News Windows War of Words

This eWeek article takes a look at the increasingly hi-rev spin surrounding Redmond and the Land of the Penguin:

Corporate IT users are getting caught in the middle of another spin war between Microsoft Corp. and the Linux and Unix communities, most recently Novell Inc.

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer sent a memo late last month to customers and partners lauding the benefits and advantages of the Windows platform over Linux and Unix, raising the ire of open-source proponents charging that Ballmer's data was biased.

Ballmer wrote that Microsoft staff around the world have been fielding customer questions about whether open source really provides a long-term cost advantage compared with Windows, and which platform offers the most security. Microsoft customers also want to know about intellectual property indemnification and the best migration alternative for moving from a Unix platform, Ballmer wrote.

Ballmer's e-mail cited case studies and research studies, many of which were sponsored by Microsoft, of Redmond, Wash., and can be found on its Get the Facts Web site, a program started in January that aims to give customers information about the advantages of using Microsoft's Windows operating system versus Linux.

Novell officials in Waltham, Mass., offered a rebuttal last week. John Hogan, Novell's vice president of strategic marketing, accused Ballmer of using only statements, principally from commissioned studies, that reflected most positively on Microsoft.

"A broader look paints a much more objective picture, one more favorable to Linux," Hogan said.

Ballmer wrote that "research methodology, findings and conclusions were the sole domain of the analyst firms," but Hogan said Microsoft nevertheless generally specified the configurations of the tests.

More here. Just don't get dizzy.

 

ohh joy


cant we all just get along?






for once...

 

They keep saying that studies were sponsored by Redmond.

But who else would give a bloody crap ? Just maybe, those studies/surveys were not biased ? But then ofcourse, it wouldnt fit the stereotype of evil MS.

 

Yeah, but if MS are basing their "don't move to Linux, it'll cost you, according to this research" statements off research they've commissioned, and only research that favours MS, then it's biased, and potentially misleading.

There's also a huge amount of research that shows the costs of moving to *NIX is cheaper than MS solutions.

So the people that might "give a crap" are the small to medium businesses paying through their noses for MS licences, when they could possibly save huge amounts of money by implementing open source solutions.

 

i gotta agree with sinizterguy.

furthermore, if there was no good research on the topic yet that microsoft wanted, then the best way to get it is to sponser some. doesn't necessarily mean its biased. if people think it might be then this should be sufficient encouragement to do their own research and proove their point, if the do indeed have one.

 

So then why don't they sponsor their own study then, since everything is "biased" ?

Because they can't ... MS has the money and has sponsored a study. The numbers will tell the truth. But the statements maybe MS biased. But if you look at the underlying numbers, they won't lie.

 

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

 

Yes, extremely constructive.

 

Let me offer a point of perspective.

No matter who pays for them, statistics can be made to show ANYthing.

Until you simultaneously start two identical businesses right across from each other selling the identical product/items- one using MS one using open source we will never know exactly what the cost comparison will be.

I think this MS "get the facts" webpage is pretty funny. It's like the automotive guys touting their own safety ratings without a 3rd party govmnt organisation to actually ratify the tests. It doesn't happen like that for a reason.

Anyway, the way I see it- weigh the pros and cons for yourself- don't listen to ANY one company, open source or MS for all your info. look around. After all, that's why most of us hang out at these computer sites- a non-biased 3rd party opinion on computer hardware/software.

 

Yes anybody can take the same stattistics to prove anything, combine that with alot of money and you have a winning combination.

 

Well, MS haters will be MS haters. There no changing that. So I'll leave off it now.

 

A high percentage of the working population can drive a car. A tiny percentage can change a cylinder-head gasket. That's the difference between Windows & Linux, to me.

 

Hmm, well you would expect the system administrators to have the expertise of a mechanic, to follow the analogy

 

Biased surveys? Makes me think back to "Yes, Prime Minister."

Here's someone who thinks the same way (with transcript from the episode in question):
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/10/12/241228.aspx#241684

And here's where he got it from, which also has a realaudio sample from the episode (scroll down):
http://www.yes-minister.com/ypmseas1a.htm#YPM 1.2

Nezuji

 

I use Linux as my main OS. I know it's better than any MS OS I've ever used, and has saved me a shedload of cash.

What Ballmer or anyone else says is completely irrelevant to me, or anyone else who actually uses Linux.