Microsoft still dominates in OS revenue

Microsoft is still the biggest company for PC operating systems, at least according to the amount of revenue it generates. A new study from Gartner Research reports that Microsoft had $23.848 billion in revenue from its OS business in 2010 which gave it a 78.6 percent share of the entire worldwide OS market for that year.

Overall, Gartner said in its press release earlier this week that worldwide revenue for OS software came in at $30.4 billion, which was an increase of 7.8 percent compared to 2009. While Microsoft still has a commanding lead in OS revenue, the report did say that Apple's Mac OS was the fastest growing in revenue in 2010 in terms of the client based OS business. The Mac OS grew by 15.8 percent that year and with revenues of $580 million. Even with that growth the Mac OS only has a 1.7 percent market share of the Client based OS systems. Overall the client OS section of the business grew by 9.3 percent in 2010 while server based OSs grew its revenue by 5.7 percent.

IBM and HP were the number two and three companies in worldwide OS revenue, respectively, in 2010. IBM owns three OSs and showed the highest growth with its AIX OS with 9.2 percent growth. HP's HP-UX OS shows a 3.2 percent growth in 2010. Red Hat's version of Linux is the biggest in the overall Linux server market. Its revenues went up to $592 million in 2010, an 18.2 percent growth and a whopping 58.2 percent share of the entire Linux server OS market.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Xbox 360 could serve up cable TV channels in the US

Next Story

Rumour: Apple's iCloud codenamed "Castle" to succeed MobileMe

50 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

So...the few that don't...? Well thats their problem. Smary people use Windows...dumb people simply don't. They use all that other crappy stuff.

Why would I want an OS that limits what hardware I can buy for it? Mac OS X is not compatible with every printer sold...not even multi-function ones especially. Sure yes there is a generic printer driver from HP that will make any printer print. That isn't full usability.

If I want to shop any computer store blindfolded, virtually anything I pick up will be 100% IWndows compatible. You can't say this about ANY OTHER OPERATING SYSTEM...NOT EVEN LINUX.

Please grow up and attempt to grow a bit of common senese..without common sense you may as well be an animal just doing what people tell u...in this case..thinking what people tell u to think.

TechieXP said,
So...the few that don't...? Well thats their problem. Smary people use Windows...dumb people simply don't. They use all that other crappy stuff.

Why would I want an OS that limits what hardware I can buy for it? Mac OS X is not compatible with every printer sold...not even multi-function ones especially. Sure yes there is a generic printer driver from HP that will make any printer print. That isn't full usability.

If I want to shop any computer store blindfolded, virtually anything I pick up will be 100% IWndows compatible. You can't say this about ANY OTHER OPERATING SYSTEM...NOT EVEN LINUX.

Please grow up and attempt to grow a bit of common senese..without common sense you may as well be an animal just doing what people tell u...in this case..thinking what people tell u to think.


No hardware exists that is incompatible with Linux. Additionally, your atrocious spelling and grammar lend your comment no credence.

When a viable 'other OS' comes along then Microsoft should be scared. Until then there's a reason everyone uses Windows.

SK[ said,]When a viable 'other OS' comes along then Microsoft should be scared. Until then there's a reason everyone uses Windows.

Except not every one does.

SK[ said,]When a viable 'other OS' comes along then Microsoft should be scared. Until then there's a reason everyone uses Windows.

You mean everyone aside from the millions of people that don't?

Flawed said,
It's amazing what underhanded tactics can achieve. Bill gates must be so proud.

Oh honestly, stop being naive enough to think the other big tech companies (e.g. Google and Apple) don't behave in the same manner. They all try to shut others out of markets, Gates was just far better at it.

So in that case, yes, he really should be proud.

Flawed said,
It's amazing what underhanded tactics can achieve. Bill gates must be so proud.

Dude, I wonder if you had a company as big as Microsoft with its large worldwide ecosystem, and you woudn't do the same. If no, then what better idea are you suggesting?

Flawed said,
It's amazing what underhanded tactics can achieve. Bill gates must be so proud.

Here is our old troll Flawed, stop replying to his posts guys, he just leaves a trolling comment to start a flame war, maybe he is sitting there and laughing at you guys for feeding him on his trolling.

mahara said,

Dude, I wonder if you had a company as big as Microsoft with its large worldwide ecosystem, and you woudn't do the same. If no, then what better idea are you suggesting?

