Linux Market share?
Patrick Grimbergen
Sally Squats wrote:
>>Linux is FREE...Market Share, less that 1.0 percent as a desktop
>>system.
Is this true?
Servers I think are about 80%, is it not?
Linux Desktop are a strange thing. If I look at my websites I get
conflicting results from the statistics. My websites are all generic
sports, museums, travel agency etc, hosted in the Netherlands and the UK.
Example: Results in June:
20% Linux/*BSD (Audistat) [http://www.schoolkorfball.org. uk]
14% Linux/*BSD (Audistat) [http://www.grimweb.info]
00% Linux/*BSD (Nedstat) [http://www.fordmuseum.nl]
None of the websites are particularly advertised in any group of OS
users. I could partly be the program, but I don't believe it should make
such a big difference. The travel agent [http://www.grimweb.info] is
most visited, and is a bit in between the both values.
I do not visit my own websites, since I can test off-line, before uploading.
How's other websites doing in this matter? 1% seems to be an
understatement.
Patrick Grimbergen
John Bailo reacted following:
The most mainstream stat agencies (IDC) are calling Linux at 3% of
/paid/ desktops with estimates of that rising to 7% in the next few
years ( by 2007).
That 3 to 7 percent doesn't include anybody who downloaded a distro and
burned a CD, or a Knoppix live CD user or probably even someone who
bought a distro that was burned by a third party from Amazon or Linux
Central ( www.linuxcentral.com ) but not from the original supplier.
So, use common sense. What would the ratio of free to paid distro
users are there? I would easily estimate it at 3 to 1, which means
that 3% could be something like 12%, very easily.
John Kloosterman
Well - the problem here is the therm "market-share". It is perfectly
posible to see how many pieces of Windows OS are beeing sold, with Linux
however it is a different story. Most versions (distributions) of Linux
are free for download, so the users dont have to buy or register
anyware. That makes it almost impossible to figure out how many people
are using Linux. What makes it even more complicated is the fact that
there are many pirated versions of Windows, ánd a lot of people using
Windows and Linux in a mixed environment or as a double-boot system.
So -i think its impossible to get accurate figures. You can only use
statistic methodes, but then it depends on the willingness (and
acuressness) of the "statistical group" involved. It leaves also the
door wide open to "bias" the outcomings (as has happend in the past and
wíll happen in the future).
So - i guess there wil be no conclusive answer. I think however that the
1 percent mentionned is a far to low figure. In my neigbourhood i have
seen an strong increase of Linux desktop usters in the last half year,
so i think that figure is very dated...
John.
billwg
"John Kloosterman" <JClosed_AD_netscape_DoT_net> wrote in message
news:92ff7$42d3b445$3ea6021a$10...@news.versatel.nl...
>
> Well - the problem here is the therm "market-share". It is perfectly
> posible to see how many pieces of Windows OS are beeing sold, with Linux
> however it is a different story. Most versions (distributions) of Linux
> are free for download, so the users dont have to buy or register anyware.
> That makes it almost impossible to figure out how many people are using
> Linux. What makes it even more complicated is the fact that there are many
> pirated versions of Windows, ánd a lot of people using Windows and Linux
> in a mixed environment or as a double-boot system.
>
> So -i think its impossible to get accurate figures. You can only use
> statistic methodes, but then it depends on the willingness (and
> acuressness) of the "statistical group" involved. It leaves also the door
> wide open to "bias" the outcomings (as has happend in the past and wíll
> happen in the future).
>
captured by some product provider to that market. It really only pertains
to whether or not your product has the largest share of that market because
your position in the market somewhat dictates your strategy and what the
future might hold for you based on market characteristics that have been
determined to be predictable from the past. The most important thing that
you can do is to determine just what your "market" consists of.
The market for "Intel compatible desktop client operating system software",
which is the market area that Microsoft was found to have monopoly power
within, was determined by the Jackson court to specifically exclude Apple
computers and their software as well as Linux computers. Apple was excluded
then because it was not Intel compatible and Linux was excluded because it
was a server product. Given that definition, Microsoft has 100% of the
market or very close to it, since today there clearly is some linux aimed at
desktops and some money has changed hands on that basis.
The money is what makes the market. Markets are measured in terms of the
money spent to buy products that compete in the same market and market
growth or decline is measured in terms of money increases or decreases over
time. It has nothing to do with how many people use the products or how
often they use them. It only depends on how much money they spend annually
for the products.
If a customer purchases a linux based PC to replace a Windows based PC, that
is a loss of share for Microsoft. If the customer switches from Sun servers
and terminals to some distributed linux based PC network, that is a growth
of the desktop market as well as a share loss by Microsoft, but it is also
an opportunity for Microsoft to compete for the business.
Tim Prince
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:57:46 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
> us:
>
>
>>The term "market share" only relates to the share of some identified market
>>captured by some product provider to that market. It really only pertains
>>to whether or not your product has the largest share of that market because
>>your position in the market somewhat dictates your strategy and what the
>>future might hold for you based on market characteristics that have been
>>determined to be predictable from the past. The most important thing that
>>you can do is to determine just what your "market" consists of.
>
>
> not properly account for "consumer" penetration of the "free" portion
> of what Linux is... So I agree with the last sentence. Actually, one
> must determine how to redefine the word market in such a case.
The usual definition compares the number of copies of Windows sold
installed, plus those bought or downloaded on legitimate trials or
distributed to TechNet and MSDN subscribers, against the number of
full-priced linux copies sold. A majority of linux installations, even
for full-time business use, will count as Windows, as the machine came
with Windows, which was replaced by a copy of linux which was not
individually purchased.
Windows vs linux market share of applications which run on both is a
more interesting measure to some of us. I spend a majority of my work
time on an application which has more individual licensees on Windows,
yet linux accounts for a large majority of the number of CPUs licensed.
Tim Prince
>>captured by some product provider to that market. It really only pertains
>>to whether or not your product has the largest share of that market because
>>your position in the market somewhat dictates your strategy and what the
>>future might hold for you based on market characteristics that have been
>>determined to be predictable from the past. The most important thing that
>>you can do is to determine just what your "market" consists of.
>
>
lqu...@uku.co.uk
Patrick Grimbergen wrote:
>
> John Bailo reacted following:
> The most mainstream stat agencies (IDC) are calling Linux at 3% of
> /paid/ desktops with estimates of that rising to 7% in the next few
> years ( by 2007).
>
> That 3 to 7 percent doesn't include anybody who downloaded a distro and
> burned a CD, or a Knoppix live CD user or probably even someone who
> bought a distro that was burned by a third party from Amazon or Linux
> Central ( www.linuxcentral.com ) but not from the original supplier.
>
I don't believe this is a valid assumption to make at all. Assuming
this is a great way to artificially inflate market-share but if we're
going to count these people as Linux users then we should also count
the 10's of millions of illegal copies of Windows in China, Indonesia
and elsewhere. This nonsense of "it doesn't count downloads and copies
friends give away" is an excuse to account for the low number.
For the nth time nobody is going to calculate marketshare by looking at
sales and/or download numbers. All you need to do is to survey 10,000
random computer users and you have a valid statistical sampling. No
need to count or guess how many live CD's somebody copied.
billwg
"TokaMundo" <Toka...@weedizgood.org> wrote in message
news:n3g7d15lpom327rdq...@4ax.com...
>>software",
>>which is the market area that Microsoft was found to have monopoly power
>>within, was determined by the Jackson court to specifically exclude Apple
>>computers and their software as well as Linux computers.
>
> one that is capable of operating under Linux...
>
> Quandry, I'd say...
No quandary if you understand the context. A computer sold without Windows
and with Linux was the definition used by the Jackson court.
billwg
>>then because it was not Intel compatible and Linux was excluded because it
>>was a server product.
>
> INTEREST as a desktop OS, and has slowly evolved toward that end.
> It has always been a server OS.
>
>> Given that definition, Microsoft has 100% of the
>>market or very close to it,
>
> Millions.
>
>> since today there clearly is some linux aimed at
>>desktops and some money has changed hands on that basis.
>
> up yer mind...
You seem confused.
billwg
>>money spent to buy products that compete in the same market and market
>>growth or decline is measured in terms of money increases or decreases
>>over
>>time.
>
>
>> It has nothing to do with how many people use the products or how
>>often they use them.
>
> of the FREELY available OS product called Linux...
>
How do you know what Bill thinks? Did he tell you? Or did you read that in
COLA?
>> It only depends on how much money they spend annually
>>for the products.
>
> For the strictest analysis of the term, yes... however, for a
> statistic of number of OSes on boxes, the stats are quite different.
>
How do you know that number?
>>
>>If a customer purchases a linux based PC to replace a Windows based PC,
>>that
>>is a loss of share for Microsoft. If the customer switches from Sun
>>servers
>>and terminals to some distributed linux based PC network, that is a growth
>>of the desktop market as well as a share loss by Microsoft, but it is also
>>an opportunity for Microsoft to compete for the business.
>
> Once a customer switches to Linux.... good luck.. Billy. When the
> numbers come in at the end of the year, the IT department is happy,
> and gets bonuses... No turning back then...
A myth to be sure. An IT department buying Sun Microsystems hardware is a
worse proposition than an IT department buying Intel hardware and running
linux. The latter is a lot closer to buying Windows than the former and
which Intel compatible vendor is going to advertise the most and have the
most recognition?
Larry Qualig
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:16:09 GMT, Tim Prince
> <tpr...@nospamcomputer.org> Gave us:
>
>> A majority of linux installations, even
>>for full-time business use, will count as Windows, as the machine came
>>with Windows, which was replaced by a copy of linux which was not
>>individually purchased.
>
> own machines? I know that I would. I can make high end boxes a hell
> of a lot cheaper than pre-made versions, and I do not have to buy
> Windblows to do it.
>
I'd be most interested in hearing how you can under price Dell when it comes
to assembling a PC. Assuming that your time is worth absolutely zero, Dell
would still have you beat simply because of the economies of scale they are
able to take advantage of.
Jim
if all I want is a bog standard box, nothing special aesthetics-wise,
I'll go buy a Dell. But I'm a showoff, I like the Bling factor. So I buy
components and assemble my own. Sure, it works out more expensive than
buying a Dell with XP preinstalled, but it affords me the satisfaction
of knowing that I've built it myself. Kinda like raising a barn, yanno?
--
Cheers, http://www.dotware.co.uk
Jim http://www.dotware-entertainment.co.uk
Are more people violently opposed to wearing fur than leather because
it's easier to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs?
Larry Qualig
> On 12 Jul 2005 07:22:43 -0700, lqu...@uku.co.uk Gave us:
>
>>For the nth time nobody is going to calculate marketshare by looking at
>>sales and/or download numbers. All you need to do is to survey 10,000
>>random computer users and you have a valid statistical sampling. No
>>need to count or guess how many live CD's somebody copied.
>
>
> result than 10k average consumers ...
Perhaps this is why I said to survey *random* computer users. For the
obvious reason that you'll get skewed results if you surveyed employees of
Sun Micro, Redhat, Msft or Boeing.
> So a statistical sampling among
> average consumers is not a valid one. A statistical sampling among
> college CS or engineering students, however, would be.
If you're looking for marketshare then it needs to be random. Once you start
hand selecting "college CS students" the results become invalid. A large
enough random sampling would likely include a fair number of college
students, lawyers, government workers and garbage men. If you're out to find
what OS people in the world are using you need to survey all cross-sections
of the general population.
Assuming there are 500 million computer users on this planet and you want
the survey to be accurate to within 1%.
You would need to survey 6806 users to get a statistical result that has a
90% confidence level of being accurate to within 1%. To be 95% confident
that the results are accurate you'd need to survey 9604 users. To have a 99%
confidence level in the survey results you would need to survey 16,589
users. The number I picked (10,000) will give you a 99% confidence level
that the survey is accurate to within 1.2%.
Note: Do *not* confuse a 1.2% accuracy rate with Linux having an installed
user base of x% +/- 1.2%. The way to read this is that whatever "x%" comes
out to... that number will be accurate to within 1.2%.
Larry Qualig
"Jim" <ja...@the-computer-shop.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4mZAe.1096$vz5...@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> I'd be most interested in hearing how you can under price Dell when it
>> comes to assembling a PC. Assuming that your time is worth absolutely
>> zero, Dell would still have you beat simply because of the economies of
>> scale they are able to take advantage of.
>>
>
> if all I want is a bog standard box, nothing special aesthetics-wise, I'll
> go buy a Dell. But I'm a showoff, I like the Bling factor. So I buy
> components and assemble my own. Sure, it works out more expensive than
> buying a Dell with XP preinstalled, but it affords me the satisfaction of
> knowing that I've built it myself. Kinda like raising a barn, yanno?
>
Are you telling us that you put those green and purple neon lights in your
case. I'm talking about "pimp my ride" but with computers.
Sort of like this....
http://aquaboxpc.com/products/halcyon/
Larry Qualig
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:29:31 -0400, "Larry Qualig"
> <removethis...@uku.co.uk> Gave us:
>
>>
>>"TokaMundo" <Toka...@weedizgood.org> wrote in message
>>news:bcn8d11obrilccgkp...@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:16:09 GMT, Tim Prince
>>> <tpr...@nospamcomputer.org> Gave us:
>>>
>>>> A majority of linux installations, even
>>>>for full-time business use, will count as Windows, as the machine came
>>>>with Windows, which was replaced by a copy of linux which was not
>>>>individually purchased.
>>>
>>> Do you really think that a smart IT personage would not assemble his
>>> own machines? I know that I would. I can make high end boxes a hell
>>> of a lot cheaper than pre-made versions, and I do not have to buy
>>> Windblows to do it.
>>>
>>
>>
>>I'd be most interested in hearing how you can under price Dell when it
>>comes
>>to assembling a PC.
>
> CAD workstations though?
>
>> Assuming that your time is worth absolutely zero, Dell
>>would still have you beat simply because of the economies of scale they
>>are
>>able to take advantage of.
>
>
> What if I want a dual CPU, Dual core capable MOBO that I can expect
> 3 to 5 years of reliable fast operating service from? I have to do
> that myself.
That's cool. I've pretty much built my own systems for the past 15 years or
so. Probably because I prefer to upgrade one component at a time. New video
card one year. A few months later I might get some new hard drives. A new
mobo and RAM the next. Then start the cycle over again.
I still to this "to a degree" but it's just easier, faster and cheaper
(oddly enough) to just get a whole new machine. I still do a fair amount of
customization by adding my own RAID controller, drives and etc to it.
Jim
colours, 24 LED bolts holding it together, also various colours, 60 feet
of neon string, also various colours, 9 cold cathode lit fans, 4
blacklights, and all the cables are treated or have been switched out
for UV reactive. Everytihng is controlled by switches on the fascia,
with the exception of the fangear, which is all on thermionic diodes.
The face cover and side panel have been etched with UV transfers, the
the top fan has a few streamers tied onto the grille. Looks fantastic,
goes like shit off a shovel, and cost me an absolute packet. Saying
that, I did build it last year, and for what I paid for the processor I
could at today's prices, build the whole system in a cheap and nasty
steel midi tower case.
Larry Qualig
>>>
>>>if all I want is a bog standard box, nothing special aesthetics-wise,
>>>I'll go buy a Dell. But I'm a showoff, I like the Bling factor. So I buy
>>>components and assemble my own. Sure, it works out more expensive than
>>>buying a Dell with XP preinstalled, but it affords me the satisfaction of
>>>knowing that I've built it myself. Kinda like raising a barn, yanno?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Are you telling us that you put those green and purple neon lights in
>> your case. I'm talking about "pimp my ride" but with computers.
>>
>> Sort of like this....
>>
>> http://aquaboxpc.com/products/halcyon/
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Yes. Totally. My clear acrylic box has: ten 6" neon bars, various colours,
> 24 LED bolts holding it together, also various colours, 60 feet of neon
> string, also various colours, 9 cold cathode lit fans, 4 blacklights, and
> all the cables are treated or have been switched out for UV reactive.
> Everytihng is controlled by switches on the fascia, with the exception of
> the fangear, which is all on thermionic diodes. The face cover and side
> panel have been etched with UV transfers, the the top fan has a few
> streamers tied onto the grille. Looks fantastic, goes like shit off a
> shovel, and cost me an absolute packet. Saying that, I did build it last
> year, and for what I paid for the processor I could at today's prices,
> build the whole system in a cheap and nasty steel midi tower case.
>
Wow... I never would have guessed it. When I read these COLA posts I tend to
get this "mental picture" of how I envision the other posters. I realize
that my mental picture is completely wrong 98% of the time but I can't help
but form one anyhow to associate with the names and people here. Well Jim,
my mental picture of you never included this "computing disco" of a system
that you have.
I have a friend (yes folks... bring on the posts of how could I possibly
have a friend - Hint: I pay him well.) who built a very nice system for
himself. It doesn't have the lights and stuff but it's the huuuge all
aluminum case made by Lian-Li or something like that. The case looked
beautiful and he installed really quiet cooling fans and etc. in it. There
was just something about this really tall bare-metal aluminum tower that
looked really cool. But as you mentioned, these cases do not come cheap.
Jim
Lian-Li cases are gorgeous. I particularly like the swish-fronted,
brushed chrome finish they use, especially when they use blue LED bars
for hidden highlighting. Kinda makes me moist. My next build will most
likely be in one of those.
Hopefully it'll be soon, as nefertiti's well overdue for a
strip/polish/rebuild, she's picked up a lot of dust over the past year
(oops to me for not installing filters from the getgo!), and I don't
want to do that until there's a box ready to go in while that's doing.
The Ghost In The Machine
<removethis...@uku.co.uk>
wrote
on Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:12:19 -0400
<1121217140.c3df67e093a068f0910814de662058f5@teranews>:
Nice eye candy if one likes glow-in-the-dark neon blue, but
does it enhance performance when fragging people with UT2004
or Halo 2? :-)
I'm inclined to think more along the lines of a Dell case (mostly
because the Precision cases open up nicely to get at things)
or the G5 (ditto, though I've never owned one). Of course the
real gem is the video card -- or would be; all I've got is
a sucky ATi9000 (which is currently sitting in a plastic case,
not in use) and a BT5500 (which is OK but still has framerate
problems with complex UT2004 scenery -- but it's a heck of
an improvement over the aforementioned ATi9000).
So OK, I've been an engineer way too long... :-)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
Jim
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 01:28:14 GMT, Jim <ja...@the-computer-shop.co.uk>
> Gave us:
>
>
>>>
>>Yes. Totally. My clear acrylic box has: ten 6" neon bars,
>
>
>
nope, no water cooling - heck, I don't allow a cup of coffee within
eight feet of it!
Patrick Grimbergen
> Nearly all PCs sold without windows are hand assembled, and hand
> installed. There aren't that many vendors actually producing Linux
> installed boxed, so th statistic gets skewed quite a bit.
I have a promedion computer (centrally essembled), it came without an
Operating System, but they did strongly advise me to buy a OEM WinXP at
the store, because the normal version is X-times more expensive. They
gave me a weird look when I said I did not want any Microsoft prducts on
the PC.... ever...
r.e.b...@usa.net
> "John Kloosterman" <JClosed_AD_netscape_DoT_net> wrote in message
> news:92ff7$42d3b445$3ea6021a$10...@news.versatel.nl...
> >
> > Well - the problem here is the therm "market-share". It is perfectly
> > posible to see how many pieces of Windows OS are beeing sold, with Linux
> > however it is a different story. Most versions (distributions) of Linux
> > are free for download, so the users dont have to buy or register anyware.
> > That makes it almost impossible to figure out how many people are using
> > Linux. What makes it even more complicated is the fact that there are many
> > pirated versions of Windows, ánd a lot of people using Windows and Linux
> > in a mixed environment or as a double-boot system.
Market share statistics can vary radically depending on what you are
counting.
Count how many machines are "sold" with Linux preinstalled, and the
number is almost microscopic (since most Linux servers are configured
by the corporate administrator). Ironically, many of the servers now
running Linux were originally "Sold" as Windows machines.
You can count number of servers, which puts Linux at about 30% and
Windows at about 40%, with UNIX at about 30%, depending on the year
sampled.
You can also count revenue, but again, this will skew the numbers
toward Windows - especially if you make the distinction between License
fees and Support fees and do not include support fees in the count.
Again, because Linux usually gets the "leftovers" or "hand-me-downs",
Linux will be consistently be undercounted here too.
A very interesting approach is to count "function points" or
"processing equivalents". A single Linux server typically does the
work of 3-4 NT servers. A Solaris StarFire or HP Superdome can do the
work of 5,000 NT servers. A Z-Series e-server running ZVM and Linux
can do the work of 50,000 NT servers.
> > So -i think its impossible to get accurate figures. You can only use
> > statistic methodes, but then it depends on the willingness (and
> > acuressness) of the "statistical group" involved. It leaves also the door
> > wide open to "bias" the outcomings (as has happend in the past and wíll
> > happen in the future).
It's possible to get accurate figures, just very expensive. There are
services who do detailed studies, and gather the numbers a number of
different ways. Often, "abridged" reports are published about 6-12
months later for use by advertisers.
> The term "market share" only relates to the share of some identified market
> captured by some product provider to that market. It really only pertains
> to whether or not your product has the largest share of that market because
> your position in the market somewhat dictates your strategy and what the
> future might hold for you based on market characteristics that have been
> determined to be predictable from the past. The most important thing that
> you can do is to determine just what your "market" consists of.
This is why it's so important to know the exact methodology used in the
survey.
It's also necessary to have the raw numbers as well as the various
percentages. It's also important to have the breakdown of anything in
the "other" classification.
One of the great classic surveys is the "ip/browser" counter survey. A
company did a survey of something like 500 sites, all running Windows
based servers, and doing "browser counts". Further disclosure of the
details showed that this company was only counting Linux on IP
addresses that showed ONLY Linux. Furthermore, it was counting DHCP
pools indescribinately as well. In this survey, Linux got less than
1%, but this was ONLY browsers that had "Linux" in the browser
signature. A bit of research into the 3% marked "other" showed that
nearly all of the "other" turned out to be Linux because Netscape and
others were not specifically placing "Linux" into the default
signature.
> The market for "Intel compatible desktop client operating system software",
> which is the market area that Microsoft was found to have monopoly power
> within, was determined by the Jackson court to specifically exclude Apple
> computers and their software as well as Linux computers.
I think that even at the time that the trial started, Apple had less
than 5% of the established market share. Microsoft claimed during
their defense testimony that Linux had 14% of the market. It's quite
possible that Microsoft was counting cookies against signatures and
tracking all permutations. This would be about the only reliable type
of count. Even then, you might get dual-boot machines counted as both
Windows and Linux (since there would be two different cookies), or
VMWare images.
> Apple was excluded
> then because it was not Intel compatible and Linux was excluded because it
> was a server product.
During the trial, Microsoft did try to give Linux a much larger market
share. I found it significant that no one actually challenged them. I
might have been grounds for challenging the findings of fact as well as
the findings of Law.
They just dropped a big number and everybody let it slip.
> Given that definition, Microsoft has 100% of the
> market or very close to it, since today there clearly is some linux aimed at
> desktops and some money has changed hands on that basis.
One of my favorite numbers is the number of licenses Microsoft claims
to have shipped/sold, and the number of PCs the OEMs claim they have
shipped. Microsoft has about 120% of the market by that count. I know
from the period of time I was setting next to the cubicle used by the
Microsoft rep to make calls to a number of customers and decision
makers that the sales rep was offering substantial discounts to
corporate customers when they purchased more licenses than they
actually needed.
Of course, since Microsoft often oversells the OEM and then oversells
Windows licenses to Corporate customers for the same machines - it's
even conceivable that Microsoft has over 200% of the market. And since
Microsoft donates tax deductable Windows licenses to 501C organizations
when the machines above are donated to charities, Microsoft might even
have something like 250% of the market. If you think about it, it's
really quite a feat of marketing.
> The money is what makes the market. Markets are measured in terms of the
> money spent to buy products that compete in the same market and market
> growth or decline is measured in terms of money increases or decreases over
> time. It has nothing to do with how many people use the products or how
> often they use them. It only depends on how much money they spend annually
> for the products.
This certainly gives Microsoft the advantage. If you figure Microsoft
licenses and cost about 3 times the price of Linux licenses, and that
Linux hardware is mostly hand-me-down hardware from Windows, Windows is
certainly going to have the biggest dollar sign percentage.
> If a customer purchases a linux based PC to replace a Windows based PC, that
> is a loss of share for Microsoft.
The more interesting case is when a customer purchases a new Windows PC
to replace an older Windows PC, then the old PC is converted to Linux.
The practice of purchasing a new machine for Linux seems to have
increased since the availability of AMD-64 bit chip.
