Wed 03 Dec 2008

RSS Feed

Edited by Paul Hales

Published by Incisive Media Investments Ltd.

Terms and Conditions of use.

To advertise in Europe e-mail here

To advertise in Asia email here.

To advertise in North America email here.

Join the INQbot Mail List for a weekly guide to our news stories:

Subscribe

IDC explains where Linux went right

Ecosystems are us, apparently

IDC RESEARCHERS reckon that the Linux market will be worth almost $50 billion by 2011.

Dropping effortlessly into premium-grade marketingspeak, IDC says that spending on the Linux ecosystem will rise from $21 billion in 2007 to more than $49 billion in 2011, driven by rising enterprise deployments of Linux server operating systems.

Linux server deployments are expanding from infrastructure oriented applications to more commercially oriented database and enterprise resource-planning workloads that historically have been the domain of Microsoft Windows and Unix.

"The early adoption of Linux was dominated by infrastructure-oriented workloads, often taking over those workloads from an aging Unix server or Windows NT 4.0 server that was being replaced," says IDC, adding that Linux is increasingly being 'viewed as a solution for wider and more critical business deployments and that the growth of Linux as a platform for business-oriented workloads appears to be coming largely from migration of existing Unix deployments in combination with organic growth of Linux deployments in these same workload areas.'

But IDC says the OS most under threat in the next few years is Unix, with the crusty old OS being attacked from all sides by Windows and Linux.

It's good to see that Linux is finally adopting a more businesslike approach by leveraging world class competencies and thinking outside the blue sky envelope. The gratuitous use of meaningless management jargon can only accelerate its penetration of ecosystems.

Now if only they could drop ridiculous code names like Gutsy Gibbon and Loquacious Lemur, they'd be home and dry. µ

L'Inq
Newsfactor

Comments

*nix

Funny, I'd recently been suprised to find out how little if any differences there were between cli linux and unix commands.

Because I'd been led to believe that they were like - really different.
posted by : zupakomputer, 11 April 2008

re: *nix

Yeah, I've always wondered how that myth got started.

Linux is basically an implementation of the UNIX SYS5R4 fork, and *BSD descendants of the BSD fork.

There are differences in some arguments at tat level, but not so much as can't be easily dealt with b detecting the of level in scripts.

As an old UNIX jock that's why I like the free *nixes, it allows me to use major league os functionality for extremely low cost on commodity hardware.

X windows derives from efforts to make a portable GUI that will function on any system, so you can install Ubuntu or FreeBSD, start gnome, and look at the same GUI.
posted by : cutis rendon, 11 April 2008

wasn't impressed by Ubuntu

I recently got a new laptop and since I aimed at 4Gb RAM and VISTA wasn't going to touch my harddrive I installed hardy heron x64 on it. Since it was an XPS 1330 where Dell offers Ubutu in some countries (not in mine..) I thought it should all work out. Well It didn't. Some stuff works, but a lot of stuff just doesn't. when browsing the screen occasionally shows nasty twitches and shivers. Azureus doesn't run, the integrated microphone doesn't work, and a couple of other stuff. I find myself using windows XP, missing out 0.5 Gb of my memory and everythging works without a hitch. And while I am not a Linux freak - I run a Linux 64 Server for serious number crunching and as a file server - so I got some Linux knowledge. But as a desktop 64 bit Linux just isn't there.

M.
posted by : mschira, 13 April 2008

Re: wasn't impressed by Ubuntu

Thanks for the anecdote, M. Clearly my 5 working U 7.10 systems are a figment of my imagination.
posted by : Fnord, 14 April 2008

So mschira wasn't impressed, huh?

mschira: 64-bit Hardy? Did you not realize that Hardy is still beta? And that there still are some things that don't work on 64-bit systems?

Linux IS ready for some desktops. There are lots of people happily using Linux on their desktops.

There isn't anything wrong with you deciding to use XP on your shiny, new Dell. But, that does not imply that Linux isn't ready for the desktop.

Clearly, Dell can get Linux running on your hardware (in some countries), so Linux IS ready for your hardware. Maybe Dell isn't ready to support it everywhere, but that's a different matter.
posted by : KD, 14 April 2008

code names

Andrew: You probably know this and are just trying to get a rise out of someone like me, but just in case not, let me point it out: In any environment where the funny code names would not be suitable, the official names ought to satisfy anyone's sense of dignity: Ubuntu 7.10, Ubuntu 8.04, etc. The funny code names shouldn't be an issue.
posted by : KD, 14 April 2008
IThound
Search for solutions, reports & analysis

Newsletter signup



 

Top INQ Stories