Slashdot Mirror
Linux: One quarter of the server market by 2003
weezer writes "LinuxToday has a nice little article about a Dataquest study that claims that Linux will account for about 24% of the server market by 2003. "
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
"Linux will continue to grow as an operating system deployed on new server hardware, but much of the hype surrounding Linux will fade once Microsoft ships a service pack for Windows 2000 server," Brown said.
Didn't I hear this crap a year ago? Something like "hype will fade once Microsoft ships NT 5.0." Am I wrong?
The basic concept is to turn the entire hard drive into a searchable database of files instead of a hierarchy of directories. (Oops! I mean "folders".)
Well at least the guy didn't take issue with the contents of the post. Must have been a "dis-information" worker from Microsoft that could only find spelling as "non-factual".
Children like this should have their toys taken away from them. We don't need the "ignorant" to overrun the forums.
"respect is earned, not commanded"
Sub Zero means Overclocking
Most contractors I know hate Linux because Linux pretty much puts an end to the lucrative recurring support charges they can get from companies running Microsoft products. Such charges make up the bulk of the contractor's income. As most PHB's are too dim to realize this, I think Linux will not achieve world domination as quickly as it would if everyone were as technically sharp as we are in this forum. It still will, mind you, but it will be a few years farther out than 2003.
Anyone who buys Win2k and installs it without even thinking probably deserves what they get. If anyone even reads a review of it they'll notice at some point it will say "for business users" or something to that effect.
Windows 2000 is not targeted to home users. I'm sure it will be advertised the same way Windows N4 was and probably have a similar price point.
From what I've read, it looks like they went with a hybrid that consists of the old-style NT domains and some aspects of the "regular" directory structure, as known from, say, Novell's NDS:
m parisons/ADandNDScomp.asp
you have your regular tree structure with a Root, Organization, Organizational Units and leaf objects, but you also have a Forest, which is supposed to be a collection of separate directory trees that trust each other and are able to synchronize and replicate directory data through some sort of trust relationship....I played with it a bit and then went back to NDS 8, which is infinitely better in every aspect - scalability, stability, ease of use, not to mention maturity (it's been in the works since mid-90's).
As for LDAP, M$ AD has an LDAP connector, although it is "implemented a bit differently" (read: "embrace and extend").
If you are into FUD, here's what M$ has to say about their "new" invention in regards to NDS:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/server/eval/co
The rebuttal from Novell can be found here:
http://www.novell.com/products/nds/nds-rc.html
Hope this helps.
No kidding. It is 17:25CST and I am going home. Our SAP is humming, the EMCs are working well with the data mining queries, and all is right with the world. And I am going home at 17:25.
Yes, I wish that AIX were a little less weird, but I am happy that I can keep 10000 users up and happy without any problems at all, essentially without fail.
Four weeks without any more s70 power supply weirdness. So far, so good. I want some of those nice new (not yet released) s70 replacements with 24 Power3 chips, each with 8MB L2, and everything triple-redundant. Then I can use the HACMP to cluster, and connect them, like the s70s, to the SP stack (heap? jumble?) as unusually snappy nodes, and thence to the EMCs.
Life is good. I have no idea why I ever considered law school.
Good night!
tsk. tsk A slashdot reader so out of date? It was at least a month ago that MS said that the next consumer version of windows would be called millenium and based on 9x code. Notice that NT5 WS is called W2K professional and that there is no W2K consumer. And actually W2K should be a great upgrade of home machines. By then I will have a K7 (hopefully) and I can run all the cool OpenGL and media stuff without having my machine crash every few minutes.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I don't think this is accurate at all. A few years ago noone would have predicted that linux would be on the number of servers it is now, so how can this be an more reliable.
"c) It is sort of like the old saying, 'it only takes one bad apple to spoil the bunch.' I have seen how one Linux geek can convert a large number of MS people in the dorms. I have yet to see the opposite happen. "
:)
;(
Well I was a college student once myself so feel qualified to say this...
The reason is, because college students don't have real work to get done, and as such Linux is cool.
When I was in college it was the Amiga. After showing my Amiga 500 to various people they all thought it was cool and we had about 5 people on the floor who purchased them.
That doesn't mean the Amiga was ever practical for doing real work. I had to sell it when I graduated.
wow up an whole hour without the /. linux fanatics jumping on his case! Well flames away. Seriously though, I have to agree with you to a certain extent that W2K is better than Unix in some areas. I do however disagree that Solaris has less features than W2K. Plus the fact that the x86 version should not be taken as representative of Solaris in general.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
First.. plug for a book. Innumeracy. Talks about recognizing statistics that don't make sense.
