IT behind Ferrari

[mindgam3]

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5160704.html?tag=nl

Both the HP and IBM models used in the test ran unix based OS....

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5347325.html

Article regarding server OS

from MS:

"We continue to watch the evolution of open-source software development and distribution...We believe that Microsoft's share of server units grew modestly in fiscal 2004, while Linux distributions rose slightly faster on an absolute basis," the filing said. "

[RC45]

Originally Posted by mindgam3 http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5165213.html Server Revenue 1st IBM 2nd HP 3rd Sun Microsystems 4th Dell

Includes all sales - according to your posted article.

Originally Posted by mindgam3 Of which IBM and Sun only use linux based OS and HP say there linux servers are faster.....

Bullshit - IBM has uncreased their push tsell Linux based systems - they do not ONLY sell Linux based systems.

Speed has little to do with deployed servers in business.

And a little notice - servers are delivered more often than not with NO OS INSTALLED. The servers are DESIGNED to SUPPORT various OS's - but the customer will install what they need to run

[RC45]

Originally Posted by mindgam3 http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5160704.html?tag=nl Both the HP and IBM models used in the test ran unix based OS....

Again purely academic information. The customer will purcahse and use the system and OS that SOLVES THE PROBLEM on HAND!

Originally Posted by mindgam3 http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5347325.html Article regarding server OS from MS: "We continue to watch the evolution of open-source software development and distribution...We believe that Microsoft's share of server units grew modestly in fiscal 2004, while Linux distributions rose slightly faster on an absolute basis," the filing said. "

Your point?

Linux vs Win2K3 is as pointless as V8 vs V6 etc.

The task on hand will dictate the requirement.

And BTW - I have actually been part of a project that wiped Linux from 150 servers - and installed Win2k

[mindgam3]

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/36141.html

The figures are for server revenue only.....

"Gartner said Linux revenue grew more than 54 percent in the quarter, with server shipments up 61 percent on a unit basis. Linux servers made up just a shade under 10 percent of the overall revenue, compared to 34 percent for Windows and 4.3 percent for Unix, a sharp decline from last year."

Thats 14% vs 34%, i wouldnt say thats an insignificant value for unix based OS sales and

I stand corrected on the IBM and unix..... they only ship 75% of their servers with linux.

http://news.com.com/Linux+server+sal...3-5166155.html

"Microsoft identified Linux as a top threat, and indeed Linux servers outgrew Windows servers. But Windows still has a healthy lead, with growth of 16 percent leading to overall sales of $3.9 billion, IDC said. That was roughly four times the Linux market for the quarter"

Although I agree, windows do have the majority, linux servers are outselling windows at the moment and they dont take up an insignificant percent of the market.

Many companies and governments either have or are switching to linux as well.

Just as an example last year....

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5145332.html

and thats including desktops as well as servers which i wouldnt think many would be doing. In fact many companies are also switching their desktops as well as servers to linux

[mindgam3]

and you keep saying that the user will purchase the system that best suits them.... your point is??

Linux severs sales are increasing more than windows, thats a fact

If you want the fastest server solution your going to have to go for linux.

Cost is debatable and no one can say which is more cost effective in general.

oh, and btw jsut to keep it relative to F1, williams who are supplied by HP, the biggest computer systems sponser in F1 us linux....

http://h71032.www7.hp.com/gp/us/en/f...nux/index.aspx

[RC45]

You are so naive.

"Switching to" does not mean REPLACING all existing.

ZD Net is so anti-microsoft biased you can set your watch by their linux is king articles being published.

I live in this enterprise server world - not the sales and marketing side, been there done that - that is full of smoke, mirrors and snale oil promotion - but rather in the solution providing and deployment side.

Even if every company stops buying NT servers at this point in time, and only buy linux at the current rate - it will take years before the number of installed and deployed linux servers will be more than the NT installed and deployed base.

That is the point.

Just because box X costs less, and has a higher benchmark speed - does not mean it automatically arrives on site and displaces everything else.

When you have a vendor proving the various tiers of a multi-million doallr soution that needs a Wintel SQL on on platform, HPUX platform on the other, and MAYBE has a Linux compatible Web-component on the other - the answer is NOT cut and dried.

There are still many, many, many systems being deployed in many fields that only have Win32 client components - so that rules Linux out as the desktop for that part of the company - and the same goes for many other components.

This is almost as entertaining as the Ferrari vs the world debate..

[mindgam3]

lol, but as with the "ferrari vs world" debate your missing the point or at least failing to see anyone elses point of view.

I am by no means saying that linux is taking over the world, i am merely implying that there are a significant amount of linux based servers out there to the extent that MS considers them a threat.

For instance 8 out of the top 10 gobal investment banks run linux servers.

and "META Group predicts that Linux will run on 45% of new Intel based servers by 2006 or 2007, up from 15%"

This was in 2002, but to make this sort of prediction from a world renowned independant advisory there has to be at least some evidence to make them point out this in the first place.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by mindgam3 lol, but as with the "ferrari vs world" debate your missing the point or at least failing to see anyone elses point of view.

A point of view based on biased jealousy is just another opinion.. and you know what say about those?

Originally Posted by mindgam3 I am by no means saying that linux is taking over the world, i am merely implying that there are a significant amount of linux based servers out there to the extent that MS considers them a threat. For instance 8 out of the top 10 gobal investment banks run linux servers.

Micro$haft consider everything not owned by or destroyed by them a threat - thats what keeps them financially lightyears ahead of the competition.

And 8 of the 10 top investment banks run a PART of their systems on Linux.

