03.03.10
GNU/Linux a King of Servers, But Microsoft Boosters Disagree
Summary: Using flawed and partly Microsoft-funded numbers, the advocates of proprietary software beg to suggest that GNU/Linux is declining (which it’s not)
SEVERAL days ago, Pingdom published this reminder which shows how GNU/Linux dominates the top end of computing.
Most popular supercomputer OS
Here below you can see the division by operating system family across the top 500 supercomputers.
1. Linux (89.2%)
2. Unix (5.0%)
3. Mixed (4.6%)
4. Windows (1.0%)
5. BSD based (0.2%)
Two days ago we wrote about Gartner's bogus numbers referring to server 'share' (improperly measuring the wrong things). One thing we did not highlight at the time (or in more detailed posts on the subject) is that a supercomputer/mainframe would count as one server and so will a dual-core machine. Since GNU/Linux is dominant at the high end, any number of units (let alone just sales of boxes, as opposed to installations) is going to demote Free software, by the very definitions chosen.
Microsoft booster Preston Gralla* takes IDC/Gartner numbers (they deceive in the same way) and he is being very dumb, as usual. SJVN sets him straight.
But Gralla and other critics are missing that IDC is not measuring what server operating systems are being used; it’s measuring what server operating systems people are buying, and those are bundled with their hardware purchases. Specifically, to quote IDC, the researchers are measuring “server revenue includes components that are typically sold today as a server bundle, including frame or cabinet and all cables, processors, memory, communication boards, and OS.”
Another piece of disinformation that’s floating at the moment cites the Microsoft-sponsored Net Applications. Adversaries of Free software are desperate for something to boost their own ego as Microsoft’s results are still declining [1, 2, 3, 4] and their expenditures rise. █
______
* For the uninitiated, see [1, 2].
Needs Sunlight said,
March 3, 2010 at 7:12 am
The current US administration is looking at making massive consolidation of servers. It’s going to be just plain terrifying when all the machines get put in one room and the waste becomes unavoidably visible. Any server farm infected with Windows usually has a far worse than 2:1 hardware to service ratio. That would be one of the reasons Microsoft boosters are pushing blades so hard again.
GNU/Linux, BSD, and Solaris rule the server space because you can run services on one SPARC what you can run on 50 Wintels. Put a hiring freeze on any with a Microsoft background and phase out the legacy staff along with the legacy hardware.
At the strategic level, rounding up all the Microsoft executives past and present would be in the interest of not just national security (any nation). It’s not like the DoD, FBI, or NSA doesn’t know who’s been at Microsoft as an Intern or an Executive. Getting them out of the way would also be in the interest of that nation’s economy and ecology even if only the electrical usage is taken into account and not the toxins or metals. You have to consider how many jobs are lost because of the resources spent trying to finance owning and operating Microsoft products while at the same time pretending that they work.
Roy Schestowitz said,
March 3, 2010 at 7:18 am
Microsoft’s Charney suggests ‘Net tax to clean computers
From another source: “Microsoft hired Charney, who had worked for the U.S. Department of Justice and served as assistant district attorney in the Bronx, at what he said was a unique time.”