Slashdot Mirror


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."

24 of 237 comments (clear)

  1. Wow . . . by Drewcool · · Score: 4, Funny

    For a second, I read that as "Linus To Take Over Microsoft".

    1. Re:Wow . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean you actually tried to read the headline before posting? Amazing!

    2. Re:Wow . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, the expression should be "overtake", which is much different than "take over".

    3. Re:Wow . . . by Bert64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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!
  2. ActiveDirectory - the last missing piece by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Informative

    I know quite a few companies who run 3-4 Windows servers for ActiveDirectory domain controllers and a lot of Linux servers as AD clients.

    Once Samba4 is released, these Windows servers could be replaced as well.

    1. Re:ActiveDirectory - the last missing piece by rjch · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Once Samba4 is released, these Windows servers could be replaced as well.

      Samba 4 has been in various stages of alpha for the last five years - or is it six?

      Personally, I have considered a Samba 4 installation in only one place - a volunteer organisation that simply didn't have the budget for anything else. I'm still sniffing around for a surplus Windows Server license to replace it.

      For an alpha release, Samba 4 is remarkably usable. 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. I don't see that reducing a huge amount even when Samba 4 is released - there's a lot of configuration involved to get DHCP, DNS and Samba 4 talking to each other properly.

    2. Re:ActiveDirectory - the last missing piece by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.
    3. Re:ActiveDirectory - the last missing piece by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've installed Samba4 on a test site. Installation was quite easy, even considering the DNS integration. However, I couldn't manage to set up DHCP with dynamic DNS updates. Though I see that they are adding an embedded DNS server into the Samba4 distribution (as they did with Kerberos and LDAP servers), so it should be much easier in the future.

      Also, Microsoft tools for administration are seriously better than anything Samba4 has.

    4. Re:ActiveDirectory - the last missing piece by gbjbaanb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

  3. Re:News for Nerds: by rjch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?

  4. Selfcongratulatory survey by arivanov · · Score: 5, Informative

    This survey is not statistically representative by all means. It is done amidst users that already use Linux and done by a Linux advocacy. I am no MSFT fan. I have not had a Windows machine in my house since 1997 (and even that was Win 3.x running under OS2 Warp). However, the reality is not as rosy as this survey would like us to see.

    First of all, the majority of Windows users are SMEs and they are Windows _ONLY_. They _WILL_ buy more of the same and that is a definite. A lot of the rest is desktop estate and its essential dependencies - Exchange and their friends. 95% of these will be buying more of the same. There are very few successful desktop migrations to account for anything more than that. Even that will be an underestimate. 99% buying more of the same is more likely.

    That leaves "enterprise" backend use which is pretty much what this survey is about. There is a lively migration racket going on there nowdays as most of this runs in the form of Java and friends on top of middleware stacks. Every 1-2 years the latest and greatest backend idea comes along with its migration programme. As a result servers and stacks get chucked out and replaced by others.

    There Linux is gaining and the numbers are about right. However that is a very small portion of the market and misrepresenting it for the whole market is to the very best disingenuous. Additionally, it also completely ignores the "Elephant In The Corner of The Room". The merger of Sun and Oracle has created a vertical stack which will once again effectively compete for their place under the sun (pun intended) in the server room. Any stats regarding enterprise migration that assign (Sn)Oracle a negative year on year growth are frankly wishful thinking.

    --
    Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
    http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  5. Re:News for Nerds: by Pieroxy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, I just switched my home server from Windows to Linux this very week-end. That cannot be a coincidence, right?

  6. wake me up.... by batistuta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    wake me up when Linux starts taking over Microsoft in Desktops.

    I'm happy about it, but not surprised. As the old generation of IT admins go away, newer ones are more flexible and have ways of saving money without MS in the equation. Linux is not the only solution, but one competitive alternative. Different is the Desktop, partially because it is not baked up big companies like the kernel and enterprise tools are. Canonical is an exception, but sadly a more or less lonely one.

