http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=10424 90975962&p=1012571727092
"Microsoft's inroads into the server market rest on a similar calculation. Intel-based machines that run Windows account for about a quarter of server sales. As a result, Linux and Windows are both eating into a market dominated by Unix, rather than competing head on, though that will change as the market matures." I'm not sure that's true any more. Both UNIX and Windows spread into corporates via guerilla actions as users took their workloads off the mainframe (or refused to develop new ones there) largely as a result of software charges. There's no inherent reason why every user department should have its own server - any more than it should have its own kitchen, air-conditioning plant, power generators, elevators, building entrances or any other facility that shows benefits of scale. The threat to Windows is two-fold. First, individual user departments can show an easy and significant local cost reduction that management close to the decision can claim as their own - and move their own systems to Linux. Second, in contrast to IBM's proprietary mainframe pricing model, applications that are moved to mainframe Linux pay only for their own use of licensed software and not for everyone else's. A generalisation, but largely true. Many regret the decision to move to departmental servers, but refuse to admit it and lose face. Linux gives them a 'Get out of Jail free' card. I got beaten up by IBM in early 2000 when I said that mainframe Linux wouldn't take off until mid-2002. -- Phil Payne http://www.isham-research.com +44 7785 302 803 +49 173 6242039
