Microsofyt Executive Email (a lame attempt to argue win is better)

[jatos]

http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/execmail/2004/10-27platformvalue.asp I was recently reading this, a copy of email telling users to use Windows as a server I don't about you lot but I think this email is VERY thin on substance. The main argument they really have is Windows costs less to deploy, well why is does it costs less to deploy etc. I don't about you lot but after reading this I would more enclined to use Linux as a server.

edit, I just noticed that this is a year nevertheless, I still think their arguments are lame

[Sirin]

http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/execmail/2004/10-27platformvalue.asp I was recently reading this, a copy of email telling users to use Windows as a server I don't about you lot but I think this email is VERY thin on substance. The main argument they really have is Windows costs less to deploy, well why is does it costs less to deploy etc. I don't about you lot but after reading this I would more enclined to use Linux as a server.

edit, I just noticed that this is a year nevertheless, I still think their arguments are lame

Here is a newer, more "Let's Bring Down Linux" version:

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

[Brunellus]

it costs less to deploy because....it's already deployed.

[23meg]

"the Yankee Group" - what a name.

[-Rick-]

The main argument they really have is Windows costs less to deploy, well why is does it costs less to deploy etc
So...MS gives you money if you deploy a windows based server? ;)

[Perfect Storm]

Nice fairytales...I think Microsoft is in the wrong buisness :rolleyes: they should write stories instead.

[AllenGG]

To Jato :
a small computer biz that I know, one that deals mostly with SMB's summed it up well:
1. they make money selling M$ products, server systems etc.
2. M$ software breaks down, and they make money.
3. most SMB's are too stubborn (or stupid) to get away from M$
............so they make money.

they have tried to convince these same "Small to Midsize" companies to change.
Allen G:razz:

[Efwis]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy.aspx?CaseStudyID=17131[/url]
In late 2003, RadioShack was forced to reexamine the ability of its in-store technology infrastructure to support continued business growth. At the time, the company was using a UNIX-based server computer in each of its 5,100 company-owned stores to support point-of-sale (POS) devices and in-store kiosks—roughly 22,000 PCs that ran the Microsoft® Windows® 95 or Windows 98 operating system. A second in-store server, which ran the Microsoft Windows 2000 Server operating system, handled connec¬tivity with the company's headquarters and basic in-store network routing, and served as a workstation for store employees.

hmm, go figure, they are so proud of themselves for selling their product to Radio Shack, A company that already had MS for their in-store systems. talk about Lame alright.. All that is doing is showing how they can Keep their customer base.

I have a feeling that if they had gone with Linux before this article wouldn't have even been in the case study. Windows needs to remember that SCO Unix is not Linux.
Personally I would have passed up on Red Hat for my company too.