Pogson’s Tablet Sales Forecast

Everyone seems to be doing it. Why not me? Forecasting sales of tablets is easy.

  • Assumptions:
    • Google’s Android 4.0 aka Ice-cream Sandwich will soon appear and be loved, particularly with the new quad-core CPUs.
    • That other OS won’t get “8” out until near the end of 2012.
    • iPad 3 also is months away
    • Tablets will continue to take 10% share of the PC market and another 10% of “new” market.
  • Conclusions:
    • Tablets will sell about 70 million units in 2012, 35million replacements for PCs and 35million sales for their own worth.
    • iPad’s share which is about 60-70% today will be cut in half due to a great diversity of suppliers of Android/Linux tablets with every feature some consumers and organizations could ever want.
    • In 2012, Android/Linux tablets will rule the roost with 60% share and iPad will decline to about 30%.

The fans of Apple claim iPad will hold its own in 2012 but they are just whistling. They also believed that iPhone would hold its own but it took only a year for its share to be cut in half. One supplier cannot stand up against such a large marketing system as Android/Linux has. iPhone shipped 20million units in Q2 2011 but Android/Linux shipped 47million. Android/Linux smart phones had three times the rate of growth of iPhone. There is no reason that will not also happen with tablets. If Apple thought it had no worries, would it be suing the world over Android/Linux tablets? Would it be doctoring photos of Samsung’s tablet to make it look more like an iPad to fool the courts?

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

63 Responses to Pogson’s Tablet Sales Forecast

  1. oldman says:

    “Basically we have to remember Dell is a prick to anyone without an account. Because they presume you don’t know computers and will just order the Ubuntu option because it cheaper then complain when it don’t run Windows programs. Yes they think you are a moron since you don’t have an account. Ok that might be a true average for most of the population.”

    So basically You’ve just confirmed that dell only sells linux on their desktops to entities that want it, and no one else.

    Anyone who has been around dealing with dell could have told you that this was the case. The interesting thing is that I have been watching as the workstation offerings which only used to come with Red Hat Enterprise Workstation only, now seem to be configured mostly with 64 bit windows 7 – Red Hat workstation is an afterthought.

    And BTW – the rest of the population are not “morons” for wanting to go with what works for them or their friends.

  2. Contrarian says:

    More baloney, #oiaohm. Give it up.

  3. oiaohm says:

    Contrarian I order enterprise from Dell. I have custom image option as well on a lot of machines. There are a lot of models that you can truly get Linux on if you are ordering enterprise numbers 200 units +.

    If you have a enterprise or business account you can select that laptop you found as Ubuntu. Home user that site the option disappears.

    There is currently a big difference what someone with account can select and someone without can Contrarian. Annoying but true. I have helped people get dell Linux machines. Reason enterprise account I could get machine Linux. Business account they had they could not. Funny enough if you can find the get it configured particular point send link and when they open link they magically have the Linux machine so they can buy it. Only works with those with an business account.

    Its not that the Linux machines are not there Dell just makes it a prick for anyone without an enterprise account.

    First time I went to that link of yours Contrarian I had Ubuntu and custom image by the way because still being logged in. This is causing disputes between us in enterprise and people like you Contrarian.

    You ask us for a cheap Linux laptop that is good we quote a dell model we know is good and you come back to us and say you cannot buy it with Linux. Then if we are stupid show you the 15 we have just had landed with Linux on and tell you that you had done something wrong because we ordered them no problems. Basically we have to remember Dell is a prick to anyone without an account. Because they presume you don’t know computers and will just order the Ubuntu option because it cheaper then complain when it don’t run Windows programs. Yes they think you are a moron since you don’t have an account. Ok that might be a true average for most of the population.

  4. or not… I have seen Grade 1 students use it with some assistance and Grade 3 and up have no difficulty at all.

  5. Contrarian says:

    “he would have to be quite a fool”

    He did pay some $20M for a ride to the space station and back, IIRC. Quite a hoot, I would imagine, although not a great investment.

  6. Contrarian says:

    But no one seems to ever want to do that. Regardless, it is odd that Canonical’s own link leads to such a blind alley. Remember, the original idea was that Canonical is somehow making a profit from their Linux activities and that does not seem to be evident from the level of promotion and support and even access by the general public.

    Linux remains the province of dweebs and nerds, kept out of sight and out of mind.

  7. For an individual that might be true but a larger organization has no such problem. They can buy a FreeDOS desktop and slap on Ubuntu or they can buy an Ubuntu notebook directly.

  8. Contrarian says:

    “I see 20”

    Granted, but when you select one of them, you do not see any way to actually order a model with Ubuntu pre-installed. Taking something that people can actually view, go to http://configure.euro.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?oc=l0854210&c=fr&l=fr&s=bsd&cs=frbsdt1&model_id=latitude-e5420m

    for example. The upper level says Ubuntu 10.10 is available, but when you go to select and order, there is no way to select it. Claim what you wish about how Ubuntu is so “popular” and is receiving revenues from Dell in some way, but I think it is all an illusion. Anyone with the fortitude to want Ubuntu on a Dell would simply buy a Windows version and install it themselves.

  9. We’ve seen this before. A page loads showing Ubuntu and then another pops up to show none available. This is based on location. Some locations have Ubuntu on Dell’s site and others do not. Don’t ask me why Dell thinks USA is not wanting Ubuntu…

    China, for instance, gets hits. http://search.ap.dell.com/results.aspx?s=gen&c=cn&l=zh&cs=&k=ubuntu&cat=all&x=0&y=0

    I see 20.

