Re: Server shipments [was Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call]

["Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>]

>> > More data from news.com.
>> > 
>> > Dell has 19% of the server market with $531M/quarter in sales[1] over
>> > 212,750 machines per quarter[2].
>> > 
>> > That means that the average sale price for a server from Dell was
>> > $2495.
>> > 
>> > The average sale price of all servers from all companies is $9347.
>> > 
>> > I still don't see the big profits touted by the scaling fanatics,
>> > anyone care to explain it?
>> 
>> Sigh. If you're so convinced that there's no money in larger systems,
>> why don't you write to Sam Palmisano and explain to him the error of
>> his ways? I'm sure IBM has absolutely no market data to go on ...
> 
> Numbers talk, bullshit walks.  Got shoes?

Bullshit numbers walk too. Remember the context? Linux.
Linux servers vs. Linux desktops. If you think the Linux desktop market is
large, I'd like some of whatever you're smoking, as it's obviously good
stuff. 

I think there's money in big iron, you don't seem to. That's fine, you're
not paying my salary (thank $deity). 

Perhaps a person with the slightest understanding of basic arithmetic would
see that this:

>> > That means that the average sale price for a server from Dell was
>> > $2495.
>> > 
>> > The average sale price of all servers from all companies is $9347.

means that somebody other than Dell is making the money on the big servers.
As Dell is a PC company, no real suprise there.

By the way ... you remember when I said that Linux could scale upwards
without hurting the low end? And that the reason we'd succeed in that where
Solaris et al failed was because the development model was different? 

When you said you'd go run some UP benchmarks, that's *exactly* where the
development model is different. It's open enough that you can go do that
sort of thing, and if errors are made, you can point them out. I honestly
welcome the benchmark results you provide ... it's the strength of the
system.

M.