> If the customer switches from Sun servers
> and terminals to some distributed linux based PC network, that is a growth
> of the desktop market as well as a share loss by Microsoft, but it is also
> an opportunity for Microsoft to compete for the business.
This one is more tricky. If someone were to upgrade from a group of
10-12 Sun servers with 2 1 billion instruction per second processors,
to a StarFire with 64 processors each running 4 billion
instructions/second or roughly 128 times more power, they might not
need so many servers. By server count, Sun is losing market share, by
cost, the supporting hardware of the separate machines would make the
new server cost less - again, Sun loses market share. Of course, in
reality, the Sun box is actually doing the work of more machines.
> > So - i guess there wil be no conclusive answer. I think however that the 1
> > percent mentionned is a far to low figure. In my neigbourhood i have seen
> > an strong increase of Linux desktop usters in the last half year, so i
> > think that figure is very dated...
Again, it depends on what you are counting. The range goes from less
than 1% of all the machines sold in the United States by OEMs, to as
high as 35% of the server market based on number of servers. If you
really want a stretch, you can figure Linux is almost 40% based on
"function point" counts - essentially "NT equivalents".
> > John.
The Ghost In The Machine
<Toka...@weedizgood.org>
wrote
on Wed, 13 Jul 2005 04:59:49 GMT
<v879d1p14pa48atah...@4ax.com>:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 04:00:03 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
> <ew...@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> Gave us:
>
>>
>>I'm inclined to think more along the lines of a Dell case (mostly
>>because the Precision cases open up nicely to get at things)
>
>
> modular inside, and I couldn't be more satisfied with it.
I don't have access to that newsgroup (mostly because I've not
bothered to set up my Leafnode) but http://www.antec.com/us
does have some interesting capabilities, touting among other
things isolated thermal zones and a sleek but simple bordered-black/
anodized aluminum and/or cold-rolled steel affair (the P180).
I don't know how revolutionary it is but it does look nice.
Of course, it's also priced accordingly - $169 - but it should
last awhile.
(And that's sans power supply, AFAICT, though it does come with
several trispeed cooling fans.)
There's also a number of other cases. I'm all for transparency
in software development but I can't say I find clear plastic
side insets all that useful. :-)
>
> I do so like those lian-li jobs I saw that "Monarch" showcased with
> all the tiny holes in the front panel... Cool!
Hmm...I have no idea what case you're referring to, then,
but certainly holes are a necessity somewhere if only to
get the heat out. :-)
rapskat
>> if all I want is a bog standard box, nothing special aesthetics-wise, I'll
>> go buy a Dell. But I'm a showoff, I like the Bling factor. So I buy
>> components and assemble my own. Sure, it works out more expensive than
>> buying a Dell with XP preinstalled, but it affords me the satisfaction of
>> knowing that I've built it myself. Kinda like raising a barn, yanno?
>>
>
>
> Are you telling us that you put those green and purple neon lights in your
> case. I'm talking about "pimp my ride" but with computers.
>
> Sort of like this....
>
> http://aquaboxpc.com/products/halcyon/
Heh. I guess it's just a difference in
opinions/tastes/preferences/priorities/etc., but I never really cared much
what my system looked like, but I care alot what it performs like.
Considering my tower is usually hidden away anyways, this seems like a
moot point.
"Hey, what's that strange glow coming from underneath your desk?"
--
rapskat - 03:42:59 up 4 days, 3:15, 4 users, load average: 0.44, 0.61, 0.56
"The Arkansas legislature passed a law that states that the
Arkansas River can rise no higher than to the Main Street bridge in
Little Rock."
John Bailo
> "Patrick Grimbergen" <pat...@grimweb.info> wrote in message
> news:42d49c76$0$74537$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl...
> same response to oddballs.
>
>
You mean like a Windope who spends all day monitoring a Linux ng?
The Ghost In The Machine
<k269d1pv5o26kntmf...@4ax.com>:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 02:02:04 GMT, Jim <ja...@the-computer-shop.co.uk>
> Gave us:
>
>> Kinda makes me moist.
>
>
> Ewwww.... TMI, dude!
Seconded, though http://www.lianli.com resolved to
http://www.silverpcs.com/ which among others features some
very odd pyramid casings. Not sure about their capabilities
but there's some art thereto.
(Also some bling. $295 for an aluminum server case? Woof.
Not that I'm in the market admittedly -- though it's tempting.)
billwg
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:37:18 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
> us:
>
>>How do you know what Bill thinks? Did he tell you? Or did you read that
>>in
>>COLA?
>
> Are you saying that Billy and his directors aren't getting sweaty
> armpits?
If I had his kind of money in my account, I might worry about a
thermonuclear war, but I wouldn't worry at all about some silly twits
telling one another that a homemade server OS is going to eat my lunch. Do
you remember the Iraqi Public Relations guy? His job was telling silly
twits that they were actually winning the war and that the invaders were
suffering terrible losses. The Iraqis who didn't live near the airport
believed him.
Now you say you believe those who tell you that Microsoft and its officers
are quaking in their boots over linux, but who is telling that tale? People
have had access to linux for over 10 years now and it is still a curiosity
in the desktop environment. It is being used a lot now as a server, but
mostly that is due to IBM adopting it as a marketing ploy against Sun. The
use of linux in those venues is mostly Red Hat, too. Novell has about 10%
of the Red Hat volume and there isn't anyone apparently in third place.
Keep kidding yourself, though, you seem to enjoy it!
Jim
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:12:19 -0400, Larry Qualig wrote:
>
>
>>>if all I want is a bog standard box, nothing special aesthetics-wise, I'll
>>>go buy a Dell. But I'm a showoff, I like the Bling factor. So I buy
>>>components and assemble my own. Sure, it works out more expensive than
>>>buying a Dell with XP preinstalled, but it affords me the satisfaction of
>>>knowing that I've built it myself. Kinda like raising a barn, yanno?
>>>
>>
>>
>>Are you telling us that you put those green and purple neon lights in your
>>case. I'm talking about "pimp my ride" but with computers.
>>
>>Sort of like this....
>>
>>http://aquaboxpc.com/products/halcyon/
>
>
> Heh. I guess it's just a difference in
> opinions/tastes/preferences/priorities/etc., but I never really cared much
> what my system looked like, but I care alot what it performs like.
>
> Considering my tower is usually hidden away anyways, this seems like a
> moot point.
>
> "Hey, what's that strange glow coming from underneath your desk?"
>
hehe... my acrylic box sits on top of my desk, next to the twin panel
TFT. It's got the Bling factor /and/ the performance factor. :)
billwg
"Ray Ingles" <sorc...@dmc22317.local> wrote in message
news:slrnddaovn....@dmc22317.local...
: In article <qybBe.192880$IO.1...@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, billwg wrote:
: >> Are you saying that Billy and his directors aren't getting sweaty
: >> armpits?
: >
: > If I had his kind of money in my account, I might worry about a
: > thermonuclear war, but I wouldn't worry at all about some silly twits
: > telling one another that a homemade server OS is going to eat my lunch.
: No, but they might worry about one with plenty of corporate backing.
: Good thing Linux doesn't... oh, wait.
:
: > Now you say you believe those who tell you that Microsoft and its
: > are quaking in their boots over linux, but who is telling that tale?
: You mean besides Microsoft?
:
: http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
:
Well, Ray, does the author of the alleged piece speak for Microsoft? It
seems to me that the thing was written by some newbie who, like all newbies,
has an opinion, but that opinion is only a thought and not an expressed
policy of Microsoft. Unless you see it written by a member of the
management committee, it is just a curiosity.
: > People have had access to linux for over 10 years now and it is still
: > a curiosity in the desktop environment.
:
: I remember when people were saying it would always be a curiosity in the
: server environment, too. In fact, see my .sig below.
:
: > Keep kidding yourself, though, you seem to enjoy it!
:
: But not as much as you seem to. As I've said before, I don't think MS
: is in danger of imminent demise. But I do think they face some long-term
: problems, and Linux is a good candidate to address those problems.
:
Well every company has long term problems with their product lines, Ray, and
it is the measure of the company as to how well they adapt to a changing
market. Microsoft's record on this is most excellent, wouldn't you agree?
They have managed to convince the world to continue to use Windows in spite
of over a decade of attempts by the linuxers to subvert their markets. In
that time they have gone from zero to about 40% share of the overall server
market and have held onto essentially 100% of the Intel based desktop client
OS market. No mean feat for any company and a tribute to the business
skills of those running the show at MSFT!