  10. Contrarian says:

    “Canonical is a private company. There are no public numbers for revenue but they have deals with OEMs like Dell, HP, etc. and they provide services to business so we know there are some revenues”

    The Canonical site http://www.ubuntu.com/dell#weu has links:

    http://www.dell.com/ubuntu

    This resolves to a page that says there are no Ubuntu offerings.

    http://www.dell.ca

    Which allows you to search for Ubuntu, but ends up returning no actual models that use it. Ditto, AFAICT, for other countries where the same sort of thing happens, just expressed in the local country language. It seems to me that there is not much of a relationship with Dell beyond some lip service and you cannot say that there is any money involved for Canonical. Since it is not a public company, there is no audited information. There is no evidence at all of any robust business activity.

  11. Cut out the ad hominem attacks. Some people are just poor at communication. Some have little use of English. They are all welcome. My wife has English as a second language and life can be difficult but worthwhile.

  12. Contrarian says:

    “Both oldman and me fall into the big business camps different sections. Me Commercial him Education”

    If nothing else, being in Education seems to make one’s sentences read more clearly, #oiaohm! Are you really as bad with English grammar as you are demonstrating or is it some sort of affectation?

  13. Canonical is a private company. There are no public numbers for revenue but they have deals with OEMs like Dell, HP, etc. and they provide services to business so we know there are some revenues.

    In 2009, Shuttleworth said, “Canonical also receives revenue from companies like Dell that ship computers with Ubuntu and work with it on software engineering projects like adding Linux-based features to laptops. All told, Canonical’s annual revenue is creeping toward $30 million, Mr. Shuttleworth said.” when they had 200 employees.

    They have grown a lot since then. They now have 400 employees.

    Read about Return on Investment.

  14. Ch says:

    “Holy Reality Distortion Field, Batman!”
    Indeed, your Reality Distortion Field seems to be quite powerful:

    “Canonical does not need to be making a profit if it’s main investor sees it as a good investment. (…) If Canonical’s investor(s) see it as a good investment, why can’t you? Canonical’s hiring unlike some “profitable” businesses we know.”
    Mark S. is pumping his money into it because he can and wants to. If he still believes he can eventually make a profit he would have to be quite a fool, so I would rather assume that he is just continuing for the sheer heck of it.

    “The goal is profitability and the greater the investment likely will be the greater the profit.”
    Where do you learn BS like that ?

    Next, you write:
    “You analysis utterly lacks numbers.”

    And then you go on with:
    “If they are not making a profit, it’s not by much.”

    without citing any numbers at all. Pot, kettle, black.

  15. oiaohm says:

    D-G please look where Canonical is registered as a company. You will never see profit figures from it profit or not.

    Yes its a tax free zone. In fact if they did publish a press release with profit numbers they would have committed a crime since there a private company is not meant to release internal income information due to the laws where the company is. Price of avoiding tax basically.

    Basically legally Canonical cannot publish any financial data. So why are you asking for it do you want to force Canonical into committing a crime just to because you have too much curiosity?

  16. D-G says:

    “You analysis utterly lacks numbers.”

    ROFL! Lamest comeback ever. Where from should I get the data if Canonical doesn’t publish anything? If they had turned profitable they would have issued a press release right away. Not even the dumbest marketing people would let have such an opportunity slide by them. But we haven’t heard — anything.

  17. You analysis utterly lacks numbers. Canonical has huge numbers of users and now servers on the go. They have lined up many OEMs to distribute Ubuntu on PCs. If they are not making a profit, it’s not by much.

  18. D-G says:

    “Canonical does not need to be making a profit if it’s main investor sees it as a good investment.”

    Ahem, yes, Canonical needs to make a profit in the near future. Because even Shuttleworth’s pockets aren’t deep enough. And Canonical has yet to publish ANY financial data. I mean, wow, Canonical is the company that STOLE Banshee’s (and therefore Gnome’s) potential revenue by altering Amazon affiliate codes in the source code. That’s how desperate they are, Pog.

    And Pog … that they’re hiring doesn’t mean jack. First of all, they’re not hiring where it counts: intelligent leadership. You wanna know why? Read this first-hand account of what developing Ubuntu is like [1]:

    “Unfortunately Canonical’s own performance-review and management is also based around this schedule. The Ubuntu developers so employed (the vast majority) have such fundamentals as their pay, bonuses, etc. dictated by how many of their assigned features and work items are into the release by feature freeze. It’s not the only requirement, but it’s the biggest one.”

    You know now why Ubuntu sucks like it does. THE PAY (not only Bonuses) is coupled to the amount of features one gets into the next release? Then how about I as a developer prioritize QUANTITY over QUALITY? At least that way my family doesn’t have to starve.

    [1] http://netsplit.com/2011/09/08/new-ubuntu-release-process/

  19. The Other Linus says:

    Aww, banning again?

  20. Holy Reality Distortion Field, Batman!

    Canonical does not need to be making a profit if it’s main investor sees it as a good investment. The goal is profitability and the greater the investment likely will be the greater the profit. No reasonable business venture expects to make a profit while growing rapidly if the proceeds are cycled back into the business. If Canonical’s investor(s) see it as a good investment, why can’t you? Canonical’s hiring unlike some “profitable” businesses we know.

