Linux To Take Over Microsoft In Enterprises
shougyin writes "For years, Linux has enjoyed much of its success as a replacement for Unix. Companies turned to Linux to replace Unix servers, or for new deployments within a Unix-heavy environment. Linux is still king there, but it's starting to encroach on Microsoft as well. Big companies are planning overwhelmingly (76.4%) to add more Linux servers in the next year, and less than half (41.2%) of the companies are planning to add Windows servers in the next year. Even more interesting, nearly half (43.6%) are actively planning to decrease use of Windows servers in the next year."
This week, bogus statistics pushing an increasingly boring anti-microsoft zealotry and a pro-"operating system that takes at least one more step than windows to run any popular application or game" agenda.
I agree. Percentages are tossed around without any evidence or explanation as to how these figures were arrived at. Who was surveyed? What industries were they in? Why are they planning to add Linux servers? What function will these servers have? Why aren't they planning on adding Windows servers?
I thought it was very funny to see 41% called "less than half", and 44% called "almost half! :D
Technically correct and true, yes, but I smell bias...
Who was surveyed?
from the TFA:
the organizations surveyed were picked by the Linux Foundation End User Council
Next up:
10 out of 10 randomly selected stock brokers want more deregulation of the financial system
10 out of 10 randomly selected Taliban fighters don't trust the USA
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
Any organization small enough to have trouble funding and domain controller Doesn't need one.
Just because the only tool you know how to use is a hammer doesn't mean every problem is a nail.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
However the time and effort that I have spent installing Samba 4 would have cost this organisation a fair bit more than the cost of a Windows Server 2008 Standard license
Does trhat count the time it took you to get trained in Windows Server 2008, Active Directory and all the other gubbins? IIRC there was a fair learning curve going from domains to AD. (and we'll ignore the cost of the CALs)
This annoys me a little about Linux migrations, people say how much more it costs based on the fact that they already know Windows, then compare that to the time taken to not only implement but also learn the Linux equivalent. Now you've done it once, you should be able to put in another Samba4 system without any fuss, surely?
and you can, of course, supply your config experience to the community - or to your own, ad-laden, blog. Might as well earn a little from getting people to come read what you did.
As a poll taken by the Linux Foundation based on the answers of two hundred of it's largest members that responded, what I found suprising is that less than half of them plan on increasing their use of Linux - these are the biggest supporters of Linux, and 50%+ ARE NOT PLANNING TO INCREASE THEIR USE OF LINUX!
These are Linux's biggest supporters (they joined the foundation, they replied to the survey, and they are of a certain size) - if half of them aren't increasing use of Linux, to me that is the interesting number. If 50%+ of the largest members of the Oracle Users Group said they were not going to increase use of Oracle DB that would be the story, why is the spin backwards here? Oh yeah, Linux Foundation wrote the press release, slashdot partitas it...
Ken
Yes, the expression should be "overtake", which is much different than "take over".
Vendor driven certs are worthless, wether they come from microsoft, cisco or redhat... Those vendors goals is not to educate people or even to ensure a high standard, they simply want more people out there promoting their products and having a large number of "qualified" cert holders helps more than a small number of "qualified and competent" cert holders.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!