On 2008-09-13, nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu claimed:
>
> But Linux use could be on the upswing: 47% of respondents said they
> would use or evaluate Linux in the coming year, with lower cost as the
> primary driver. But the largest percentage said they had no further
> plans to migrate from Unix to Linux, indicating that future Linux
> growth would be at the expense of other platforms. In response to a
> different question, 23% said that whenever possible they would migrate
> from Windows to Linux, and another 16% said that to avoid a Windows
> upgrade, they would migrate to Linux.
>
>
> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtar...329483,00.html

Whether or not that last part is good news depends entirely on whether
MICROS~1 ever puts out an upgrade. Recent events (the last 6 or so
years) lead me to believe that isn't in the cards.

Maybe they mean they want to avoid being forced to move to some other
Micromess "software", such as V.I.S.T.A.

--
Dogs crawl under fences. Software crawls under Windows.

---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups

wrote in message
news:db2c0533-74fa-4d67-98ce-e4941eb68ff1@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> But Linux use could be on the upswing: 47% of respondents said they
> would use or evaluate Linux in the coming year, with lower cost as the
> primary driver. But the largest percentage said they had no further
> plans to migrate from Unix to Linux, indicating that future Linux
> growth would be at the expense of other platforms. In response to a
> different question, 23% said that whenever possible they would migrate
> from Windows to Linux, and another 16% said that to avoid a Windows
> upgrade, they would migrate to Linux.
>
>
> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtar...329483,00.html

The reporter seems to ignore the facts. Linux use for servers is growing at
a substantial rate, but Windows use is growing also. The losers are Unix,
Netware, and IBM mainframe. In absolute terms, Windows is increasing more
than Linux, since it has a greater base to measure against. The facts do
not bear out the implications of the attitude surveys. Talk is cheapl.

On 2008-09-13, amicus_curious wrote:
>
> wrote in message
> news:db2c0533-74fa-4d67-98ce-e4941eb68ff1@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> But Linux use could be on the upswing: 47% of respondents said they
>> would use or evaluate Linux in the coming year, with lower cost as the
>> primary driver. But the largest percentage said they had no further
>> plans to migrate from Unix to Linux, indicating that future Linux
>> growth would be at the expense of other platforms. In response to a
>> different question, 23% said that whenever possible they would migrate
>> from Windows to Linux, and another 16% said that to avoid a Windows
>> upgrade, they would migrate to Linux.
>>
>>
>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtar...329483,00.html
>
> The reporter seems to ignore the facts. Linux use for servers is growing at
> a substantial rate, but Windows use is growing also. The losers are Unix,
> Netware, and IBM mainframe. In absolute terms, Windows is increasing more
> than Linux, since it has a greater base to measure against. The facts do
> not bear out the implications of the attitude surveys. Talk is cheapl.
>

You will also need more Windows gear to do the same job.

It's quite interesting to see a Unix server replaced by a Windows server and see
the Windows server fall flat on it's face when it's 2 generations newer than the "old
Unix box".

--
NO! There are no CODICILES of Fight Club! |||
/ | \
That way leads to lawyers and business megacorps and credit cards!

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:51:24 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:

> wrote in message
> news:db2c0533-74fa-4d67-98ce-e4941eb68ff1@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> But Linux use could be on the upswing: 47% of respondents said they
>> would use or evaluate Linux in the coming year, with lower cost as the
>> primary driver. But the largest percentage said they had no further
>> plans to migrate from Unix to Linux, indicating that future Linux
>> growth would be at the expense of other platforms. In response to a
>> different question, 23% said that whenever possible they would migrate
>> from Windows to Linux, and another 16% said that to avoid a Windows
>> upgrade, they would migrate to Linux.
>>
>>
>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtar...329483,00.html
>
> The reporter seems to ignore the facts. Linux use for servers is growing at
> a substantial rate, but Windows use is growing also. The losers are Unix,
> Netware, and IBM mainframe. In absolute terms, Windows is increasing more
> than Linux, since it has a greater base to measure against. The facts do
> not bear out the implications of the attitude surveys. Talk is cheapl.