:)
Second:
Lets see 24 percent of the market by revenue, but only 14 percent of the units? That's as if linux would be more expensive. That won't happen. (ie microsoft has 60% of office apps by volume but 90% by revenue, cause everyone else sells for less). Unless they mean total units, and not just for that year... which isn't what they mean. If they actually think that linux will be more costly then other server OS's, they are dead wrong. The only one still selling an expensive server version is turbolinux (I may be wrong, as they aren't selling it yet). Caldera stopped selling the Server Edition (i believe).
However, the traditional server market numbers are correct 3.4% of revenue w/ 8.1% of shipments.
Linux will always have %shipments > %revenue (unless other OS vendors start giving their OS away for free).
Thanks,
give me a high rating
Ahh, I wish I hadn't made a student comment earlier, I could have then use my moderator points to bump this AC up to being Insightful.
:(
It is unfortunately in a way that you speak the truth. The majority of Linux advocates I see are either still in college and have no comprehension of the way IS works, or work for really small companies and have unfortunately not experienced intelligent IS decisions being made.
I was in college once as well, and also worked for a small company. So cheer up guys, there is hope in this world!
Well that is unless your only hope is to see a 100% Linux world, in which case better get that Prozac.
You're using RC1, which __JUST__ shipped, and you're already giving your final opinion on it? Sounds like your company should heavily downplay your opinion on these things.
Well, it is a RELEASE CANDIDATE. That means Microsoft thinks that this code is probably about ready to SHIP. If this thing's supposed to be ready to go out the door, and it has nearly zero hardware support, I'd certainly have a hard time wanting to use it. (Not that I'd want to use NT/W2k anyway.)
Rest assured that in a couple of months when Windows 2000 ships there will be robust, high performance drivers for the top 99% or so of hardware.
Robust. High-performance. Gee, that sounds like *gasp* market-speak! Give it a rest, guy. We all know how robust the current generation of Windows drivers (not to mention the OS itself) is. (In other words, not at all.) And high-performance? Well, sure, in benchmarks. That's all that matters, right? RIGHT?
In any case I do find your assertion that it doesn't support much of "anything" interesting. Already I am fairly certain the hardware support of Windows 2000 dwarfs Linux or any other operating system.
You're on Slashdot, and you sound like you haven't used Linux. Hmm. M$ employee? Maybe. However, Linux's hardware support keeps growing. (Gee, I just built a kernel today that supports everything on a Compaq Proliant - we have a new one to play with at work. The hardware support must not be too poor.) Until you've actually used Linux, don't try to make that straight-across comparison - you don't have the right perspective.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
But on the flip side IDC is unfair to NT becuase most people buy it installed.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Point 1. Different situation. Win98 only had great benefits if you had new hardware because of support for USB, etc. Thus not to many people upgraded existing Win95 computers with Win98.
Compare this to the upgrade from Win3.1 to Win95. Win2000 is a similar leap.
Point 2. I have seen no decline in number of existing servers. I think your show your lack of understanding by pointing to netcraft. The majority of servers in this world do not exist as web servers.
Point 3. Are you saying that this is a strength of Linux? That's almost laughable as support for legacy software has never been a design criteria for Linux.
Point 4. Actually W2K is exceeding the hype. I know up until I saw Beta 3 I was pretty much of the opinion it'd be more of the same. Same with the media, but once betas began to be released the reviews have all been "Wow!".
Point 5. Win2K will likely start off with slow sales. But I don't see how you expect to leverage this into a strength for Linux.
Frankly given the lack of testing regarding Year 2000 issues which has been performed with Linux and other Open Source software I wouldn't be surprised that there won't be a huge Linux failure on 1/1/2000.
Oh, and as to your question... What's the safe bet for a platform that will thrive... Windows 2000 is your answer.
NT does not use the WDM, WDM started with Win98 and all drivers written specifically for 98 will also work on NT with the exeption of video drivers. Most vendors though will probably chose to optimize their drivers specifically for W2k though.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Everything I read is in heavy marketspeak, mostly directed towards the differences in Active Directory and NDS, rather than saying what they actually do, which is why I've remained confused despite sincere efforts to understand. I have very little experience with NT or Novell, so Unix terminology and analogies would be particularly helpful :-)
I'm a consultant, which is different than a contractor. But frankly I am more afraid of having to support Linux because I already have more than enough work deploying solutions. I don't want to have to waste my time handholding a Linux box.