Give the devil his due, Ray!
Larry Qualig
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:54:51 -0400, "Larry Qualig"
> <removethis...@uku.co.uk> Gave us:
>
>>
>>If you're looking for marketshare then it needs to be random. Once you
>>start
>>hand selecting "college CS students" the results become invalid.
>
> Not when your "selection" involves a "random" public which is largely
> uninformed about the available choices... D'oh!
But by definition this is "marketshare" is it not?
B Gruff
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:57:46 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
> us:
>
>>The term "market share" only relates to the share of some identified
>>market
>>captured by some product provider to that market. It really only
>>pertains to whether or not your product has the largest share of
>>that market because your position in the market somewhat dictates
>>your strategy and what the future might hold for you based on market
>>characteristics that have been
>>determined to be predictable from the past. The most important
>>thing that you can do is to determine just what your "market"
>>consists of.
>
> Though your definition is for SOLD, "marketed" products, it would
> not properly account for "consumer" penetration of the "free"
> portion of what Linux is... So I agree with the last sentence.
> Actually, one must determine how to redefine the word market in such
> a case.
I wonder what happens if one speaks of the market as "number bought" -
literally?
For instance, there was a large "market" over here many years ago for
plastic daffodils. One was given away "free" (bundled) with every
packet of a well-known detergent.
The Windows advocates here would have me believe that Windows is
"free" (gratis) in that it is bundled with a new computer.
Obviously, if price is the same (as was the packet of detergent with
or without the plastic daffodil), it will tend to be "bought".
Hows abouts we compare the number of Windows systems "sold" (we could
consider first just the private consumer) by walking into the shop
and buying the boxed edition, or by doing so by mail order, against
Linux "sold"?
I could even go on to argue that Linux downladed for gratis is "sold"
with a selling price of zero, in that obtaining it was not
conditional on buying anything else.
I wonder if that might change the picture?:-)
(btw, I don't see many plastic daffodils in vases these days!)
Bill
billwg
"Patrick Grimbergen" <pat...@grimweb.info> wrote in message
news:42d49c76$0$74537$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl...
Well, you might interpret it as a weird look, but most people would have the
same response to oddballs.
The Ghost In The Machine
<angrya...@n0spam.com>
wrote
on Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:47:42 -0500
<42d561d0$0$8017$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>:
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ew...@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
> message news:m3vfq2-...@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...
> http://www.antec.com/us
>> does have some interesting capabilities, touting among other
>> things isolated thermal zones and a sleek but simple bordered-black/
>> anodized aluminum and/or cold-rolled steel affair (the P180).
>>
>> I don't know how revolutionary it is but it does look nice.
>> Of course, it's also priced accordingly - $169 - but it should
>> last awhile.
>
>
> customer. Although the case is very nicely designed, its built very cheaply.
> The aluminum is very thin, the front is very cheap plastic, and internal
> edges are not treated for burs or sharp edges. If I could somehow combine
> the style of this case with Lian Li build quality, I would love it to death.
>
> Dan
>
Hmm...noted. Perhaps that's why the Lian-Li cost more.
I can only guess at this point.
Angry American
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ew...@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
message news:m3vfq2-...@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...
> does have some interesting capabilities, touting among other
> things isolated thermal zones and a sleek but simple bordered-black/
> anodized aluminum and/or cold-rolled steel affair (the P180).
>
> I don't know how revolutionary it is but it does look nice.
> Of course, it's also priced accordingly - $169 - but it should
> last awhile.
Ray Ingles
>> armpits?
>
> If I had his kind of money in my account, I might worry about a
> thermonuclear war, but I wouldn't worry at all about some silly twits
> telling one another that a homemade server OS is going to eat my lunch.
No, but they might worry about one with plenty of corporate backing.
Good thing Linux doesn't... oh, wait.
> Now you say you believe those who tell you that Microsoft and its officers
> are quaking in their boots over linux, but who is telling that tale?
You mean besides Microsoft?
http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
> People have had access to linux for over 10 years now and it is still
> a curiosity in the desktop environment.
I remember when people were saying it would always be a curiosity in the
server environment, too. In fact, see my .sig below.
> Keep kidding yourself, though, you seem to enjoy it!
But not as much as you seem to. As I've said before, I don't think MS
is in danger of imminent demise. But I do think they face some long-term
problems, and Linux is a good candidate to address those problems.
--
Sincerely,
Ray Ingles (313) 227-2317
I remember when people said Linux would never be more than a toy. Then
they said it was capable of some neat things, but would never be used
in a business. Then they said it could be used for small things in a
business, but it'd never scale to the high end. Now, it's fine in a
server role, but will never be any good as a desktop...
Patrick Grimbergen
> Sorry, posted this one wrongly... so again... this time the right way...
> Sally Squats wrote:
> >>Linux is FREE...Market Share, less that 1.0 percent as a desktop
> >>system.
>
> Is this true?
> Servers I think are about 80%, is it not?
<snip>
> How's other websites doing in this matter? 1% seems to be an
> understatement.
According to Microsoft Linux has a marketshare of 14%
(see above post/Microsoft anti-trust case)
This sounds more into the direction of the real marketshare to me then 1%.
billwg
: On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:45:10 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
:
: >Now you say you believe those who tell you that Microsoft and its
: >are quaking in their boots over linux, but who is telling that tale?
People
: >have had access to linux for over 10 years now and it is still a
curiosity
: >in the desktop environment
:
: Tell us, Billy... if it is a mere curiosity why are there several
: tens of magazine publishers publishing quite profitable magazines
: about it?
Are those linux magazines? How profitable are they? They don't seem to
last very long.
:
: >Keep kidding yourself, though, you seem to enjoy it!
:
: You keep kidding yourself. We'll be laughing.
I think the correct term is "giggling," Toka! LOL!!!
billwg
: On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:45:10 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
: >
: >"TokaMundo" <Toka...@weedizgood.org> wrote in message
: >news:vno8d1pmsa414fels...@4ax.com...
: >> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:37:18 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: >> us:
: >>
: >>>How do you know what Bill thinks? Did he tell you? Or did you read
that
: >>>in
: >>>COLA?
: >>
: >> Are you saying that Billy and his directors aren't getting sweaty
: >> armpits?
: >
: >If I had his kind of money in my account, I might worry about a
: >thermonuclear war, but I wouldn't worry at all about some silly twits
: >telling one another that a homemade server OS is going to eat my lunch.
Do
: >you remember the Iraqi Public Relations guy? His job was telling silly
: >twits that they were actually winning the war and that the invaders were
: >suffering terrible losses. The Iraqis who didn't live near the airport
: >believed him.
: >
: >Now you say you believe those who tell you that Microsoft and its
officers
: >are quaking in their boots over linux,
: Well.. why not be forthcoming about access parameters on NTFS
: volumes? Fear!
:
: With over 150 other file systems out there that ARE disclosing their
: access parameters, why does Billy choose to thumb his nose at the rest
: of the free world? Also, why does BillyWare not allow one to look at
: or access other file system volumes while one operates in his severely
: threatened OS realm? Fear!
:
I do not know what you mean by "access parameters" unless you are talking
about the file permissions set during file open operations, Toka, you will
need to be more specific. I am at a loss to see how this might relate to
any fear that Bill Gates might have either. Could you connect this up? As
to alternate file system access, they do connect to FAT and FAT32, of
course, but maybe those don't count with you. Even so, I wouldn't attribute
that restriction to any fear. Rather, that would seem to indicate a bold
confidence that their system was superior to yours and so yours would not
need to be considered. No money in it, eh? BTW, if you scout around, you
can find folks giving away or selling installable file systems for WinNT and
later installations. All it takes is a .SYS file to do the job.
: > but who is telling that tale? People
: >have had access to linux for over 10 years now and it is still a
curiosity
: >in the desktop environment.
:
: Yeah right... it is a curiosity. Tell that to IBM, and the
: Pentagon. They'll laugh in your face.
:
Let's see here, if I tell them that I don't think that Bill Gates is quaking
in his boots over linux and that linux has not had any meaningful
penetration in terms of desktop use in over 10 years, they will laugh at me?
When IBM was in the desktop business, did they even offer a linux machine
for sale? Has the Pentagon ever made an order for linux machines? I saw
recently where the Navy bought some billion dollars worth of Windows
machines for installation throughout the Naval Air Systems Command sites as
well as on shipboard.