I agree with most of what you are saying except the IBM mainframe.
IBM mainframe sales are soaring and in fact Linux is part of the reason.
Logical partitioning has breathed new life into the mainframe as well as
the single point for maintenence.
Redundency has all but eliminated single point of failure so that's not as
much an issue as it has been in the past.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:

http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:51:24 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:

Apologies for the awful spelling. I hit enter too fast

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:

http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

"JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
news:slrngcmc72.99v.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2008-09-13, amicus_curious wrote:
>>
>> wrote in message
>> news:db2c0533-74fa-4d67-98ce-e4941eb68ff1@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> But Linux use could be on the upswing: 47% of respondents said they
>>> would use or evaluate Linux in the coming year, with lower cost as the
>>> primary driver. But the largest percentage said they had no further
>>> plans to migrate from Unix to Linux, indicating that future Linux
>>> growth would be at the expense of other platforms. In response to a
>>> different question, 23% said that whenever possible they would migrate
>>> from Windows to Linux, and another 16% said that to avoid a Windows
>>> upgrade, they would migrate to Linux.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtar...329483,00.html
>>
>> The reporter seems to ignore the facts. Linux use for servers is growing
>> at
>> a substantial rate, but Windows use is growing also. The losers are
>> Unix,
>> Netware, and IBM mainframe. In absolute terms, Windows is increasing
>> more
>> than Linux, since it has a greater base to measure against. The facts do
>> not bear out the implications of the attitude surveys. Talk is cheapl.
>>
>
> You will also need more Windows gear to do the same job.
>
> It's quite interesting to see a Unix server replaced by a Windows
> server and see
> the Windows server fall flat on it's face when it's 2 generations newer
> than the "old
> Unix box".
>
And that explains why so many companies have switched from Unix to Windows
over the past decade? I think you are in denial.

Micoshaft asstroturfing fraudster pounding the sock amicus_curious
wrote on behalf of Half Wits from Micoshaft Department of Marketing:


>
> wrote in message
> news:db2c0533-74fa-4d67-98ce-e4941eb68ff1@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> But Linux use could be on the upswing: 47% of respondents said they
>> would use or evaluate Linux in the coming year, with lower cost as the
>> primary driver. But the largest percentage said they had no further
>> plans to migrate from Unix to Linux, indicating that future Linux
>> growth would be at the expense of other platforms. In response to a
>> different question, 23% said that whenever possible they would migrate
>> from Windows to Linux, and another 16% said that to avoid a Windows
>> upgrade, they would migrate to Linux.
>>
>>
>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news
article/0,289142,sid39_gci1329483,00.html
>
> The reporter seems to ignore the facts. Linux use for servers is growing
> at
> a substantial rate, but Windows use is growing also. The losers are Unix,
> Netware, and IBM mainframe. In absolute terms, Windows is increasing more
> than Linux,


A complete lie of course.

Linux is growing more than windopws.

Because Linux is more than servers and desktops.
The typical micoshaft funded asstroturfing sock like 'amicus_curious'
relies on narrowing definitions to bring to attention worthless
points.

Linux sells 3 million+ embedded Linux gadgets per day.
The modern electronics high street
market would not exist were it not for Linux supplying high value
electronics products like flat TVs, DVD recorders, IP webcams, MP3 players,
UMPCs, digital photoframes, routers, set top boxes and the like.
Someone had to build all that - it was Linux.

That is more reason for IT companies, electronics companies, product
developers, multinationals, conglomorates, and software houses to switch
everything to Linux because the whole envelope of Linux is much bigger than
micoshaft. Open source and Linux has biggest software developer teams and
support infrastructure than anyone else on the planet. Even in places
like India, the big companies like Wipro and Infosys should switch en-masse
to Linux. The whole of Asia is and needs relevant services.
Someone has to supply the needs. It may as well be you!

