac at this point.
Everybody knows that people buy Linux servers just so they can install pirated versions of Windows on them!
Linux may be sitting high and pretty on the desktop market, but it has to create a usable UI to break on thru to the server market.
They're planning to make it coincide with the release of Duke Nukem Forever
That's what the adverts on Slashdot say, anyway
Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff that matters only to them
Whenever I see words like forecast and prediction buried, I wonder what the motivation of the writer is. I dug around a very little bit and found this link to an IDC ress release that this is based on (I think). IDC - Press Release http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=pr2004_1 1_02_093312
Reading the press release, I could only think to myself "uhm, duh, who couldn't see that coming."
I do wonder how they came up with the time frame though. Four years seems like a long time to predict anything in the IT business with any accuracy.
I'm so going to buy SCO now.
@ $700 a server their going to make a bazillion gudzillion dollars!
the dollar amont is not as important as the number of units. 9.1 billion is like, what, 100 sun servers? seriously though, the numbers of servers shipped is more important. because alot of that will be replacing NT servers. and alot of that will be new server infrastructure. every linux server sold is one less windows server, regardless whether it replaces a sun/ibm or not. dollar sales are a relative figure. what matters if the total number of servers, or market share. and what matters is what they're used for. are they just serving up web pages or are they running the backbone of business web applications? if linux is relegated to the periphery, it won't matter a whole lot.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
I would have liked to see what percentage of servers OS's like Solaris, Microsoft, and other *nix made up of the total "internet".
Who will be able to predict the market in 2008? With spam, viruses and hacker attacks escalating, and Longhorn due to be released... who really knows what the market will be like then?
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
This is sales of Linux *SERVERS*, not the OS itself.
Good point as we all know these servers now run pirated copies of the superior Microsoft(C) Windows(TM) Server 2003(C)(TM)(R).
PS: Don't forget to click the banner on top of
Bill.
I don't need a signature.
ZDNET is just another publishing company that generally have b grade IT writers. Just look at the spam software show down. Hangon.. where is spamassassin.. maybe they didnt pay zdnet enough money to advertise thier product so it wasnt included.
Got a question about UNIX ask it here : Unix/xBSD Forum
Don't forget that FreeBSD is stealing in on MS and the other UNIXes as well.
Here, we're winding down Solaris and replacing it with FreeBSD.
(although patch management on BSD is an absolute PITA... portupgrade my ass. Give me Debian anyday)
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
The Lunix kernel is built on top of a library called FeltchMale, which was originally writen by homosexual extraordinaire ESR.
The kernel is currently maintained by Mr. Anal Cocks while living legends Lunix Thorvolds and RMS are trying to concieve a child deep in the poopy bowels of MIT. RMS is also CEO of GPL: Gay Porno Laboratories.
Mm.. if I raise the price of Linux servers by 20% , will there be a predictable 20% rise in revenue for Linux ?
Statisticians say "YES" . Economists "Supply and Demand equality fundamentals suggest that the profits would increase but not upto the 20% mark". Of course this brings up a number of "Simplest answer is often right" idiots babbling about growth.
Strangely, Managers have a wierd rationale built into their head that says "You get what you pay for". So if an employee draws 6 times the salary of another , he's 6 times more "valuable" , which sucks when you compare an European programmer to a Indian one. Similar cost inversions are happening in the Operating Systems world, where the more costly version of the current "trendy OS to have" are likely to increase in popularity over cheaper versions doing the same thing.
Costly != State of the Art and Revenue != Popularity . But Managers do read it that way often, so it's a good thing to say. So a reasonable price increase might actually increase the popularity of Linux in the corporate world.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Dell has a pretty healthy selection of Linux options these days and of course there's always Penguin Computing
Where do you buy your Linux servers?
Get it straight! It's lower TC0 - Total Cost of 0wnership.
Around 2000, Linux was already reported at over 30% and to rise even more.
How is it possible that it is expected to account for only 26% of shipments in 2008?
Easy: IDC changed their counting methods in the meantime, while the earlier numbers are about shipments, the current numbers are about revenue and only for server-hardware that actually ships with Linux.
That is correct:
So to make a long story short, most Linux server installations do not exist for IDC.