    If public companies are making money selling GNU/Linux to public companies my argument works even with your interpretation. Do you think all those public companies are untruthful?

  21. glome says:

    “Desktop Linux initiatives by public companies have all fallen by the wayside.”

    Canonical, Suse, RedHat, and Mandriva are all doing well. IBM continues to benefit from its investment and participation in propagating GNU/Linux:
    IBM has completed tens of thousands of Linux customer engagements… IBM holds ongoing, significant roles in a large number of Linux-related and other open source projects.

    Are you even reading what people are posting? Your response doesn’t even make sense.

    He’s talking about Desktop Linux.

  22. Trucker Joe says:

    Once again, poggy is being intentionally dense and not actually realizing what he is responding to. He was talking about public companies switching to Linux not about public companies selling Linux. Seriously, even a 5 year old has better reading comprehension than that but still to respond to your list:

    Canonical still isn’t making a profit:

    “Is Ubuntu profitable yet? If not, any ideas on when it will be?

    No, and while we have projections which are grounds for confidence, there are also reasons to continue to push the investment faster than it would grow organically.”

    Suse is only being propped up by Microsoft after having to be sold off when Novell went under.
    And Mandriva? The one that last year had to layoff quite a few employees?

    The only one doing okay is Red Hat but even it is nothing in comparison to Microsoft or Oracle, etc.

  23. Contrarian wrote a bunch of nonsense, followed by this gem:
    “Desktop Linux initiatives by public companies have all fallen by the wayside.”

    Canonical, Suse, RedHat, and Mandriva are all doing well. IBM continues to benefit from its investment and participation in propagating GNU/Linux:
    IBM has completed tens of thousands of Linux customer engagements… IBM holds ongoing, significant roles in a large number of Linux-related and other open source projects. The most high-profile projects are:… Community Linux Distributions: Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, Asianux, and more.

  24. glome says:

    And Linux distros.

  25. Trucker Joe says:

    Must be all the dried potato mash is finally rotting his brain.

  26. glome says:

    Who the hell are you talking to Poggy?

    Poggy’s gone bye bye. He’s gone to his happy place and his “auto pilot” is answering with random gibberish.

    Point is Trucker Joe, Pogson will never allow himself to admit that Google is simply another company, not worse or better than Microsoft. But most of all he’ll never admit that Linux is anything less than perfect.

  27. Trucker Joe says:

    Yeah, there aren’t. The Samsung S has like 10 million “shipped” but even that is like half of the actual sales of the iPhone 3, 3GS or the 4 by themselves.

  28. glome says:

    are no Android phones

  29. glome says:

    Please no more dodging and strawman.

    If there are no patents to tax Android/Linux, how will M$ get a penny from them?

    Ha ha ha … Pogson just can’t handle that one. He can’t answer it because he’d have to admit that there are Android phones sold that exceed Apple’s iPhone.

  30. Trucker Joe says:

    Who the hell are you talking to Poggy?

  31. The value of anything in a free market is the lower of

    1. the cost to make the product from scratch,
    2. the cost to replace the product with another similar product, or
    3. the cost to buy the product from the seller.

    Of course, monopoly and lock-in break these rules but the free market is the ideal. Using GNU/Linux we can operate in a free market.

  32. Trucker Joe says:

    Since when is the SCOTUS going to throw out software patents? Oh right, never.

  33. If there are no patents to tax Android/Linux, how will M$ get a penny from them?

  34. Trucker Joe says:

    Oh and it has to be a model with actual sold numbers, not that phoney shipped number that Samsung uses to inflate its numbers.

  35. Trucker Joe says:

    “No need. Android/Linux works with them all.”

    How does that answer my question?

    “The Apple Fan Club is saying the anything Steve Jobs touched was blessed and without flaw and dominant in the market. It is not so.”

    I’m saying nothing of the sort but that’s a nice strawman. So care to actually answer the question now of which single Android model has more sales than the iPhone 4? Please no more dodging and strawman.

  36. While that is a legitimate use of GNU/Linux it minimizes the benefits of using GNU/Linux. I think most organizations should set GNU/Linux as the default unless there is a compelling reason to use that other OS. Then you might have 10-20% of seats running that other OS and 80-90% GNU/Linux. I would bet M$ would drop its price to $20 or so in that case just to stay relevant. Once GNU/Linux share rises a bit further, those applications will be available on GNU/Linux and M$ is history.

    In education and in government, threatening migration to GNU/Linux, say with a demonstration project, is almost sure to get a huge discount, even freebies from M$. It costs M$ nothing to have an illegal copy or a freebie running as long as it holds a place for that other OS. It costs M$ almost nothing to issue a licence compared to what it normally charges.

  37. The Apple Fan Club is saying the anything Steve Jobs touched was blessed and without flaw and dominant in the market. It is not so.

  38. No need. Android/Linux works with them all.

  39. Trucker Joe says:

    It’s rather sad that the only way you FOSSies can make Apple “lose” is by having to combine all the sales from all the Android manufacturers across all their phone lines just to get higher sales than Apple and their single line of phones that has only had 4 models. Can you even name a SINGLE Android phone that has more sales than the iPhone 4?

  40. Trucker Joe says:

    “iPhone shipped 20million units in Q2 2011 but Android/Linux shipped 47million.”

