Linux

Dell CEO says Linux server sales increasing faster than Windows

Speaking at a Gartner Symposium/ITxpo in Orlando, Michael Dell says that his company is seeing Linux update on the server end increasing faster than Windows. Recent claims by Microsoft alleging software patent infringements have also not affected Linux-based hardware sales.

Speaking at a Gartner Symposium/ITxpo in Orlando, Michael Dell says that his company is seeing Linux update on the server end a little faster than Windows. Recent software patent infringement allegations by Microsoft have not affected Linux-based hardware sales.

Excerpt from silicon.com:

He said: "On the server side Linux continues to grow nicely, a bit faster than Windows. We're seeing a move to Linux in critical applications, and Linux migration has not slowed down."

However, for those customers who might be concerned about whether Microsoft's claims of patent violation could result in legal action, Dell added that there were "certainly mechanisms if customers are concerned about patents."

So, there you go. Linux-based server sales are on the rise. It is a pity that Michael Dell did not furnish a more concrete sales volume though.

How many of you IT professionals out there are actually running Linux-based servers? Did you initiate the switch-over yourself, was it a set-up you inherited, or was the change decreed by management?

About

Paul Mah is a writer and blogger who lives in Singapore, where he has worked for a number of years in various capacities within the IT industry. Paul enjoys tinkering with tech gadgets, smartphones, and networking devices.

20 comments
drleos
drleos

We had to ditch Windows from the 24/7 operations wherever I have worked due to poor reliability and poor security reasons, upgrading for Linuxes. We won the majority on the market thanks to doing so sooner than our competitors.

nwoodson
nwoodson

I work in a wll M$ enterprise.....and cry about it. Anytime I have a failure, server or desktop, I use a linux rescue disk and just shake my head. If only everything were that easy.

r_darling
r_darling

Use HP UX for our 2 business apps. Our payroll package switched to Windows/MS SQL and I have had a lot of weird errors on the Windows 2003 with SQL 2000 release. MS says hardware - hardware says ms. HP UX just keeps ticking - only reboot was when we lst electricity during the Merrimack River flood last year.

jdclyde
jdclyde

Started with SCO Openserver, added in new servers running RedHat. In the process of migrating all SCO and Redhat boxes to SuSE right now. Four down, five to go. B-) We had two servers with over a year uptime until we recently had a power outage that lasted the whole weekend. :(

red.tred26
red.tred26

yes it is. As our application multiplies we only use linux ever since we started and very very minimal problem. not unlike with with windows servers. Windows can only be used as desktops for games.

Jaqui
Jaqui

naturally, I do not have even one MS based system at all. even my workstations are linux.

catseverywhere
catseverywhere

Same here, I haven't deployed windows anywhere in 6-7 years now. (I do reinstall it for folks on occasion for their machines, after rescuing their data using Linux of course...) For desktops, check out Mandriva 2008, this is one fine OS that I think can and should start giving Vista a run for the money. All I need to do is port a couple proprietary apps to Linux somehow, maybe with wine, and a whole new client base is gonna open up for me with this latest Mandriva. Microsoft is going to shoot itself in the temple one of these days, the BS and perpetually shelling out ever more $$$ is going to be their undoing.

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

First time I've been able to have a look over it. It's very nice so far. I rather like what they've done in the drakconf tools. I can't give it a proper look over until I get hands on a the full install DVD but the liveCD is a nice update. I can't wait to get a custom install on my notebook.

catseverywhere
catseverywhere

Neon Samurai, Save yourself the download and install from Mandriva One. This from a LOT of experience. One has more/better drivers and hardware detection than the free DVD installer. One installs in about 15 minutes whereas the full free DVD will take hours. In both cases you are going to add mirrors after the initial install, that will allow you to legally add all the "non-free" stuff. So either with free DVD or an install starting from One, you're going to do most of the installing after the initial OS is loaded. With One you get there a heck of a lot faster and potentially have better drivers out of the box. I just tested all this again yesterday. There were far more problems with the full DVD installed machine (which was the much better of the two, hardware wise) the One install was totally updated and all apps I wanted installed by the end of the day. The DVD installed machine still has some apps to be added, followed by a last update. The way I look at it is One "inoculates" the system with a working OS and the ability to add literally everything Mandriva offers in it's full-blown power pack, once the minimal OS is installed. I am a member of the Mandriva club and have confirmed it from the horse's mouth: you are legally free to add all the proprietary and "non-free" stuff by adding mirrors and having at it. The average user might find this a daunting task, especially seeing that the mirrors often crap out and you have to manually change them. But for someone in IT it's not hard at all. Given you are going to add most of the stuff you want after the fact anyway, installing swiftly with One is THE way to go. cat

paulmah
paulmah

How many of you IT professionals out there are actually running Linux-based servers?

NaughtyMonkey
NaughtyMonkey

linux and Windows servers. Mail gateway, Domino server, router, firewall, development, web, vpn, DHCP, DNS, and any other machine that touches the outside world is linux. We do have Windows for domain controllers, development, and other internal functions. Totals are 18 linux/unix and 10 Windows.

indysawmill
indysawmill

Since 1995, and various 'nix flavors before that, here. Currently, we support dozens of LAMP and other Linux based servers in various large data centers. My career, along with many others I know, are based around Linux administration with no MS-Windows.

red.tred26
red.tred26

all of our production and development servers are running on linux and solaris.

VNCoder
VNCoder

Whenever a server is required, we usually either put in Unix or Linux on it unless there is a desperate need for Windows server. All our main systems (ERP, web server, etc) run Unix or Linux. Unix/Linux to Windows ratio is about 5 to 1. Recently, a DHCP server failed for some mysterious reason on a Win2003, we quickly configure two low end machines with Linux to replace the relatively new Windows server. The two machines can act as Primary and Secondary DHCP servers. No need to worry about failing DHCP server anymore. We have more problems administering Windows boxes than administering Unix/Linux boxes.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

But my last one, a contract we, put eight in ... They all came with W2k installed, which we promptly wiped. A lot of suppliers won't sell you a linux, box, they jib at a blank one, almost as if they had a deal with MS

scottyc2005
scottyc2005

We are a microsoft shop but we use Linux servers for some functions. They can both work together in my opinion. Can't we all just get along?

myztry
myztry

No proprietary company can provide a full tier of functionality for every application, yet they all sabotage compatibility in order to force you into their tier structure, and limit you to their Agenda. Canned goods may allow you to survive, but if you can't whip up a custom delight, the customers just aren't going to be that interested. You're going to need to source (sauce) things up a bit.

dilireus
dilireus

I work on a large project for NOAA/NWS. All servers and workstations run Linux or HP-UX, and the HP-UX machines are being replaced by commodity Intel boxes running Linux.

Jaqui
Jaqui

not until MS stops trying to lock linux out, making DRM violating tools like SAMBA needed for them to work together. [ R. Stallman's comments re proprietary device drivers in the kernel taken to logical conclusion, proprietary networking protocol used by MS and duplicated by SAMBA is against V3 of the GNU=GPL's DRM stand. ]

Editor's Picks