Isn't it funny that Windows always looks good in heavily distorted studies (TCO "studies", market share studies, etc.) while they no longer look so good in not-so easily distorted studies (like Netcraft)?
Of course IDC is quite smart, they talk about "sales" and they know that people will think about shipments/units and not revenue.
While the older numbers had some touch with reality, the current numbers are just nonsense. In reality Linux already accounts for a lot more than IDC wants us to believe.
Lookit here - slashdot.org
Unless, they do a very elaborate setup whereas it is actually WinNT but presenting it as *nix.. It can be done you know..
But if it is running IIS, somehow or rather, I doubt slashcode can be run on IIS with ActivePerl, stably I mean..
Regards
Will sys-admin for food
Bascially, almost all non-GNU userland toolchains suck donkey balls through a straw.
Where I work, we all have servers as desktop development machines (typing this on a dual xeon, etc). We get our machines from Dell, and usually default to the Windows XP setup. As soon as we get them we reformat and install RedHat Enterprise or Fedora. I guess that means we arent counted in the stats, but instead are counted in the 'Windows Server' statistics, even though we are all using Linux servers. So I would think the Linux server stats are probably higher than stated.
Businesses tend to be risk adverse, which is generally a good thing. This means also that they are afraid of change. So this slows down Linux quite a bit.
Home users tend to stick with what they use at work. So until Linux takes over on the corporate workstation, it will be a slow tough fight.
All that being said, I think that Linux will kill windows. It will just be a slow process until a certain market share is reached. At this point application compatibility will be less of an issue. But progress is occuring much faster than some people realize: Linux is certainly killing proprietary UNIX (as is Windows), and the fate of OS X is uncertain, though I suspect that it will slowly be open sourced bit by bit, and they may slowly subsume eachother.....
Consider that 5% of the PC's which shipped last year ran Linux (mostly Linspire and Mandrake). Even after you count those where Windows was later installed, that was still up to three percent of *new* PC sales. Yes, Microsoft's monopoly has begun to collapse already. This year, maybe, it will be more.
Linux is already causing Microsoft real headaches in a few very key markets such as internet server and embedded system markets. The real beacheads are business web application development, desktop, and groupware now. But it is a slow process at the moment and will be for some time. I do predict though that it will be a fierce war for the desktop by the time Longhorn ships.
Also, Microsoft's last year of record profits was the year XP was launched. This is to be expected. But their market share is another question-- how do you measure market share? In dollars? If so then the slow demise of proprietary UNIX and Netware gives Microsoft greatly inflated numbers. If in deployments, then the simple answer is: we don't really know what real numbers are because we have no good way of measuring them.
Now, is there a tipping point? You bet. At a certain point, people won't write their business web tools for IE only (as Safeco does). Vertically targetted tools will be available for Linux, etc. and all basic productivity tools will be open source. At this point, I expect Linux useage to take off much faster.
ZDNet is reporting that sales of servers using Linux will reach a whopping $9.1 billion by 2008...
Considering Linux (and OSS in general) makes money via support offerings, shouldnt this be added to the overall $$$ amount ? Does 9.1. billion include support charges or simply the cost of hardware ?
Another thing I routinely keep hearing about is that hardware is going to keep become VERY cheap (as a matter of fact there were some articles suggesting it might even become free in the long term). If one cant sell hardware, and cant sell the OS, where the hell does 9.1 billion come from ? "Voluntary donation" ??
Linux conquering the desktop? Any year now.
(sorry, couldn't resist. It was this or a Beowulf cluster remark...)
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Communists:They are 100% right and their cause is just
Linux Zealots:They are 100% right and their cause is just
Communists:The revolution is coming, after which the world will become a paradise
Linux Zealots:Desktop-ready Linux is coming, after which the world will become a paradise
Communists:Anyone who disagrees with them is a capitalist pig or a brainwashed stooge
Linux Zealots:Anyone who disagrees with them is a Microsoft pig or a brainwashed stooge
Communists:Membership made of students and failed academics. Personal hygiene and social skills are not virtues
Linux Zealots:Membership made of students and failed academics. Personal hygiene and social skills are not virtues.
Communists:Despite all evidence to the contrary, the majority of people really do care about their issues and would convert if they could only be told of the solution
Linux Zealots:Despite all evidence to the contrary, the majority of people really do care about their issues and would convert if they could only be told of the solution
Communists:Building the movement is the most important aim in life.
