Linux.com

Feature: Commentary

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

By Joe Barr on November 02, 2007 (5:00:00 PM)

Share    Print    Comments   

I felt bad for Linux vendors after reading Peter Galli's eWeek article, which claims that Linux server sales on X86 hardware have run into a stone wall, going from a 53 percent growth rate to four percent decline over the past six quarters -- until I did a little research that easily refuted that claim.

Galli cited the IDC Quarterly Server Tracker (QST) as the source of the figures. While looking for that report on the IDC site, I found one from August which states that "Linux servers posted the fifth consecutive quarter of accelerating revenue growth, with year-over-year revenue growth of 19.0%, for a total of $1.8 billion in the quarter. Linux servers now represent 13.6% of all server revenue, up from 12.1% a year ago."

Encouraged to find that the sky was not falling after all, I kept looking for Galli's QST, but had no luck. Evidently, it is available only by subscription. I requested a copy of the survey from IDC press relations on the company's Web site, and followed up the next day by telephone. I didn't receive a copy of the the QST, but IDC's Mike Shirer did tell me that "Galli hacked that article pretty badly."

Then I noted that Galli cited Bill Hilf of Microsoft -- probably the single least trustworthy person on the planet to ask about Linux, except, perhaps, for Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer himself. Given Microsoft as a primary source, and IDC's assertion that Galli "hacked" the article, it dawned on me that the whole thing might be bogus, that maybe Linux servers are not losing market share after all.

I decided to do a little research of my own. I looked at the revenue figures over the last six quarters for Red Hat, the most successful commercial Linux operation, and for Novell's revenues based on its Linux platform. Amazingly, those graphs show Linux server revenues from the top two commercial offerings of the FOSS platform have increased, not declined. Both are hitting record highs, quarter after quarter after quarter.

Did IDC go wrong in the QST? It's pretty hard to tell when you can't see the survey. In fact, it seems likely that it is Galli who is erring on the issue, rather than IDC. But if IDC is counting preloads at the factory, it is using meaningless data about Linux versus Windows in the real world. Red Hat and Novell both get the overwhelming bulk of their (Linux-related) revenue from subscriptions for support of their server software.

In Red Hat's most recent quarter, for example, total revenues were $127.2 million, and 85% of that came from subscriptions. Measuring server preloads would not reflect market size, strength, or vitality. Apparently that's tough for some people to understand. I've written before about the difficulties inherent in measuring open source usage.

I admit I see a lot of irony in the computer trade press, especially with so many sources eager to discount the phenomenal growth of Linux the past few years by saying, "Oh, well, it's natural. All the low-hanging fruit is gone now, and the day of reckoning has come."

Where have these pundits been the past 20 years? It's about that long ago that Microsoft announced it was the Unix killer, and that all of the Unix market share would be Microsoft's. If Linux really is doing a better job of winning over Unix boxes than Microsoft is, or if it is being installed on more Unix than Windows boxes, it doesn't matter. Linux is still taking boxes that Microsoft had targeted, staked out, and claimed for itself. The real story here is that Microsoft has lost servers it claimed it would win, boxes it wanted to win. Instead, Linux has taken them. Enough is enough.

I'm reminded of a survey that made the rounds a couple of years ago. It was done by a Canadian research group called Info-Tech and paid for after the fact by Microsoft, and it claimed that small business was losing interest in Linux. Microsoft wanted so desperately for customers to buy into that tale that it plastered the survey results on its Web site.

That was two years ago. Red Hat reported revenues of $57.5 million for the quarter ending February 28, 2005. For the same quarter this year, Red Hat revenues were $111.1 million, an increase of more than 93%. Not bad for a firm which business has lost interest in, eh? By the way, comparing the quarter ending December 31, 2004, and the same quarter two years later, in 2006, Microsoft's revenue increased only 18 percent. I guess that company can't find even the low-hanging stuff.

The bottom line is that Linux continues to thrive, and Microsoft -- well, Microsoft continues to do what it does best. Linux improves and grows its user base day-in and day-out, and Microsoft dishes out deceptions. Note to Galli, Peter Judge, Stan Beer, and all the other pundits echoing the meme that Linux is losing: based on the facts -- which show 93% growth for Red Hat versus 18% for Microsoft over the past two years -- if any company is getting close to hitting the wall, it's not a Linux vendor.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 203.23.238.47] on November 02, 2007 06:06 PM
Thank you for this nice article
skj99

#

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 148.87.1.171] on November 02, 2007 09:53 PM
Good article

#

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 207.105.138.226] on November 02, 2007 11:12 PM
Nicely researched - thanks for the FUDbuster.

#

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 91.106.197.185] on November 03, 2007 01:18 PM
Excellent article. I've seen so many "Linux is fizzling out" articles lately, its nice to see this one so carefully debunked.
Perhaps they have always been there, and as I am fairly new to Linux, I'm seeing what the older hands have been seeing for years.
I firmly believe that Linux is way more popular than any of the much publicized figures suggest, and is only lacking a method for accurately tracking the user base to show this. The Microsoft figure of however many million licenses they have sold is just as inaccurate, as they don't track the licenses in use, so can't quantify the number of people who have removed Vista and either gone back to XP or put Linux on their systems or dual boot instead.

#

Re: Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 15.211.153.72] on November 15, 2007 08:18 AM
Excellent article.