There is no point in doing micoshaft unless you happen to be
a retard and don't get the whole picture.

On 2008-09-13, amicus_curious wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
> news:slrngcmc72.99v.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2008-09-13, amicus_curious wrote:
>>>
>>> wrote in message
>>> news:db2c0533-74fa-4d67-98ce-e4941eb68ff1@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>> But Linux use could be on the upswing: 47% of respondents said they
>>>> would use or evaluate Linux in the coming year, with lower cost as the
>>>> primary driver. But the largest percentage said they had no further
>>>> plans to migrate from Unix to Linux, indicating that future Linux
>>>> growth would be at the expense of other platforms. In response to a
>>>> different question, 23% said that whenever possible they would migrate
>>>> from Windows to Linux, and another 16% said that to avoid a Windows
>>>> upgrade, they would migrate to Linux.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtar...329483,00.html
>>>
>>> The reporter seems to ignore the facts. Linux use for servers is growing
>>> at
>>> a substantial rate, but Windows use is growing also. The losers are
>>> Unix,
>>> Netware, and IBM mainframe. In absolute terms, Windows is increasing
>>> more
>>> than Linux, since it has a greater base to measure against. The facts do
>>> not bear out the implications of the attitude surveys. Talk is cheapl.
>>>
>>
>> You will also need more Windows gear to do the same job.
>>
>> It's quite interesting to see a Unix server replaced by a Windows
>> server and see
>> the Windows server fall flat on it's face when it's 2 generations newer
>> than the "old
>> Unix box".
>>
> And that explains why so many companies have switched from Unix to Windows
> over the past decade? I think you are in denial.

Pointy Haired Bosses.

Sometimes they can limp along after their forced conversions to NT.
Other times, it just explodes in their faces so badly that they have to
to back to Unix with their PHB tails between their legs.

That's not to say that NT solutions can't necessarily cut it. You just
can't "treat it like a Windows box". You have to approach it more like you
would have approached the original Unix solution. You also need similar
talent. Otherwise, what potential NT and the 3rd party softare might have
will all be basically wasted.

OTOH, there are no 100 cpu or 1000 cpu NT monsters.

--


Some people have this nutty idea that in 1997 |||
reading to a hard disk and writing to a hard disk / | \
both at the same time was something worth patenting.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

"JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
news:slrngcsu9o.rtv.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>
> Pointy Haired Bosses.
>
It is certainly true that Scott Adams has made his fortune from these
characters and most people like to associate real life with these fantasies.
However, the overall premise is just a spoof and your conclusion is absurd.
You reason that the huge number of IT managers who have chosen to implement
Windows solutions to servers are incompetent and only lucky if their
companies do not founder due to their mistakes. Yet the Fortune 500 uses
billions and billions of dollars worth of these servers and adds to them by
the billions annually and remain in the Fortune 500. You are completely
mistaken on that evidence.

>
> That's not to say that NT solutions can't necessarily cut it. You just
> can't "treat it like a Windows box". You have to approach it more like you
> would have approached the original Unix solution. You also need similar
> talent. Otherwise, what potential NT and the 3rd party softare might have
> will all be basically wasted.
>
So you admit that the world is round after all? So now we have competent
administrators with talents equivalent to their contemporaries who manage
Unix networks choosing to remain with Windows solutions. Well, that is the
reality and the number of such administrators grows annully.

On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
> news:slrngcsu9o.rtv.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>
>> Pointy Haired Bosses.
>>
> It is certainly true that Scott Adams has made his fortune from these
> characters and most people like to associate real life with these fantasies.

You can try and be dismissive all you like. That won't change
the reality of the situation now or when the fad was to all move
over to msoffice to to some "single supplier" notion.