    So your point is that a single company with a single phone line sold nearly 50% as many phones as more than a half dozen companies with probably more than a dozen phone models combined? And that is supposed to be negative against Apple? Did you also forget about how Apple now takes in more than 2/3rds of all the profits from smartphone sales globally?

  41. oiaohm says:

    oldman
    “Microsoft isn’t stupid Mr Ohio Ham. Any institution that makes use of Linux in any way shape or form, should have no problem keeping them on their toes.”

    Other than being insulting to my handle. Is this not enough reason alone to experiment with Linux. And take what ever saving you can get for either using Foss or Discounts you arm twist out of Microsoft. Yes this is why Microsoft only shops are becoming rare. Most shops staying Microsoft only are going under because they cannot compete with those that are FOSS and Microsoft.

    oldman
    “I watched one institution parlay some hard ball into a free site license for MS office 2010, AFTER, the institution passed up exchange for Google Mail.”

    Exactly the bazaar pricing exists for those who have Foss in there businesses and other options to force Microsoft hand over good prices.

    Phenom and Contrarian. Read what Oldman said. Dispute it if you dare.

    Phenom Economics is exactly one reason why big business must run FOSS. So they have the economic power to force decent pricing.

    Microsoft only shops have no economic power so will get ripped off. This is economics 101. So yes drop Microsoft to 10 to 20 percent of desktop space and more often get to pay only what education has to or less. Just so Microsoft can hold onto that market share and you cannot be used as an success story to push Linux and FOSS take up. So you save both ways. Less per seat for the remaining Microsoft seats. Mostly so you don’t have the funds to nuke key products holding people to Microsoft. Less costs maintaining that are Linux seats due to longer hardware update cycles and many other save money paths.

    Robert Pogson
    “That is preposterous. The cost of software should be development costs+distribution costs+reasonable profit.”
    100 percent agree. But when people don’t have economic power they cannot enforce this.

    Contrarian
    “Nonsense, IP has value to the extent that a user who wants it is willing to pay for it. Is the Mona Lisa overpriced because its appraised value is millions of times the value of the canvas and paints and hourly labor rate that went into it?”

    Economic idiot. Mona Lisa is worth millions of times the value of the canvas and paints because there is only 1 of it. Rare price mark up. Software is not a rare form of IP. Mass producing identical software in the billions costs almost nothing. Not having FOSS in your business means you have to pay Rare price mark up on MS stuff.

    Phenom and Contrarian. Both oldman and me fall into the big business camps different sections. Me Commercial him Education. Neither of us is going to say don’t have FOSS. We know its importance.

    Oldman will dispute on quality of solution that FOSS is possibly lower quality. I accept at this stage converting all seats can be foolish. Converting zero seats to FOSS is not an option if you want decent pricing out of Microsoft.

    Of course Oldman is not in the location where I am where arm twisting Microsoft is required to get decent pricing.

    Phenom
    “It is the monetary profit, which means everything.”
    Exactly 100 percent true. I make more profit if I have to spend less. Paying to maintain some FOSS software for cost saving in Microsoft licenses is worth it. Since at end of day I make more monetary profit. Question is who monetary profit is important. For me sure Microsoft monetary profit I don’t give a rats about they could be making a loss for all I care. The business I am working for monetary profit is the important thing that means everything. Basically Phenom you don’t understand what you are talking about. You have blinkers on about time you take them off.

    Small businesses and Home users normally don’t have diversity in machine usages to make FOSS viable at this stage. So basically have zero economic power against Microsoft.

    Yes FOSS is part about getting a decent deal for everything not FOSS.

  42. oldman says:

    “Now only way to get a decent percent offer discount on the table is mention the FOSS. That can get a magical 10 to 40 percent discount with extras thrown in on top of a good 15 percent plan. Even with that the 1000 and 500 still apply unless you are really lucky to get an insanely good deal. Yes the 40 insanely good deal then 500 is not worth it and 1000 becomes iffy. Then you have to hope get that next time.”

    Microsoft isn’t stupid Mr Ohio Ham. Any institution that makes use of Linux in any way shape or form, should have no problem keeping them on their toes.

    I watched one institution parlay some hard ball into a free site license for MS office 2010, AFTER, the institution passed up exchange for Google Mail.

    FOSS does have its uses….;)

  43. oldman says:

    “From what I remember you work in education right oldman. So you are use to seeing huge discounts.”

    Correct. under the select academic I can get office pro for $60.00 ? Windows 2008 R2 Enterprise edition is $400.00 per server and $5 per CAL.

  44. glome says:

    The irony is that MS makes more money from android than Google does.

    That will fall flat when the patents are invalidated and/or software patents are thrown out by SCOTUS.

    I don’t think I could ever find a better example of cognitive dissonance than this!

  45. Contrarian says:

    “The cost of software should be …”

    Nonsense, IP has value to the extent that a user who wants it is willing to pay for it. Is the Mona Lisa overpriced because its appraised value is millions of times the value of the canvas and paints and hourly labor rate that went into it?

  46. Contrarian says:

    “So, there are no businesses producing commodities these days…”

    You have a way of missing the point, #pogson, that seems deliberate. First I was talking of business “entry” which is far different from simply staying in a business already previously entered in a profitable way. Second, if you examine things more closely, you see that commodity suppliers dominate in market niches frequently based on geography. A product does not have to have any unique characteristics on its own, merely that the connection between supplier and target customer be efficiently maintained.

    “M$ is trying to compete in server operating systems, game consoles and the like where they have no hope of monopoly.”

    Well, dominance does not require monopoly, #pogson, it merely requires that you be larger than your nearest competitor in the niche(s) that you choose to compete. Do some research on the Boston Computer Group product positioning grid. Here is a handy reference:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth-share_matrix

    It is Wikipedia, you like that, I think!

    That said, Microsoft dominance in server OS is pretty high. As to games, I seem to recall the the original effort there was to make some sort of initiative into the family room which included TV and games. Xbox was originally meant to be some sort of camel’s nose in the tent, I believe, and that effort has morphed into simple gaming where Microsoft does indeed dominate the complex game play once dominated by Sony. Their Kinnect product is taking gobs of business from Wii as well these days. Overall, they are adding several billion dollars a year to their net profit line and game profits are starting to rival mainstays such as Windows and MS Office. You don’t need a monopoly, as I said, just dominate your niche.

    “What poor performance?”

    Financially poor performance, #pogson, financially. Isn’t that what I was talking about? I am sure that it is enough for your needs technically, but that is beside the point. You said that “FLOSS made huge gains” and that is simply wishful thinking and far from the truth. Desktop Linux initiatives by public companies have all fallen by the wayside.

  47. oiaohm wrote, “You still end up around the 800-1000 dollar mark with a complete set of cals for everything and anti-virus. This is ok ish. About the price the hardware its running on. With lots of free license updates.”

    That is preposterous. The cost of software should be development costs+distribution costs+reasonable profit. M$ making the same profit on the 100 millionth PC as the 500 millionth PC is a rip-off. If you build a house, you don’t get paid 1000X for it. You get paid once. Copyright exclusivity should cut off at some reasonable number of copies IMHO. The purpose of copyright is to encourage production of works, not to feed pigs. The price of a licence to use software should be the lower of the replacement cost/N or the cost of a similar product/N where N is the number of copies made. GNU/Linux, for instance costs about 300 person-years of work to produce each year, about $30million. If there are 100million copies in use, the cost per copy is about 30 cents. The major cost of producing and distributing an OS is not the development but the distribution costs which are a few dollars a copy. M$ gets to charge $100 for M years only because it has a monopoly on retail shelves. M$’s OS is over-priced by 5 – 7 times. M$ should not be paid for the use of the owner’s network. A CAL is purely a rip-off.

  48. Phenom wrote, “they even receive money from most android devices sold out there. The irony is that MS makes more money from android than Google does.”

    That will fall flat when the patents are invalidated and/or software patents are thrown out by SCOTUS.

  49. Phenom says:

    Pogson, marketshare itself means nothing to companies. It is the monetary profit, which means everything. Not only is 3.25% a miserable marketshare, but it is also (free software, right) close to $0 income for the producers.

    I am afraid your Economics background leaves a lot to be desired. Of course you must have an unique advantage to be successful. That might be the price / quality factor, or some interesting feature, or a nice shiny package, or a combination of all forementioned.

    MS have their uniqueness. I already pointed it out – software stack, which makes development reliable and relatively cheap, and backwards compatibility, which enables businesses increase lifetime, hence the ROI of their custom software systems.

    As for other markets… They now account for more than 50% of the server market. They are the second popular gaming console. If being the second sole contender in a market is not success, well, I don’t know how 3.25% marketshare can be named anything but failure.

    And, heck, they even receive money from most android devices sold out there. The irony is that MS makes more money from android than Google does.

  50. oiaohm says:

    oldman I should have been more exact for the case of Government and Business(non Microsoft Partners) do the 1000 and 500 seat numbers apply. Yes a particular group of volume licenses.

    Education and Charity discount rates of Microsoft Products do drop to somewhere saneish. 100 dollars a seat approx for all MS client software. Server software is still a issue. You still end up around the 800-1000 dollar mark with a complete set of cals for everything and anti-virus. This is ok ish. About the price the hardware its running on. With lots of free license updates.

    Government and Business volume discounts are really not that high you will be lucky to see 15 percent under recommend retail with some talks at retail you can get 10 in most cases. Insanity I had recently for one business with one of the open volume license agreement it was cheaper to go to store and buy boxed set of MS Office Professional pro plus. Reason the volume license was 15 percent higher than Microsoft recommend retail(so basically 20-25 percent above market price for boxed set). Yes volume licenses sold as how to get Microsoft software cheaper. In fact they can be how to rip yourself of major-ally if you don’t watch it. So volume licenses for business and government contain a lot of smoke and mirrors where it appears cheaper until you start doing the maths over a 10 year time frame. Yes the subscription models are particularly sneaky and bad you can end up paying almost double buying boxed sets for no little gain. Some of those are the most expensive. Also there is the trap of fact you are paying these days on volume installs if you have to use Mak what is paying for a number of install attempts or KMS where the machine has to connect to the network every so often to remain active.

    Also a business and government don’t get what education gets of free updates of licenses. So when a license time frame comes to the end for business its dead and business has to buy new or extension. With education and charity if a product is not selling well you get freebies on extensions of your existing licenses(sometimes you have to ask).

