Anyone seen this much crap on a single page before?

[Jekshadow]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/compare/default.mspx

"Microsoft technology met the higher security requirements and provided superior support than Linux."

Higher security requirements on... WINDOWS??????

"By choosing Windows Compute Cluster Server over Linux, Callaway Golf is benefiting from a solution that is easier to use, is simpler to support, and will save the company thousands of dollars in software and maintenance costs."

Windows Server 2008 = $999 for standard (aka. basic) edition
Linux (99% of distros) = $0

[Rainstride]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/compare/default.mspx

"Microsoft technology met the higher security requirements and provided superior support than Linux."

Higher security requirements on... WINDOWS??????

"By choosing Windows Compute Cluster Server over Linux, Callaway Golf is benefiting from a solution that is easier to use, is simpler to support, and will save the company thousands of dollars in software and maintenance costs."

Windows Server 2008 = $999 for standard (aka. basic) edition
Linux (99% of distros) = $0

i like the word play in that load of ********. what you need to ask is WHO'S requirements? mine or micro$oft? there only requirement is make sure it sells.

[ad_267]

i like the word play in that load of ********. what you need to ask is WHO'S requirements? mine or micro$oft? there only requirement is make sure it sells.

Your avatar is awesome.

[x33a]

there only requirement is make sure it sells.

and that's why they promote it with such utter crap.

[ade234uk]

Your correct it is crap.You need to ask yourself why they do this?
They damn know well know for a fact Linux is far more reliable than any Windows server.

Linux does not need to go this low in order to get its point across. Linux + Apache is still and will always be the most reliable, preferred option for hosting websites. Linux + Apache is free, Windows server costs money.

I don't try to read any Microsoft propaganda anymore. They are screwing things up quite nicely at the moment, leaving the doors wide open for Open Source.

Microsoft want too much, they want to be leaders in the OS market, the console market, the search engine market, the browser market, the server market.

[Sealbhach]

What do you think about this statement:

At one time there was a push to move everything that we could to Linux. However, during our testing, we found that interfacing a Linux-based domain controller with Windows Server® did not support the level of security that the law requires for financial institutions. The vendor agreed it was a problem, but said that it could never guarantee that the open source community would implement a fix. That was really the end of our big Linux initiative. I'm confident that if I were to call Microsoft with a similar problem, it would be in a position to say, "We can guarantee that a fix will be included in the next release of Windows." That's the difference between being a Microsoft shop and being a Linux shop.

From:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/compare/InterviewDetails.mspx?recid=17

The next release of Windows?????:o

.

[TheNosh]

Linux + Apache is still and will always be the most reliable, preferred option for hosting websites.

so advancement is impossible? what a sad world

[schauerlich]

It's not propaganda... it's advertising. What do you expect them to say? "Most people use Apache and Linux or FreeBSD. Windows has a reputation as being insecure. But really, though, give us some money. Kay?"

People seem to apply all of these ethical and moral standards to Microsoft. In the end, they are a business. Businesses do what brings them in more money. That's how it works. There's no grand campaign, a cause to cheer for, a moral side to take. There's no code of ethics. It's not a religion.

Maybe that's why this community will never understand it.

[PurposeOfReason]

Man, I feel so cool to have posted in a thread with Microsoft bashing. It makes us so elite, I mean, I nearly die if I don't get to make fun of them at least ten times a day.

[Jekshadow]

It's not propaganda... it's advertising. What do you expect them to say? "Most people use Apache and Linux or FreeBSD. Windows has a reputation as being insecure. But really, though, give us some money. Kay?"

People seem to apply all of these ethical and moral standards to Microsoft. In the end, they are a business. Businesses do what brings them in more money. That's how it works. There's no grand campaign, a cause to cheer for, a moral side to take. There's no code of ethics. It's not a religion.

Maybe that's why this community will never understand it.

That is why I use linux, as it actually has a set of morals and ethics toward the users, and that its goal is not to make money, but instead to provide the best OS possible to its users.

[schauerlich]

That is why I use linux, as it actually has a set of morals and ethics toward the users, and that its goal is not to make money, but instead to provide the best OS possible to its users.

That's all fine and dandy. But who cares if Microsoft wants to sell software licenses? And who cares if they advertise it? The point of advertising is to make something look more appealing than it actually is.

[KiwiNZ]

That is why I use linux, as it actually has a set of morals and ethics toward the users, and that its goal is not to make money, but instead to provide the best OS possible to its users.

Nothing wrong with making money.
Money = profit = jobs = salaries= food, roof over ones head, ability to buy Computers to Linux on or windows if you choose....

[Viva]

Opensource developers are not charity workers. There is money behind everything.

[TheNosh]

It's not propaganda... it's advertising. What do you expect them to say? "Most people use Apache and Linux or FreeBSD. Windows has a reputation as being insecure. But really, though, give us some money. Kay?"

People seem to apply all of these ethical and moral standards to Microsoft. In the end, they are a business. Businesses do what brings them in more money. That's how it works. There's no grand campaign, a cause to cheer for, a moral side to take. There's no code of ethics. It's not a religion.

Maybe that's why this community will never understand it.


Man, I feel so cool to have posted in a thread with Microsoft bashing. It makes us so elite, I mean, I nearly die if I don't get to make fun of them at least ten times a day.

+1 to you both

[edd07]

Over the first 650 days of product life for Windows Server 2003, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, Windows Server 2003 had 75 percent fewer published vulnerabilities.(emphasis mine, obviously)

I agree, there's nothing wrong with advertising your product. But this is really sneaky, even by Microsoft's standards. Of course Linux has more published vulnerabilities: every single one is published, because it's open source!

Technically, they're not lying, but that doesn't make this any less wrong.

[amingv]

That's all fine and dandy. But who cares if Microsoft wants to sell software licenses? And who cares if they advertise it? The point of advertising is to make something look more appealing than it actually is.

+1
Now there's something you won't hear my marketing teacher saying.

It should come at no surprise, anyway:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_Documents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#Misrepresentation

I feel rather flattered that this would happen, besides it may actually backfire and make people aware of linux who otherwise wouldn't be (a bit unlikely but very amusing if it happened :)).

Those who use linux servers know why they do, those who don't will be deciding whether to pay money for an upgrade or doing a little mythbusting, in any case I can't see how it will affect the market.