Linux's TCO is much higher than NT. I don't quite understand why people keep insisting otherwise.
M$ also has a W95 patch for this. I installed on our Winboxes just in case...
Who cares if NT (errr...Win00) steals the media's attention in 2008 or whenever MS gets around to releasing their next version of boat. I will always have my Linux - MS will never be able to kill it. Linux will continue to improve and it will continue to outpace NT regardless of how many adds MS buys. So I don't really care - I'm plain sick of the media and 100% buzzword compliant companies. Linux works, it works well, I have complete control over my Linux boxen - I don't care what MS does.
\forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
Not necessarily true. Experienced MS OS users know that if they want bugfixes, they need to upgrade and update. (Not unlike experienced Linux users needing to update.) Don't think that PHBs are suddenly going to wise up and realize that buying W2K isn't a great idea.
4. W2k will not live up to the hype.
Again, this is nothing new. MS users are either used to it or are probably not going to have success with Linux. (Ahhhhh! Where's my mouse???!!!)
5. Finally, there's Y2k. Nobody's going to make any major changes to their mission-critical now, and in January there will be enough mopping-up to do that they'll delay still more.
I hear this a lot, but I think it applies more to larger, older networks than to recently-purchased stuff. Also, who says that W2K will be out in time to sell well before the end of the year?
-Imperator
Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
Predictions in the software industry are not too
reliable.
As a customer, you need to evaluated the products
that are available NOW and pay absolutely no
attention to promises and predictions...
Mark
Does anyone else find these numbers a little strange? 24% by cost = 14% by volume?? The competition here is Linux, NT, commercial Unix in various flavours, proprietory OSes and free Unixen. All but the free alternatives cost more than Linux (assuming you pay, which is not actually necessary), so how come the volume percentage is lower than the cost percentage? What am I missing? The term 'Server Applience Revenue'. The article makes a distinction between appliences and 'traditional servers'. Also, the prediction is for the cost of hardware + software sold in 2003. It appears that they are expecting the higher end applience boxes to be running linux. Later in the article, they refer to 'traditional server'. Dataquest noted that Linux will account for much less in the traditional server market. By 2003, it will represent $1.9 billion, or 3.4 percent of traditional server revenue. That represents 450,000 units, or 8.1 percent of shipments.
I feel like picking a fight with everyone who thinks they are right. - Rainmakers
Where do you want to go today?
*grins, runs, ducks projectiles*
-Imperator
Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
I pretty much expected this would happen sooner or later... All fads fade sooner or later. In this case, it's simply a matter of running out of server admins who follow whatever hype happens to be out there. The same factors that work against rapid adoption of Win2k work against continued adoption of Linux.
I do expect linux to be more than the 3.4% of the server market that they indicate in this study, though.
The only OSes ya need when it comes to servers; Linux, Solaris and IRIX.
Two things come into play:
1/ Caldera and others are creating point and click interfaces for Linux,
2/ Everybody I know who's currently in the education system (and most of the Unix admins I know) is into Linux. In three years the market will be teaming with Linux admins. In ten years those Linux admins will be making purchasing decisions.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
So IDC expects Linux to hit 40% of the server market by unit count by 2003, and Dataquest expects it to hit 8.1% of units (450K Linux units) by 2003. (Only 450K server units in 2003?)
The discrepancy is rather large here.
Explanations other than Dataquest/IDC wild-ass-guessing, anyone? Is there some other terminology or market definition difference between DQ and IDC for 'server OS units'?
Well, Bob Metcalfe predicted the total collapse of the Internet in 1995. True to form, he literally ate his own words in 1997 when he admitted his earlier mistake.
----------
In a real emergency, we would have all fled in terror, and you would not have been notified.
[would the Hurd's translators be similar, or BSD shadow filesystems? Oh, I don't even have the slightest idea of what AD is, so it probably doesn't matter]
Our network admin (for the entire enterprise, not just a "site admin") is a certified ignoramus. She's in charge of NT and Novell (with a couple Unix, etc oddballs) machines and she knows diddly. Calls the programmers in to create batch files, has never heard of Perl, still creates NT users with the GUI (even though 99% of them are identical and could be scripted), etc ad nauseum. What's even funnier is that she's gone to week-long training classes on NT, Exchange, SQL Server, etc and yet still knows nothing. (The only reason I said the above was "funny" was that I don't have to work with/for her. If I did, I would quit after a month.)
---
Put Hemos through English 101!