    1. Re:wake me up.... by Sique · · Score: 3, Interesting

      SAP R/3 was always a Three-Tiers-System, so it was "cloudy", before the term was coined. You have your big database server, you have some application servers hooked to the database, and you have clients which in turn connect to the application servers. When you connect to a R/3 system, it is never clear which dialog server you get connected to. That was so in 1995, and it is still so in 2010.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
  7. I'm a Linux fanboy, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

  8. Who was surveyed? by benjymouse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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*
  9. Re:News for Nerds: by koiransuklaa · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don Marti tears the methodology and the point of the whole survey to pieces: http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/hands-up-who-likes-me/

    This sort of surveys may have value but used like this they're just embarrassing.

  10. Re:News for Nerds: by shougyin · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is directly from the report. "This survey was conducted with members of The Linux Foundation’s End User Council, as well as other end users identified by The Linux Foundation and Yeoman Technologies. This report is being published at The Linux Foundation End User Summit, where many respondents will be in attendance. These companies include Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Bristol- Myers Squibb, NTT, Deutsche Bank, Dreamworks, ADP, McKinsey and Company, Bank of New York, Barclays Capital, AIG, the US Department of Defense, MetLife, CME Group, NASDAQ QMX, the New York Stock Exchange, Goodrich, and many more."

  11. Re:Single sign on? by Stumbles · · Score: 4, Informative

    LOl, so true. The sad thing is Microsoft took Kerberos, bastardized it and changed the name to AD so most people are ignorant that "Single Signon" technology was not developed by Uncle Bill. But then most technologies gives Microsoft fits when they try to develop their own code. Anyone remember trumpet winsock from the early days of Win95? What a horrible POS that was and Microsoft finally threw in the towel and used the BSD TCP/IP stack.

    --
    My karma is not a Chameleon.
  12. Re:Single sign on? by ledow · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apart from the fact that AD was derived from a Unix technology that does exactly what you ask:

    Install Likewise Open. That's your client problem solved. My school has trolleys full of Ubuntu netbooks that log onto the wireless network and allow any AD login on any domain they are joined too. It took three commands I think (install the package, name the machine, join the domain). Kids don't even need to know that the netbooks are Linux whereas the rest of the school is almost all Windows. And, yes, I can use the Windows Administrators to do privileged operations by just sticking them in the right groups.

    Server is a bit more tricky but if you're keeping homogenous systems (Linux server, Linux clients), single-sign-on on Linux has been around for donkey's years. Server probably needs Samba4 if you want modern-Windows-clients on a Linux-only server.

    Next, please describe how to use MS-supplied tools to achieve the same (i.e. log MS clients onto Linux servers, or even Linux clients onto MS servers). It's hardly surprising that nobody really supports joining the competition, so homogenous systems are infinitely easier to support. But your claim as a unit is bollocks. Wanna come see a Linux netbook join an unprepared, untampered-with Windows-only domain run by a Windows-only machine with no Linux help server-side, and support SSO for all its operations (including initial login, printer access, fileshare access, even desktop icons etc.)? A group of 8 year old's here do it every day.

  13. Growing by Stooshie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm just trying to think of some area of tech/i.t./communications where MS is increasing it's sales ...




    ... Still thinking!

    --
    America, Home of the Brave. ... .and the Squaw.
  14. The surprise is in the unreported (but implied) nu by kenh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  15. Bias much? by bberens · · Score: 4, Interesting

    41% is less than half in one sentence, but 43% is nearly half in the next. I guess 42% is the hard cutoff by which we begin referring to the statistic in the affirmative vs. the negative.

    --
    Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
  16. Re:News for Nerds: by netsavior · · Score: 3, Informative

    weird, I work for one of the companies on the list... our web servers for customer front-end (not business front-end) run Linux and a very small amount of our analytics run Linux... Most of our Windows servers are virtualized, so maybe that is where the numbers are going askew... My department alone added something like 2000 Windows servers this year, and about 5 new Linux -- I would estimate about 50 of those windows servers were non-virtual. Now our existing Linux servers are upgraded significantly beyond what our windows servers run (more processors, more RAM), and in general we upgrade and patch Linux servers, but we never reconfigure hardware on windows servers -- we always replace/rebuild them (company standard policy), which really adds to the "new windows machines" numbers and makes TFA's statistic seem more and more made-up. I do not have exact stats for company-wide, but I can say the support team, the internal user base, the server footprint, the development staff, the administration staff are all orders of magnitude bigger for Wintel vs Linux/Unix/iSeries(which is one team)... In other words, I do not believe this survey, based on inside information about one of the companies listed.