    I have been though all the MS volume licensing methods and plans for business and governments. And I was careful todo all of them as if I would be using them for 10 years. They are pity much had the goal of extracting about 2.5 to 4 thousand per seat for everything every 5 years without having to provide very much. Also third world country prices are party linked to wage rates. So even that the MS prices are lower in those countries the numbers of hours todo the conversion are still covered at around the same magical 1000 seats figure.

    Now only way to get a decent percent offer discount on the table is mention the FOSS. That can get a magical 10 to 40 percent discount with extras thrown in on top of a good 15 percent plan. Even with that the 1000 and 500 still apply unless you are really lucky to get an insanely good deal. Yes the 40 insanely good deal then 500 is not worth it and 1000 becomes iffy. Then you have to hope get that next time.

    Best plan of all for business is the Microsoft Partner plans. What is a basic 50 dollar a year a seat for the works yes that a cal for every feature. So with a cheap anti-virus is a 100 dollars. Of course that only applies to building systems or selling services that will result in Microsoft selling more product. Yes why people selling computers can get themselves highly bias.

    Person selling you the software the software is cheap. Business or Government using it that is in a different business its expensive as hell.

    Education, charity and partner have a higher break even numbers than 1000 and 500 machines for license costs. Education, charity partner I would guess would be 10000 and 5000 machines. But I have not bothered doing the full numbers on those since a most of my clients don’t fall under those volume licenses.

    Yes the education discounts are why Munich government is going FOSS and Munich schools are going Microsoft.

    When 1000 seats start being equal to 1-4 million dollars plus every 5 years in license costs. So meaning you can afford to have a few more full time staff instead it becomes a little insane to be paying the software. Its not like Foss causes you 1 million dollars worth of issues every 5 years if you management system is setup right.

    Closed source is meant to be cheaper than employing your own staff to build your own custom software.

    As Robert Pogson said there are maintenance differences. Linux motherboard fails rip hard-drive out put in new machine and it goes most of the time worst most of the time is to have to remove closed source video drivers/install correct drivers and correct network settings. Windows repair install min that can come back at you with long term problems at worse most of the time reinstall(if you want to trust the machine).

    So even that education by license cost is about 10 000 machines. The maintenance reduction(school kids are vandals at times.) Can justify the change.

    Education comes down to maintenance costs in the TCO. Of course someone not use to using Linux configuration management can kinda blow the maintenance costs of Linux out major-ally. Same with a person who cannot use group policies on windows. Both require skilled just different skills.

    From what I remember you work in education right oldman. So you are use to seeing huge discounts.

    Charities have the issue lot of them don’t have the budget to start off with. So is a battle.

  51. Contrarian wrote, “Business schools teach that you do not enter a business that you cannot dominate in some way.”

    So, there are no businesses producing commodities these days… Wait. That’s not true, so Contrarian must be wrong and those business schools must be wrong. The fact is that the majority of lines of business are mature and if you want to be in business you must enter some highly competitive fields. M$ is trying to compete in server operating systems, game consoles and the like where they have no hope of monopoly.

    Contrarian wrote, “What has FLOSS produced outside of Linux itself that is of much use today?”

    OpenOffice.org, LibreOffice, GNOME, KDE, XFCE4, audacity, vlc, SugarCRM, Evolution, Zimbra, Apache, PHP, MySQL, Postgresql, and many more

    Really, Contrarian, you should wake up.

    Linus is OK with GPLv3 but with many thousands of contributions in the collection, he cannot snap his fingers and make a change happen even if he thought it necessary. He doesn’t so there is little chance that will happen without a fork and quite a bit of rewriting. It would take the expiration of copyright or a more compelling situation to make change of licence practical for Linux.

    Contrarian wrote, “All that you have to show is the poor performance of Linx itself on the desktop “. What poor performance? GNU/Linux is crisp on my desktop. I never have to wait-please-wait, fight malware or re-authorize myself to use GNU/Linux. Many millions of users feel the same. Even if 3.25% is the share of GNU/Linux over 1500million PCs that’s 45 million users and then there are the Android/Linux users… What’s not successful?

  52. Phenom says:

    Pogson, you can believe whatever you want. It is your right afterall.

    But, if you think that large companies suffer malware, and all the other fancies you mention, you are sadly mistaked. What might happen to common home users back in the old XP days, does not happen to businesses. Businesses tend to enforce strict restrictions on the users via AD, where no software can be installed, and no user has even close to admin priviliges. All updates are pushed via WSUS, after being determined as important for the internal operations, and tested with the existing software. Hence, reboots are forced on a scheduled basis.

    You can give me examples of other practices as much as you wish. Many businesses would have a linux server here and there, too. So we do. So what. The bare facts state that Windows accounts for more than 90% of PC desktop, and has a nice share of servers, too.

  53. Contrarian says:

    “Google actions are no more bizarre than Microsoft giving away Internet Explorer for free at a time when all web browsers were sold for money”

    Perhaps you are too ignorant of the facts of the matter, #oiaohm, so you make such foolish statements! Microsoft had, for some time, clearly recognized that a browser had to be a part of the Windows package which was marketed as a one-stop shopping experience for OEMs to provide in their hardware packages. They initially tried to get Netscape, the leader in that product space, to partner with them and supply the Navigator basic browser in the Windows package. Netscape refused to do that and forced Microsoft to turn to Spyglass for similar technology.