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
/* W2k will break some third-party software that runs fine under current NT releases. */
This is happening in the beta releases. Maybe they'll fix some of this stuff for the release, probably not.
Seen it myself, many a time. I am disgusted at the mess the industry has become. There are too many people now employed in this field who don't deserve the money they earn.
A simple illustration is a typical example of the things I have had to deal with when I worked in customer support. I gave up working in this field due to the fact that there was no-longer anyone with intelligence left to support - every customer was now staffed by mindless morons.
A year or so ago I was sent to a nameless UK organisation to install an SMTP Mail gateway to allow the existing NOS to talk to a Notes system to ease the decomissining of the existing system. It took me a couple of hours to get the gateway installed and working, due to having to patch the NOS and covert the hundreds of accoumts in the mail system into a new file format before the gateway could be installed. All that was left was to configure Notes to also use SMTP, and then go home!
The two conttacted NT/Notes admins were clueless. There followed five hours of box checking, form filling and NT reboots. Nothing worked. There was no methodical means to their actions, just attempting things in case it made any difference. My gateway was still unable to deliver mail. I suggested using TELNET to see if the SMTP process was actually listening, went straight over their heads.
I then took a look at it, and in five minutes all was up and running. They retired to the pub for the night, where they celibrated getting this gateway working, as if it was some major acheivment. And they worked for a major force in the outsourcing market.
The place I work at now is no much better - too many clueless individuals who have no idea what a command prompt is. Management is attempting to roll-out CA Unicenter, and set it up to automatically fix problems that occur, as if it is a replacement for a quality administrator.
It seems to be now that if you've got a suit and some form of paper qualification, you can easily get a job in this field. In 10 years I have never had a potential employer give me a practical test to ensure that I was capable - this is where the current job marketplace has gone totally wrong.
It's doubled approximately 28 times to get to where it is now, and at a very predictable rate. It only needs to double 4 more times to reach 60%. Given that it's doubled 28 times without much trouble, well.. you do the math.
OK, I did the math. We start with 1 user. We double that 28 times. We now have have 2^28 users or ~268Million users. We double 4 more times, that's 2^32 users. ~4Billion users. That's not 60% of the server market, that's 60% of the entire planet earth. We double once more and we have 2^33 users. Wow. We're now out of people to use linux. We'll have to start marketing to the aliens that transmeta keeps in its underground bunkers.
There is no evidence to support the claim that Linux's TCO is higher than NT - this idea comes from an interview with Ed Muth (a MS Exec) - no supprise.
Linux doesn't require a re-install every 6 months to 1 year as my experiance has been. Linux won't start BSODing, and acting strange just because you install a new product. You install it, config it once, and the it just works all the time - what a concept! Further - if a user needs something changed/installed an admin can do a remote login, make the changes, and then log out without even going to the machine. I'd be more willing to say that a properly administered Linux/UNIX network will have a lower TCO in the longrun.
\forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
I work as a developer for a company (not Microsoft) that writes Windows CE apps and dev tools. I haven't done any CE network programming, but I've seen what's there. CE supports practically all the network protocols that NT does, including IP, TCP, UDP, PPP, RAS, and more.
cpeterso
What is so hard to understand about this?
"As for W2K having more features than Solaris x86. I would hope an OS that is specifically designed to work on a type of processor would be better than an OS that is designed for a different processor and compatability was, in a sense, just thrown together last minute."
With my limited understanding of the English language, being from Texas and all, I think it is pretty clear the poster was not talking about your beloved W2K but Solaris x86. And you accuse Linux users of being quick to cry FUD! Take a look in the mirror, my friend. You will discover that you don't have to be a "Linux zealot" to be hot-headed, defensive and reactionary.
Have a nice day.
One intesting thing for you to look up is the Windows 40 day bug, or something like that. Basically if you were able to keep a Windows machine up for 40 days straight without rebooting it would crash because of over-writing something. It wasn't discovered for several years because NO ONE WAS ABLE TO KEEP A Windows MACHINE UP THAT LONG!
Yes, that's true, although don't forget that's Windows 95/98, _not_ Windows NT/2000.
The bug is in the OS's tick counter, which is only a 32 bit counter... after ~47 days, the counter suffers an overrun, and the machine crashes. This has been fixed in 98 SE, I believe.
Cheers
Alastair
-- "I believe the human being and the fish can coexist peacefully." - George W. Bush, 29 September 2000
I know that this is totally offtopic but isn't your sig ("I see that I have turned my eyes to a treasure no less dear than the treasure of Thingol that Beren once desired.") what Elassar (Strider) says about Arwen when he falls in love for her in "The Lord Of The Rings"?
