begin oe_protect.scr
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ B Gruff ] on Thursday 30 March 2006 18:22 \__
>
>> On Thursday 30 March 2006 16:05 Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "33.6% of servers sold in Q4 2005 were Windows servers"
>>
>> Please forgive my ignorance, but if one third of servers sold were Windows
>> servers, what were the other two thirds of servers sold?
>
>
> The revenue from Unix is going down while Microsoft's goes up by a margin.
> Linux goes up in big numbers, despite it being free. Microsoft possibly lead
> in terms of /revenue/ because their servers are overpriced. In terms of
> numbers, they are nowhere to be seen. Over here, the trend is that of
> replacing ever-crashing Windows servers with Linux.
>
>
>> - and second, what about servers that were not sold? Do we have, or is
>> there any way to get, an estimate of the number of servers that were
>> just.... well ... installed?
>
>
> In my humble opinion, no. The definitions vary. See an old(er) discussion
> that started with Qualig in the context of Linux on the desktop. The only
> true way to estimate anything is by counting sales/revenue.
>
I think the /trend/ in money flows will be very interesting, doing d£/dt
calculation for Linux and competing stuff like Windows is clearly the
better measure than absolute figures, but even d£/dt will not give much
of a clue about download/install activities. One of the key questions
is whether we've gone past a d2£/dt2 inflexion point, for MS, indicating
that their growth rate has changed.
Now, must give up reading calculus books. must give up reading calculus
books :-)
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Anything cut to length will be too short.
|
|