Don't feed the troll. He's been trolling here and there, condemning Microsoft for whatever they achieved.

Flawed said,
It's amazing what underhanded tactics can achieve. Bill gates must be so proud.

No one ever got to the top of the mountain by being the nice guy. Even Google's figuring THAT out.

autobon said,

Oh honestly, stop being naive enough to think the other big tech companies (e.g. Google and Apple) don't behave in the same manner. They all try to shut others out of markets, Gates was just far better at it.

So in that case, yes, he really should be proud.

Agreed

And yet the PC market is shrinking. That's why Microsoft is no longer viewed as a growth company by investors. Mobile is the growth sector of the future.

As I have said before, Microsoft is an empire in decline. Yes, it might currently dominate a stagnant / shrinking market (PC), but its future is altogether more precarious. In ten years we'll be asking, Microsoft who?

Flawed said,
In ten years we'll be asking, Microsoft who?
No, we really won't..

IBM's market declined.. So do we ask IBM Who ? .. Or that little company, what's it's name, Apple, that almost rolled over dead before Jobs came back and was their salvation.. ( along with MP3's )

Ryoken said,
No, we really won't..

IBM's market declined.. So do we ask IBM Who ? .. Or that little company, what's it's name, Apple, that almost rolled over dead before Jobs came back and was their salvation.. ( along with MP3's )


+1

Flawed said,
As I have said before, Microsoft is an empire in decline. In ten years we'll be asking, Microsoft who?

Your entire point is centered around the fact Microsoft is not doing well in the mobile phone space. So what you really mean to say is that we might not hear of Windows Phone in ten years. Because in most of the other markets Microsoft competes in, they not only dominate, but continue to grow.

Mobile is important, but only a fool would act as though its the only way to be successful. Or for that matter act like the mobile market is already done and decided, even though the large majority of people dont own a smartphone or tablet and won't for a long time. There have been many vital markets companies have failed in and then made a comeback later. Apple is one of those companies.

Flawed said,
And yet the PC market is shrinking.

Your comment is flawed.

Mobile market complements PC market, I won't be using a mobile device all the time if I can use a more comfortable device at home: PC. PCs are here to stay for now.

Flawed said,
And yet the PC market is shrinking. That's why Microsoft is no longer viewed as a growth company by investors. Mobile is the growth sector of the future.

As I have said before, Microsoft is an empire in decline. Yes, it might currently dominate a stagnant / shrinking market (PC), but its future is altogether more precarious. In ten years we'll be asking, Microsoft who?


One of the many flaws with your statement is that you will never get the powerhouse of a full PC into a mobile device. Therefore there is still a need for PC and therefore Microsoft will continue to grow.

Flawed said,
And yet the PC market is shrinking. That's why Microsoft is no longer viewed as a growth company by investors. Mobile is the growth sector of the future.

As I have said before, Microsoft is an empire in decline. Yes, it might currently dominate a stagnant / shrinking market (PC), but its future is altogether more precarious. In ten years we'll be asking, Microsoft who?

You think so? So I guess Microsoft can't enter the mobile market? Windows 8 for ARM what does that tell you.

Mnay people who use tablets and iPads and iPods and iPhones must have a desktop to sync data. Sure maybe one day Apple will be like Google, but you still need a PC to backup the device for a full backup. and what about businesses?

Until Office and Photoshop can work on a powerful enough mobile device, are they going to replace desktops? I mean really?

You hate Microsoft so much you think in 10 years we will be asking Microsoft who?

If it wasnt for Microsoft, we would be asking Apple who. and it has nothing to do with the 150M investment. Windows runs your PC, it runs scanners, it runs cash regsiters, it runs Microsoft Sync in cars, it runs Surface PC and gambling casino...Only Linux is on more devices. However a router has a purpose and its not multi-purposed.

Stop dreaming. Windows will be around for another 30 years. You think Apple will be here in 30 years?

And let me ask you this...if Apple went out of business right now...who would be hurting? Lets see. The vast majority of businesses dont use Macs...Macs make up 3% of the entire planet. WIndows makes up 95% of the entire planet. if MSFT decided to close up shop many more people would be affected vs Apple.

I'd really love to see some more detailed server market share chart. Not just Linux-based / Windows / Other, but also what versions of each OS. I've been using Windows Server for some testing in my home, so far it has been wonderful.

Any other server OS I should look at?

KavazovAngel said,
I'd really love to see some more detailed server market share chart. Not just Linux-based / Windows / Other, but also what versions of each OS. I've been using Windows Server for some testing in my home, so far it has been wonderful.

Any other server OS I should look at?

This is worth a read - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U..._share_of_operating_systems . Skip down to the Server Section. Based on Revenue alone, Windows is pegged as top operating system on servers but most other methods put Linux based operating systems even or above Windows as they're based on actual units sold - not how much was made selling those units.

KavazovAngel said,
I'd really love to see some more detailed server market share chart. Not just Linux-based / Windows / Other, but also what versions of each OS. I've been using Windows Server for some testing in my home, so far it has been wonderful.

Any other server OS I should look at?


Debian is a really wonderful OS, and if you have any experience with Ubuntu you can pretty much jump straight in.

still1 said,
What???? Microsoft is known for making OS???? I didnt know that and they dominate it?

Amazing isn't it?

Being serious, the article indeed should have been named differently, we all know Windows dominates the worldwide market.

Yeah, Windows dominates only by virtue of being pre-installed on most OEM PC's. Of course, Microsoft could only achieve that by hook and by crook.

Flawed said,
Yeah, Windows dominates only by virtue of being pre-installed on most OEM PC's. Of course, Microsoft could only achieve that by hook and by crook.
Yes because if computers didn't come with Windows, most people wouldn't go out and get a copy of Windows for it.. Oh wait, they would..

Ryoken said,
Yes because if computers didn't come with Windows, most people wouldn't go out and get a copy of Windows for it.. Oh wait, they would..

+1 Windows is used because of its compatibility and ease of use. No otner reason.

robert_dll said,

Amazing isn't it?

Being serious, the article indeed should have been named differently, we all know Windows dominates the worldwide market.

Still... I really don'τ geτ that "Still" in τiτle... What else did the wriτer expect? Linux to geτ τhe lead? lol

In my counτry, over 90% using Windows and τhere is no way to change τhaτ percenτage.

Edited by Deo Domuique, May 2 2011, 5:43am :

Deo Domuique said,

Still... I really don'τ geτ that "Still" in τiτle... What else did the wriτer expect? Linux to geτ τhe lead? lol

In my counτry, over 90% using Windows and τhere is no way to change τhaτ percenτage.

Well... Ubuntu 11.04 looks very sweet and it works fine for me, I wouldn't not be surprised if a lot of people use linux instead of Microsoft in the future! just my oppinion...

Deo Domuique said,

Still... I really don'τ geτ that "Still" in τiτle... What else did the wriτer expect? Linux to geτ τhe lead? lol

In my counτry, over 90% using Windows and τhere is no way to change τhaτ percenτage.

Using tau instead of T makes you look cool?

mehta708 said,

Using tau instead of T makes you look cool?


More like stupid because he forgot to change them all... lolz

Flawed said,
Yeah, Windows dominates only by virtue of being pre-installed on most OEM PC's. Of course, Microsoft could only achieve that by hook and by crook.

Really? According to FACTS...Apple refused to license Mac OS out to other outfits when it was first released. All these othr PC makers didn't have an OS to put on their system. Microsoft brought DOS first and then Windows. If Microsoft would have made their own hardware they would have been like Apple and kept there OS to themselves it would have been the same. MS chose to sell the OS to others and so Windows cloned to other machines bec they didn't have any choice. There were no other choices...what Unix? Unix is not and has never been a desktop oriented OS. Linux wasnt an option...so what other choice ws their. You dont have to hook or crock if you are the only option.

Learn your history. Microsft used IE to strong arm Netscape bec netscape didnt want to play ball. MS's issue was they didn't Netscape to run independant of Windows. If you make a platform that can run sandbox within Windows, the OS isn't even needed...it is just there to play host. Same for Java. But IE killed Netscape because it was free and it offered more. No need to download so many addons to make stuff work. Yes IE was slower...but by the time you added all the plugins, Netscape was just as slow. And yes theer was a free version, but there were paid versions as well.

The rest is history. Read the facts of how Windows became what it was. Stop listening to BS proganda by MS haters.

However this is what you guys dont get. Yes Apple is more profitable. But see, Apple is also easy to beat. Apple relied on popularity. When you arent popular anymore.