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
Funny, I do not know any Linux "FUDders" at all. And what the hell does the pay of NT people have to do with market growth. Using your logic, the use of mainframes must be growing exponentially judging by the salaries of those who run them.
And speaking of pay, give the certification industry another year or two and certified "engineers" will be hurting. Giving just about anyone with a 3rd-grade reading level and the ability to use a No.2 pencil a piece of paper declaring them "engineers" is a ploy to make administering a certain manufacturer's software appear cheap. Just another club to use against their rivals' systems. Supposed lower TCO.
We have three of these "engineers" to admin 80 desktops and two servers (file & print, crappy VB app). Never mind the time of other employees who are always having to take time out of their busy days to show them how to do basic things like striping a disk. Yeah, that is lower TCO alright.
You can't beat free! Of course you need someone knowledgable enough to use the product, but I didn't know anything about Linux a year ago, and now feel comfortable with it (I'm still learning though)!
>Who cares if.......yadi yadi yada
Must be nice to be independently wealthy or self employed. The rest of us have to 'speak' to someone and those someones aren't technical enough to know what is a Microsoft lie/press release and what is REALLY going on.
2008 would be nice for a NT 5 release date but I think you're dreaming. Microsoft will likely ship it within the next 6-9 months and release fixes shortly after to stop the bleeding. They can't afford to let Linux run the press as it has and they can't pull a 3 year delay like Win95. They need the product shipping. I think you're right in that it will be a flop because of the bloat.
In the Internet age.............
Linux: A fighter jet is far more usefull because of its speed...
NT: A tank with 12" thick armor, which only covers 60% of the vehicle, will be useless even though it might keep lumbering along IF the armor is hit....NT
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I, on the other hand, prefer to be more cautious in my predictions. I think Microsoft will successfully leverage y2k panic-buying into massive sales for Windows 2000. The press will gleefully report this as the death of Linux. It will be, as with NT 4, two whole years before there is significant media coverage of the shortcomings of W2k. By the time this happens though, the press will have caught on to the fact that W2k hasn't put a dint in the exponential growth of Linux, and Microsoft will have seen the writing on the wall and begun the transition into a respectable team player in the software industry.
fish and pipes
That is what I like to see. Any *nix in the server place is great, bonus if open source
Dataquest isn't really a group I consider a purveyor of reliable information. Just look at their past predictions on the growth of NT (They've been wrong a LOT). For a long time they were considered a mouthpiece for MS products.
It's not that this is not good news for Linux users -- it's definately a sign that the winds of public opinion are changing direction. It's just that Dataquest reports tend to be reflective of what is trendy and buzzworthy, not necessarily what is statistically sound.
Eviscerati.Org: All Hail the Eviscerati
Not a day goes by without my reading (me reading?) about x having y% of the z market by the year (2000 + w). I'd love to have the time/inclination to keep a database of these predictions and find out if any of them turned out to be actually true.
When was the last time you read a press release that said 'five years ago we said this. We were right'?
These articles all have misleading titles. If you read the actual contents of the articles, they explicitly say:
... Dataquest noted that Linux will account for much less in the traditional server market. By 2003, it will represent $1.9 billion, or 3.4 percent of traditional server revenue. That represents 450,000 units, or 8.1 percent of shipments.
It estimates Linux servers will account for $3.8 billion, or 24 percent, of the worldwide server appliance revenue by 2003. By volume, that represents 14 percent, or 1.1 million units.
A server appliance is not a "traditional" server. What operating systems are used in server appliances? Probably *BSD, Linux, NT, and a tiny fraction of proprietary others? So in four years, which operating systems are used in the other 76% of server applicances? Which operating systems are used in the other 92% of "traditional" servers?
cpeterso
Most predictions that are done are rarely close unless they are not very specific. It would be nice if Linux could capture that much of the market by 2003. But unless people make the major shift from one OS to the next I don't see that happening.
(I have to admit though, switching from NT to Linux is worth it, but it is very time consuming..once your on one OS, most people stick with it.)
"Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
Does anybody else find it the least bit amusing that the C|NET article (link from summary @ linuxworld) includes a quote along the lines of "Interest in Linux will fade when Microsoft ships its first service pack for Windows 2000 server."?
Why not have an OS that comes out with patches soon enough to make a difference?
