A new survey of server unit growth and revenue shows that last quarter 1.6 million new servers were put into action, demonstrating that the server sector of the IT economy is growing strong. Linux servers showed the most growth, while Windows servers generated the most revenue. Unix servers showed a decline. Mainframe installations also grew. Our Take: As always these numbers are based on documented sales sales of commercial products, so they should be taken with a grain of salt, as they exclude FreeBSD and Linux servers based on freely-distributed software. Nevertheless, it looks like commercial Unix is in decline, while Linux and Windows move up.
Despite legal threats from SCO Group…
I too am suprised the lesser expensive Linux servers ramained a popular choice even with SCO’s rock solid legal case.
I am sure everyone else will find the survey results equally as shocking.
One success of Linux is the marketing from users… this is highlighted as a ‘new’ system written from scratch to replace UNIX.. the term “Unix’ has changed, as there are so many different versions of unix now–linux is one of them.
This contributes to some of the success linux has. ill explain further if you want..
This survey should be “Linux vs. Commercial UNIX-based OS’s”.. completely leaves out the OTHER open source versions of UNIX… some written from scratch some deriving from origional sources… it seems all they care about is linux 🙁
Linux:
“A trademark for an open-source version of the UNIX operating system.”
“An implementation of the Unix kernel originally written
from scratch with no proprietary code.”
UNIX: a trademarked (of the open group) to govern the open UNIX specification. UNIX was origionally an OS created at bell labs… However now its merely a specification
Nobody can say if SCO is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. People can make wild opinions based on little evidence… and with little evidence try to prove that wrong. i personally don’t care if they win but if my organization relied completely on linux i dont want to be paying no $500+ for an OS! that’s insane pricing.
Also, when someone does something ‘outrageous’ they are covered more in the news. Before SCO’s (not well thought about) attack on linux I never heard Linux mentioned on TV.. now I’m seeing it on the news channels. alot of people had no idea it existed…
I think that was sarcasm.
It was right?
Right?
Linux is not Unix. You might notice it’s typically paired with GNU tools.
Having worked with a flavor or two of Unix, and several flavors of Linux, I LOVE GNU tools…. It’s like coming home..
BSD would be more like flavors of Unix, or at least that seems to be the boast of most BSD lovers.
Also, I do believe Linux was written off Minix, which was open but still Linux isn’t really from scratch. Although I doubt much, if any, of the Minix code remains after all these years.
I agree though, Linux often gets too much press. But that’s because it’s coming into popular knowledge. I’ve found I can say Linux to non-technical people and some will say “oh my friend uses that.” If I say, for example, BSD they will say “huh?”
linux was ‘ment’ to fit the UNIX specification which it never really acheived.. unix grew from an OS at bell to a specification for a large verity of OS’s.
Well, according to Open Group.. there are only a few OS’s that are certitified to be called unix..which exludes the bsds, mac, linux, unicos, alot of others, etc…
so.. linux is supposed to be an open source version of unix and it pretty much is as it is somewhat compatible with most unix OS’s and copys the design.
The GNU’s not Unix name came up before the unix spec was open. times change.
“which was open but still Linux isn’t really from scratch. Although I doubt much, if any, of the Minix code remains after all these years.
”
linux was written from scratch. andrew tannebaum agrees. he wrote minix. are you contradicting him,
linux and minix never shared any code at all.linus used minix originally to develop linux but never took any code from it. it simply was not possible because minix then had a restrictive license.
Uh, well, no, actually Linux is moving up and Microsoft made the most in revenue – which is obvious because Microsoft costs a hell of a lot more than Linux.
Also, I do believe Linux was written off Minix, which was open but still Linux isn’t really from scratch. Although I doubt much, if any, of the Minix code remains after all these years.
Luckily Andrew Tananbaum himself just posted a comparison done for the ADTi “study” that compared the source of the first versions of Linux (v0.1, v0.11, v0.12) to all Minix versions. He found only a few instances of simularity, not even 1:1, most of wich where in header files defining posix standard values.
see:
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/codecomparison/
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/codecomparison/alexey.html
So I guess it’s safe to say Linus at the very least didn’t use minix source code in his first released kernel.
whats solid about that case. sco is dropping one claim after another and the stock market is crashing up
Lackwit. That was so obviously sarcasm.
I’m surprised BSD isn’t kicking Linux’s ass. I’ve always thought of it as a more professional production system.
But I know Linux will pounce it on the desktop for a year or two.
>I’m surprised BSD isn’t kicking Linux’s ass. I’ve always
>thought of it as a more professional production system.
If you read for once you would have red that the counted systems where commercial systems not he downloadable version of Linux and BSD(not sure if they even counted BSD).
BSD got no commercial or corperate backup. at least not like LInux does that its the reason…
>But I know Linux will pounce it on the desktop for a year
>or two.
MacOSX is BSD.