[deletia]
>> That's not to say that NT solutions can't necessarily cut it. You just
>> can't "treat it like a Windows box". You have to approach it more like you
>> would have approached the original Unix solution. You also need similar
>> talent. Otherwise, what potential NT and the 3rd party softare might have
>> will all be basically wasted.
>>
> So you admit that the world is round after all? So now we have competent
> administrators with talents equivalent to their contemporaries who manage

There are worlds of difference between our idea of comptetent and
your idea of "competent". In the real world, genuine competence tends
to completely anniahalte whatever TCO savings Microsoft was promising
you.

> Unix networks choosing to remain with Windows solutions. Well, that is the
> reality and the number of such administrators grows annully.
>

You mean NT admins that can deal with Oracle client administration
on Windows without needing rescued by the Unix team?

Not really.

BTW... "administrators" of the system variety are not the ones
that ultimately make the decisions regarding whether not to go with
one technical solution over another. It's not the "guys in the trenches"
making the choices. They're simply living with them (one way or another).

--


Some people have this nutty idea that in 1997 |||
reading to a hard disk and writing to a hard disk / | \
both at the same time was something worth patenting.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
> news:slrngcsu9o.rtv.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>
>> Pointy Haired Bosses.
>>
> It is certainly true that Scott Adams has made his fortune from these
> characters and most people like to associate real life with these fantasies.
> However, the overall premise is just a spoof and your conclusion is absurd.
> You reason that the huge number of IT managers who have chosen to implement
> Windows solutions to servers are incompetent and only lucky if their
> companies do not founder due to their mistakes. Yet the Fortune 500 uses
> billions and billions of dollars worth of these servers and adds to them by
> the billions annually and remain in the Fortune 500. You are completely
> mistaken on that evidence.
>

I currently work for a company in the top 50. And we use lots of windows
servers - but we also use lots of Unix and Linux servers. I have done work
for other Fortune 500 companies at a previous job - and like the company I
work for now, they run mixed mode environments. Some stuff is windows, some
stuff is Unix or Linux.

That is more the reality.

--
Tom Shelton

"JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
news:slrngct3re.46i.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>>
>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
>> news:slrngcsu9o.rtv.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>>
>>> Pointy Haired Bosses.
>>>
>> It is certainly true that Scott Adams has made his fortune from these
>> characters and most people like to associate real life with these
>> fantasies.
>
> You can try and be dismissive all you like. That won't change
> the reality of the situation now or when the fad was to all move
> over to msoffice to to some "single supplier" notion.
>
> [deletia]
>>> That's not to say that NT solutions can't necessarily cut it. You
>>> just
>>> can't "treat it like a Windows box". You have to approach it more like
>>> you
>>> would have approached the original Unix solution. You also need similar
>>> talent. Otherwise, what potential NT and the 3rd party softare might
>>> have
>>> will all be basically wasted.
>>>
>> So you admit that the world is round after all? So now we have competent
>> administrators with talents equivalent to their contemporaries who manage
>
> There are worlds of difference between our idea of comptetent and
> your idea of "competent". In the real world, genuine competence tends
> to completely anniahalte whatever TCO savings Microsoft was promising
> you.
>
"Our"? I was not aware of your royal ancestry! Even so, you cannot just
complain and insist that the successful companies are all incompetent or at
least woefully inefficient in terms of IT infrastructure. You offer nothing
in support of your allegations which are contrary to what seems to be common
experience.



>> Unix networks choosing to remain with Windows solutions. Well, that is
>> the
>> reality and the number of such administrators grows annully.
>>
>
> You mean NT admins that can deal with Oracle client administration
> on Windows without needing rescued by the Unix team?
>
> Not really.

You may say that, but you are acting as did the fox complaining of the sour
grapes.

>
> BTW... "administrators" of the system variety are not the ones
> that ultimately make the decisions regarding whether not to go with
> one technical solution over another. It's not the "guys in the trenches"
> making the choices. They're simply living with them (one way or another).
>
I infer from your comments that you are a "trench worker" then. I think
that you are mistaken to denigrate the competence of those who do make the
decisions. Successful companies are built on good decisions and those who
make them are those with a history of making successful ones.

