Microsoft increases share of Server market

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Mickey Mouse, Aug 28, 2007.

  1. Mickey Mouse

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    Whether from Linux open-source technology or virtualization, many have
    predicted the demise of Microsoft's traditional software business. So far
    the company that built its house on Windows isn't caving in to soothsayers.

    The latest figures from consulting firms indicate that although Linux sales
    are growing by number of servers shipped with the operating system, the
    software is losing ground to Microsoft's Windows.

    Microsoft picked up 2 percentage points, bringing its market share to 67.1%
    of servers shipped during the second quarter, according to data from
    Gartner. Of 2.06 million servers shipped overall, nearly 1.4 million came
    preloaded with proprietary OS. That works out to an extra 77,650
    Microsoft-based servers sold during the quarter, year over year.

    Linux accounted for 22.8% of server shipments, down from 23.1% the year
    before.

    http://www.thestreet.com/s/microsof...ndows/newsanalysis/itmanagement/10376540.html
    Mickey Mouse, Aug 28, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mickey Mouse

    Allistar Guest

    Mickey Mouse wrote:

    > Whether from Linux open-source technology or virtualization, many have
    > predicted the demise of Microsoft's traditional software business. So far
    > the company that built its house on Windows isn't caving in to
    > soothsayers.
    >
    > The latest figures from consulting firms indicate that although Linux
    > sales are growing by number of servers shipped with the operating system,
    > the software is losing ground to Microsoft's Windows.
    >
    > Microsoft picked up 2 percentage points, bringing its market share to
    > 67.1% of servers shipped during the second quarter, according to data from
    > Gartner. Of 2.06 million servers shipped overall, nearly 1.4 million came
    > preloaded with proprietary OS. That works out to an extra 77,650
    > Microsoft-based servers sold during the quarter, year over year.
    >
    > Linux accounted for 22.8% of server shipments, down from 23.1% the year
    > before.
    >
    >

    http://www.thestreet.com/s/microsof...ndows/newsanalysis/itmanagement/10376540.html

    I wonder how many of the new MS Window server shipments were to replace
    existing servers rather than being "new". I think I'd be right in
    generalising that the hardware for a Linux server would last longer than a
    Windows server from an upgrade perspective. A PII is still perfectly
    adequate to host an FTP server for example. Would anyone try that with a
    recent MS Windows release?

    Also, how do they count "Linux shipments"? Typically businesses who buy
    Windows servers would do so through an OEM or by bulk licensing which is
    easier to count. Linux servers for example could be installed on an OS-less
    server with a distribution downloaded off an FTP server. How are they
    counted?

    I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.

    Allistar.
    Allistar, Aug 28, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    Allistar wrote:
    > Mickey Mouse wrote:


    >
    > I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >


    Not to mention that many commercial Linux users keep their traps shut
    about using Linux for fear of having Microsoft salespeople with fat
    entertainment accounts descending on their directors and top managers.

    Goodness knows how Gartner (who tend to be Microsoft friendly) get their
    Linux figures from.
    peterwn, Aug 28, 2007
    #3
  4. Mickey Mouse

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <>,
    Allistar <> wrote:


    > I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >
    > Allistar.


    as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed, then
    abandoned for another.
    whoisthis, Aug 28, 2007
    #4
  5. Mickey Mouse

    Allistar Guest

    whoisthis wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Allistar <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>
    >> Allistar.

    >
    > as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed, then
    > abandoned for another.


    Indeed. The numbers presented in such surveys cannot be trusted.

    Allistar.
    Allistar, Aug 28, 2007
    #5
  6. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    whoisthis wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Allistar <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>
    >> Allistar.

    >
    > as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed, then
    > abandoned for another.


    And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    loaded on to.
    peterwn, Aug 28, 2007
    #6
  7. Mickey Mouse

    Shane Guest

    peterwn wrote:

    > whoisthis wrote:
    >> In article <>,
    >> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>
    >>> Allistar.

    >>
    >> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed, then
    >> abandoned for another.

    >
    > And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    > or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    > loaded on to.


