| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
The Ghost In The Machine
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:29 am Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
 |
|
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, amicus_curious
<ACDC@sti.net>
wrote
on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:53:20 -0400
<48b7105a$0$23210$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com>:
| Quote: |
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
news:k6bjo5-mc5.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, amicus_curious
ACDC@sti.net
wrote
on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:24:26 -0400
48b6fb84$0$23240$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com>:
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
message
news:g77jo5-9n4.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
Total: $13.2, leaving $1B unaccounted for.
Well, $13.9B minus $13.2B is closer to $700M and that is doubtless sales
of
Netware based servers.
http://www.itjungle.com/bns/bns083007-story01.html
suggests Novell's Workgroup unit (containing Netware)
barely had $82.9 million in 2007. Total Novell sales is
only $243.1 million.
That's a quarterly figure. Also the sales of servers is a multiple of that.
|
Of course it is. Does it matter? Divide all by 4, and one still gets
relative percentages. Or are you suggesting I should use $60.8M
or $972.4M? The latter at least gets close to Linux sales.
| Quote: | For Microsoft's ~$1B of software, the server sales were $5.1B so figure the
ratio at 5:1 and see where Netware and Groupware times 5 accounts for the
missing server revenue.
|
And why would I need to do that? At best, I can compensate by
multiplying $5.1B to $25.5B.
| Quote: |
Linus has cannibalized Unix to some extent, but Windows has devastated
Netware.
|
And is trouncing Linux servers as well, as you can plainly
see, even without the 5:1 correction.
--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #992398129:
void f(unsigned u) { if(u < 0) ... }
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
The Ghost In The Machine
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:57 am Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, JEDIDIAH
<jedi@nomad.mishnet>
wrote
on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:03:41 -0500
<slrngbe85t.9fo.jedi@nomad.mishnet>:
| Quote: | On 2008-08-28, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
7 <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> writes:
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:39:41 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
http://www.techspot.com/news/31405-linux-server-market-exceeds-13.html
quote
Published: August 28, 2008, 11:18 AM EST
Linux has always been better received in the server market than the
desktop market, where it's compatibility with UNIX and POSIX-compliance
has made it a great fit for companies who aren't about to shell out for
UNIX licensing. The past year along has seen significant Linux server
growth, which now accounts for over 13% of the market.
They share this with many top players, including Microsoft, who has more
than a third of the total market. While UNIX-like operating systems
still make up the lion's share of all servers active in the world,
vendors who support and sell Linux will likely have to find new ways to
erode Microsoft market share rather than others, or they risk stalling
growth. </quote
I suspect the number is even higher.
Linux makes a good cost effective server operating system.
The numbers are about revenue, not about count of machines
Exactly! And that information is carefully concealed!!!!
Last I heard, more than 50% of all servers are running Linux.
Dont talk such utter nonsense.
Wake up to the realities and maybe you can improve things. Exchange is
gaining market share. Sad but true. And until the collaberative tools
under Linux improve it will continue on that trend.
This is just more nonsense along the lines the article of faith
that Windows or msoffice are in their current dominant position due
to any technical characteristics they possess.
|
One of those technical characteristics being brand name recognition.
| Quote: |
I suspect you can't even name the alternatives, nevermind criticize
them. I am also sure you can't describe the actual problems with OO
either.
|
The main problem with OpenOffice is that nobody knows about it. ;-)
| Quote: |
This is just the ancient and nebulous "anything not MS is inferior".
|
Anything not MS *is* inferior, with regards to sales
revenue. Of course that's rather orthogonal to actual
technical superiority, but there are three questions, which
might illustrate how stupid the system (no, not computer --
I'm referring to the worldwide trade/capitalism system)
actually might be:
[1] How important is sales revenue of OO versus MSO to
the business selling the product?
[2] How important is sales revenue of OO versus MSO to
the purchaser of the product?
[3] How important is sales revenue of OO versus MSO to
the actual end user?
