Microsoft by the numbers

From correspondent AY:

Number of Windows 7 licenses sold, making Windows 7 by far the fastest growing operating system in history.
Percentage of US netbooks running Windows in 2008.
Percentage of US netbooks running Windows in 2009.
Number of customer downloads of the Office 2010 beta prior to launch, the largest Microsoft beta program in history.
Linux Server market share in 2005.
Predicted Linux Server market share for 2007 (made in 2005).
Actual Linux Server market share, Q4 2009.

Those last numbers are especially damning since Linux started with superior technology, has an easier business model if your only goal is market share, and did not have a legacy ball-and-chain anywhere near the size MS has to drag along. But years of directionless bloat have taken a toll and the sponsor driven decisions to go for traditional “server/OS” technology methods in place of trying to find solutions to current customer problems has been very damaging.

Even discounting the obvious PR froth of this article: it is an interesting trend.

and just for kicks from April 2000

“During his presentation on scaling Linux to the enterprise, BitMover, Inc. CEO Larry McVoy raised a few furrowed eyebrows at the recently-held Colorado Linux Info Quest (CLIQ). His message: Symetric multiprocessing (SMP) scaling may be hazardous to your operating system (OS) health.”

“McVoy said that the level of harm is “directly proportional” to the amount of scaling and is “worse than linear” in the number of processors. Converting a uniprocessor OS to a four-way SMP OS introduces a “small amount of damage.” Converting the four-way SMP OS to a 32-way SMP OS does even more damage, he told the crowd. McVoy calls this phenomenon “the locking cliff.””

“The bottom line, said McVoy, is that: “Linux needs to have bragging rights on ‘big iron’ to be taken seriously in the enterprise. But the traditional way of getting those rights involves a series of changes which do a lot of damage to the source base. So the problems are that Linux needs to scale, and traditional scaling is a bad idea. Linux will use traditional scaling if nothing else shows up,” he said, “but SMP clusters is a better way to do it. I’m the driving force behind that and I’m not driving because I’m wrapped up in BitKeeper.””


One thought on “Microsoft by the numbers”

  1. The market share for Linux on servers is almost certainly severely undercounted since they ONLY count stuff like RHEL where you have a support contract involved (ie where there’s some sort of ‘sale’) The problem with doing this is that that’s not the only way Linux is deployed to production environments, people frequently just install debian or some other distro after downloading it themselves. (Just an example Google’s entire infrastructure is missing from those market share numbers, I’d say that makes them questionable)

    It looks like MS got those numbers from Gartner which wikipedia says is based on ‘Revenue’ so Linux will be very underrepresented

    Netcraft says Windows and Linux are both about 41% (and Apache is almost 90%…)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s