    This is what happened at my previous job. Images were created of around
    half a dozen distros, and then used for several hundred servers.

    --
    Q: What's big, grey, and proves the uncountability of the reals?
    A: Cantor's diagonal elephant.
    Shane, Aug 28, 2007
    #7
  8. Mickey Mouse

    Fred Dagg Guest

    On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:06:47 +1200, Shane <-a-geek.net>
    exclaimed:

    >peterwn wrote:
    >
    >> whoisthis wrote:
    >>> In article <>,
    >>> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>>
    >>>> Allistar.
    >>>
    >>> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed, then
    >>> abandoned for another.

    >>
    >> And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    >> or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    >> loaded on to.

    >
    >This is what happened at my previous job. Images were created of around
    >half a dozen distros, and then used for several hundred servers.


    LOL! Man you guys are a joke.
    Fred Dagg, Aug 28, 2007
    #8
  9. Mickey Mouse

    sam Guest

    Fred Dagg wrote:
    > On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:06:47 +1200, Shane <-a-geek.net>
    > exclaimed:
    >
    >> peterwn wrote:
    >>
    >>> whoisthis wrote:
    >>>> In article <>,
    >>>> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Allistar.
    >>>> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed, then
    >>>> abandoned for another.
    >>> And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    >>> or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    >>> loaded on to.

    >> This is what happened at my previous job. Images were created of around
    >> half a dozen distros, and then used for several hundred servers.

    >
    > LOL! Man you guys are a joke.


    Its probably what Weta Digital do as well with their renderfarms.
    Andrew Lambert can tell us.
    Your insider was a bit of a joke. eh ?
    sam, Aug 28, 2007
    #9
  10. Mickey Mouse

    Shane Guest

    peterwn wrote:

    > whoisthis wrote:
    >> In article <>,
    >> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>
    >>> Allistar.

    >>
    >> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed, then
    >> abandoned for another.

    >
    > And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    > or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    > loaded on to.


    Further to my last post. Here are a few Xen based providers, that
    sell/lease virtual servers, from http://hostingfu.com/vps/xen-hosting
    Server Axis
    Unixshell#
    SliceHost
    VPSLand
    * Bluelinux (UK)
    * BudgetDedicated.com (EU)
    * Crystal-VPS (UK)
    * Dynamic Web Hosting (AU)
    * GPLHost
    * GrokThis.net
    * LeeWare
    * Linode
    * Quantact
    * RimuHosting
    * VPS Hosting (CA)
    * Xelhosting
    * Xtraordinary Hosting (UK)

    What they do is create images of distros they wish to support, then install
    them on demand for customers. Of course they arent going to download a
    fresh image for each new customer (why waste bandwidth and time tailoring
    the distro to their enviroment)

    It's no different to the IT admin for <foo> having (Microsoft product)
    images on his network for servers/desktops/whatever except no licensing is
    needed, therefore no tallys kept.

    Of course, the only people who deny this are the ignorant, and those that
    seek to mislead


    --
    It is only two weeks into the term that, in a calculus class, a student
    raises his hand and asks: "Will we ever need this stuff in real life?"
    The professor gently smiles at him and says: "Of course not - if your real
    life will consist of flipping hamburgers at MacDonald's!"
    Shane, Aug 28, 2007
    #10
  11. Mickey Mouse

    Shane Guest

    sam wrote:

    > Fred Dagg wrote:
    >> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:06:47 +1200, Shane <-a-geek.net>
    >> exclaimed:
    >>
    >>> peterwn wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> whoisthis wrote:
    >>>>> In article <>,
    >>>>> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Allistar.
    >>>>> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed,
    >>>>> then abandoned for another.
    >>>> And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    >>>> or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    >>>> loaded on to.
    >>> This is what happened at my previous job. Images were created of around
    >>> half a dozen distros, and then used for several hundred servers.

    >>
    >> LOL! Man you guys are a joke.

    >
    > Its probably what Weta Digital do as well with their renderfarms.
    > Andrew Lambert can tell us.
    > Your insider was a bit of a joke. eh ?


