Slashdot Mirror
Unix servers up 2.7%, Linux servers up 35.6%
cfelde writes "Linux servers up 35.6% and other Unix servers are up 2.7%. Also worldwide server revenue increased 6.2 percent to US$49 billion in 2004. The blade server market nearly doubled in size to over $1.1 billion in 2004 and 7 percent of x86 shipments in the U.S. were blade servers."
Didn't MS claim their server was up in the market as well?
Are these numbers the same (due to more servers being shipped) or are they actually due to increased market share?
none other than IBM I would presume. Sun and SGI are dead so I don't see unix jumping ahead in the near future. Apple doesn't come off as a server company. BSD isn't as widely supported (I don't think) as Linux, and certainly doesn't have the momentum. Continue to see Linux Rise !
If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
That's even better news from a proliferation standpoint, though, because it will lend Linux additional credibility in the eyes of the PHB. "Hey look, other people are buying this Linux thing"...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Well kinda-sorta. I have devoted last 13 years of my 40+ years life to be a full time computer systems admin, after getting my bachelors and masters degrees in EE and working 7 years in the electronics assembly and manufacturing trenches. I knew that there was an ulterior motive to go in the UNIX direction rather than windoze path subconciously but did not know exactly why and how I ended up being a UNIX guy. :)
During the last few years, certificate mills creating an army of windows admin drones, who can only click a predefined sequence of location on the screen with their mouse and passing as "system administrators", I tend to think that, certificate watching management types are going to hire more and more of these admin lookalikes and increase the share of windows in the server room which would make a demise of my careerpath. When I see articles like UNIX/Linux gaining ground on the server room, it makes me breathe a little easier. I do not want another career change, even though, after a week of skiing in Colorado, doing something like that for living is tempting
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
P.S. I don't own any Activant stock (if they are even public). Also, I do have a gripe with their lack easy to find web integration information for their seemingly home-rolled database, "Eagle."
I don't keep a lid on my coffee so when I walk around I look busy -me
That is, in terms of the number of Unix servers vs. Linux servers vs. Windows servers?
If it takes 15 Linux servers to do the work of 1 Windows server, what does the number of servers tell you?
BSD seems to always get clumped in with unix. Don't see why, unless its the commercial BSD's but meh I'm assuming it is included in the unix category (with OSX too I bet)
Clearly Linux is coming of age in the enterprise data center.
For instance, all of Oracle's hosting for its ERP product is done on Linux. In my company, we run our PeopleSoft ERP system on Linux.
I believe that we are still on the bottom of the S-curve and will easily see numbers in the 30% range in the next 3 years.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
You misread, if you can't do simple math and realise that Linux/Unix grew at LESS THAN HALF the rate that the server industry grew, you'd realize that it actually LOST market share.
In that case I would not use the term "Gaining Ground" but rather "Mostly holding on but slipping a bit" instead.
Not to mention that you are seriously a bigot.
"What about *BSD?"
I still don't understand why Linux isn't categorized as Unix. Is it a license issue?
In the beginning, I can remember all the Unix guys degrading Linux. At the time Linux was probably missing a lot of what the large products had to offer. Now days, Linux feels pretty much like my old Unix boxes; but with BASH as my primary shell.
"I think the absence of any mention here is a clear indicator that it's dying."
FreeBSD has recently grown in popularity. They just released their new kernel and things are still looking good for them. I've finally become accustomed to Gentoo's portage enough that I prefer it over FreeBSD's ports; but ports still has some very powerful features that make it the choice of many.
My lame blog.
internet pr0n is a 5-7 billion dollar industry
During the last few years, certificate mills creating an army of windows admin drones, who can only click a predefined sequence of location on the screen with their mouse and passing as "system administrators"
Not to bash a Windows admins, but merely some observations.
1) On average a *NIX admin can code and script, a windows admin can't.
2) On average a *NIX admin can handle more boxes than a windows admin (probably because of #1)
GUI administration is fine and dandy, and UNIX and Linux releases come out with more of them each year. But the shear fact that knowing where these things are stored on the system and being able to directly manipulate, distribute, and restore these things is godlike. Even things like remote desktops and whatnot make things easier in the GUI land, they still don't scale very well.