    Spyglass stuff came from the same source as Navigator but was fairly crude and compared poorly to Navigator at the time. However, it was the only course of action open to Microsoft and they put a lot of money into enhancing IE until it rivaled and eventually surpassed Navigator. That allowed Microsoft to maintain the price realization for Windows, which actually increased slightly over a period of time when such things were likely to decrease. See #pogson’s rants about excess Microsoft profits if you want any corroboration on that point.

    OTOH, Google does not sell Android and cannot recover the billions of development and acquisition dollars that it has put into it so far. #pogson suggests that Google does this to protect its search business from potential usurpment by Apple and Microsoft, but that is patently absurd.

    Google plainly does not understand why it is in the Android business other than as a publicity tool to enhance its overall brand recognition. It does well at that, I would agree, but it is not very clear as to how that affects Google’s business results since they are already the strong leader in their niche.

    My conclusion is that they are making the same sort of mistake that Sun’s McNealy did with their forrays into network PCs and office automation a decade or more in the past. That led to their losing focus on their bread and butter server businesses and their ultimate demise as a going concern.

  54. Contrarian says:

    “Classic businesses compete on price and performance”

    That isn’t what they teach at Harvard, #pogson, nor is it what they teach at any other business school in the world. Business schools teach that you do not enter a business that you cannot dominate in some way. That leads to the concept of niches where whatever your product does is far superior to anything that a competitor’s product can do.

    Microsoft gained what you call a monopoly in the x86 PC arena by first being the core supplier to IBM in the clerical busineess personal computer niche. At the time, Apple was the leader in what has become known as the scientific and graphics personal computer niche. Quite possibly, much of Microsoft’s success was due to pure good fortune although they had to first recognize the opportunity and then stay with it until it blossomed into a wonderfully profitable thing. In that market, they beat Tandy/Radio Shack. The home user/hobbyist, like the desktop Linux fans, died on the vine as expected.

    The classic advice for a new enterprise is to “find a need and fill it!” A company, like Microsoft or
    Apple, or Google, even Red Hat, that follows that advice can succeed. If all you think that is necessary is to jump in and start discounting, you are doomed to failure. You can perhaps wreck a market doing that, but you cannot build a success and, in the long run, the consumer will lose out when the market becomes non-profitable and products vanish from the scene.

    Pay some attention to facts. What has FLOSS produced outside of Linux itself that is of much use today? MySQL is not really FLOSS, it is just what Oracle says it is today. Apache and PHP are not even FLOSS since the “L” is missing. Firefox is rigidly managed and is, after all, just what Netscape became after Microsoft shot holes in the nascient price umbrella for browsers. Open Office is/was a similar fate for Star Office.

    All that you have to show is the poor performance of Linx itself on the desktop and Linus Torvalds will not even go along with the GPL version 3.0, rightly discerning the mania associated with the Stallman cult and not wanting to associate himself with it.

  55. oldman says:

    “Yes “miniscule part” is what software licenses should be. Problem is Microsoft licenses are not priced at miniscule levels.”

    Out of curiosity, do your calculations take into accounts the discounted pricing available via various volume licenses?

  56. oiaohm says:

    Phenom the problem is you just stated a myth.

    The simple fact on Large installs the MS licenses are more than the rest of the TCO cost.

    The Munich Migration talk on here has pissed me off major-ally because people like you Phenom cannot to a TCO to save you ass.

    Yes I do talk TCO Phenom. The TCO for the FOSS solution for Munich Migration is less than the Microsoft Licensing for the same machines. Same applies to the french police and many other large desktop deployments.

    Once you cross 1000 machines the unit price for MS solutions is too high for sure. 500 is suspect.

    Yes “miniscule part” is what software licenses should be. Problem is Microsoft licenses are not priced at miniscule levels.

    TCO is loved by people like me Phemon is pure disgusting that you dare use it when you cannot calculate a TCO to save yourself. Or are you intentionally stupid when you were responding to the “Munich Migration From The User’s Viewpoint” since you should have produced two TCO maths for that. One for staying with Microsoft and one for going Linux. To see what one is cheaper. Yes Munich going Linux is a lower TCO than staying Windows.

    Phemon this is the problem lot of FOSS people these days have had TCO said to them so much they have have know how to calculate the TCO fully.

    Most FOSS people love talking TCO since they will kick you ass twelve ways from Sunday with TCO. Most Closed Source people don’t do a TCO properly they miss parts of the cost.

  57. Phenom wrote, “low TCO are exactly where MS shine”.

    Nope. Some estimates have it that for every $1 spent on M$, $8 has to be spent keeping their trash OS running. Think malware, re-re-reboots, Patch Tuesdays, and wait-please-wait. A lot of the problems/costs of using that other OS stem from it being closed source and backwards compatible with some of the largest mistakes ever made in IT. Then there are the manipulations of the market by M$ raising the price of IT far above what can be done with GNU/Linux.

    I suppose Phenom believes all these folks
    chose GNU/Linux because it increases their costs…

    The French parliament reported, “The study showed that open-source software will from now on offer functionality adapted to the needs of MPs (members of parliament) and will allow us to make substantial savings despite the associated migration and training costs”

    A lot of costs are manpower… “We noted on our last Largo visit, and note once again, that these are the least harassed, least worried, calmest sysadmins we have ever met. They have one of the smallest and least-worked help desks we have ever seen — five people who support 450+ client units and over 800 users, and it is all done without any fuss, muss or hurry. The desktop units, remember, have no moving parts or applications software on them.” That’s Largo, FL, running GNU/Linux on thin clients.