    As Ive just pointed out in my last post, its no different to any medium to
    large IT infrastructure (Microsoft or otherwise)
    Images are kept on the network that are patched and ready for deployment as
    and when necessary. The only difference is one set of products needs
    licensing, and so figures are reported. The others arent.

    --
    "The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please, rotate your phone by 90
    degrees and try again..."
    Shane, Aug 28, 2007
    #11
  12. On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:58 +1200, Allistar wrote:

    > Also, how do they count "Linux shipments"?


    What they're counting is only hardware with a pre-installed OS on them.

    That hardware that has not got a pre-installed OS is simply not counted.

    IOW, what we're talking about are probably servers for the SMB market -
    that part of the market where good IT skills are in seriously short
    supply, and where *nix skills are virtually non-existent.

    In that context, nearly 1/4 of all servers shipped having a *nix system on
    it is actually a substantial proportion - given that the M$ software is
    the choice for those who don't know, or are prevented from knowing, better.


    --
    Jonathan Walker

    "The IT industry landscape is littered with the dead
    dreams of people who once trusted Microsoft."
    Jonathan Walker, Aug 28, 2007
    #12
  13. Mickey Mouse

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <46d3fc0a$>,
    Jonathan Walker <> wrote:


    > In that context, nearly 1/4 of all servers shipped having a *nix system on
    > it is actually a substantial proportion - given that the M$ software is
    > the choice for those who don't know, or are prevented from knowing, better.


    so, what linux software can replace an exchange server ?????

    And what total fucking arrogance that Windows is for those who don't
    know better...seeing a lot of FUD you write (AND Believe!) it is you who
    are ignorant and don't know better, you have repeatedly been caught
    peddling factually incorrect information.

    But will you give up, no because you are worse than the fucking mormons,
    you have no interest in anything but "linux good, microsoft bad", you
    have no interest in learning, no interest in the fact that other peoples
    needs are not you own, no interest that in many cases Microsoft is not
    only the ONLY tool for the job it is often the BEST tool.

    You are the kind of person that everyone wants on the oppositions team
    simply because you are a myopic tosser.

    Yes, you LOVE linux.... who the **** cares. People choose what is right
    for themselves, I use Macs because they work the way I think, Windows
    and Linux DONT, however I recommend OSX, Linux and Windows to people
    based on their NEEDS (Software, support, hardware, skills, etc) to the
    point where the OS of choice is almost the LAST item. Hell we have
    bought Macs to run Linux on them and have bought Macs to run Windows on
    them, all for good reasons, cost being only ONE of them.

    I fully understand that the software is one of the lowest cost items
    when it comes to total cost of ownership, and that it is the person at
    the keyboard who is the highest cost, by a large margin. My MAIN concern
    is productivity of the person using the machine. Retraining and lost
    productivity is a real cost amounting to thousands of dollars in some
    cases. I know YOU would choose free software over commercial simply
    because of your monotonous anti-microsoft bullshit you post, for you
    maybe your time is worth nothing ( and as a computer person that price
    is about right) where as other peoples time has value and costs.

    A properly set up and maintained Windows machine is not a virus magnet,
    we have not had one on well maintained machines for years. And don't
    forget a poorly set up and maintained linux box is a vulnerability too.

    So, do us all a favour, leave it alone for a year or two, you are adding
    nothing of value and are only pissing people off.
    whoisthis, Aug 28, 2007
    #13
  14. Mickey Mouse

    thingy Guest

    Allistar wrote:
    > Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >
    >> Whether from Linux open-source technology or virtualization, many have
    >> predicted the demise of Microsoft's traditional software business. So far
    >> the company that built its house on Windows isn't caving in to
    >> soothsayers.
    >>
    >> The latest figures from consulting firms indicate that although Linux
    >> sales are growing by number of servers shipped with the operating system,
    >> the software is losing ground to Microsoft's Windows.
    >>
    >> Microsoft picked up 2 percentage points, bringing its market share to
    >> 67.1% of servers shipped during the second quarter, according to data from
    >> Gartner. Of 2.06 million servers shipped overall, nearly 1.4 million came
    >> preloaded with proprietary OS. That works out to an extra 77,650
    >> Microsoft-based servers sold during the quarter, year over year.
    >>
    >> Linux accounted for 22.8% of server shipments, down from 23.1% the year
    >> before.
    >>
    >>

