Microsoft Propaganda Site - guaranteed laugh :)

[showty]

http://www.microsoft.com/canada/getthefacts/default.mspx

"With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."

"No other exchange is undertaking such an ambitious technology refresh programme based on next-generation Microsoft technology. We have always provided a first-class service, but now we can claim to be the fastest in the world as well."

"Linux required 77% more costs in ongoing patch management support than Windows."

The Highly Reliable Times?! Please MS stop, you're killing me! :D :popcorn:

[Pollywoggy]

http://www.microsoft.com/canada/getthefacts/default.mspx

"With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."

"No other exchange is undertaking such an ambitious technology refresh programme based on next-generation Microsoft technology. We have always provided a first-class service, but now we can claim to be the fastest in the world as well."

"Linux required 77% more costs in ongoing patch management support than Windows."

The Highly Reliable Times?! Please MS stop, you're killing me! :D :popcorn:

I wonder what Microsoft had to give the people who said such nice things about Microsoft products.

[jackmc]

"The Higly Reliable Times"? Obviously a joke :)

[blastus]

Contrast Microsoft's Linux website with Microsoft's Mactopia website (
http://www.microsoft.com/mac)

Fighting Linux is like trying to fight a ghost. They really ought to be concerned with the large number of people migrating or thinking about migrating to Macintosh. :) I know so many people who have just recently started using a Mac it is staggering.

[juxtaposed]

The sad thing is, the people at microsoft who made those quotes up probably believe it :/ And so do the people that read it and know nothing about linux besides what microsoft says.

[Wugglz]

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


This is a link to the US version of the page.

Its easy to see this is false. They have AMD on their list, but you can see here (http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.amd.com) that AMD is using linux.(At least for their web server)

[starcraft.man]

Get the facts.... you know, I think they mis titled that.... Get our Facts, it sounds better and is more reflective of whats going on :).

I've seen the propaganda site before though, I'd like to see what they were doing to that linux box to crash it weekly given that I have heard of Linux web servers operating for over 1000 days without a single crash/reboot. I'd like to see a windows box go 200 (lol, what am I saying... I'd like to see any windows machine last a month without a reboot or crash :p).

I am sad to see there is a Canadian section just for us though.... geez, I dunno, I just don't like that... we must strike back with our beaver navy and flying squirrel army. They will rue the day they tried to brainwash these Canucks!!!! :D

[cody50]

Get the facts.... you know, I think they mis titled that.... Get our Facts, it sounds better and is more reflective of whats going on :).

I've seen the propaganda site before though, I'd like to see what they were doing to that linux box to crash it weekly given that I have heard of Linux web servers operating for over 1000 days without a single crash/reboot. I'd like to see a windows box go 200 (lol, what am I saying... I'd like to see any windows machine last a month without a reboot or crash :p).

I am sad to see there is a Canadian section just for us though.... geez, I dunno, I just don't like that... we must strike back with our beaver navy and flying squirrel army. They will rue the day they tried to brainwash these Canucks!!!! :D

What are you talking Aboot?

[juxtaposed]

(lol, what am I saying... I'd like to see any windows machine last a month without a reboot or crash

When I used Windows XP, it went 27 days once without a reboot or crash. In the end it got shut off, if I can remember correctly, because there was a thunderstorm and I was worried that the power might go out.

[M$LOL]

They CANNOT be serious.

EDIT: Ah, I see that one of the companies they said switched from Linux to Windows was the "Jelly Belly Candy Company". Enough said.

[starcraft.man]

When I used Windows XP, it went 27 days once without a reboot or crash. In the end it got shut off, if I can remember correctly, because there was a thunderstorm and I was worried that the power might go out.

Very lucky man, I can't say in 15 years I was able to leave my windows OS on for more than 2 weeks without a failure/reboot of some kind (including 5 years of XP).

Oh and cody...

*stares at cody for making fun of his Canadian accent, then stares over at somewhat feral pet beavers* Sick 'im.