"Tom Shelton" wrote in message
news:ObCdnak4orHaB1PVnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>>
>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
>> news:slrngcsu9o.rtv.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>>
>>> Pointy Haired Bosses.
>>>
>> It is certainly true that Scott Adams has made his fortune from these
>> characters and most people like to associate real life with these
>> fantasies.
>> However, the overall premise is just a spoof and your conclusion is
>> absurd.
>> You reason that the huge number of IT managers who have chosen to
>> implement
>> Windows solutions to servers are incompetent and only lucky if their
>> companies do not founder due to their mistakes. Yet the Fortune 500 uses
>> billions and billions of dollars worth of these servers and adds to them
>> by
>> the billions annually and remain in the Fortune 500. You are completely
>> mistaken on that evidence.
>>
>
> I currently work for a company in the top 50. And we use lots of windows
> servers - but we also use lots of Unix and Linux servers. I have done
> work
> for other Fortune 500 companies at a previous job - and like the company I
> work for now, they run mixed mode environments. Some stuff is windows,
> some
> stuff is Unix or Linux.
>
> That is more the reality.
>
Do you also think that the Windows servers were purchased by the fools in
your organization?

On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>
> "Tom Shelton" wrote in message
> news:ObCdnak4orHaB1PVnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>>>
>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
>>> news:slrngcsu9o.rtv.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>>>
>>>> Pointy Haired Bosses.
>>>>
>>> It is certainly true that Scott Adams has made his fortune from these
>>> characters and most people like to associate real life with these
>>> fantasies.
>>> However, the overall premise is just a spoof and your conclusion is
>>> absurd.
>>> You reason that the huge number of IT managers who have chosen to
>>> implement
>>> Windows solutions to servers are incompetent and only lucky if their
>>> companies do not founder due to their mistakes. Yet the Fortune 500 uses
>>> billions and billions of dollars worth of these servers and adds to them
>>> by
>>> the billions annually and remain in the Fortune 500. You are completely
>>> mistaken on that evidence.
>>>
>>
>> I currently work for a company in the top 50. And we use lots of windows
>> servers - but we also use lots of Unix and Linux servers. I have done
>> work
>> for other Fortune 500 companies at a previous job - and like the company I
>> work for now, they run mixed mode environments. Some stuff is windows,
>> some
>> stuff is Unix or Linux.
>>
>> That is more the reality.
>>
> Do you also think that the Windows servers were purchased by the fools in
> your organization?
>

No.

--
Tom Shelton

On 2008-09-15, Tom Shelton wrote:
> On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>>
>> "Tom Shelton" wrote in message
>> news:ObCdnak4orHaB1PVnZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
>>>> news:slrngcsu9o.rtv.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>>>>>
>>>>> Pointy Haired Bosses.
>>>>>
>>>> It is certainly true that Scott Adams has made his fortune from these
>>>> characters and most people like to associate real life with these
>>>> fantasies.
>>>> However, the overall premise is just a spoof and your conclusion is
>>>> absurd.
>>>> You reason that the huge number of IT managers who have chosen to
>>>> implement
>>>> Windows solutions to servers are incompetent and only lucky if their
>>>> companies do not founder due to their mistakes. Yet the Fortune 500 uses
>>>> billions and billions of dollars worth of these servers and adds to them
>>>> by
>>>> the billions annually and remain in the Fortune 500. You are completely
>>>> mistaken on that evidence.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I currently work for a company in the top 50. And we use lots of windows
>>> servers - but we also use lots of Unix and Linux servers. I have done
>>> work
>>> for other Fortune 500 companies at a previous job - and like the company I
>>> work for now, they run mixed mode environments. Some stuff is windows,
>>> some
>>> stuff is Unix or Linux.
>>>
>>> That is more the reality.
>>>
>> Do you also think that the Windows servers were purchased by the fools in
>> your organization?
>>
>
> No.
>

Horses for courses.

--
Regards,

Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power