    > http://www.thestreet.com/s/microsof...ndows/newsanalysis/itmanagement/10376540.html
    >
    > I wonder how many of the new MS Window server shipments were to replace
    > existing servers rather than being "new". I think I'd be right in
    > generalising that the hardware for a Linux server would last longer than a
    > Windows server from an upgrade perspective. A PII is still perfectly
    > adequate to host an FTP server for example. Would anyone try that with a
    > recent MS Windows release?


    If you are a responsible corporate you buy a server with a warrantee 3~5
    years, at the end of which you replace it. So still running Linux on a
    P2 is a hug no no.....

    BUT see my virtualisation comment below....

    > Also, how do they count "Linux shipments"? Typically businesses who buy
    > Windows servers would do so through an OEM or by bulk licensing which is
    > easier to count. Linux servers for example could be installed on an OS-less
    > server with a distribution downloaded off an FTP server. How are they
    > counted?


    We buy all our servers OS free...both windows and Linux. This is the
    telling part though,

    "Linux sales are growing by number of servers shipped with the operating
    system"

    I wonder as a rule whether Windows "tends" to ship with a server by
    default, where bare servers which will end up with Linux do not....

    Also Vmware, such servers may well be shipped bare....

    Then there is virtualisation in general...our virtual Linux guests are
    multiplying faster than our Windows ones....it really shows in terms of
    hardware utilisation. The old attitude of run it on a P2 does not really
    make sense, but running say 10+ linux guests on the same ESX3 host that
    can only manage 8 windows ones shows a substantial difference...

    > I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >
    > Allistar.


    Lies, damn lies and statistics....

    IDC seems to have a good handle on total shipments....and generally seem
    less MS biased than Gartner...also trying to compare Gartner's % with
    IDC % makes no sense....

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Aug 28, 2007
    #14
  15. Mickey Mouse

    thingy Guest

    peterwn wrote:
    > whoisthis wrote:
    >> In article <>,
    >> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>
    >>> Allistar.

    >>
    >> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed,
    >> then abandoned for another.

    >
    > And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    > or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    > loaded on to.


    kickstart....

    regards
    thingy, Aug 28, 2007
    #15
  16. Mickey Mouse

    thingy Guest

    Shane wrote:
    > sam wrote:
    >
    >> Fred Dagg wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:06:47 +1200, Shane <-a-geek.net>
    >>> exclaimed:
    >>>
    >>>> peterwn wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> whoisthis wrote:
    >>>>>> In article <>,
    >>>>>> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Allistar.
    >>>>>> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed,
    >>>>>> then abandoned for another.
    >>>>> And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    >>>>> or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    >>>>> loaded on to.
    >>>> This is what happened at my previous job. Images were created of around
    >>>> half a dozen distros, and then used for several hundred servers.
    >>> LOL! Man you guys are a joke.

    >> Its probably what Weta Digital do as well with their renderfarms.
    >> Andrew Lambert can tell us.
    >> Your insider was a bit of a joke. eh ?

    >
    > As Ive just pointed out in my last post, its no different to any medium to
    > large IT infrastructure (Microsoft or otherwise)
    > Images are kept on the network that are patched and ready for deployment as
    > and when necessary. The only difference is one set of products needs
    > licensing, and so figures are reported. The others arent.
    >


    yep, we have a site licence based on our FTE's, so we pay RedHat a sum
    per year for as many as we want...MS licences we pay for individually
    and get a unique key....

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Aug 28, 2007
    #16
  17. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    thingy wrote:
    > Shane wrote:


    >
    > yep, we have a site licence based on our FTE's, so we pay RedHat a sum
    > per year for as many as we want...MS licences we pay for individually
    > and get a unique key....
    >


    Some organisations decide to buy Linux with support, which is fine.
    Others will just use a dog standard distribution like Debian without
    formal support licences. That is fine too. It is the latter case the
    number of intallations can only be guessed at.

