Slashdot Mirror
A Look at Windows Server Outselling Linux
THG writes "CoolTechZone.com has an interesting look at Linux's position in the market now that Microsoft has sold more Windows Server software than Linux. From the article: "The most important reason that Windows based servers are doing so well could be that programmers find it extremely easy to work on .Net and other related technologies (seamless integration). Plus, you have hassle free and rapid support from Microsoft, which is a comforting feature for corporate customers. When Windows Live comes in, we will see further integration between the server and online technical support areas, thereby making the troubleshooting process easier for in-house administrators and reducing overhead costs for the company."
From the article:
Is this really true? The teams I worked with on .NET and
Windows technology hardly found the integration seamless. As a
matter of fact we had a full-time staff of Microsoft consultants
on-site as well as on call to help provide workarounds for all of
the glitches with the .NET technology, and there were a LOT of
them.
I do wish there were less license for this kind of publishing. It is the complement to libel, i.e., it gives undue credit to someone for something not true. Weird. And, it still does damage to third party simply by virtue of lending credence and credibility to .NET and Microsoft. Sigh.
A common problem in trying to count the number of servers running an OS is defining what a 'server' is. Most Linux servers I've seen run ten times the number of virtualhosts that Windows servers do. Do you count a Linux server running 1000 sites as 1 server or 1000?
I wouldn't be surprised if there were more physical servers running Windows, but if you count virtualhosts instead there would be far more sites using Linux.
At my work place we are (painfully) slowly moving away from our existing Microsoft Windows Servers and replacing them with Linux and Solaris solutions. Note things like our Exchange servers are staying in place as there are no suitable equivalents though most other things are being moved across. Why? Because Microsoft's support is a joke compared even to unofficial IRC support channels for FOSS, it costs far to much when compared to Free* (*plus training, installation, support) solutions, and we dislike the vendor lock in Activation and licenses that are forced on those using Microsoft Server software; we paid good money only to be treated like pirates and have to deal with those systems failing and causing server problems, it is Microsoft's problem and making it our problem is a punch to the face. Right now as I type this I'm converting a Windows 2k3 Server to Ubuntu 5.10 (yes I know...) for another company in towns that I'm mates with the boss as they simply can't afford to deal with support issues on a mission critical server. They need some thing that Just Works(tm) and that is Linux (I tried pitching Solaris 10! I really did!). From my look on the Industry (note I'm in Australia) I see it as being more of a case that people are looking at Linux seriously, testing the water, liking it, and then attempting to migrate their servers. Along with hardcore Linux users who refuse to move to Microsoft (Rubbish) Software I see this as the Linux server market growing and I seriously doubt Microsoft dominance over Unix really exists. (Then again...There are a lot of Exchange servers out there...) 2 cents
I ate your fish.
the copies of Linux that were not purchased from retail channels but were downloaded free of charge.
They also, no doubt, included in the counting the number of times a single, freely downloaded copy of Linux was installed more than once.
Yup, despite the fact that these "onsulting" firms income streams totally depend on advising on the use of Microsoft software, I'm sure Gartner analysts will be professional and do their best to tally accurate counts, eschewing the crass action of merely rubberstamping a Microsoft PR memo. After all, people who earn fees by being featured in Microsoft server sales videos shouldn't have too much trouble remaining unbiased.
mmm... after thinking about it I'm sure they never counted the four Linux servers we recently installed at work. Maybe they aren't as accurate as I thought.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
I call BS.
We've worked with Microsoft's $245/call service several times with obscure problems and two things to Microsoft's credit:
1) they never gave up on the problem
2) they came through with a fix (longest wait time was a really odd Office/Windows OpLock prob and we had a fix within 10 business days).
Man, I think MS is the devil as much as the next guy (Apple guy here, for reference), but I've put dollars up that they've refused to take.
FUD you're speakin', I'd say...