See the disconnect here? It's a problem.
Ideally, of course, competition would force purchasers to
shop around, looking for the product that best fits their
user's needs.
--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #889123:
std::vector<...> v; for(int i = 0; i < v.size(); i++) v.erase(v.begin() + i);
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Linonut
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:58 am Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
* Hadron peremptorily fired off this memo:
| Quote: | Last I heard, more than 50% of all servers are running Linux.
Dont talk such utter nonsense.
|
Well, depends what you mean by "server". I have two servers running
right now, but they're also workstations. And they're at home, not in a
business (though I have a server running at work, too).
| Quote: | Wake up to the realities and maybe you can improve things. Exchange is
gaining market share. Sad but true. And until the collaberative tools
under Linux improve it will continue on that trend.
|
I tend to doubt that even an exact Exchange equivalent would put much
dent in the real Exchange. Exchange is just another example of how a
"business" black hole keeps getting more massive. You got a lot of
Windows clients, Mr. CTO? Well then you need Windows servers, too!
http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/2002/11/30.html
This link quotes from a source that, alas, now comes up 403 Forbidden:
Just as in a Bose-Einstein condensate all particles crowd into the
lowest energy level, leaving the rest of the energy levels
unpopulated, in some networks the fittest node could theoretically
grab all the links...It destroys the hierarchy of hubs characterizing
the scale-free topology...And there is a network in which we cannot
fail to notice one node that carries the signature of a Bose-Einstein
condensate. The node is called Microsoft.
--
Freedom from incrustation of grime is contiguous to rectitude. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
DFS
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:08 am Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:39:41 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
http://www.techspot.com/news/31405-linux-server-market-exceeds-13.html
quote
Published: August 28, 2008, 11:18 AM EST
Linux has always been better received in the server market than the
desktop market, where it's compatibility with UNIX and
POSIX-compliance has made it a great fit for companies who aren't
about to shell out for UNIX licensing. The past year along has seen
significant Linux server growth, which now accounts for over 13% of
the market.
They share this with many top players, including Microsoft, who has
more than a third of the total market. While UNIX-like operating
systems still make up the lion's share of all servers active in the
world, vendors who support and sell Linux will likely have to find
new ways to erode Microsoft market share rather than others, or they
risk stalling growth. </quote
I suspect the number is even higher.
Linux makes a good cost effective server operating system.
|
I thought it was much higher, like 33% or so. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Christopher Hunter
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:09 am Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
| Quote: | The number is higher than 13 percent (my mistake BTW) but no where near 50
percent.
|
An explanation to the hard of thinking:
The metric used to determine "market share" was /revenue/ which is an
obvious nonsense when you're considering a (mostly) free operating system.
I did about 400 server installs last year - /none/ of them used MS products
(because they don't work properly), and only four of them used "paid-for"
operating systems (all Red Hat). The rest were mostly CentOS.
C. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Moshe Goldfarb.
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:09 am Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:48:35 +0100, Christopher Hunter wrote:
| Quote: | Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
The number is higher than 13 percent (my mistake BTW) but no where near 50
percent.
An explanation to the hard of thinking:
The metric used to determine "market share" was /revenue/ which is an
obvious nonsense when you're considering a (mostly) free operating system.
I did about 400 server installs last year - /none/ of them used MS products
(because they don't work properly), and only four of them used "paid-for"
operating systems (all Red Hat). The rest were mostly CentOS.
C.
|
Idiot.....
An explanation to the hard of reading comprehension:
I realized my mistake, admitted above BTW, and was replying to a moron who
was talking percentages. IOW the discussion changed from the original post.
BTW who cares what you installed?
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
JEDIDIAH
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:16 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
On 2008-08-29, Christopher Hunter <chrisehunter@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
The number is higher than 13 percent (my mistake BTW) but no where near 50
percent.
