Linux: Who got it right, who got it very wrong?
Who predicted Linux servers would outnumber Windows servers by 2006? Who said one in five enterprise desktops would be Linux-based by 2008? We look back at the bad (and good) predictions made about Linux over the past decade.
Analysts picked up on the possibilities of open source pretty early on, particularly its ability to unify the long-fragmented Unix market around a single, consistent platform. The persistent incompatibilities between Unix distributions, each of which had been used by vendors to preserve their enterprise market share, led to great enthusiasm for Linux as an alternative, which was both open and far more consistent.
Back in 2000, Forrester Research pegged the Linux market — based on server revenues — at US$1.5 billion, to grow to US$2.5 billion in 2002 and US$15 billion in 2007. A 2002 Giga Information Group report was entitled "Linux has gone mainstream: are you up to it?" and predicted Linux would overtake Windows as the leading operating system on new servers by 2006.
A 2003 survey of enterprise shopping lists let Forrester Research conclude that these predictions were on track: 72 percent of respondents, the firm reported, were planning to use more Linux systems in 2004, a quarter were replacing Windows servers with Linux systems.
In the survey, only 46 percent of customers were holding off purchasing because of perceived lack of enterprise support — a concern that started to evaporate as IBM and HP led the charge to embrace Linux shortly after.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version
- 476 reads
No backward compatibilty, Microsoft eats Linux ? Installed base?
Linux is all raw emotions. Linus was not business man enough to be CEO. So, Linux distros moved on and left all the older computers in the dust. Dram requirements are way too demanding for older computers.
Then, the new Linux distros let browsers be developed without supporting swap file.
In the mean time, Microsoft is going backwards to support all the older operating systems on installed base for their new server 2008. This will solidify the Microsoft network of desktops. They did not leave anyone out.
Linux strategy has to change, as we push more tiny Linux distros to simplify and reassemble SeaMonkey(Puppy) to use less drams and speed up code processing.
There is hope yet, if Linux open sourced community recognizes the need for simplified codes that are backward compatible like RHEL? Gnome/RHEL without Mono will look more like Debian/OpenSolaris. New QT/KDE will take two more years to be even usable. The handwriting is on the wall. Lacking leadership in the Linux community is stopping Linux from going beyond 2% installed base. Linux must pay attention to have installed base by installed base established. Just trying Linux, does not build installed base. Preloaded without synaptic one click update, will not keep customers locked in.