"The obvious question is, did Microsoft pay Go Daddy or offer any incentive to move its parked domains to Windows?"
"News of Go Daddy's move to Windows brought some criticism from Linux supporters and Microsoft foes, including Go Daddy customers threatening to leave the company as a result"
"As for domains that actually do get Web traffic, plenty of those still remain on Linux at GoDaddy.com"
http://tinyurl.com/yno2qe
layta...:)
According to the recent market share report by Netcraft, Microsoft’s IIS, a product included as part of Windows Server, has been making important gains against Apache. Though Apache still has the lead with a 49.98% market share, which is 14.5% ahead of IIS. As the survey notes, however, the different was 33.4% the previous July.
I am not surprised. Though people may wonder whether other divisions within Microsoft are firing on all cylinders, the server team has moved from strength to strength. Windows Server experienced strong sales, which should matter to technology-types, as the consumers who tend to buy server hardware aren’t ordinary home users who might be accused of buying things for reasons other than the technology. The security of Windows 2003 has been solid, and in particular, the security of IIS certainly compares favorably to that of Apache. Windows 2003 served as the foundation of the new Windows Home Server, and the new features of Windows 2008, among them PowerShell and new UI-free installations (a testament to the customizability the server team is building in to Windows Server, an obvious response to Linux competition), are generating a lot of excitement.
.NET has established itself as a popular server-side programming environment (at least on Windows, which is a growing share of the server market), and ASP.NET is, in my opinion, the best server-side web application development framework in existence (feel free to disagree, but I don’t want to develop in anything but .NET anymore).
Does that explain all the server gains for IIS? Maybe not, but I don’t think the effect is inconsiderable. Windows Server products are generally recognized as solid systems these days, and though IIS had its past problems, those issues lie in the distant past.
From a Microsoft greenhouse standpoint, however, Windows Server has certain advantages as a Microsoft product, as it caters more closely to Microsoft’s core DNA as a builder of software frameworks (not to mention as a company that historically has made most of its money by catering to business needs). Consumer products are different, however, which as computers move from being something we mostly use in a work capacity, will force changes. This is why Apple has proven so adept as a competitor in recent years. They lack chops in the busines space, but understand exactly what non-business consumers want, and have leveraged that effectively.
Frameworks, however, do matter, as they are the foundation upon which good software is built. Apple is starting to move down the framework path, using OS X across its product line. I expect they will work harder to update their software tools as well, because if they want to be a force in desktop computers, they will need to attract developers to their cause.
From the other direction, Microsoft is trying to move down the consumer path, though it still has a history as a vendor of business-oriented products (which partly explains its persistence at concentrating on business users with its Windows Mobile product line). XBOX 360 is no slouch in the consumer space, and the entire XBOX business unit is clearly Microsoft’s greenhouse for consumer-oriented product categories.
I just hope that they don’t forget that Microsoft is, at heart, a framework builder. Microsoft should work at making great consumer products. They need to also ensure, however, that they are part of the Microsoft “framework,” and are as customizable and flexible as any other participant in that ecosystem.