From my personal experience with a Fortune 500 company I get to see a huge (well why not the FUDsters do it) amount of Linux machines being sold into the telecommunications and corporate sector and usually at the expense of MS Windows machines. The thing is with regard to servers and blades there is no Microsoft tax so customer usually have to pay for the software and the installation of it and there is no prize for guessing which is the cheaper. Of course if you make the new machine production management usually dictates that a software and eventually hardware subscription is paid and Linux is still cheaper. When a MS Windows machine is required depending on the application (normally MS Windows specific) we find that you may need three or even five machines to do what one Linux machine can do so I can see were the skew comes from the Microsoft camp.



Unfortunately large companies still prefer (normally dictated by management) Microsoft on the desktop but over 95% of all applications on the desktop can be performed by Linux ones and without re-training but try and convince Microsoft centric managers of that. At least the company I work for allows people to choose their own desktop OS providing they can do their work (a catch 22 for me but I do have a dual boot) and over 16,000 people have taken this up.

#

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 75.116.177.130] on November 03, 2007 01:29 PM
"Where have these pundits been the past 20 years?"

In Microsoft's pocket, as usual.

#

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 80.168.224.59] on November 03, 2007 02:04 PM
It's pretty clear that "Linux is faltering" is Microsoft's new talking point in their campaign against Linux, and is being picked up by the press.

For whatever reason, Microsoft still can't stop themselves from comparison advertising against Linux: when you're market leader, conventional wisdom is that you don't ever mention your competitors to avoid giving them mindshare. It's clearly not succeeding, as shown in your article.

#

Be fair to Stan Beer

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 82.192.250.149] on November 03, 2007 10:17 PM
Stan Beer's blog, which you link to, does quote the eWeek article, but also points out many of the reasons it might not reflect reality.

#

What's the point in trying to measure "Linux Server Sales"

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 24.82.95.51] on November 04, 2007 04:22 AM
I've just finished a month in which I installed six new Linux servers: three dual-core Pentiums, and three quad-core Xeons -- yet none of these I suspect will show up on anyone's stats. The Pentiums were bought from TechData as empty HP servers (no OS load), and I installed Debian -- the quad-core units we assembled from Intel parts (SR1530 chassis + X3210) and also used Debian -- no revenue to any Linux supplier and hence no "Linux Server *Sale*" -- yet a healthy amount of server capacity (not to mention the 20Gb of RAM and roughly 3Tb of storage) that has nothing to do with Microsoft.

If these analysis firms were to be honest (ho ho ho), they would have a category to cover the server sales that went out the distributor's door without an OS -- and let the reader guess what (large) fraction of those ended up running an Open Source OS.

#

Great Article

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 24.82.95.51] on November 04, 2007 04:37 AM
Forgot to add to my previous comment that this is an excellent article: well researched, well written, and critically important. Thank you for helping to set the record straight and counter the vast amount of misinformation funded by Microsoft. Too delicious that the ad that displayed when I brought up the article was one for Microsoft. Too wonderfully ironic to have Microsoft funding, in part, an article that helps refute Microsoft's propaganda.

Thanks again. Job very well done!

#

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 124.150.115.70] on November 04, 2007 06:04 AM


I believe your inference that the revenue growth of Microsoft indicates their server strength is flawed. Microsoft plays in too many markets unrelated to servers for this to hold.



The comparison of revenue growth is also taken from two different time periods; this is not fair. You also fail to specify Microsoft's revenue growth in dollars. I don't have the figures but the 18 percent growth you quoted would be billions of dollars. Should I then believe they are selling more servers?


I cannot believe interest in Linux on the server is sagging and the knowledge that Red Hat is growing stronger is encouraging. However, the comparison between Red Hat and Microsoft presented in this article is flawed.

#

Re: Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 66.44.153.6] on November 05, 2007 05:44 AM
I agree with most of your comment. Perhaps, however, the reason for the different time-periods is that, strictly speaking, there is no common time-period available. Redhat's quarter ended in February 2005. The closest Microsoft quarters would have ended December 2004 or March 2005. March would have seemed the logical choice, but for some reason the author chose the former. My guess is that Microsoft had not yet reported numbers for its most recent quarter at the time the article was written.

#

"OpenDocument Foundation" is the very similar story

Posted by: Michael Shigorin on November 05, 2007 06:01 PM
Joe, would you like to run another article on <a href="http://whois.americaregistry.com/displayWhois.php?zone=opendocumentfoundation.us">looking up opendocumentfoundation.us</a> | grep "^Registrant Organization" and then TransNet's relation with Microsoft?

You might also peek into Sam's history while leaving openoffice.org marketing lead position ;-)

#

Get the facts about sagging Linux server sales

Posted by: Joe Barr on November 05, 2007 07:49 PM
Michael,

Would you mind dropping me a note at joebarr at linux dot com?

Thanks,
Joe

#

THE FONT YOU'RE USING IS TOO SMALL

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 132.236.128.75] on November 06, 2007 03:20 PM
And it doesn't scale in the browswer. WTF?

#

What is the graph showing?

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 222.172.221.99] on November 07, 2007 12:20 PM
This is a pet peeve of mine, but for goodness sake, please, as a general rule, whenever you make a graph, label the axes.


Otherwise, I enjoyed the article.

#

Grup hepsi

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 88.254.253.65] on December 07, 2007 07:24 PM
<a href="http://www.erenbakici.com">galatasaray</a>
<a href="http://www.erenbakici.com">fenerbahçe</a>
<a href="http://www.erenbakici.com">beşiktaş</a>
<a href="http://www.erenbakici.com">pendikspor</a>
<a href="http://www.erenbakici.com">ultraslan</a>
<a href="http://www.erenbakici.com">kaan</a>

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.



 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya