It has been my experience that managing a server with nix is a nightmare. That's why I would always pay someone else to do it, but even when I do it still occasionally breaks down. Usually when it's upgraded.
Well, managing servers in general is a pain in the ass. I won't say linux makes it foolproof, just that the general trend (and the trend among sysadmins I know personally) is that they prefer it. Maybe it's just bias, but either way the server market is not the cornerstone of microsofts' dominance.
I was more talking about how Microsoft got ahead, at this point it's true almost all public facing servers are Linux. I would suggest almost all private or internal servers still are not though.
Friend of mine does server deployment for IBM, it's a mix depending on what the client wants, but he seems to mostly work on linux ones.
Ones that are Linux are far out of date because everyone's rightfully afraid to touch them.
That's also true, but again that's a general feature of critical infrastructure. For example, 747s still have their software upgraded by floppy disc, because it works and no one wants to risk switching to another format in case it doesn't work. Heck, back when the y2k bug happened a bunch of companies had to entice fortran programmers out of retirement because they were still running their code from back in the 60s.
If been hearing variations on this for 20 years.
Well, it's been happening for 20 years. Microsoft have at best plateaued, at worst they're in decline. Their major new product launches tend to go down like a lead balloon and their old products are mostly kept around for legacy reasons.
The only real success they've had breaking into a new market since windows/office is the xBox and the console market isn't exactly something that'll keep a corporate juggernaut afloat on it's own.
[–] Broc_Lia ago
Well, managing servers in general is a pain in the ass. I won't say linux makes it foolproof, just that the general trend (and the trend among sysadmins I know personally) is that they prefer it. Maybe it's just bias, but either way the server market is not the cornerstone of microsofts' dominance.
Friend of mine does server deployment for IBM, it's a mix depending on what the client wants, but he seems to mostly work on linux ones.
That's also true, but again that's a general feature of critical infrastructure. For example, 747s still have their software upgraded by floppy disc, because it works and no one wants to risk switching to another format in case it doesn't work. Heck, back when the y2k bug happened a bunch of companies had to entice fortran programmers out of retirement because they were still running their code from back in the 60s.
Well, it's been happening for 20 years. Microsoft have at best plateaued, at worst they're in decline. Their major new product launches tend to go down like a lead balloon and their old products are mostly kept around for legacy reasons.
The only real success they've had breaking into a new market since windows/office is the xBox and the console market isn't exactly something that'll keep a corporate juggernaut afloat on it's own.
[–] [deleted] ago (edited ago)