Linux Zealots:Building the movement is the most important aim in life.
Communists:The only thing stopping their success is the evil propaganda of the capitalists
Linux Zealots:The only thing stopping their success is the evil propaganda of Microsoft.
Communists:Highly strung, humorless and unable to take any criticism of their cause
Linux Zealots:Highly strung, humorless and unable to take any criticism of their cause
Communists:Most are virgins
Linux Zealots:All are virgins
Yes, but... can they run Linux?
Oh wait...
Everybody who uses "the programmers deserve to get paid" as a reason why open-source won't work, please post your objections here. Remember to explain why none of these companies value the software side of things enough to contribute any resources.
Corporate purchasing has as much to do with IT directors furthering their careers by riding the trends than pure economics. With constantly increasing bangs per buck you can always do what you did 3 years ago for a fraction of the cost, but no-one gets that corporate promotion by doing the same thing as the last IT manager did. You've got to rip out UNIX and replace it with NT, showing the millions you saved ('96 to '00) or rip out proprietry UNIX and replace it with Linux ('01-'05?). People may see through the ripping out what you've got, replacing it with the new version of what you've got and claiming to save millions. Just leaving what you've got there and replacing it with newer, cheaper stuff when needed is for nerds with no ambition.
I think this article misses the fact that not only are people in the corporate world finally getting the issues with Linux in the enterprise, but by 2006 there should be an established new new new thing: Rip out your big ol' SPARC systems and downsize to Solaris x86. Save those zillions, get the promotion, and still get the warm fuzzies of a familiar and manageable enterprise platform.
Don't get me wrong: No OS other than Linux (well, maybe a couple of bsds a few years back) have crossed the threshold of my home, but (a) 15 years corporate infrastructure experience says Solaris is easier to deal with with mixed-ability staff in a massive corporate environment and (b) NEVER underestimate corporate politics and the requirement for the climber to have a ready response to the "what's your XYZ strategy, Bob?" question at the CIO's golf club. beats cost-benefit analysis every time...
Microsoft has the unparalleled advantage of a single vision driving their platform and software. Right now, the babbling bazaar that is Linux has too many voices and too many chefs to spoil the soup.
While the great many voices working on Linux insure diversity and provide a wide range of choice, I, for one, think we can benefit from just a little less chocie and a little more standardization.
RPM is pretty much the standard now (also defined in the LSB), so while different distributions might have different methods of installing a RPM, there is a unified packaging format.
Sounds a bit like "nerdy" Gates and "leather boy" Ballmer.
n/t
It's 3am.
Shit, the server's doing some weird shit. Where that support contract? What you just downloaded it and instelled it well I'm going to pay you the standard support call cost and you'd better come round and sort the fucking thing out then.
TCO Just went through the roof.
True most small companies don't want to fork out for support, the medium ones can't afford full time support staff but the bigger ones always seem to outsource (supporting PC's ain't our business!).
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
How much is $9.1 billion going to be worth in 2008 compared with today's money?
Except that a whole lot of newish distros are based on debian and use .deb , eg Knoppix, Mepis, Lindows, Xandros, Ubuntu, Libranet, Progeny. They aren't getting less popular - but alien generally works for rpms. The real problem is that generally what is inside these packages is infact very tightly coupled to everything else about a distro. This is where the LSB has failed, and needs more work.
.msi which does whatever it wants, or a sicko .exe which does whatever it wants. Any vaguely standard system is a step up from that.
Tbh, package formats is not a level of integration that matters. Lets face it, on windows, you either get a sicko
I think it's good to keep an eye on the horizon and all, but this is still 2004. That's quite a way off when you think about it... a lot can change; a lot can go on between now and then. As much as I'd like to say "Hoo-yeah! My team's gonna win!" I think it's just too early to say.
There are a number of admins out there that won't buy a shrinkwrapped linux server because the prices are just insane. IBM and HP/Compaq think that you'll pay 3 times the going rate for memory, storage, processors, etc...just for the perk of having a "big name" badge on the computer.
So I've just resigned myself to rolling my own 1RU and 2RU server systems. Then I throw CentOS http://www.centos.org/ , a RHEL clone, on them. That saves me a couple thousand per server.
