__/ [ Linønut ] on Wednesday 22 February 2006 13:10 \__
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Roy Schestowitz belched out this bit o'
> wisdom:
>
>> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6041804.html
>>
>> <quote>
>> Computer makers sold $17.7 billion worth of Windows servers
>> worldwide in 2005 compared with $17.5 billion in Unix servers,
>> IDC analyst Matthew Eastwood said of the firm's latest Server
>> Tracker market share report. "It's the first time Unix was not
>> top overall since before the Tracker started in 1996."
>>
>> And in another first, fast-growing Linux took third place, bumping
>> machines with IBM's mainframe operating system, z/OS. Linux server
>> sales grew from $4.3 billion in 2004 to $5.3 billion in 2005,
>> while mainframes dropped from $5.7 billion to $4.8 billion over
>> the same period, Eastwood said.
>> </quote>
>
> And
>
> Conventional wisdom in the 1990s forecast that Microsoft's Windows
> would inexorably move to market leadership, but its arrival was
> slowed by several factors. For one thing, Windows took much longer to
> mature than many expected.
Windows is not maturing. It is aging. Viruses are one indication (among
others) of the its wrinkles, which will soon have Windows put in a parents'
home.
http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/09/12/microsoft-management-software_cz_vma_0913microsoft.html
( Microsoft's Midlife Crisis )
> Too bad they didn't compare server counts.
Linux servers would probably be cheaper; not only to buy, but also to
maintain. Remember IBM's TCO rule, which suggests that Linux is 40% cheaper
to own.
It is worth pointing out that this article was the only one, among several
that had cropped up, which bothered to explain the decline UNIX, which is
the due to the impact of Linux. The Windows /relative/ share of the pie may
have actually decreased.
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Warning 0x12C: ispell feels tired
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
2:40pm up 5 days 2:59, 9 users, load average: 1.08, 0.86, 0.44
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