An explanation to the hard of thinking:
The metric used to determine "market share" was /revenue/ which is an
obvious nonsense when you're considering a (mostly) free operating system.
|
....I think at one time Redhat had as one of it's stated goals, the shrinking
of the server market in terms of total revenue per year. This still may be
the case.
So basing "marketshare" on revenue is potentially quite stupid.
There's a wide gap in pricing and price models between each of the
classes of servers in that "study": Free Unix, Commercial Unix, Windows
and Mainframes.
| Quote: |
I did about 400 server installs last year - /none/ of them used MS products
(because they don't work properly), and only four of them used "paid-for"
operating systems (all Red Hat). The rest were mostly CentOS.
C.
|
--
It is not true that Microsoft doesn't innovate.
They brought us the email virus.
In my Atari days, such a notion would have |||
been considered a complete absurdity. / | \
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Matt
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:
| Quote: | But since it's by revenue and not number of machines, it means that if
Microsoft doubled their price, their market share would go up!
Meanwhile, it would be interesting to compute the dollar value lost to
Microsoft by those Linux machines, assuming they could get them.
|
A naive estimate of that dollar value would be the number of Linux
servers times the price of a copy of Windows Server. But the true loss
is much larger than that: If Linux weren't available for free, MS would
be charging a lot more per copy than they do now.
That phenomenon is seen in MS's dumping of desktop Windows into
third-world and low-cost-hardware markets. Next we'll see them
practically giving Windows away in the developed world: first to
schools, then to governments, then to big companies. By then they might
only be able to get the small-time Windows addict to pay, and improved
migration tools will cause even that market to shrink. Antitrust
regulators will hinder their attempts at user lockin.
They will run short of money to develop Windows and Office. They will
have difficulty adding uncalled-for features or secret, changing,
complex APIs. Complexities they previously introduced as barriers will
turn out to be a big burden on them. But they may be in a better
position than anybody to help people migrate to FOSS. And there is the
possibility of releasing their own software as FOSS and supporting it as
Red Hat and Suse now support Linux. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
DFS
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:39 am Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
Ignoramus23257 wrote:
| Quote: | At work, we removed Microsoft Windows on 22 servers. Replaced it with
Ubuntu linux (server edition, no GUI). Guess how this shows up on the
"server market share" numbers? That's right, they count as Windows
servers.
i
P.S. The marginal cost of administration on these linux servers, that
is, the extra effort to manage them individually, is zero. They are
all managed by scripts and system administrators do absolutely nothing
for each individual server. This is in contrast to Windows, where
people have to go from machine to machine and click buttons.
|
That's 'cause you have ignorant admins. Even I, a desktop jockey, know you
can script the heck out of Windows servers. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rex Ballard
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:00 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
On Aug 28, 8:39 pm, "Ezekiel" <z...@zekerules.com> wrote:
| Quote: | http://www.techspot.com/news/31405-linux-server-market-exceeds-13.html
quote
Published: August 28, 2008, 11:18 AM EST
Linux has always been better received in the server market than the desktop
market, where it's compatibility with UNIX and POSIX-compliance has made it
a great fit for companies who aren't about to shell out for UNIX licensing.
The past year along has seen significant Linux server growth, which now
accounts for over 13% of the market.
They share this with many top players, including Microsoft, who has more
than a third of the total market. While UNIX-like operating systems still
make up the lion's share of all servers active in the world, vendors who
support and sell Linux will likely have to find new ways to erode Microsoft
market share rather than others, or they risk stalling growth.
/quote
** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com** |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rex Ballard
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:20 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
On Aug 28, 8:39 pm, "Ezekiel" <z...@zekerules.com> wrote:
| Quote: | http://www.techspot.com/news/31405-linux-server-market-exceeds-13.html
quote
Published: August 28, 2008, 11:18 AM EST
Linux has always been better received in the server market than the desktop
market, where it's compatibility with UNIX and POSIX-compliance has made it
a great fit for companies who aren't about to shell out for UNIX licensing.