I think that the people who make the server platform decisions know enough to realize that Windows 2000 is not the ideal route, and will attempt to phase it out even before it arrives.
"I see that I have turned my eyes to a treasure no less dear than the treasure of Thingol that Beren once desired."
Does anyone else find these numbers a little strange? 24% by cost = 14% by volume?? The competition here is Linux, NT, commercial Unix in various flavours, proprietory OSes and free Unixen.
All but the free alternatives cost more than Linux (assuming you pay, which is not actually necessary), so how come the volume percentage is lower than the cost percentage? What am I missing?
chaos theory
nonlinearity
dumb luck
do these mean _anything_ to people who believe such foolish predictions about future growth?
The article submitted to slashdot is somewhat misleading. The 24% number is for black box appliances. We're not talking about serious big iron. More like workgroup web servers. Time to fire up the vi vs. emacs flame fest!
If you read the C|NET article, you will find that the study refers to the "server appliance" market, not the "server market". This refers to out-of-the-box server "solutions" like the NetWinder.
The article also says that Dataquest predicts Linux-based systems will account for 8.1 percent of the "traditional server" market. I think that's underrating Linux by quite a bit.
Not that big of a deal
"Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
I think that data is off by a little bit.
First, I think Linux already accounts for at least 20% of the server market -- it's just not openly shared. It's the kind of thing that engineers sneak past dim-witted IT managers.
Second,
Linux, developed in 1991 by Linus Torvalds, then a student at the University of Helsinki in Finland, is considered a more stable version of the older Unix operating system.
Shouldn't that be, " More Stable than Windows NT ? " Because Linux is DEFINATELY more stable than NT, but I thought it was pretty much "On Par" with the other Unices.
And Finally,
" Linux will continue to grow as an operating system deployed on new server hardware, but much of the hype surrounding Linux will fade once Microsoft ships a service pack for Windows 2000 server, " Brown said.
Let's not forget that the so-called " Linux-Hype " survived the release of Windows 98®, so I'm pretty sure the Hype of Windows2K isn't enough to smother the well deserved credit and attention that Linux receives.
I dont care about how many linux servers there will be by 2003. I care about how many linux servers i can install today. they all will still be there by 2003 (*grin*)
Reasoning: More NT "admins" couldn't handle a command line to save their lives. Sure, it may be faster and more powerful and, on occassion, even a more simple way to handle things (compare setting up Apache vs. IIS), but just the thought of doing anything beyond clicking on radio boxes will scare the hell out of 'em. Sort of an advanced technophobia -- an extension of the people who are terrified to even use a computer lest they screw something up.
Sad, really. There are a lot of NT admins (not all, and not even the majority, but still a lot) who should feel guilty about picking up their paychecks. I mean, if a company pays you to come up with computing solutions, it seems really unfair to rule out an entire line of products and possibilities just because you don't know enough to really do your job.
Of course, this article was about appliance servers, but we'll ignore that for now.
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Unless CNET was in a hurry to get some copy out, this isn't much of a report. 25% of server-appliance sales (not servers, not server sales, just preconfigured colorful boxes, e.g. the netwinder). I took more issue with the "traditional server sales" paragraph, such as it was:
"...Linux will account for much less in the traditional server market... 3.4% of traditional server revenue." Well, duh -- Linux servers aren't sold as such, they're sold as blank machines and one installs Linux from elsewhere. Take the 3-5 million servers kicking Linux around out there (assume they represent the same growth rate as between now and DQ's 2003; probably wrong, but skip that for a moment). DataQuest's 450k servers over a $1.9B market share give a server price average of $4222; if this is 3.4% of total revenue, then the total market is $55.83B. Back to the 3-5 million servers (suppose 4); at $4222 each one finds $16.88B, or 30.2%.
All that said, the 4 million could be way off, and server-sales figures are a miserable estimate of relative product performance except where marketroids are concerned.
http://www.sunworld.com/swol-04-1999/swol-04-idcli nux.html
IDC said that the Linux server market was 17.2% in 1998 and predicted an annual growth rate of 25% until 2003. That means that by 2002, Linux would be more than 40% of the server market.
Given that Linux makes A LOT more sense than NT or commercial Unixes for 'server appliances' (no per-seat license fees, no duplication license fees, and open source adaptability), I think Linux will be a considerably larger part of the market than 23% by 2003.
How can anyone make an accurate prediction about server status years from now before Win 2K comes out? No one knows what kind of support that will garner...
Have a Happy.
Well, to be honest - I use IRIX only as a workstation OS... I was thinking of multimedia serving and such.