And to understand where I get that, my favorite molson commercial. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqOI7KejIng):D

[Martje_001]

When I used Windows XP, it went 27 days once without a reboot or crash. In the end it got shut off, if I can remember correctly, because there was a thunderstorm and I was worried that the power might go out.
Did you ran a webserver (with visitors) on it? It will definitely crash:popcorn:

[juxtaposed]

Did you ran a webserver (with visitors) on it? It will definitely crash:popcorn:

No, but it was running torrents (uploading and downloading) for a great deal of the time.

I'm not saying windows is a good server or desktop though. I'm certain linux could have a much longer uptime.

[mech7]

Did you ran a webserver (with visitors) on it? It will definitely crash:popcorn:

XP is for desktop use not to run a server :)

[Happy_Man]

*sounds of merriment and laughter* Ahhahahahaa... oh god... that's rich. *gasping* oh jeez... wait.... they were serious???? *starts laughing again*

[Znupi]

I did ran Win XP SP1 for 20 and something days with a webserver and yes, the server (Apache) did crash a few times, but I got it back up relatively fast. Also, I was running tons of programs, both in background and foreground (I always had at least 10 taskbar items). It was sluggish, yes, but it worked, and I did it several times. Windows is good, no doubt about it, but Linux is better :).

[cody50]

haha feral canadian beavers. I love it.

[Tundro Walker]

Note the quote though...


Why do companies that try Linux switch back to Windows server?

They're focusing on companies that are already deeply indoctrinated in Micrsoft products. These companies usually have all-MS professional IT folks working for them. One probably had the bright idea to try Linux on a server as a test (and because management was interested in cost-savings). It was probably setup sloppily, and, it was probably an island unto itself, meaning it was the only Linux box amongst a see of MS. So, they probably had to screw around with Samba, which is ok, but isn't the fastest Linux-2-Windows server adapter. Etc, etc.

As you can see, it's a recipe for disaster. Plus, like all "studies" the "researchers" will focus in on key points that only support their argument and neglect the negative points (even if 99% of the study doesn't support their theory).

Let's use an example...

You're living in (what-ever you live in). And you heard that this "house of the future" thing is totally amazing...never gets dirty, uses 75% less power, etc, etc. Ok, I'm going to let you try the "house of the future" for 1 month, then we'll come back to you to get your opinion on it compared to your current dwelling. I ship your butt off to some God-knows-where location, and when you get there, you're outside this huge shell of a building. You walk inside, and there's just boxes and boxes of stuff. You're not a mechanical / electrical / etc engineer, so you can't figure out what to do with it all. You have a computer, so you start googling stuff up about what to do with it all. Over that month, you realize you've just been given parts, and you have to put together all this "cool stuff" that this house of the future is supposed to do. At the end of it, you tell the researcher the "house of the future" sucks. Here's why...

1) You get some setup, but because some of it is so different from where you used to live, it's hard to get used to.

2) You think you got some setup correctly, but you're not sure. I mean, the auto dishwasher keeps destroying all your dishes when you use it. So, you gave up and just washed your dishes by hand.

3) You had some REAL issues with the power connections. The house uses a totally different power outlet / wiring system, which the scientists say is 75% more efficient. But, because none of your current appliances can use the power outlets, you assume that 75% efficiency comes from not being able to use anything you normally would.

4) etc, etc

You get my point. Now, if you ask companies like "Google" how their experience was when trying out Linux when they were using all Windows Server...they'd laugh at you. They've ALWAYS used Linux servers, so, they don't qualify for the study.

The lynch-pin of this is that there are far more MS IT professionals out there then Linux IT professionals. And, the MS professionals probably cost less, since they're so common. Thus, big business, already indoctrinated in MS products, justifies hiring a guy for $40k/yr instead of a guy for $60k/yr. But, you have to hire 10 MS IT guys vs. 4 Linux IT guys. But since your whole company is MS, you can't justify hiring any Linux guys. So, you hear about all these Linux cost-savings, but all you can do is theorize about them, since it would take a whole, costly restructuring of your company to actually make those numbers tangible. Until then, it's intangible, and business really suck at trying to measure cost/benefit of intangible things. That's why that guy you know who really peps morale in the company, but doesn't quite do as good of a job as the other workers...gets fired. They don't realize he's making everyone 5% more effective at their job. They just see that he's 5% less effective at his job.

