All the latest UK technology news, reviews and analysis
|
|
|
16 Sep 2008
Developers are choosing commercial, rather than non-commercial, distributions of Linux when it comes to building high-performance or mission-critical systems, according to new research.
Evans Data Corporation questioned 400 open source developers last month and found that non-commercial Linux distributions are still favoured for web development and embedded systems.
But the research also showed that commercial flavours are strongly preferred for higher-end systems, mission-critical large enterprise development and data centre development.
"The open source nature of Linux, and the availability of Linux source code, appeal to developers doing complex leading-edge and mission-critical work," said John Andrews, president of Evans Data Corp.
"But they also like the additional support they get with commercial products. And since improper configuration is the largest perceived security threat to a Linux system, configuration and management tools that come with commercial distros are important in these situations."
The survey found that Ubuntu is the most popular distribution (24 per cent of respondents), followed by Red Hat Linux (21 per cent) and Red Hat Enterprise (19 per cent).
VMware emerged as the most popular virtual machine technology. Over a third of developers are using it, something that the company is looking to capitalise on with its new product announcements.
Apache/BSD-style or GPL2 are by far the most popular open source licensing models, according to the survey. GPL3 and LGPL were well down developers' lists.
Latest stories from Developer
Related articles
Related jobs
Poll
What is the most important IT priority for your company this year?
Connect with V3.co.uk
This paper focuses on a series of best practices and techniques for development teams looking to improve their software development processes
Why good data management at all levels is essential in the modern business (video, 6mins)
SOFTWARE ENGINEER - BERKS - to £34k plus package WAREHOUSE...
We currently have a position for a Senior Project Manager...
JAVA DEVELOPER TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS / TMS...
We are looking for an experienced Software Business Analyst...
Keep up to date with the latest products, services and technologies from the world's leading IT companies. IThound.com brings you over 2,000 white papers, case studies and analyst reports.
Do you agree?
Survey results Skewed? For what purpose?
By dividing up Red Hat into two different reported operating systems and lumping Ubuntu's products, you have effectively skewed the numbers in favor of Ubuntu. I understand Ubuntu has only recently released a server product(as opposed to it's desktop product), While Red Hat has several different server products as well as a desktop which it doesn't push, in deference to it's community Fedora distribution. Just citing the numbers you mention, Red Hat clearly has at least 40% of the market, putting it way ahead of any other distribution, including Ubuntu.
Posted by: motie38 22 Sep 2008
Red Hat vs. Red Hat Enterprise
Red Hat Linux ceased to exist in 2004. Red Hat Enterprise Linux was created in 2002.
Posted by: Barry 18 Sep 2008
Misleading, though
The distros mentioned all *offer* support, but are these developers you speak of actually *buying* support? You note that Ubuntu is the most common choice, but it can be used without a support contract so calling it "commercial" is misleading. If they buy support, sure, but otherwise, how is it different from them using Debian in this case?
Posted by: alan 17 Sep 2008
Where did you get your data?
Highly suspicious of your source stating Ubuntu has 24% share?! When did that happen?
Posted by: Alex Roy 16 Sep 2008
Weird article
I wasn't aware that Ubuntu was a 'commercial distribution'. Also whats the difference between Red Hat Linux and Red Hat Enterprise Linux? Commercial products are favoured by management-types who are trained to buy branded products and know next to nothing about Linux. From experience the 'support' you buy from the likes of Red Hat or Suse are barely worth the bother. You're paying for the brand, such as it is.
Posted by: dogStar 16 Sep 2008