That's the only thing I've had to scrounge for drivers with so far though (mostly because everything else in this Compaq is stock stuff.)
- A.P.
--
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Not true...
From everything I've heard/read, Win2k is going to be marketed as BOTH. Why?!!!
Oh joy, I can't wait to do tech support for all the home-pc owners who installed 2k as an upgrade for 98!
The Divine Creatrix in a Mortal Shell that stays Crunchy in Milk
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
"4. W2k will not live up to the hype.
Again, this is nothing new. MS users are either used to it or are probably not going to have success with Linux. (Ahhhhh! Where's my mouse???!!!)"
Same place it is on your Windows machine. Get current and check out KDE and GNOME.
"5. Finally, there's Y2k. Nobody's going to make any major changes to their mission-critical now, and in January there will be enough mopping-up to do that they'll delay still more.
I hear this a lot, but I think it applies more to larger, older networks than to recently-purchased stuff. Also, who says that W2K will be out in
time to sell well before the end of the year?"
I don't know of ANY business in my area (huge corporation or tiny mom 'n pop shop) that is planning on making major changes (such as upgrading their OS) before next year.
We're an NT shop where I work, and there's a small betting pool going as to how extremely NT4 (with Y2K updates) will fail on New Year's. I have absolutely no confidence in the Win9x family to survive the change.
"4. W2k will not live up to the hype. Again, this is nothing new. MS users are either used to it or are probably not going to have success with Linux. (Ahhhhh! Where's my mouse???!!!)" Same place it is on your Windows machine. Get current and check out KDE and GNOME. "5. Finally, there's Y2k. Nobody's going to make any major changes to their mission-critical now, and in January there will be enough mopping-up to do that they'll delay still more. I hear this a lot, but I think it applies more to larger, older networks than to recently-purchased stuff. Also, who says that W2K will be out in time to sell well before the end of the year?" I don't know of ANY business in my area (huge corporation or tiny mom 'n pop shop) that is planning on making major changes (such as upgrading their OS) before next year. We're an NT shop where I work, and there's a small betting pool going as to how extremely NT4 (with Y2K updates) will fail on New Year's. I have absolutely no confidence in the Win9x family to survive the change.
- A.P.
--
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
hey there are companies out there that are trying to make linux more mainstream. one of them is Buypogo.com that is starting to sell $299 and $599 linux PC's.
It'll take companies like them who will take on the next phase of widespread linux acceptance. Anything other than MS is fine with me, actually!
check out their site. http://www.buypogo.com
w2k is supposed to be the "linux killer". i beleive it will have a decent personal web server built in.
as M$ did with the browser, they will slowly take everything using their incredible hold on the desktop as a lever.
as ellison of oracle says : pc's are really just extremely poor implementations of a database.
expect to see a stronger division between M$ clients and servers, with increased bundling of web servers and db's as they put the bullet through the heads of all other s/w vendors.
the possible savior of linux will come from the third world, as hackers in asia, europe and africa sift through the code. america will probably lose out as M$ exerts more pressure on industry and government to go pure-M$, leaving less professional unix gooroos available to bang on the code here.
Yeah, my "boss" is such a person. Completely clueless, and he calls me 20-30x a day asking me how to do all manner of stupid shit. Lately I've been very short with him. What an idiot.
support gun control: take guns from cops
You're using RC1, which __JUST__ shipped, and you're already giving your final opinion on it? Sounds like your company should heavily downplay your opinion on these things.
Note that the majority of device drivers are in the beta stages with the hardware manufacturers right now and they don't want the nightmare of a million support calls...hence they don't come with any of the Windows 2000 betas or RCs until the final retail box. The Soundblaster Live! drivers just made it into RC1 yet Creative Labs had them far earlier.
Rest assured that in a couple of months when Windows 2000 ships there will be robust, high performance drivers for the top 99% or so of hardware.
In any case I do find your assertion that it doesn't support much of "anything" interesting. Already I am fairly certain the hardware support of Windows 2000 dwarfs Linux or any other operating system.
"Funny how the first Service Pack for Windows 2000 will (somehow) reduce interest in Linux in the year 2003."
Many major purchasers hold off buying new products until at least one service pack, assuming that has taken care of the majority of the serious flaws.
"They probably already have a release date for SP1 less than six months after Windows 2000. A "silent" SP1 was released for IE4 just one month after IE4.0 was released. "
Isn't it a supposed super great thing about Linux that bugs get fixed instantly and perpetually? If that's the case then what's the problem with MS expediting bug fixes?
