| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
The Microsoft/Linux Connection, Explained | |
|
||
| Time: 13:37 EST/18:37 GMT | News Source: Business 2.0 | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Last week, when research firm Meta Group of Stamford, Conn., predicted that Microsoft would begin to support Linux by late 2004 with some of its key server products -- Exchange, IIS, SQL server, and the like -- reactions ranged from outrage to befuddlement. A source inside Microsoft called the report "wacky." Analysts of all stripes debated the veracity of the findings. Even Dale Kutnick, Meta's chief research officer, admitted that Microsoft "is pissed." | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 224 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:44:21 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 6859 (204.71.100.217) at 12/16/2002 2:16:12 PM |
|
I'd be pissed too. If I ran a company, dominant or not, and someone said that I was going to do X by the end of the year (or some other event), I'd not only be angry about their presumption, but I'd make damn sure to not support X in the future, just to make the claimant look like an ass. You just don't go around bantering things like that with Microsoft, they're not a bunch of spineless people, and no matter how badly some may want it to be otherwise, Windows is their business (along with the applications that they produce that work on top of it.) Jumping ship would be suicide.
To reiterate what I said on this a while ago: META is on crack. |
| #2 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 12/16/2002 2:29:50 PM |
|
Another example of wishful thinking on the part of the Linux crowd.
The media ALWAYS has to have a Microsoft battle brewing. After RedHat, they'll find somebody else... |
| #3 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/16/2002 2:30:26 PM |
|
This statement is not accurate:
"Linux's server presence and market growth is continuing unabated." Linux market penetration hasn't grown for two years now. |
| #4 By 415 (199.8.71.121) at 12/16/2002 4:16:36 PM |
| lol ... you almost had me convinced! |
| #5 By 7760 (12.155.143.52) at 12/16/2002 5:50:18 PM |
| I guess that I was one of the few people who noticed that last week's article was a prediction and gave it all of the credence that it deserved: none. |
| #6 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/16/2002 6:07:37 PM |
|
linuxhippie: Good work!
Seriously... You didn't comment on my claim. I've been trying to find any information talking about Linux marketshare that is more recent than 1999. I found one article that talked about 2001 and stated the market remained stagnant. IDC and others have done the info, but they aren't releasing it publicly... which indicates to me it's not good news for someone. |
| #7 By 20 (24.243.41.64) at 12/16/2002 7:25:52 PM |
|
#13: I don't think that IDC, Gartner, or any of those groups release that information publicly. You must purchase the research from them (that's how they make their money).
They usually release a PR about some reasearch that gives away some of the basic results, but you must buy the report to get the full gist and summary. Not that changes your story, but just because IDC doesn't release it doesn't mean it's good or bad news one way or the other. You're right though, I'm pretty sure Linux hasn't been going anywhere. Rest assured that if Linux were doing well, it'd be plastered over every media outlet 5 times a way with stories like "Linux to buy out Microsoft?" or "Microsoft shaking in boots from Linux" or "Penguin steps on Gates" or some other cheesy, stupid, and misleading headline. |
| #8 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/16/2002 7:36:51 PM |
|
soda, they are only talking about on the server side. And from what I've seen those numbers seem inline--both the present day number and future projections. I don't think there's any conspiracy to keep these numbers hidden, but I don't care to do the research now.
The numbers seem perfectly reasonable and verifiable: "Meta Group pegs Linux's market share at 15 to 20 percent of new server operating-system shipments. By 2006 or 2007, the report predicts, Linux will be on 45 percent of new servers." |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/16/2002 9:01:15 PM |
|
parker, well, your first comment is idiotic so on to the next...
So, you admit that IDC could be off, and even if they are dead-on right, doesn't that mean that linux marketshare could have grown 3% in the last three years? Obviously, linux had a big growth spurt--if they just continued to grow by 1% for the next five years, wouldn't that be 25% of the market. And isn't it conceivable to imagine that there will be a new push in the marketplace if it's at least entrenched at 1/4 the server marketplace? If there was a big spurt from 0 to 15, why wouldn't there be another one from 20 to 40 or more? In fact, aren't these numbers most likely compiled from what the server vendors anticipate their clients will be spending, and isn't it likely that their projections are relatively sensible since they do anticipate these orders several years in advance? I see nothing so damaging here--in the very least you've provided the evidence to calm soda's sceptical nerves. Thanks. Anyway, this post is more in answer to soda as it's easy to disregard your inanity--"The beginning of the end of open source"? You do realize that from the very beginning there have been proprietary OS licenses and people selling OS software, don't you? Whatever. This post was edited by sodajerk on Monday, December 16, 2002 at 21:07. |
| #10 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/16/2002 9:12:04 PM |
|
You can keep repeating silliness, parker, but the only claim I made, you provided evidence for. The current marketshare of servers held by linux is between 15 and 20 percent, and these analysts groups seem to have equally accurate, but approximate, projections.