    So, reality is that GNU/Linux saves a lot of money and headaches. It has for me.

  58. Phenom says:

    Pogson wrote: “Nonsense. Classic businesses compete on price and performance. …
    Apple expanded into a vacuum, survived in a niche and then competed solely on reputation.”

    Pogson, you are both wrong, and contradicting yourself.

    The classic business competes on search and demand of an aggregation of factors. Price is an important one, but only as everything has its price. Managers, you know, are good in percieving costs. The term TCO is loathed by the FOSS community, but it is there for a reason. And price of purchasing software licenses is often a miniscule part of the TCO. And low TCO are exactly where MS shine, due to their software stack, and their backwards compatibility – two things with FOSS basically lacks. Only Java with Linux on servers gets close to the stack, but without a potent DB, and without any usable tools for desktop GUI whatsoever. In FOSS, backwards compatibility is a joke.

    Then, “Apple expanded into vacuum” simply means that there was a demand for the Apple products. They simply created a market for devices and services, which was waiting for someone to do it. They were the first to plunge into it, and still the best, as the facts have it now.

  59. Contrarian wrote, “Microsoft and Apple have had such huge financial success because they work at it as a classic business.”

    Nonsense. Classic businesses compete on price and performance. Neither Apple nor M$ are used to doing that. M$ was granted a monopoly by IBM with its PC and Apple expanded into a vacuum, survived in a niche and then competed solely on reputation. They lasted long enough that people confused that survival with merit and consumers paid the premium price for standard COTS stuff from China (FOXCONN etc.).

  60. oiaohm says:

    Contrarian you call Google actions bizarre. Google actions are no more bizarre than Microsoft giving away Internet Explorer for free at a time when all web browsers were sold for money. So that Microsoft could scorch the earth of their competition.

    Of course you are most likely to young to remember that Microsoft gave Internet Explorer away for free on Unix. There was no direct path for profit for doing that other than to take out their competition.

    Exactly what massive expenses Contrarian most of the Android code base is not maintained by Google.

    Android is a wedge. Its worked companies like Samsung are now taking part in the Linux kernel and other projects. Samsung is also looking at taking part in Meego.

    Really FOSS has made a bigger hit than most have noticed Contrarian. We are seeing more and more large companies make the switch from Windows desktops to Linux desktops. This is very much the down fall pattern Linux had against Unix. It worked the last time to take the super computer market it should work again to take the desktop.

    Linux does have a classic business model. Contrarian it is older than the Microsoft or Apple Business models.

    “No direction or control of its destiny.” Yep that is part of it model. Alter to what user wants. The bazaar business model is a very old model Contrarian the bazaar business model predates all forms of IP rights. Markets where you were free to copy what your competition was doing. Not known for it effectiveness of moving in one direction quickly. Microsoft and Apple both would fail in a market without IP rights. Where Linux will just keep on going on.

    The bazaar business model is not an “inferior business mode” its a different model. In fighting is expected.

    Bazaar model is known for innovation in what is produced at a far high rate than Apple or Microsoft models.

    Piracy that Microsoft jumps up and down about does not exist in the bazaar model.

    Have we truly forgot the art of war? Where if you enemy has a better weapon than you that you copy and improve it. Yes bazaar model is really old goes back to hunter gathers and possibly before. Without it we would not be here today.

  61. Contrarian says:

    I think you are seeing things too romantically, #pogson! That is good for your mental health, perhaps, but not so hot for doing business. Microsoft and Apple have had such huge financial success because they work at it as a classic business. Linux has flopped in retail and commercial use because it doesn’t do any of the things that it needs to do to succeed. Most of that is due to its inferior business model, namely wishing and hoping for someone to do it a favor and make it better. No direction or control of its destiny.

    GNU is a big zero and using it in conjunction with Linux is a silly way of making obesiance to Stallman and makes you look sort of extreme. Android uses Linux code at its core, but do not kid yourself about it being “linux” in any way, shape, or form. It is a bizarre sort of business initiative by Google to do something without any clear way of recovering the massive expenses that they have been running up in the process.

    FLOSS or FOSS or just plain open source has not made much of a mark on the world as yet. Given the advancing age of the product market here, I do not think that it ever will make any sort of mark. PCs may die out entirely someday, replaced by embedding their functions into phones and other handy mobile devices, but when the day comes, they will die out as mostly Windows PCs, with some Macintosh for the trendy folk to use.

  62. Those products are like muzzle-loaders, low tech devices in the 21st century. GNU/Linux and Android/Linux will emerge from the battle victorious whereas the opposition have nowhere to go but down. Their models of business do not fit the world well at all. M$ lucked into monopoly and Apple conned people. FLOSS is open and fair with people, a refreshing difference. FLOSS made huge gains with the waves of malware, then Vista, then netbooks and now ARM. Monopoly does not scale. Apple is suing itself out of business.

  63. Contrarian says:

    “The fans of Apple claim iPad will hold its own in 2012 but they are just whistling.”

    One can only paraphrashe Tennyson, #pogson!

    Windows to right of them,
    iPad to left of them,
    MS Office in front of them
    Volley’d and thunder’d;
    Storm’d at with shot and shell,
    Boldly they rode and well,
    Into the jaws of Death,
    Into the mouth of Hell
    Rode the FLOLSS kindred.

Leave a Reply