2021

2021 is nothing special. It’s not even a prime number although it is odd. It is however the year by which M$ could lose its majority in server revenue as calculated by IDC. In Q4 of 2012, GNU/Linux “factory revenue” grew 12.7% per annum while M$’s was almost flat…
Extrapolated_Server_Share

Face it. No matter how you calculate things, you can’t beat the price/performance of GNU/Linux and in servers, that’s key. Even bloated with high unit prices, that other OS is sinking in share. If only IDC published unit shipments, we might see that GNU/Linux is ahead today.

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 and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to 2021

  1. oiaohm says:

    Der Balrog that is why it would be so cool if it works out to be that date.

  2. Der Balrog says:

    2021 is nothing special. It’s not even a prime number although it is odd. It is however the year in which Skynet initiates Judgement Day in the Terminator novel “New John Connor Chronicles: Dark Futures”.

  3. lpbbear says:

    “You? You add nothing of value to the conversation whatsoever, do you? Put a pleated skirt on you, and you’d be nothing than a particularly unappealing cheerleader.”

    Ahhhhh Moe, did I get under your…..skirt. Bushwah I say! (or maybe that was Curly or Larry, can’t tell you Stooges apart)

    Woooop wooooop wooooop!

  4. oiaohm says:

    bw Redhat, Orcale, Ibm, Suse all are reporting growth in support contracts for Linux.

    It is hard to total up the income of all the Linux support companies. bw. Even so the top 4 are doing more half MS server turn over a Quarter in Linux.

    bw
    –Even a casual reading of the price lists from Red Hat show that their Linux costs far more than Windows server for equivalent periods of time. Red Hat charges by the year whereas Microsoft is a one-time charge.–
    There is a catch. A lot of people who want the one time change equal don’t use RedHat.
    https://www.scientificlinux.org/ Binary compatible.

    You pay Redhat if you want support services. If you don’t you use Scientific Linux that is built from the same code base as Redhat Enterprise Linux. In fact Redhat and the groups behind Scientific Linux do work with each other. Redhat know these groups are never going to pay for support contracts. But these groups are willing to help with software development.

    bw it would be confusion to have a support service device showing the same OS brand as a machine that does not have a support service. Its better for Redhat not to have there phones tied up by people who don’t have a support contract.

    Support services for windows is not cheep either.

    http://support.microsoft.com/gp/profsup/en-au
    bw That is Microsoft Prices for equal service in Australia as Redhat provides.

    Notice after hours support only apply to critical failures. So you cannot be just debugging stuff while other people are not in office.

    http://www.redhat.com/about/subscription/whatyouget.html Remember redhat I can pick up phone ring any time of the day over any type of problem.

    http://www.redhat.com/support/ There is also no Incident. No requirement to issue staff with credit cards to use this service either.

    bw when you compare apples to apples. Microsoft sux balls. You missed the included support in a redhat subscription and the Microsoft costing to access the equal support.

    So yes redhat subscriptions are a lot more expensive than buying the software out right from Microsoft. It is the support you are paying for. The Redhat support is way cheaper than Microsoft support and more convenient. Ring state company and machine id and go with Redhat. Microsoft ring give up credit card and hope they help you.

    bw your problem you were comparing an apple to an orange. So not the same compare.

  5. Dr Loser says:

    And your job, IPB?

    It appears to be a slavish fawning. Have you ever contradicted your lord and master?

    I actually agree with Robert on a number of things. I use LAMP stacks. I program in C/C++ on Linux using emacs.

    I choose to disagree where I believe Robert is wrong.

    You? You add nothing of value to the conversation whatsoever, do you? Put a pleated skirt on you, and you’d be nothing than a particularly unappealing cheerleader.

  6. lpbbear says:

    Pog, you know it doesn’t matter what you post, the three stooges, at least one or all, will pop in with their comments every time.

    You could post anything, even make it up, but as long as whatever you post points out the Emperor has no clothes Larry, Moe, and Curly will HAVE to contradict you. That is their job…. 😉

  7. bw says:

    “One should look at units”

    One should look at revenues and expenses, I would think. Red Hat, SUSE, and Microsoft (and some others) sell their services to companies that prefer to purchase their IT services rather than have in-house capabilities. That creates a business opportunity for those who might want to be in that business.

    What you are counting is rather useless. If and when Microsoft folds their tent and leaves their incredibly successful businesses, you might celebrate some sort of moral victory, but you will not have turned a profit from that.

    If more Linux based servers are ever sold in your future world, it will simply mean that Microsoft, however rich and profitable they might be could have been even more profitable and richer than they are. Seems kind of a hollow victory.

    “a unit of GNU/Linux costs much less than a unit of that other OS”

    Not from Red Hat or SUSE. Even a casual reading of the price lists from Red Hat show that their Linux costs far more than Windows server for equivalent periods of time. Red Hat charges by the year whereas Microsoft is a one-time charge.

  8. bw wrote, “A more meaningful comparison would be to compare Microsoft’s server software revenues to those of Red Hat and SUSE which have products that directly compete with Microsoft’s products.”

    Not at all. You can compare a billion times $0 and you still get $0 even though unit share is astronomical. One should look at units and a unit of GNU/Linux costs much less than a unit of that other OS, $0 to $thousands for a server licence.

  9. bw says:

    “M$ could lose its majority in server revenue”

    Microsoft gets revenue money from selling server software, not servers. From their SEC reports, it is clear that they are getting more money every year. I think that they are likely to be satisfied with that.

    What you are charting here is the trend in revenue splits for servers, not server software, and that really only applies to companies like IBM, Oracle, Dell, HP, and some others who sell the server hardware. A more meaningful comparison would be to compare Microsoft’s server software revenues to those of Red Hat and SUSE which have products that directly compete with Microsoft’s products. That crossover date may be a lot further in the future.

Leave a Reply