The past year along has seen significant Linux server growth, which now
accounts for over 13% of the market.
|
Keep in mind that this is market share by REVENUE, not unit volumes.
And
this is all revenue, including hardware, software licenses, access
licenses (CALS),
and/or Enterprise licenses. Given that the average Windows 2003
Enterprise Edition
system would cost 6-15 times what a similarly configured Linux system
would cost,
it's not such a surprising development. That could put Linux at over
50% in terms of
unit volumes.
I also found it interesting that Z-Series got 11.8% of the market, and
each Z-Series
can run a as many as a thousand virtualized Linux servers (which were
probably NOT
counted in the previous number).
The other thing is that virtualization, 8 core blades, and integration
of blade servers to
storage arrays may have further increased the number of virtual Linux
servers per physical
server. This would also substantially lower the price per server,
since hardware costs could
be spread across 4-8 virtual servers per blade. That would be another
advantage of Linux
making efficient use of smaller footprints, allowing more virtual
servers per blade, compared
to Windows 2003 or Windows 2008 which has a much larger footprint, has
much larger CPU
and memory demands, meaning fewer virtual servers per blade.
| Quote: | They share this with many top players, including Microsoft, who has more
than a third of the total market.
|
Again, this is a third by revenue. If Linux costs $1000 per
virtualized server, and Windows costs $5,000 per virtualized server, a
13% to 34% could translate to 50% Linux and 20% Windows by volume. If
I have $13 million at $1000 per virtualized server for Linux, that's
about 13,000 servers. $34 million at $5,000 per server would be just
under 7 million servers. That would mean Linux would have almost
double the total number of virtualized servers.
See also
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS21399008
Top-Level Server Market Findings
* Linux servers posted year-over-year revenue growth of 10.0%, for
a total of $1.9 billion in the quarter. Linux servers now represent
13.4% of all server revenue, up from 9.4% a year ago.
* Unix servers experienced year-over-year revenue growth of 7.7%.
The high-end enterprise segment of the Unix market was strongest of
all three segments (volume, midrange enterprise and high-end
enterprise), as worldwide Unix revenues totaled $4.6 billion in 2Q08,
representing 32.7% of quarterly server spending. Unix servers account
for the second-largest segment of spending, by operating system in the
worldwide server market.
* Microsoft Windows server revenue was $5.1 billion in 2Q08,
showing 1.7% year-over-year growth and comprising 36.5% of all server
revenue in the quarter. Windows servers account for the single largest
segment of spending, by operating system, in the worldwide server
market.
* IBM's System z servers running z/OS experienced the second
consecutive quarter of positive revenue growth, with 31.7% year-over-
year growth in 2Q08 to $1.6 billion. IBM mainframes running the z/OS
operating system accounted for 11.8% of all server revenue in 2Q08.
"IBM regained the top spot in Unix market share on the strength of its
Power-based System p and merged Power Systems families, growing
revenue nearly 25.7% in the quarter and gaining 5.1% points in year-
over-year comparisons," said Steve Josselyn, research director for
Enterprise Platforms at IDC. "Sun took second position with 31.1%
share, posting a drop of 5.6% points from a year ago, and HP rounds
out the top three with 25.8% share and a gain of 1% point. Overall,
the Unix market remains a significant source of revenue and
competition among the top three suppliers."
> ** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com** |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Clogwog
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:36 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
"Christopher Hunter" <chrisehunter@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> schreef in
bericht news:7ZMtk.37564$W71.30133@newsfe12.ams2...
| Quote: | Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
The number is higher than 13 percent (my mistake BTW) but no where near
50
percent.
An explanation to the hard of thinking:
The metric used to determine "market share" was /revenue/ which is an
obvious nonsense when you're considering a (mostly) free operating system.
I did about 400 server installs last year - /none/ of them used MS
products
(because they don't work properly),
|
lol !, tell your boss to fire your fucking arse and hire some cunt who knows
what they're doing.
| Quote: | and only four of them used "paid-for"
operating systems (all Red Hat). The rest were mostly CentOS.