Isn't it a supposed super great thing about Linux that bugs get fixed instantly and perpetually? If that's the case then what's the problem with MS expediting bug fixes?
It's not a problem that they're EXPEDITING bug fixes. The problem is that they're planning for a rollout of bug fixes AFTER people will supposedly have bought many copies of their software. They must not care about their company's reputation much anymore, if they're willing to outright admit that they have bugs "but we're going to fix them... AFTER the product ships." Personally, I'd want to take the time to fix major bugs (and as many minor ones as is possible) BEFORE ship time.
But then, I do care about my reputation.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
I know i respect someone who uses words like fuckface and leaves no name. BTW it's fuck face.
DataQuest has been wrong so many times that they look like they get their numbers from Microsoft. The fact that the story has so many errors or inaccuracies tells me that this may just be another Microsoft funded report. Note that they say Linux hype will fade after service pack #1 ships for Windows NT v5/2000.....
Why don't we all just use what works best today and let the future unfold itself instead of letting Microsofts PR decide the future?
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I won't be recommending Win2K to my company anytime soon. It's more aggravating than NT 4 is, which says a lot.
- A.P.
--
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
The last time Microsoft had some REAL competition in the OS sector was in 1994 when IBM dumped $200Million on marketing of OS/2 Warp v3. Microsoft was waaay late with Windows 95 and to keep its market they spent over $500Million on a worldwide campaign to tell the world where they wanted them to go. Windows 98 had nothing close to even IBMs silly ads. Stealth marketing because they wanted most to be going to Windows NT. Well, that is very late and has competition from Linux. I predict NT v5/2000 is going to get a pretty big sendoff. Will the press swallow that pill? If they do, Linux will be hurt in the eyes of the unanointed (read IT/IS Management) by not having mindshare. History lesson concluded. :)
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Can Windows 2000 use "old" NT4 device drivers? I thought Windows 2000 used the WDM (Windows Driver Model?) that Windows 98 uses, but I can't imagine Windows 98 and 2000 supporting binary compatible device drivers!
cpeterso
So then by 2004 it will have 120% of the market?
I, for one, expect Windows 2000 to flop rather nicely in the server market. Here's why:
....)
1. Anyone who has been paying attention to the past few Microsoft releases would know that they have been increasingly less popular than expectations predicted. IIRC, MS shipped about half as many Windows 98 upgrades as they expected in the first few months; 98 became dominant not on the strength of upgrades but on the strength of the growth of the new-PC market. The idea that people need to upgrade just for the sake of upgrading is declining.
2. NT itself has peaked and is in decline in some server markets, notably the Web server market. Microsoft Web servers have been declining in market share for months on the Netcraft survey of Web servers. People are realizing that Microsoft systems are not reliable and scalable, much less enterprise-ready. Why buy more of the same?
3. W2k will break some third-party software that runs fine under current NT releases. This is just how MS operates. Sites which expect not to have catastrophic failures will wait and test W2k for some time before deploying it as a replacement for current NT systems, as the Gartner Group recommended several months ago. In the meantime, sites which rush ahead and move to W2k will have the usual early-adopter problems that any new system has. This will generate horror stories which will reduce other sites' interest in W2k. Vendors of Unix- and Linux-based systems will, if they know what they're doing, capitalize on these failures. (They may even FUD Microsoft back, though of course I wouldn't support that
4. W2k will not live up to the hype. MS has already (quietly) admitted that the widely-hyped Active Directory is not a directory at all (in the sense of X.500 and LDAP) but rather a flat pseudo-directory. Expect more of the same.
5. Finally, there's Y2k. Nobody's going to make any major changes to their mission-critical now, and in January there will be enough mopping-up to do that they'll delay still more.
Windows 2000 may well be a good deal better than NT. But will people gamble their businesses on it to the degree they've gambled them on NT? I think we can expect not.
Meanwhile, Linux-based systems are doing nothing but growing. What's the safe bet if you want to be using a platform that will continue to grow, survive, and thrive over the next ten years?
Funny how the first Service Pack for Windows 2000 will (somehow) reduce interest in Linux in the year 2003. I read that Microsoft is targeting November 1999 for releasing Windows 2000. I bet Microsoft is triaging bugs like crazy to release Windows 2000 ASAP. They already know what bugs will be shipped now and fixed later. They probably already have a release date for SP1 less than six months after Windows 2000. A "silent" SP1 was released for IE4 just one month after IE4.0 was released.
cpeterso