    By the way, in response to another sub-thread, use of 'hand me down'
    hardware which is well out of warranty is just as valid business model
    as disposing hardware when the warranty expire, one cannot call the
    former business practice 'irresponsible'.
    peterwn, Aug 28, 2007
    #17
  18. Mickey Mouse

    Will Spencer Guest

    On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 08:28:27 +1200, whoisthis wrote:

    > In article <46d3fc0a$>,
    > Jonathan Walker <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> In that context, nearly 1/4 of all servers shipped having a *nix system on
    >> it is actually a substantial proportion - given that the M$ software is
    >> the choice for those who don't know, or are prevented from knowing, better.

    >
    > so, what linux software can replace an exchange server ?????


    To this day I never figured out why the anti-microsoft movement embrassed
    Linux when there were superior systems such as BSD. Having experienced
    Linux myself I think they made a big mistake backing it and I believe it's
    the main reason they've gone nowhere over the last decade. Linux was the
    worst free OS, the most bugs, the least secure, terrible awful tcp/ip stack
    etc etc but it had the best hype and marketing. Personally I consider Linux
    the Microsoft Windows of the open source world. It really is a con.

    -ws
    Will Spencer, Aug 28, 2007
    #18
  19. Mickey Mouse

    thingy Guest

    peterwn wrote:
    > thingy wrote:
    >> Shane wrote:

    >
    >>
    >> yep, we have a site licence based on our FTE's, so we pay RedHat a sum
    >> per year for as many as we want...MS licences we pay for individually
    >> and get a unique key....
    >>

    >
    > Some organisations decide to buy Linux with support, which is fine.
    > Others will just use a dog standard distribution like Debian without
    > formal support licences. That is fine too. It is the latter case the
    > number of intallations can only be guessed at.
    >
    > By the way, in response to another sub-thread, use of 'hand me down'
    > hardware which is well out of warranty is just as valid business model
    > as disposing hardware when the warranty expire, one cannot call the
    > former business practice 'irresponsible'.


    no it is not IMHO.

    Personally I would call it 'irresponsible' and I would not work for a
    company that ran production applications on such hardware....or wish to
    deal with one that did....BCP (business continuity planning) ie if you
    rely on your vendors/partners to supply you with services in a timely
    manner to keep your in business and they fail to do so because of the
    above, you need your bumps felt.

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Aug 29, 2007
    #19
  20. sam wrote:
    > Fred Dagg wrote:
    >> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:06:47 +1200, Shane <-a-geek.net>
    >> exclaimed:
    >>
    >>> peterwn wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> whoisthis wrote:
    >>>>> In article <>,
    >>>>> Allistar <> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> I'd suggest that both of these effects are skewing the statistics.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Allistar.
    >>>>> as would the number of different distributions downloaded, trialed,
    >>>>> then
    >>>>> abandoned for another.
    >>>> And then the chosen distribution would be stored on an in-house server
    >>>> or burnt to DVD's and then heaven's knows how many machines they are
    >>>> loaded on to.
    >>> This is what happened at my previous job. Images were created of around
    >>> half a dozen distros, and then used for several hundred servers.

    >>
    >> LOL! Man you guys are a joke.

    >
    > Its probably what Weta Digital do as well with their renderfarms.
    > Andrew Lambert can tell us.
    > Your insider was a bit of a joke. eh ?


    multiple images sitting on a server using pxe boot to choose what image
    to install depending on the hardware you are installing to
    Andrew Lambert, Aug 29, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ida Young
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    431
  2. Jonathan Walker
    Replies:
    153
    Views:
    2,261
  3. cakecam
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    7,095
    John Duh
    Jan 15, 2009
  4. Sailor Sam

    Microsoft trying to buy market share for bing

    Sailor Sam, Nov 24, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    613
    Biggles
    Nov 29, 2009
  5. Simon Finnigan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    513
    Simon Finnigan
    Mar 3, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page