Otherwise there's not much there for my pattern-seeking synapses to grab ahold of. Am I missing where in TFA the "Unix servers up 2.7%" stat is? I even fired up a graphical browser to see if it was in a sidebar! I suspect the 2.7% for Unix may be directly comparable to Linux's 2.4%, and not to the percent-of-percent 35%.
Ah, bitter dregs.
From an engineering standpoint, the concept sucks. Here are a few of my gripes about blades:
- Convergent infrastructure causes issues. Blades combine power, management, network, cooling, a single CDROM, single floppy, and servers all into one box. Management module crashed? There went all your servers in that chassis! Want to physically split networks for security purposes? Sorry! Want to burn a bunch of CDs or floppies to flash many boxes in parallel? Too bad!
- Not as expandable. What happens when you need multiple NICs, a SCSI controller, a modem, etc, each allocated to a different server? The answer: you don't.
- Less serviceable. For example, IBM's lightpath is supposed to be designed to indicate where the problem is on the server so you can make a service call to get the parts in while coordinating downtime. With their blades you have to PULL OUT THE BLADE to see what the problem is! Mostly because there is no front panel to show faults at the blade level.
- Density is a myth for real servers. Every SCSI option out there only allows for 7 servers in 7U. With only two disks. Pop Quiz: How many 1U servers can you get into 7Us?
- Hot-Swappable is not a new feature. How hot swappable are individual 1U servers?
- "Integrated mass deployment tools" are again not specific to blades. There's nothing magical about fancy network-enabled ghost-like tools that operate across a LAN.
- "Cheaper" is a myth. $20G for the blade chassis, and $2000 per blade? That's $34k for 7 servers. How much for a 1U server? Times 7?
How can these be fixed? Here are some thoughts.- Drop a PCI slot into each blade with back-end access.
- Put a freaking jumper or internal dip switch on each blade to allocate it to different physical networks/ports on the back. Better yet just put separate ports for each blade on the back of the unit- along with a switch- and use something physical to connect the blade to the switch or to the external port.
- Put a CDROM and floppy drive on the front of each blade.
- Put more LEDs on the front of the blade
- Make them WAY more dense- say 24 SCSI servers per 7U.
Of course you're basically approaching "vertical 1U servers". Notice how there's already a nicely engineered solution to all the "problems" that blades pretend to solve?Thanks for listening to my rant. I have 8 bladecenters in my care and feeding - none of which I had input on for procurement - And I've give anything to swap them out for 1U boxes.
Don't sweat the petty things. But do pet the sweaty things.
There is no such thing as no accent.
Claiming that your own accent represents the lack of an accent is a sign of even greater stupidity (and pomposity), I'm afraid.
Because its not unix. Its a fundamental design difference. Linux was specifically desiegned to be a unix-like system that could run on cheap (x86) hardware, so a lot of things are similar (commands and what not) but are not always the same in function or syntax. Especially if you are comparing a GNU utility to an old corporate Unix utility. However thats where some of the similarities come in, the corporate Unix's are increasingly using the GNU tools.
You build a kit car to look like a '67 shelby mustang, that doesnt make it a '67 shelby mustang.
Most people consider Linux to be part of the family, like an inlaw. Its not a blood relationship, they are sort of related. The BSD's on the other hand are Unix, they started as unix and still maintain a good portion of unix code. Some of their unix-ness has been bred out of the family though.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
Unixware on an old old 486 machine. It has a very proprietary software, that takes in autodesk DWG files, and through the serial port controls a large plotter with plasma, cutting inches of steel. The manufacturers, and resellers who provided support are both out of business. We do not have the root password.
Before embarking on a cracking project, I tried installing the unixware on a different machine, it failed because the machine was too advanced I suppose. Gotta find a 486. Its also risky since the machine should not go down for a day... but looking away is risky too, we should take a partition image while the system is running good... its binaries could prob run on linux or bsd's sco unix binary compatibility... and we could provide a nice KDE interface remotely via terminal services, and have the files loaded via network shares... while removing SCO.
Do remember they were once admirable. Imagine this happening to Linux in 2020.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky