OS Popularity on Wikipedia Pages

vermaden

vermaden

Code: 
[U][B]Operating System   Requests  Percent[/B][/U]
Windows           3,469,687   81.78%
Mac                 327,753    7.73%
iPhone              116,311    2.74%
Linux               107,158    2.53% (including Android)
iPad                 31,506    0.74%
BlackBerry           17,028    0.40%
SymbianOS             7,926    0.19%
DoCoMo                  449    0.01%
SunOS                   368    0.01%
FreeBSD                 347    0.01%
[U]OpenBSD                  26    0.00%[/U]
[B]Total             4,242,653  100.00%[/B]

SOURCE: http://stats.wikimedia.org/archive/squid_reports/2011-03/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm
 
Those numbers show which OSes are used to browse Wikipedia, so the place that I used to work which had about 300 FreeBSD web servers would show up as 0% because none of them are used to browse Wikipedia.

That said, FreeBSD is not very popular and may not ever be. Linux has a ton of momentum and that is unlikely to change.
 
Hmm, I would love to make a witty comment on how the lowest scoring OS must just have a massively ignorant userbase to score 0.00%, but since it is OpenBSD, I have decided against it since they might throw a brick through my window :)
 
IMHO the real annoying is the iPhone popularity. I assume iPad is included there as well. I just don't get it when people tend to spend money in such crap.
 
gkontos said:
IMHO the real annoying is the iPhone popularity. I assume iPad is included there as well. I just don't get it when people tend to spend money in such crap.
Click to expand...

People tend to spend money on what ever is trendy. Is it overpriced? Probably. Is it crap? I don't think so, it is pretty solid product. But then again its off-topic.
 
It could also be argued that the enlightened (Unix) users tend to get their information from more reputable sources while the less advanced of the human race get their info from Wikipedia. :)
 
expl said:
People tend to spend money on what ever is trendy. Is it overpriced? Probably. Is it crap? I don't think so, it is pretty solid product. But then again its off-topic.
Click to expand...
Value for money is usually a good criteria for judging a product. So, when a product is highly overpriced and mainly a fashion statement it turns out to be crap.

This is also not off topic. Let me explain. It is not a big secret that FreeBSD is mainly used for servers that do not browse wikipedia. For the sake of discussion lets assume that for every FreeBSD workstation we have 100 servers, sounds fair?
According to this:
Code: 
[B]Operating System   Requests  Percent[/B]
[B]iPhone              116,311    2.74%[/B]
[B]FreeBSD                 347    0.01%[/B]
Total             4,242,653  100.00%
we would have a total of 34700 active FreeBSD machines or less than half iPhones!
 
gkontos said:
For the sake of discussion lets assume that for every FreeBSD workstation we have 100 servers, sounds fair?
Click to expand...

No.

Long Answer:
No, because there are many, many servers out there - and web hosting is only a subsection of the potential uses for a server.

I've got a FreeBSD server sitting behind me that doesn't know anything about providing http services, for instance. The percentage of job listings at a modest regional level (i.e. LA, California for instance) requesting experience with FreeBSD would be more interesting/relevant. (Even measuring that metric poses problems - not every job listing is of the same 'quality'.)

Bonus points for anyone who points out an embedded use of FreeBSD (I'm new and don't know any off hand).
 
I question the numbers though.

A lot of Linux and BSD users keep their web browsers user agent switcher set to show a version of windows just so all of the pages load fine.

So the number of *nix users browsing the web is greater than any databas shows I think.
 
One thing that worries me is that Intel Sandy Bridge CPU and AMD Fusion APU have a built-in GPU, but FreeBSD does not support them yet. I know that Intel sponsors the Intel graphics FreeBSD development, but it will be ready at least a couple of years later.

I think this graphic cards (built-in or external also) support is the biggest hurdle to the FreeBSD desktop. It affects me to choose my graphics card because only Nvidia supports recent cards with their binary blob driver. Because it is a closed driver, what if Nvidia stops FreeBSD support?
 
I don't see this happening in near future, unless they change architecture drastically.
Remember they (Nvidia) Updated driver to support amd64
 
Kind of a related question, How much of the BSD code does Apple still use... Do they still take new updates from Free/OpenBSD updates (what is the term for this... is it source trees?)
 
killasmurf86 said:
I don't see this happening in near future, unless they change architecture drastically.
Remember they (Nvidia) Updated driver to support amd64
Click to expand...

Just because the girl's said yes in the past doesn't mean she has to say yes in the future ;) Having said that, thanks, Nvidia!
 
shitson said:
Kind of a related question, How much of the BSD code does Apple still use... Do they still take new updates from Free/OpenBSD updates (what is the term for this... is it source trees?)
Click to expand...

Darwin uses less BSD code than most people think. It's mostly VFS and network stack that have been directly taken from FreeBSD, rest of the system is quite different.
 
shitson said:
Kind of a related question, How much of the BSD code does Apple still use... Do they still take new updates from Free/OpenBSD updates (what is the term for this... is it source trees?)
Click to expand...
I do not know how much BSD code is used by Apple, but Apple is definitely giving back to the community. Grand Central Dispatch, Clang, LLVM use non-copyleft licenses and OpenCL is royalty-free. As for WebKit, WebCore and JavaScriptCore use the LGPL license while the rest uses a BSD-style license.

FreeBSD will benefit more from Apple's investment in Clang/LLVM than Apple has from using BSD code.
 
Talk about enlightend/advanced... tsssk

rusty said:
It could also be argued that the enlightened (Unix) users tend to get their information from more reputable sources while the less advanced of the human race get their info from Wikipedia. :)
Click to expand...

{{Citation needed}}

--~~~~

Fonz
 
B0o-supermario said:
Now that was funny :)
Click to expand...
Glad to have made you laugh. My point however is that Wikipedia is great if you understand a) what it can or cannot do and b) how to properly use it. When I see people ridiculing Wikipedia they usually do so out of ignorance, rarely do they actually truly understand Wikipedia's merits and/or shortcomings.

Fonz (FreeBSD afficionado and Wikipedian)

P.S. For example, the English version of Wikipedia is generally pretty anal about verifiability (that's the whole [citation needed] thing), which makes it a great "source of sources". Several of those cited sources are authoritive enough even for scientific research, go figure. Even if you don't trust Wikipedia itself directly, which is quite understandable if you actually know why you don't, you can often still find {{RS|reliable sources}} that are trustworthy.
 
ian-nai said:
Bonus points for anyone who points out an embedded use of FreeBSD (I'm new and don't know any off hand).
Click to expand...
I use FreeBSD for all of my robotics projects, including my incredibly large one, G.Project, which is to be a highly capable autonomous human-like robot. However, I can't think of anything in the wild currently that uses it... the price scanners at the grocery stores here all run Windows CE, and the ATMs are either running OS/2 or Linux.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top