THAT is the point.

It is ALL business solution dependent.

Originally Posted by mindgam3 and "META Group predicts that Linux will run on 45% of new Intel based servers by 2006 or 2007, up from 15%"

This type of pie in the sky business school graduate shit is just the same stink-infested crap that predicted that EVERYTHING that touched the Web would turn to sloid gold and helped drive hollow companies that Dot Commed themselves in the late 90's to the top of Wallstreet - on;y to crash down when reality set in.

Originally Posted by mindgam3 This was in 2002, but to make this sort of prediction from a world renowned independant advisory there has to be at least some evidence to make them point out this in the first place.

These clowns are attempting to steer and drive the market for profit reasons - they are sponsored and recruited studies.

These idiots do not even know what the business solutions in 2006 and 2007 will look or feel like from a software and platform persepctive - WHICH IS WHAT DRIVES SERVER SALES..

In 1997 as has been noted before, similar studies were predicting a new Internet Dot Com bazillionaire evry 20 seconds and doctors.com and foodshop.com and petstore.com and flyboy.com etc etc etc would be the destruction of brick and mortar businesses etc etc etc.

Out of the fog emerged, what 5 or so super succesful big names and the rest got swallowed up as reality set in.

I am going on record and saying these guys are sucking air - and the only way Linux will grow to that level is if the Vendors around the world will upgrade/cross grade/modify their solutions to work on these platforms.



Exactly what is planned to be used to displace MS Active Directory -- Netware Directory Services? Yeah - right...

[mindgam3]

Your blurting all this crap at me but not giving me any facts

The fact is that Linux based servers at the moment are sales are increasing more than windows based servers. Unix has been around for a lot longer than windows and has for the most part been used by geeks, but now that people are seeing the advantages of generally more stable, more exploitable software, more and more big firms and countries are turning to linux than ever before, thats a FACT......

The fact that any news about linux a few years ago wouldnt even be mentioned anywhere and now it is shows that linux is becoming more and more popular.

Facts are IBM have been making the most server revenue and 75% of their servers are linux based. HP have been making more and more of their solutions linux based and sun microsystems are almost completely linux based. These are the 3 most profitable server companies in the world.... thats a fact.

[RC45]

OK - please yourself.

Here is a fact - when I go work on client sites in client server romms - I see 10 times more Wintel servers IN PRODUCTION at this time.

I hear a lot of talk about "more stable this and better speed that" -- HOWEVER when you are working in one of Shell's server rooms and you hear them say "none of our significant business apps are installed, deployed or designed with Linux in mind" it leaves them using the Linux boxes for miscellaneous web and netwrok requirements.

Swithes and routers are running linux, maybe a number of DNS applicaitons, the outside facing mail relays and other ancilliary components.

However - terrabytes and terrabytes and terrabytes and terrabytes - literally petabytes of data is stored on... shock horror gasp - Wintel based servers.

Why is this so? Because end users still need to access the data, and the Security Control Lists are managed with MS AD hosted accounte...

This lends to the simple and easier deployment of the core business applicaitons - example SAP having the a large portion of the logic and data bases being hosted an a Unix based platform - then a mid0tier of database and applicaiton manipulation using Wintel based SQL servers that allow for easier integration to the AD for a better security control using the existing user accounts in the Directory.

See - as you step closer and closer to the money maker and income generating part of the business - you see where the mature WIntel based environmnt is simply better at the moment.

I laugh at the Linux camp - why? Because, until such time as the BUSINESS APPS require a Linux backend, it's all just marketing lip service.

Now you may argue that Web solutions all use Linux - well, many do - but the fact that say Fedex used a number of Linux boxes to run the border routers and mail relays and customer access websites - thats where it ends..

[mindgam3]

Security, cost effectiveness and integration is all debatable when it comes to server OS software.

Why are intel making their chips more linux friendly?

Why is the most powerful computer in the world run on a unix based OS?

and Shells supercomputers (if your talking about the oil company) use linux based OS.....

The fact is more and more systems are becoming linux based, not only in server systems where they are most useful but also in desktops and laptops.

HP reports that linux is now the number 2 desktop OS, replacing apple. Although a significantly small proportion of the desktop market, this does show how much more linux is being used.

Plus HP are now shipping desktops and laptops with linux pre installed.....

[RC45]

I am done hijacking this thread..

Bring it to the new thread that I sure will get a lot of traffic..

Oh - and you forget I live in HP's home town... Houston.. (HP is only as powerful as they are because the bought Compaq) and as such have many friends who are inventing designing and configuring the stuff you are reading about.

Even they will tell you - it's all academic UNTIL the solution providers begin using the tools they are developing - and if this does not happen in the next 18 motnhs or so - the efforts will again be focused on the Wintel stuff..

[evoWalo]

The original owners of Hotmail used BSD for their servers. Seeming it was embarassing them they placed a NT server as the front end server so whenever people will check what OS was running Hotmail it'll show NT servers. Also during the time when hackers were majorly attacking Microsoft servers I think Akamai (hosts) switched their sites to those running Linux. MS placed a spin that they didnt mind it but I bet it was pissing them off they were using

IBM offers both UNIX (IBM UNIX) and Windows (Microsoft Windows) but has been shifting their offering to Linux-based servers. I guess they're trying to lower the cost on developing and supporting their own UNIX for something supported for free by a bunch of long haired and bearded hackers.

The choice of OS should be based on the apps requirements. I'd personally preffer the company I work for used Linux but alas the apps are Windows-only.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by evoWALO ...but alas the apps are Windows-only.

There you have it..