[Raedwald]

One of their "sample companies" is Wipro.....

I work with Wipro "technical staff" on a near daily basis. I think the supposed "expert" that had to look up how to use the Unix cp command says it all.

[AlphaMack]

The site is a farce. They even have the same quote attributed to two people. (Ed Castillo and Hussein Kaddoura)

[Tundro Walker]

Did you ran a webserver (with visitors) on it? It will definitely crash:popcorn:

LOL! I didn't read the studies, but it'd be funny if it was something along the lines of...


"We left this Windows Server on for 2 whole months.*"

* Two months, in an isolated room, with no server or internet connections, and no terminal access.

"Likewise, users of Microsoft Windows were 50% faster at boot up then Linux computers."**

**Windows computers had big, fat, red arrow pointing to power button, where as Linux computers had power button secretly hidden in another room.

"Windows Server showed a 50% faster transfer rate that Linux servers"***

*** Windows Servers were on a Windows Server network only. Linux server was on a Windows Server network, too, and thus had 50% latency due to Samba.

No animals were harmed in these tests.

[Wim Sturkenboom]

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


This is a link to the US version of the page.

Its easy to see this is false. They have AMD on their list, but you can see here (http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.amd.com) that AMD is using linux.(At least for their web server)So ?? That doesn't mean that they use Linux for other purposes.

[Znupi]

Someone ought to sue these guys. I can't believe it. Some people sadly believe this sh*t that M$ spews...

[feest]

Only In The U.S. XD

Looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

[canceLinux]

people can believe this,

only "no comment microZoft, go on" :D

[cunawarit]

In typical MS fashion the site is tacky, however, it isn't too far from the truth for some companies.

As someone whose living depends entirely on the stability of a few Windows 2003 Server boxes, I have to say it has NEVER let me down. It has issues, my main gripe is that security updates too often require a reboot, so if you have to warranty uptime you need to run a cluster and update one machine at a time (which I used to do in my previous job).

So they aren't lying about 2003's stability, IMHO it is a fantastic server OS!

Why would Linux be more expensive for some corporates? Because they are geared to use MS products, their current staff is experienced with them, and any transition is expensive. And I don't know if it still is the case, but not too long ago it was very difficult to find Linux people that charged anywhere near as little as MS people (admittedly because many MS people know far less than Linux people)...

Personally, if/when I have my own company, I will choose to have a mixture of MS and Linux machines.

[DoctorMO]

As someone whose living depends entirely on the stability of a few Windows 2003 Server boxes, I have to say it has NEVER let me down. It has issues, my main gripe is that security updates too often require a reboot, so if you have to warranty uptime you need to run a cluster and update one machine at a time (which I used to do in my previous job).

Yes but that is because your a good sys-admin; any monkey in front of any OS will trash it. I know I was once a monkey myself.


Why would Linux be more expensive for some corporates? Because they are geared to use MS products, their current staff is experienced with them, and any transition is expensive. And I don't know if it still is the case, but not too long ago it was very difficult to find Linux people that charged anywhere near as little as MS people (admittedly because many MS people know far less than Linux people)...

Well known that Linux people tend to be more commited, technicaly minded and better trained. not always the case but 9 out of 10 isn't bad. If you don't train your staf correctly when you moving over to linux it won't work for you.

1) Official training
2) Do the staff WANT Linux
3) Home training
4) Community participation
5) Company patience

[Babbage]

I'm surprised GoDaddy is there: "....supports half of its Web hosting business, and all of its domain hosting business, on Windows-based servers." Surprising if it's true.