: Why did Billy make deals with IBM to disclose particulars about
: WIN32 so that OS/2 could utilize it, then back out of his agreement?
: Fear!
:
Hell, Toka, Bill Gates made a deal with ME to disclose particulars about
Win32 APIs! They call it the MSDN Subscription series. I recommend the
Enterprise level, you get everything you need at a great price!
: > It is being used a lot now as a server, but
: >mostly that is due to IBM adopting it as a marketing ploy against Sun.
:
: Wrong. It has been used as a server for years now, and IBM has only
: just recently gotten on board. You lack historical knowledge, thus
: you cannot make a valid argument in this arena.
:
Well, it has been several years now and linux was nowhere until Big Blue got
the idea to use it as an excuse to drop their price.
: > The
: >use of linux in those venues is mostly Red Hat, too.
:
: Wrong.
Nope. Look at what is shipping, silly.
:
: > Novell has about 10%
: >of the Red Hat volume and there isn't anyone apparently in third place.
:
: Novell doesn't have ANY percentage of "The Red Hat volume". Do you
: know how stupid that sounds?
:
You seem to misinterpret the remark, Toka. It seemed clear to me. What it
meant was Red Hat sells more than ten times as much linux as Novell,
measured by dollar volume per the SEC reports filed by RHAT and NOVL. How
did you interpret it? Certainly not that Red Hat is distributing Novell
Linux as well as their own?
: >
: >Keep kidding yourself, though, you seem to enjoy it!
:
: Go look in a mirror, you speak of yourself.
Well, I do enjoy my posts, Toka! Don't you? Be honest now! LOL!!!
Ray Ingles
>: http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
>:
> Well, Ray, does the author of the alleged piece speak for Microsoft?
How odd... you say "the alleged piece" (singular) when multiple articles
specifically quote Microsoft documents (at least 1, 2, 3, and 7).
> It seems to me that the thing was written by some newbie who, like all
> newbies, has an opinion, but that opinion is only a thought and not an
> expressed policy of Microsoft. Unless you see it written by a member
> of the management committee, it is just a curiosity.
I'll quote from the site:
http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween3.php
"Written by a staff engineer -- with contributions, endorsements, and
reviews by two Program Managers, the Senior Vice President in charge of
NT development, and two members of the eight-person Executive Committee..."
>: But not as much as you seem to. As I've said before, I don't think MS
>: is in danger of imminent demise. But I do think they face some long-term
>: problems, and Linux is a good candidate to address those problems.
>:
> Well every company has long term problems with their product lines, Ray,
> and it is the measure of the company as to how well they adapt to a
> changing market. Microsoft's record on this is most excellent, wouldn't
> you agree?
Meh. Linux is about 10% of the overall market, and Windows is 34.4%. And
that's in *revenue*, not *units*. Linux sells for less than Windows, so
in actual units it's a much higher share than revenue numbers tell. And
then there are market effects those numbers don't capture - like 'free'
Linux installations that increase Linux's visibility and penetration but
lock out that part of the market from Microsoft. (Perhaps that's why the
overall server market is not growing as fast as it did last year... the
servers are being deployed, but they aren't running purchased software.)
Considering that Microsoft has *much* more capital to throw around, for
both development and marketing, I have to ask why their numbers aren't
much better than that...
They've done all right in the past, but as I've said before, they almost
missed the Internet boat, and they only have to make *one* mistake like
that to lose relevance fast.
> Give the devil his due, Ray!
I did. It's not due as much as *you* give it.
--
Sincerely,
Ray Ingles (313) 227-2317
"Personally, I've been hearing all my life about the Serious
Philosophical Issues posed by life extension, and my attitude
has always been that I'm willing to grapple with those issues
for as many centuries as it takes." - Patrick Nielsen Hayden
chrisv
>>If I could somehow combine
>>the style of this case with Lian Li build quality, I would love it to death.
>
> Yes, I too am noticing that they are far better cases...
Chenbro makes some very nice cases, too.
billwg
"Ray Ingles" <sorc...@dmc22317.local> wrote in message
news:slrnddcmh4....@dmc22317.local...
: In article <P1fBe.192980$IO.1...@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, billwg wrote:
: >: http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
: >:
: > Well, Ray, does the author of the alleged piece speak for Microsoft?
:
: How odd... you say "the alleged piece" (singular) when multiple articles
: specifically quote Microsoft documents (at least 1, 2, 3, and 7).
:
: > It seems to me that the thing was written by some newbie who, like all
: > newbies, has an opinion, but that opinion is only a thought and not an
: > expressed policy of Microsoft. Unless you see it written by a member
: > of the management committee, it is just a curiosity.
:
: I'll quote from the site:
:
: http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween3.php
:
: "Written by a staff engineer -- with contributions, endorsements, and
: reviews by two Program Managers, the Senior Vice President in charge of
: NT development, and two members of the eight-person Executive
Committee..."
:
anywhere and the thing has been kicking around for some 7 years now. It is
a self-serving piece created by one of the OSS gurus and makes for a fine
myth if you are so eager to believe that you will disregard the lack of
supporting evidence.
: >: But not as much as you seem to. As I've said before, I don't think MS
: >: is in danger of imminent demise. But I do think they face some
long-term
: >: problems, and Linux is a good candidate to address those problems.
: >:
: > Well every company has long term problems with their product lines, Ray,
: > and it is the measure of the company as to how well they adapt to a
: > changing market. Microsoft's record on this is most excellent, wouldn't
: > you agree?
:
: Meh. Linux is about 10% of the overall market, and Windows is 34.4%. And
: that's in *revenue*, not *units*. Linux sells for less than Windows, so
: in actual units it's a much higher share than revenue numbers tell. And
: then there are market effects those numbers don't capture - like 'free'
: Linux installations that increase Linux's visibility and penetration but
: lock out that part of the market from Microsoft. (Perhaps that's why the
: overall server market is not growing as fast as it did last year... the
: servers are being deployed, but they aren't running purchased software.)
:
Which is what I have been saying all along, Ray. The server market is the
server market and if you want to have a business in that market you have to
deal with the dynamics of that market. Microsoft has increased server
revenues from nothing to their current position and have increased their
revenues faster than the overall market growth every year. That shows an
ever increasing share. Can linux ruin the business opportunities in that
market? I don't think so, but perhaps they can continue to do some damage.
I'm curious to see just where the market goes and how the commercial unix
products react. So far they have been relatively paralyzed. I would
imagine that the unix vendors could fight linux more effectively on
copyright and patent issues since they know the territory and Sun's
acquisition of the IP rights from Microsoft may become a factor.
: Considering that Microsoft has *much* more capital to throw around, for
: both development and marketing, I have to ask why their numbers aren't
: much better than that...
:
Well, ask Sun if they would be willing to trade! IBM's AIX has been at the
job for a lot longer than Windows server OS versions and they didn't get
anywhere near as far. For that matter, linux is in a distant position
versus Windows in the server space. Of course you may have been able to do
better had you chosen to enter that market yourself, Ray, or so you say, but
there's a lot of big guys playing there, IBM, Sun, HP, so it may be a
tougher nut than you presume.
: They've done all right in the past, but as I've said before, they almost
: missed the Internet boat, and they only have to make *one* mistake like
: that to lose relevance fast.
:
: > Give the devil his due, Ray!
:
: I did. It's not due as much as *you* give it.
:
Oh you did not. You snivel and carp about 34.4% not being much of a show
when 34.4% seems to be the leader in the clubhouse at midnight of the last
day of the tourney. I think we have a winner!
billwg
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:26:48 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
: >I do not know what you mean by "access parameters" unless you are talking
: >about the file permissions set during file open operations, Toka, you
will
: >need to be more specific.
:
: For a LONG time now, NTFS was only read access from Linux. The
: reason was because our illustrious "friends" over at MS would not give
: any particulars on writing to the file system correctly.
:
: We eventually "back doored" our way into it. Too bad for Billy. We
: got what we wanted after all.
Maybe, maybe not, Toka, but how does that relate to showing "fear"?
billwg
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:26:48 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
: > I am at a loss to see how this might relate to
: >any fear that Bill Gates might have either. Could you connect this up?
: Yes, you are indeed lost. Keeping us out of NTFS file systems meant
: that Billy could keep Linux servers from accessing NTFS. Pretty
: simple.
