Under a Big Blue Shadow

PenguinCandidate writes "Linux server market share numbers can be tricky, with HP touting itself as a leader and IBM garnering all the press. For one analyst, it's all about identity." From the article: "HP can say that it has led the worldwide Linux server market for 29 consecutive quarters. HP can also say with confidence, thanks to IDC's Worldwide Quarterly Server Tracker from May 2005, that it outpaced IBM by nearly eight percentage points in quarterly revenue share. And yet, that Big Blue thundercloud remains. "

Comments

Marketing changes the perception

[winkydink]

and obviously, IBM's marketeers are doing a good job. HP's still reeling from the fiasco of the Carly years and probably will for at least another year or two.

Re:Marketing changes the perception

[njcoder]

" Well another important issue is IBM's more apparent commitment to both Linux and Open-Source. It may just be marketing for all I know, but we hear a whole lot more about IBM paying for this and donating that to Linux & F/OSS than HP."

That's what good marketting is... making sure people hear a whole lot more :)

Less is more

[fembots]

To me, HP is a middleman doing anything profitable, while IBM sticks to one thing and tries to do it well.

Re:Less is more

[arete]

In more specific terms, IBM sells Linux and Linux servers and lots of other related solutions.

HP sells lots of servers that HAPPEN to be Linux.

Market Share

[coop0030]

To be honest this article seems accurate enough. I didn't even know that HP was selling Linux servers. They definitely don't try to make it known, and do not get very much press if they do try.

IBM dominates the Linux news everywhere I look.

I think the biggest reason is that they do so many different things for Linux, and it seems they actually help the development of Linux much more than just selling servers.

There in lies the biggest difference.
HP = selling servers
IBM = developing new features in Linux, and selling servers.

Re:This is the summary

[DarkMavis]

No surprise here as HP has historically had a tight connection with Microsoft. IBM has little to lose when touting their support for Linux. They don't like Microsoft anyway. HP on the other hand, with their huge PC division and Intel server division, has much more to lose. That's probably why you don't hear HP's executives talking up Linux as much as Big Blue's.

The reason is ...

[WindBourne]

that IBM is contributing heavily in the Linux arena. They have more coders in the kernel. Most of HP's contributions are about sales for HP. Good example is HP's drivers for their printers. They have not really contributed to lpr or cups. It would be nice if HP also did advertisements for and with Linux. So far, all that see is that "We sell Windows, and Unix. Oh yeah, some Linux too.". HP has hired some top ppl from Linux, but they did not make good use of them. They wished to keep a low profile so as to not anger the Windows ppl. Well, so what. Dell is eating HP for lunch when it comes to Windows, and will continue to do so.

sigh of relief

[ohzero]

finally the day has come where huge industry players are fighting over who is more badass with open source. 10 years ago people would have laughed at this idea.