Market Share: Windows 57.5% - Linux 40.6% - an Open Source Dream Come True!

When it comes down to the operating system market, Windows, Mac OS X and Linux are in a traditional three horse rage for the largest install base. So far, Microsoft has virtually owned the market, dominating with a share of over 90% with the Windows platform, Apple is runner up with Mac OS X at about 5-6%, and Linux is the undisputed underdog with percentages varying in accordance with different reports from under 1% (Net Application) to almost 2% (W3Counter). At the same time, a survey,
put together by the Linux Foundation, comes to underline a strong growth in popularity for the open source platform, even with the advent of Windows Vista and Mac OS X 10.5 Tiger.

The Linux Foundation survey highlightes the options of no less than 20,000 participants, mainly representatives of organizations in the small business sector. According to the survey, Windows and Linux are in fact dividing the operating system market in almost equal shares. 57.5% of respondents did reveal that they were running Windows on their desktops/clients, with a staggering 40.6% pointing to Linux as their operating system of choice. Such percentages are nothing but a dream come true for the open source community, but in the real world things are a tad different.

The survey also points out that while 53.3% of participants use Linux on development desktops, with 39.2% in departmental servers, 38.1% in enterprise server and 55.2% in web servers (yes, it is more than 100% - which means that the respondents have integrated the open source operating system into more than one aspect of their IT infrastructure), another 66.1% are using it on client desktops. Now, if Linux would indeed manage to win client desktops from Microsoft, then that would be a real victory. The open source operating system has already had a strong momentum on the server side, although the launch of Windows Server 2008 is bound to produce quite an impact.

But at the same time, 20,000 respondents of the Linux Foundation's 2007 survey fail to paint an accurate overall picture. I am not disputing in any manner the fact that there are companies, especially in the small business sector, that have leveraged the advantages Linux has to offer to a great extent, migrating a consistent part of their infrastructure away from Windows. But, what I am saying is that these are rather isolated cases, nothing more than 20,000 exceptions that confirm the general rule of Windows' dominance.

Think XP and Vista Are Security Disasters? Have You Looked at Tiger and Leopard Lately?

Do you think that Windows Vista and Windows XP are security disasters? Well, in all fairness, chances are that indeed you would think that. Traditionally, The Windows platform, no mater the actual label of the iterations, has not been associated with a bulletproof operating system. Mac OS X and Linux, on the other hand, come with a natural end user perception of security. But at the same time, and this is a direct result of Apple's irresponsible marketing techniques, OS X has somewhat of an aura of impermeability to malicious code.

In fact, among the list of reasons delivered by the Cupertino-based software company as incentive to grab a copy of the latest cat, Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard, Apple states: "It’s secure. In a world where PCs constantly
do battle with viruses and malware, Mac OS X is a sea of tranquility. Just go about your business and Mac OS X minds the fortress. Your documents are safe even if you share your Mac with others, and you can keep your kids safe by using a rich set of parental controls."

Sea of tranquility? Fortress? The immediate consequence of such "descriptive" epithets for OS X security is the fact that Apple users generally run the operating system without a security solution. In fact, OS X users even deride Windows for the constant and immutable need to run an antivirus. But, OS X is not a fortress. Not by a long shot.

Case in point the December 12th, 2007 Apple Security Update 2007-009. With the update, the Cupertino-based company patched no less than 31 security holes impacting a variety of products, but with Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger and Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard taking center stage. Although Apple does not rate security flaws in accordance to a severity rating, almost half of the vulnerabilities allow for the execution of arbitrary code. This is equivalent with a Critical label judging by Microsoft terms.

In order to make a comparison between Vista and Leopard, you would have to consider that Microsoft has released a total of 12 Critical security bulletins for its latest Windows client, in the entire period since its launch, for over a year, judging according to the business release in November 2006. Out of the 18 patched impacting Leopard, no less than eight can be considered critical, as the vulnerabilities allow potential attacker to run arbitrary code on an affected platform.

That's eight in a single month. Now in all fairness, Microsoft's security bulletins account for more vulnerabilities in some cases, as a single release can address multiple holes, but by the looks of it Apple's really catching up with Leopard. And when it comes to malicious code, last I checked Sunbelt had an extensive list of websites serving the TrojanDNSChanger Trojan Horse (just scroll down and read the posts). And all that malware needs its vulnerabilities, well, Leopard and Tiger have plenty of those.