C.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Hadron
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 6:40 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> writes:
| Quote: | On Aug 28, 8:39Â pm, "Ezekiel" <z...@zekerules.com> wrote:
http://www.techspot.com/news/31405-linux-server-market-exceeds-13.html
quote
Published: August 28, 2008, 11:18 AM EST
Linux has always been better received in the server market than the desktop
market, where it's compatibility with UNIX and POSIX-compliance has made it
a great fit for companies who aren't about to shell out for UNIX licensing.
The past year along has seen significant Linux server growth, which now
accounts for over 13% of the market.
Keep in mind that this is market share by REVENUE, not unit volumes.
And
this is all revenue, including hardware, software licenses, access
licenses (CALS),
and/or Enterprise licenses. Given that the average Windows 2003
Enterprise Edition
system would cost 6-15 times what a similarly configured Linux system
would cost,
|
Links to these ridiculous claims please. Not forgetting to factor in
cost of administration and HW. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Moshe Goldfarb.
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 9:15 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:40:20 +0200, Hadron wrote:
| Quote: | Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> writes:
On Aug 28, 8:39 pm, "Ezekiel" <z...@zekerules.com> wrote:
http://www.techspot.com/news/31405-linux-server-market-exceeds-13.html
quote
Published: August 28, 2008, 11:18 AM EST
Linux has always been better received in the server market than the desktop
market, where it's compatibility with UNIX and POSIX-compliance has made it
a great fit for companies who aren't about to shell out for UNIX licensing.
The past year along has seen significant Linux server growth, which now
accounts for over 13% of the market.
Keep in mind that this is market share by REVENUE, not unit volumes.
And
this is all revenue, including hardware, software licenses, access
licenses (CALS),
and/or Enterprise licenses. Given that the average Windows 2003
Enterprise Edition
system would cost 6-15 times what a similarly configured Linux system
would cost,
Links to these ridiculous claims please. Not forgetting to factor in
cost of administration and HW.
|
My head is still spinning from Rex's last post.
This one has it spinning even faster...
He reminds me of an insurance salesman that used to come to my parents
house once in a while.
He told these awful jokes and interspersed them with horror stories of
people dying without insurance etc.
I was a kid at the time but even then I knew this guy was a real piker.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rex Ballard
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 11:43 pm Post subject: Re: Linux server market exceeds 13% |
|
|
On Aug 31, 4:40 pm, Hadron <hadronqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Rex Ballard <rex.ball...@gmail.com> writes:
On Aug 28, 8:39 pm, "Ezekiel" <z...@zekerules.com> wrote:
http://www.techspot.com/news/31405-linux-server-market-exceeds-13.html
quote
Published: August 28, 2008, 11:18 AM EST
Linux has always been better received in the server market than the desktop
market, where it's compatibility with UNIX and POSIX-compliance has made it
a great fit for companies who aren't about to shell out for UNIX licensing.
The past year along has seen significant Linux server growth, which now
accounts for over 13% of the market.
Keep in mind that this is market share by REVENUE, not unit volumes.
And this is all revenue, including hardware, software licenses, access
licenses (CALS), and/or Enterprise licenses.
|
Pricing for server and client licenses.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/pricing.mspx
(estimate based on 1000 CALS to get equivalent for 1 Linux server).
Remember that prices here are Per Processor Core.
http://www.google.com/products?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=Red+Hat+Linux+Enterprise+Server+prices&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title
Remember, there are no Client Access Licenses with Red Hat Linux.
Linux TCO - vs Microsoft Fast [with the] Facts
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Breaking/TCO-study-Linux-wins-again/2004/12/13/1102786990788.html
| Quote: | Given that the average Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
system would cost 6-15 times what a similarly configured Linux system
would cost,
Links to these ridiculous claims please. Not forgetting to factor in
cost of administration and HW. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