I used to be a big fan of the Proliant line, but the prices just got to be so ridiculous. They haven't figured out that this is a commodity market yet. Oh well.
I've had good luck with http://www.pogolinux.com/ .
I work in a shop that is mixed windows and linux but just a few linux boxes are doing all of the heavy lifting. We keep adding processing to these couple of linux boxes until they absolutely beg for mercy. On the other hand we have a ton of windows boxes that mostly sit idle because the OS is not partitioned enough to handle that type of load and still be reliable.
So 25% means in most cases at least 50% of the data center processing will be linux.
Got Code?
I think a good portion of the growth of Linux has been due to IBM's very successful push to get users to run Linux on IBM's big iron AS/400 and S/390 machines for large-scale computing needs.
:-)
Mind you, I think that's a good thing because IBM gets to sell and/or lease out a lot more hardware in the long run.
Didn't know anyone still used that. I love column programming. Long live /free :)
Is this the Holy Grail of evidence that linux is over-taking MS? HARDLY.
No one calculates MS Server sales using hardware as part of the equation, if you did I'm sure you'd see MS Still eclipses linux.
How much did Red Hat or SuSE earn last year selling licenses for their enterprise OS? I'd be interested in comparing apples to apples.
"I have an odd craving to whisper about those few frightful hours in that ill-rumored and evilly shadowed seaport of dea
On Windows there is no system and all the packaging systems on Linux are a lot better than that. - There is absolutely no problem in having an installer in Linux that works on all Linux distributions. (And actually for example skype is offering packages that work on all Linux distros, as an example.) So the whole packaging system is an additional bonus, nobody is forced to use it, neither the users nor the creators of software.
My bet? Solaris and BSD will battle for the same space. Sun needs to shake up the upper management. They have good ppl and good systems. They need to offer Linux as well and mean it. They are using it as a stop gap and hoping to turn the customers to the dark sides (legacy unix and windows).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I see no way they could accurately predict linux growth over the next five years. I suppose all they are doing is measuring the last five years growth, and basing their future predictions on that.
This reminds of 1999 market analysts predicting that the Nasdaq was going to hit 10000 by 2004.
I am not trying to assert that linux growth will be either faster, or slower, than this study predicts, I just don't see how these sorts of studies can be meaningful.
Back in 1999, IDC had a study that said that Linux would account for about 3-4% of all the web servers by 2004 and that Linux would never make it in the business space.
IDC's studies will ALWAYS go to where their money os coming from, not to where the money is going to.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
We did not know the media makes a living of grabbing eye balls.
Man, what would we do without people like you....
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
and mod the one before it down.
I am so sick of this "ITS CALLED GNU?LINUX YOU ASSH*LE!" crap that is going on.
I call it whatever Linus calls it since its his creation. If Debian wants to call it gnu/linux then let them. If Redhat wants to call it just Linux then its fine too.
I bet I could call it Schrawux. Who cares?
Its just flamebait and not all of a Linux distro is gnu so in essence does not pass the gnu test. Debian comes close if you select to only install free software but that is it.
Linux can be built with Possix BSD tools so Gnu is not needed for Linux.
Just end this debate please.
http://saveie6.com/
It's sad that the public is so easily duped by Linux marketing hype, when there are much more useful and GUI-friendly OSes out there, like the BSDs for example and SkyOS. Why must Linux always be the center of attention? I think there is some serious money exchanging hands in the back rooms...
As many have noticed, IDC has changed the way they count linux market penetration. Last year they counted the number of installations and this year it all about revenue. For something that often comes free... Some event suggest that they are pro-microsoft.
/ ms/idc2.html
Well after reading this, you will be sure they are : http://www.theglobeandmail.com/partners/microsoft
I doen't look like the usual anti-linux attack, it's much more subtle this time.
If i'm not mistaken, BillG predicted that the cost of hardware can be neglected to that of software in the future. I assume he meant Microsoft software. Again $9.1 billion in sales of AMD/Intel based server hardware is not, what i would call, a neglectable deal! :)
Robert
...for themselves, as Annie & Co. used to say.
Personally, I like The Register's formulation: "World+dog". Short, sweet, to the point, and non-sexually biased.
...though my cat objects ;-)
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?