I have always claimed that the widely used Operating System market share statistics from Net applications were not really accurate when it comes to MacOS and Linux market share. In my opinion there were two factors that prevented an accurate Worldwide market share to be produced: Linux browsers potentially ignoring the counter and improper geographical distribution.

Earlier this week an article concerning Vista and market share and one about how Open Source Software has cost the IT Industry $60 Billion dollars over the last five years or so hit the newswire. Needless to say this generated some conversations about their validity.

As I recently reported, there is an order of magnitude difference between the market share of Linux "out there" in the world, and the market share of LInux on Scienceblogs.com and on this very blog. Subsequently, I was trolled by my very own brother "...

I consistently find myself looking up statistics for OS market share around this time every year. Every year numbers change. Every website reports different numbers from the last, and the only thing that one can assuredly deduce is that it is impossible to accurately gauge how many systems are running a specific OS. With that said, market share does matter.

If Microsoft lies about market share to the courts, imagine how much it can lie to the public

NetApplications is out with a couple of new metrics of market share for operating systems and browsers, and the news is good for open source. Topping their findings, Microsoft Windows' market share has dropped below 90 percent for the first time in its measurements. The share erosion is largely attributed to increased interest in the Mac platform, but Linux is cited as on the rise as well.

Did you know that 55% of statistics are made up on the spot? (or maybe it was 68% I don't recall) If you have ever taken a statistics class you know that data is everything, but it's not just about the data itself.

I recently came across some Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) information Microsoft has published on their website, showing how using Windows Server gives you a better Return On Investment (ROI) than Linux. Given the ubiquity of Microsoft Windows, you may think that what they have to say would hold a good deal of truth to it. I think the truth is a little closer to "Microsoft makes it as expensive as possible to break out of the lock-in their products create."

The market share of an OS is important. The larger the market share the more companies take notice and create software and hardware compatible for it.