Linked by snydeq on Fri 17th Dec 2010 22:32 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu InfoWorld's Savio Rodrigues sees 2010 as a watershed year for Ubuntu, one that could herald meaningful enterprise interest in the OS, thanks to a rising tide of developers - and deployment servers - adopting the OS. "As with many recent trends in the IT industry, developers become ambassadors for products they enjoy using and have quickly become an early indicator for enterprise technology usage in the future. In a seemingly perfect storm, Ubuntu is benefiting from strong developer usage, and the fact that developers are increasingly selecting Amazon's EC2 cloud platform bodes well for continued Ubuntu success on EC2," Rodrigues writes, noting that Ubuntu has surpassed Red Hat usage on deployment servers as well. "As that occurs, IT decision makers will need to consider or reconsider Ubuntu for usage within the enterprise. Rest assured that Red Hat won't sit idly by during these discussions."
Thread beginning with comment 454044
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Comment by flanque
by dylansmrjones on Sat 18th Dec 2010 17:46 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by flanque"
dylansmrjones
Member since:
2005-10-02

You are twisting my words around and using them with the opposite meaning.

My claim was that Linux on the Desktop was a reality several years. This is merely a matter of technological level and has NOTHING to do with Market Share which will always be near-zero because Linux is free and gratis. My second claim was that Europe was the main area for GNU/Linux desktop. I didn't claim GNU/Linux was larger than Windows in Europe. Just that Europe was an area where GNU/Linux was doing well. And it is. Flawed statistics does not disprove that, no matter how much you try.

Besides that my claims have nothing to do with market share or usage share per se. But rather with usability.

Linux conquered the desktop back in 2003/04 AFAICT.

EDIT: If you read the post you'll see that Westlake asked me to take a look at the mobile area. I did that. I did not switch context. Westlake did. I just answered questions in regard to the mobile are. Besides that the mobile area is very much relevant for the desktop and for the distributed systems running on the net (e.g. the cloud).

Edited 2010-12-18 17:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[8]: Comment by flanque
by AmigaRobbo on Sat 18th Dec 2010 17:53 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by flanque"
AmigaRobbo Member since:
2005-11-15

"Market Share which will always be near-zero because Linux is free and gratis"

Sorry, could you run that one past me again?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Comment by flanque
by lemur2 on Tue 21st Dec 2010 03:27 in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by flanque"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Market Share which will always be near-zero because Linux is free and gratis" Sorry, could you run that one past me again?


Market share is a measure of new systems being sold.

Most Linux desktops do not appear in these statistics, mostly because people cannot buy new GNU/Linux systems. Google for example has a million Linux servers, and it is replacing Windows on the desktop with either GNU/Linux or Macs (this is up to the individual employees choice), but not a single one of those desktops will appear in market share statistics.

Even if one has to buy a Windows machine, wipe it straight away, and install a full GNU/Linux system instead, the GNU/Linux system will end up with a full set of desktop applications, with better functionality, at a far cheaper overall cost. As a bonus, one is safe thereafter from malware intrusions and from BSA audits.

The machines will still, however, all be counted as part of Windows market share. This is the way it is.

Edited 2010-12-21 03:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

v RE[8]: Comment by flanque
by lucas_maximus on Sat 18th Dec 2010 18:24 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by flanque"
RE[9]: Comment by flanque
by dylansmrjones on Sat 18th Dec 2010 18:42 in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by flanque"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

WTF!? What kind of childish arguments are you using? I'll discuss no further with you. This is my last post to you.

Claiming Gnome equals Windows 95 with a screenshot which could be used to prove Windows 7 is identical to Win95. WTF? That small screenshot proves nothing except that you are a troll, a Microserf and a damned lier and zealot. The same could be proven with Vista or Mac OS X or Windows 7. AFAIK Windows 95 didn't have antialiazing of small fonts, 3D desktop nor subpixel hinting. Windows 7 still cannot do drag'n'drop properly.

What kind of kindergarden is this!?!?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[8]: Comment by flanque
by bassbeast on Mon 20th Dec 2010 13:25 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by flanque"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

You said Linux was doing good in Europe, you did NOT say "Linux is doing good in Europe*" (*from a technological and NOT an adoption standpoint). He then produced figures, and you start screaming shill and changing the point of conversation. And now stats don't matter? How are you SUPPOSED to count Linux then, by using pixie dust?

The ONLY place Linux has gained ANY share at all is Droid, which is just as locked down and GUI centric as any Windows desktop. My router runs Linux too, it don't really help "Linux adoption" on the desktop now, does it? Using Linux in embedded devices is a tradition that goes back aways thanks to the ability to "TiVo" it, which is why Droid devices are using GPL V2. Again a locked down embedded OS is pretty much the same across the board and for the purpose of this discussion, which was Ubuntu VS Windows, is neither here nor there.

And while I can't speak for Europe i CAN speak for the southern US, and here you will not find a SINGLE shop, not big, not small, selling Linux, why? Are we getting paid by a big MSFT money truck? I wish! It is that NOBODY WANTS IT...full stop. Best Buy, Staples, Walmart, the smaller stores like mine, we have ALL tried selling it, and were looking at on average 70-80% returns compared to 3-5% for Windows. Now since you have to sell returns as used by law that VERY quickly made Linux MORE expensive than Windows. The reason for returns? Their apps don't work, their PMPs won't interface, their printers won't print, and of course the always lovely "update broke my stuff" fun.

So if you find Linux the most wonderful thing since sliced bread, hey I'm happy for you. But the numbers do NOT show that others agree. Show us a SINGLE statistic, anywhere, that shows Linux has made more than a single percentage gain ON THE DESKTOP, not mobile, not embedded, and I'll be happy to declare you the winnar!

Oh and final food for thought, just to highlight why retailers don't like your OS...ever look at those Ubuntu netbooks by Dell...closely? Ever notice anything...funny...about them? Like how Dell has to RUN THEIR OWN REPOS and disable the Canonical ones? why is that? I'll tell you, it is because Canonical does such lousy QA that even with their teeny tiny amount of OEM machines to support you can NOT use Canonical repos without breaking the sound and networking drivers! Whee! what fun for the customer! And since most of us don't want to have to set up our own blooming servers and pay developers to support an OS which doesn't make us any money anyway, we'll just add that to the checklist of why we don't sell no Linux round here.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[9]: Comment by flanque
by spiderman on Mon 20th Dec 2010 13:56 in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by flanque"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

70-80% returns compared to 3-5% for Windows. Now since you have to sell returns as used by law that VERY quickly made Linux MORE expensive than Windows. The reason for returns? Their apps don't work, their PMPs won't interface, their printers won't print, and of course the always lovely "update broke my stuff" fun.

I don't want to go into your debate but I just have address that quote.
The return rate is a direct result of a poor job on your part. You don't sell a Linux machine like a Windows machine. It's not a Windows machine. When you sell something you have to make sure your customers understand what they are buying or else you are useless. If you sold them the latest Ubuntu, did you tell your customers that the computer you sold them contained beta or alpha software, that may contain bugs? Did you warn them about software compatibility? Did you capitalize on the first returned machines and stop doing the same mistake again? No? Then you have only yourself to blame for the return rate. You did a very poor job at selling your product and you deserve that return rate.
When you sell a product, you have to make sure your customers are trained to use it or to sell them the training they need, you have to make sure you don't sell them something they don't want and you have to capitalize on their feedback. That is your job. If you don't want to do that job, just quit selling. Sooner or later you will have to pay for that and the cost may be much higher than what you may gain from poor sells.

Edited 2010-12-20 14:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3