:
: The other file systems were never an issue. FAT 16 was known, and
: FAT 32 wasn't much of a stretch from that.
You don't seem to have a useful attention span, Toka. We were talking about
"fear" here. Try to get back to the context.
billwg
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:26:48 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
: >Let's see here, if I tell them that I don't think that Bill Gates is
: >in his boots over linux and that linux has not had any meaningful
: >penetration in terms of desktop use in over 10 years, they will laugh at
me?
: >When IBM was in the desktop business, did they even offer a linux machine
: >for sale?
: I already told you IBM has only just now gotten into Linux. You can
: bet theirs will be robust as well.
:
: > Has the Pentagon ever made an order for linux machines?
:
: Yes. They order gear, and integrate all the components together, and
: then the IS guy sets them up with Linux.
:
: Are you that unfamiliar with how IS/IT departments operate? Larger
: situations (like as in a fleet or large corporation) put together
: their own machines from the ground up. The military even buys their
: hard drives DIRECTLY from the manufacturers. In fact early hard drive
: designs were inspired by military directives... You know, like
: vibration tolerance, MTBF, and the like. Most of those reliability
: specs began in the military.
:
: So they certainly place their own operating systems on them. And
: they were not windblows machines either. Hell, most were not even
: Intel based.
:
: So for them to indicate to a department that they want 100 Linux
: machines is no more difficult to achieve than simply assembling the
: machines, and loading the OS which was dictated by the command orders.
:
I wonder where all those UPS and FedEx trucks leaving the Dell warehouse
loading docks are headed. Since you know so much, do you know about them?
: > I saw
: >recently where the Navy bought some billion dollars worth of Windows
: >machines for installation throughout the Naval Air Systems Command sites
as
: >well as on shipboard.
:
: Yeah.. and every single one was in NON critical situations... You
: know.. like the recreation hall.
Well, tell that to the naval aviators using them to brief the sorties they
flew in Iraq a couple of years back, Toka. But leave yourself some room to
run if one of them decides you are an oddball and in need of education!
LOL!!!
billwg
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:26:48 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
: >Hell, Toka, Bill Gates made a deal with ME to disclose particulars about
: >Win32 APIs! They call it the MSDN Subscription series. I recommend the
: >Enterprise level, you get everything you need at a great price!
:
: And you still could not write you own OS with them.
:
Why would I want to do that, Toka? Why would anyone? Do you write your own
OS? Why? Are you an oddball?
: Also, back in the day of the deal OS/2 was to receive info that was
: not being released at the time, and it was very likely BEFORE MSDN
: even existed.
:
: It is the very same reason that DesqViewX went by the way side. Tell
: us... oh oracle... how many desktops did that OS reside on?
:
You are saying that DesqViewX had a deal with Gates to disclose particulars
about the Win32 APIs and he reneged and so they went by the wayside?
Amazing!
: The key word you didn't see was the hook in your back...
: that was "great price!". We got you beat there too.
Well, every year I make more money off if it than the year before, Toka!
What's wrong with that?
billwg
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:26:48 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
: >You seem to misinterpret the remark, Toka. It seemed clear to me. What
: >meant was Red Hat sells more than ten times as much linux as Novell,
: Red Hat began selling ten times earlier as well. Now redo the math
: of your remark. Guess what? Look at the rate that Suse is gaining
: while you do.
:
: >measured by dollar volume per the SEC reports filed by RHAT and NOVL.
: >did you interpret it?
: As yet another biased FUD.
:
I think you are just trying to be difficult, Toka. How is it "FUD" to say
that Red Hat has a lot more revenue from linux than Novell? FUD means
"fear, uncertainty, and doubt" and describes the tactic of getting someone
to doubt the wisdom of their decision to take an untested route based on
pointing out possibilities for failure relative to the more well-known
results that come from the more popular decision. For example, I could tell
a person that they would be in danger of having their system obsolete if
they choose linux since there is no one but little companies supporting it
and there are so many different versions that it is hard to find one that is
likely to be around in a couple of years. Far safer to pick Windows, since
it comes with the computer and you can take it all back if it doesn't work
out.
: > Certainly not that Red Hat is distributing Novell
: >Linux as well as their own?
:
: Get off it.
It was your idea, Toka.
billwg
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:26:48 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
: us:
:
: >Well, it has been several years now and linux was nowhere until Big Blue
: >the idea to use it as an excuse to drop their price.
:
: successfully, and NOW THAT IBM has embraced it, it is garnering even
: more acceptance.
Oh, you are just fooling yourself, Toka, and not fooling anyone else. But
maybe that is because you are easier to fool.
Ray Ingles
>: I'll quote from the site:
>: http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween3.php
>:
>: "Written by a staff engineer -- with contributions, endorsements, and
>: reviews by two Program Managers, the Senior Vice President in charge of
>: NT development, and two members of the eight-person Executive
> Committee..."
>:
> Well, who wrote that, Ray? There is certainly no corroborating evidence
> anywhere and the thing has been kicking around for some 7 years now.
Are you seriously questioning who wrote the original memo? I'll tell you:
a Microsoft engineer, and Microsoft confirmed that on November 2, 1998:
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-217387.html?legacy=cnet&st.ne.ni.lh
"The document was originally written by Microsoft's Vinod Valloppillil,
an engineer who analyzes industry trends, said Edmund Muth, the company's
enterprise marketing group manager."
Microsoft has since taken down their public acknowledgement, but the
Internet Archive has it:
http://web.archive.org/web/19990417205353/http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/
highlights/editorletter.asp
You stated that "There is certainly no corroborating evidence anywhere."
This is demonstrably false. Come clean, you didn't even *look*, right? It
doesn't fit your preconceptions, so it *must* be wrong, is that it?
Now, perhaps you are suggesting that the Microsoft engineer *lied* about
getting reviews and contributions from "...two Program Managers, the Senior
Vice President in charge of NT development, and two members of the
eight-person Executive Committee..."?
Or are you admitting that the comment is true, but suggesting that there's
no evidence ESR wrote those words?
Frankly, no matter how I try to interpret your statement, it looks
utterly, well, stupid. See my .sig below.
>: Meh. Linux is about 10% of the overall market, and Windows is 34.4%. And
>: that's in *revenue*, not *units*. Linux sells for less than Windows, so
>: in actual units it's a much higher share than revenue numbers tell. And
>: then there are market effects those numbers don't capture - like 'free'
>: Linux installations that increase Linux's visibility and penetration but
>: lock out that part of the market from Microsoft. (Perhaps that's why the
>: overall server market is not growing as fast as it did last year... the
>: servers are being deployed, but they aren't running purchased software.)
> Which is what I have been saying all along, Ray. The server market is the
> server market and if you want to have a business in that market you have to
> deal with the dynamics of that market.
And the market is changing... in some areas (volume servers that perform
canned functions like filesharing and webserving) dying off. Why pay for
software to do it when you can do it utterly reliably and inexpensively
with Linux?
There's some higher-end stuff that requires support or more technical
setup. Ask IBM & SGI about how well they did sticking only to the higher
end, and assuming that the lower end would never grow into their space...
Linux *is* eating into the commercial Unix space, of course. How could
it *not*? On the other hand, it's *also* speading elsewhere, and tilting
the whole Unix vs. Windows value proposition dramatically away from
Windows.
> Microsoft has increased server revenues from nothing to their current
> position and have increased their revenues faster than the overall market
> growth every year.
As has Linux... with the last eleven consecutive quarters of double-digit
growth, BTW, which is something MS has *never* had in the server area.
> I would imagine that the unix vendors could fight linux more effectively
> on copyright and patent issues since they know the territory and Sun's
> acquisition of the IP rights from Microsoft may become a factor.
You can "imagine" that, but somehow no one's doing it. The only one that
has tried, SCO, has gotten spanked badly by the judge in the case for not
presenting *any* evidence in support of IP violations in the Linux kernel.
Until you come up with an actual example, I figure your imagination is
pretty irrelevant.
>: Considering that Microsoft has *much* more capital to throw around, for
>: both development and marketing, I have to ask why their numbers aren't
>: much better than that...
> Well, ask Sun if they would be willing to trade!
If you want to play that game, Sun's ROI is way better.
> For that matter, linux is in a distant position versus Windows in the
> server space.
Again, look at the trends (especially the second derivative of the
rates of growth) and the ROI. I'd say Linux is doing very well indeed.
> I think we have a winner!