Linuxdid not peak in 1998. Linux did not peak in 1998. Linux isn't only being used in static web servers. |
| #11 By 3339 (64.175.42.17) at 12/16/2002 10:12:04 PM |
| you relish being an idiot, don't you, parker? Just to help you out--when someone provides a RANGE of numbers, that means the true number can lie somewhere between the lower and upper constraint. |
| #12 By 3339 (64.175.42.17) at 12/16/2002 11:20:02 PM |
|
No, seriously, parker, do you really believe that it's best to cling to childish perceptions that are as deluded as nomldev's when the marketplace disagrees with you.... and to further assert that not only is the marketplace wrong, but that it's regressing? Do you feel like that's an intelligent posture and image to present of yourself?
Have fun, buddy. |
| #13 By 135 (208.50.206.187) at 12/16/2002 11:30:42 PM |
|
parker - You made my point exactly. Since 1998 we've been hearing that Linux marketshare is 15-20%... It hasn't moved upward since.
This is growth? Why would anybody believe these predictions of 45% if the past predictions have not been accurate. Like I've said in the past... Linux zealots tend to always overstate their position. Same thing happened with Team OS/2, and eventually the media catches up with it and realizes that demand does not exist... why are we bothering to write about it? |
| #14 By 135 (208.50.206.187) at 12/16/2002 11:31:24 PM |
| I also think it's interesting how quickly jerky boy resorted to insults... that usually indicates his position for arguing is weak. |
| #15 By 3339 (64.175.42.17) at 12/16/2002 11:36:11 PM |
| Oh, by the way, maybe it's a good time to mention that the IDC study measures just the marketshares of OSes, but Meta is describing NEW server AND OS shipments. Do you think that large growth of Linux in '98 was all on NEW hardware? Were there any vendors shipping servers with Linux in '98? If so, I at least know there are more now and the % of sales is growing, that's for sure. And I would bet that the linux growth in '98 was mostly on OLD Win or Unix servers with Linux installed over it... so I can entirely see how these numbers are inline, certainly non-contradictory. Can you, parker? |
| #16 By 3339 (64.175.42.17) at 12/16/2002 11:41:35 PM |
| ...and soda I only call people idiots when they are. |
| #17 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 12/17/2002 1:43:41 AM |
|
I won't comment on the numbers, because I don't care.
The notion that Linux can and is only used for a static web server is rediculous. PHP, JSP, J2EE, ColdFusion and many other dynamic web technologies run on Linux. Lying about OSes you don't like doesn't improve your position, it just makes you look foolish. |
| #18 By 20 (24.243.41.64) at 12/17/2002 11:52:53 AM |
|
#32: Linux makes a very, very, very poor dynamic web server. I don't think I've ever seen a Linux PHP server that wasn't regularly on it's knees from a load that's half of what ActiveWin gets.
Also, Java on Linux is pathetic. They almost never use it in benchmarks because it's so sad (see the latest Middleware comparison of .NET Petshop v2 and J2EE Petshop v2). Face it, Linux is not an enterprise OS and it has horrible scalability. It's a classic old-fashion Unix that works well in large clusters for processing statistical and mathematical calculations in Academic settings. It's pathetic when it comes to scalable enterprise apps. |
| #19 By 20 (24.243.41.64) at 12/17/2002 11:55:07 AM |
|
#33: Rabid zealotry knows no logic or bounds, kevin.
Every argument is valid, even if contradictory. Microsoft is evil out of hand, no evidence necessary. They are a monopoly and a failing company all in the same. They can be controlling the market, yet losing marketshare left and right to Linux at the same time. I am Penguinista, hear me make a fool of myself. |
| #20 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/17/2002 1:32:12 PM |
| see, soda, watch this--I'm going to call kevinu a dumbass. Dumbass, we are talking about servers, something Microsoft has never had a monopoly in. Microsoft still has a monopoly in desktops. This isn't hypocrisy, it's knowing what we are talking about and not trying to confuse people by mixing unrelated issues. |
| #21 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/17/2002 5:03:56 PM |
|
kevin, if you were paying attention, I have never once said linux is better. Never.
I don't get your point about leveraging the monopoly--advocating such is advocating criminal activity.... Our country has said they haven't done so and the marketplace seems to show this. Europe thinks different and may slap them down a bit... But what is your point? Yes, Microsoft has two monopolies. They could further leverage this but this would be further illegal activity. They haven't done so, and I have pointed to what I think is a legitimate estimate of Linux market share and what it's projected to be in the future. What's your point? Besides inanity that most everyone else has disagreed with: 1) that linux is dead, 2) that linux marketshare is decreasing, and 3) linux is only good for static web servers. All three of those points are idiotic. So do you have a good point? |
| #22 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 12/17/2002 5:55:55 PM |
|
if you respond to jerk, you perpetuate the problem. its the same as responding to nomdlev.
blue is right, Linux' market share hasn't moved... in YEARS. The media has to stay busy, so they continually seek to create/build a Microsoft killer. Its been done upteen times before and Linux continues this tradition. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 224 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:44:21 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