Mac OS X is based largely on BSD. It’s also based largely on OPENSTEP, which itself started off as a BSD derived system.
Look at the source for crying out loud, and read up on it’s history.
http://gobsd.com/code/darwin/
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=4042
There are likely countless others. Read. Learn. STFU until you do both.
http://developer.apple.com/darwin/
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Darwin/Darwin.html
http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/history.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_history
http://www.macos.utah.edu/Documentation/macosx/history/mac_osx_hist…
etc, etc, etc.
“Mac OS X is based largely on BSD. It’s also based largely on OPENSTEP, which itself started off as a BSD derived system. ”
the original poster said mac os x is bsd. its not. it has a bsd code and the gui is completely proprietary and coded by apple.
mac os x is based on bsd
mac os x !=bsd
so who is name calling?
I forgot a really good one:
http://developer.apple.com/darwin/history.html
Learn to think.
you arent same as your family. right?
Unfortunately for your argument, I largely am. It’s all about context I suppose.
From: http://developer.apple.com/darwin/history.html
Darwin also incorporates a full implementation of BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) UNIX, welded on top of the Mach kernel. The hybrid BSD architecture adopted by Darwin embodies its historical association with the BSD code base and underscores both the project’s strong relationship with the various BSD organizations and its strong cultural affinity with the open source developer community.
Sounds like a BSD to me, despite the proprietay dressing.
“Berkeley Software Distribution. Implementation of the UNIX operating system and its utilities developed and distributed by the University of California at Berkeley. BSD is usually preceded by the version number of the distribution, e.g., 4.3 BSD is version 4.3 of the Berkeley UNIX distribution. Many Internet hosts run BSD software, and it is the ancestor of many commercial UNIX implementations.”
“”Berkeley Software Distribution. Implementation of the UNIX operating system and its utilities developed and distributed by the University of California at Berkeley. BSD is usually preceded by the version number of the distribution, e.g., 4.3 BSD is version 4.3 of the Berkeley UNIX distribution. Many Internet hosts run BSD software, and it is the ancestor of many commercial UNIX implementations.””
thats the definition of bsd. freebsd is not bsd. openbsd is not bsd. netbsd is not bsd. mac os x is not bsd.they are all based on bsd
Mac OS X !=BSD
That is one definition of BSD. I claim “BSD” to be the family of 4.4BSD derived OSs.
no agreed upon definition.
“That is one definition of BSD. I claim “BSD” to be the family of 4.4BSD derived OSs.”
you can claim whatever you want and call names but thats the official definition
Mac OS X is very different from the berkeley distribution. in fact its kernel uses a hybrid approach very unlike freebsd/netbsd/openbsd
the pseudo microkernel approach and proprietary gui are very clear distinctions including usability
Mac OS X!=BSD
There is no “Official” definition. It doesn’t matter that it’s kernel is designed differently. It’s still BSD derived and flavored code. DragonFly is becoming mightly different from 4.4BSD, and it’s still BSD.
like a sparrow is still a bird, despite the fact that a penguin is too.
“whats solid about that case. sco is dropping one claim after another and the stock market is crashing up
Lackwit. That was so obviously sarcasm.”
this wasnt sarcasm. its a fact
you obviously can call others names without hesistation kingston. thats good proof of your “brightness”
The guy was being sarcastic. It was a joke. You acted as if he or she was spreading lies. That speaks volumes about yours.
Let’s not forget how you misquoted yourself in the most contradictory of fashions not even 24 hours ago in our last little spat.
“The guy was being sarcastic. It was a joke. You acted as if he or she was spreading lies. That speaks volumes about yours.”
he was obviously trolling just like you and you are even worse because you resort to unnecessary name calling like asking me to fuck off and calling me not bright.
I’m not going to win this fight ever because I’ve got an acidic personality that makes people conveniently ignore the fact that I am right. You’re not going to win because you’ve got few cohesive arguments.
“Let’s not forget how you misquoted yourself in the most contradictory of fashions not even 24 hours ago in our last little spat.”
prove it
so its not about discussions. you have taken it up as a personal fight. thats explains all the name calling. good. that explains your childishness.
bye
“‘m not going to win this fight ever because I’ve got an acidic personality that makes people conveniently ignore the fact that I am right. You’re not going to win because you’ve got few cohesive arguments.”
acidic eh?
very convenient for all that name calling you do.
You keep saying “bye,” but you never follow through with the going. And it’s not personal, it’s just a fun way to waste the time, trying to enlighten the incurably clueless.
“You keep saying “bye,” but you never follow through with the going. And it’s not personal, it’s just a fun way to waste the time, trying to enlighten the incurably clueless.”
you can define bsd as bsd family and i cant define bye as bye for this post. thats flexible
you can define bsd as bsd family and i cant define bye as bye for this post. thats flexible
Pointless, but acceptable.