You apparently have "imagination" and demonstrably false claims at
your disposal. What you "think" is a matter for amused curiousity,
nothing more.
--
Sincerely,
Ray Ingles (313) 227-2317
I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe
what you just said. -- William F. Buckley, Jr.
Kier
>
> "TokaMundo" <Toka...@weedizgood.org> wrote in message
> news:833bd15ctpu1f441a...@4ax.com...
> : On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:45:10 GMT, "billwg" <bi...@twcf.rr.com> Gave
> : us:
> :
> :
> : >Now you say you believe those who tell you that Microsoft and its
> officers
> : >are quaking in their boots over linux, but who is telling that tale?
> People
> : >have had access to linux for over 10 years now and it is still a
> curiosity
> : >in the desktop environment
> :
> :
> : Tell us, Billy... if it is a mere curiosity why are there several
> : tens of magazine publishers publishing quite profitable magazines
> : about it?
>
> Are those linux magazines? How profitable are they? They don't seem to
> last very long.
There are three in England alone, and they've all lasted years. Linux
Format just grows and grows, and has readers all over the world. You, on
the other hand, continue to talk out of your nether orifice.
--
Kier
Kier
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:45:58 +0100, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> Gave
> us:
>
>>There are three in England alone, and they've all lasted years. Linux
>>Format just grows and grows, and has readers all over the world. You, on
>>the other hand, continue to talk out of your nether orifice.
>
>
> I buy Linux Format DVD version here in the US. I find that what is
> included on those DVDs is invaluable. Not only do I not have to
> download it (whatever it happens to be) online, I do not have to
> search for where it is either. Thanks to that magazine, I have several
> Distros that I was able to check out, and that is also where I found
> Suse! and found it to be GREAT!!! DOSbox TOO!
Linux Format is the best of the UK mags, IMO, with plenty in it for
beginners as well as more experienced users. Well worth the subscription
to anyone who can't get it off the newsagent's shelves.
--
Kier
billwg
"Ray Ingles" <sorc...@dmc22317.local> wrote in message
: In article <zmuBe.160120$VH2....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, billwg wrote:
: >: I'll quote from the site:
: >: http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween3.php
: >:
: >: "Written by a staff engineer -- with contributions, endorsements, and
: >: reviews by two Program Managers, the Senior Vice President in charge of
: >: NT development, and two members of the eight-person Executive
: > Committee..."
: >:
: > Well, who wrote that, Ray? There is certainly no corroborating evidence
: > anywhere and the thing has been kicking around for some 7 years now.
:
: Are you seriously questioning who wrote the original memo? I'll tell you:
: a Microsoft engineer, and Microsoft confirmed that on November 2, 1998:
No, I was questioning the "contributions, endorsements, and reviews by two
NT development, and two members of the eight-person Executive Committee...""
Q: Is this an official Microsoft response to the open source model and Linux
in particular?
A: No. These documents do not represent an official Microsoft position or
road map. They are technical analyses written by a staff engineer that
represent the thoughts of one individual at one point in time. They were
intended to encourage an informed internal discussion of issues by marketing
and engineering middle managers.
Q: Who is Vinod Valloppillil and what is his role at Microsoft?
A: Vinod is a staff engineer who, from time to time, is chartered with the
responsibility of monitoring and analyzing market conditions and competitive
offerings. His analyses are intended to spur internal discussion about
industry trends and market dynamics. He is not an official company
spokesperson.
: http://news.com.com/2100-1001-217387.html?legacy=cnet&st.ne.ni.lh
:
: "The document was originally written by Microsoft's Vinod Valloppillil,
: an engineer who analyzes industry trends, said Edmund Muth, the company's
: enterprise marketing group manager."
:
: Microsoft has since taken down their public acknowledgement, but the
: Internet Archive has it:
:
:
http://web.archive.org/web/19990417205353/http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/
: highlights/editorletter.asp
:
: You stated that "There is certainly no corroborating evidence anywhere."
: This is demonstrably false. Come clean, you didn't even *look*, right? It
: doesn't fit your preconceptions, so it *must* be wrong, is that it?
:
: Now, perhaps you are suggesting that the Microsoft engineer *lied* about
: getting reviews and contributions from "...two Program Managers, the
Senior
: Vice President in charge of NT development, and two members of the
: eight-person Executive Committee..."?
:
: Or are you admitting that the comment is true, but suggesting that there's
: no evidence ESR wrote those words?
Certainly ESR wrote the words and without any notion of whether they were
true or not. The author has a list of names that he kow-tows to and there
is nothing to indicate that any of them actually believe or approve or
intend to take action on the ideas in the paper. And even then, it has been
7 years since the writing and linux has not done anything to displace
Windows on the desktop certainly and nothing other than wishful thinking
about displacing Windows in the server markets. Linux has devastated the
unix biz, but that is someone else's problem.
Further, there has been zero actions on the part of Microsoft to do anything
regarding the suggestions in the memo. That would sort of argue that senior
management, where policy is determined, had no confidence in the contents.
:
: Frankly, no matter how I try to interpret your statement, it looks
:
Colorful, but wrong, Ray! The proof of the pudding is in the eating and
every year Windows increases its revenues and its relative share of its
target markets. Pooh-pooh that all you want with your mantras, but they are
not having any useful affect on the situation from your POV.
: > Microsoft has increased server revenues from nothing to their current
: > position and have increased their revenues faster than the overall
market
: > growth every year.
:
: As has Linux... with the last eleven consecutive quarters of double-digit
: growth, BTW, which is something MS has *never* had in the server area.
:
And linux is still a distant second. The only way to maintain it's double
digit growth is to have started so late and so far in the rear. And I doubt
that you are correct insofaras "never" regarding Windows.
: > I would imagine that the unix vendors could fight linux more effectively
: > on copyright and patent issues since they know the territory and Sun's
: > acquisition of the IP rights from Microsoft may become a factor.
:
: You can "imagine" that, but somehow no one's doing it. The only one that
: has tried, SCO, has gotten spanked badly by the judge in the case for not
: presenting *any* evidence in support of IP violations in the Linux kernel.
: Until you come up with an actual example, I figure your imagination is
: pretty irrelevant.
:
Spanked is all in your mind, Ray. The case is still in the courts AFAIK.
: >: Considering that Microsoft has *much* more capital to throw around, for
: >: both development and marketing, I have to ask why their numbers aren't
: >: much better than that...
:
: > Well, ask Sun if they would be willing to trade!
:
: If you want to play that game, Sun's ROI is way better.
:
You would have to define your methods, Ray, but, even so, so you think Sun
would be willing to trade places?
: > For that matter, linux is in a distant position versus Windows in the
: > server space.
:
: Again, look at the trends (especially the second derivative of the
: rates of growth) and the ROI. I'd say Linux is doing very well indeed.
:
: > I think we have a winner!
:
: You apparently have "imagination" and demonstrably false claims at
: your disposal. What you "think" is a matter for amused curiousity,
: nothing more.
:
Well, I used your figure, Ray. Was it in error?
billwg
"Kier" <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.07.14....@tiscali.co.uk...
Oh you are so lacking in humor, Kier! You should move to a warmer clime.
Are these rags profitable? Are they found at the news stands? That is not
the case here.
Kier
Not thanks, I like it here.
> Are these rags profitable? Are they found at the news stands? That is not
> the case here.
Where's here? They're in reputable newsagents over here in the UK, they
are not rags, and they are pretty sure to be profitable or they wouldn't
still be in business.
As for my sense of humour - where did you say anything funny? Talking out
of your arse doesn't count.
--
Kier
Patrick Grimbergen
Bill,
I don't know where you are from, but every respectable newsstand (by
that I mean one that sells more then 20 different magazines) sells at
least 1 Linux Magazine.
There is a Dutch languaged Linux Magazine by HUB from Haarlem, they
turned a profit from their verry first issue a few years ago(I think it
is 6 years, but I am not sure).
This magazine you can buy in almost every corner news stand, additional
to this one most stand will have a veriety of international Linux
Magazines, ranging from English to French and from Spanish to German.
English is of course more prominent. My regular newsstand (Bruna chain)
has 5 english, 1 dutch, 2 german and 2 french on standard offer and
sometimes some others as well. Polish magazines seem to be on the
increase lately.
Hope this satisfies your need for magazines. I don't know if the
internationals are profitable, but I guess they are since most have been
around since forever, but the Dutch one is profitable by certainty!