Point By Point
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| SFN Jan 10, 2006 5:16 AM EDT |
I knew I shouldn't have read this but I guess I just can't help myself. As usual, MS - this time throwing it's voice through ventriloquist dummy Martin Gregory - is presenting us with ideas that run the gamut from baseless opinion to bald face lie. Let's take each point one at a time.Quoting:Sure, Linux is free to anyone who cares to download it, but to really deploy it in a company, you are going to go to Novell or Red Hat and pay for support. Not true. I only run Debian at work. Originally because it was the best way to get a foot in the door with Linux. Once we got used to it, we found that we didn't need support for it. We were getting what we needed. However, should we add a piece in that we will need support for, we have the right to go to a Novell or Red Hat or any number of others to get it. Chioces. Quoting:And I guess the open source debate has been very emotional and had a lot of combative language in it, and I think the approach we’ve been on for the last 18 months has been to encourage people to make it a data-driven decision. The "Get The Facts" campaign has been about spreading lies in order to make Windows look good and Linux look bad. The closest that campaign has come to encouraging people to make a data-driven decision is by providing people with false data. Quoting:You get one or the other. Either a product that’s designed with smooth surfaces where things are integrated and work together, or where you pay for that integration another way … through your own time or through paying for service contracts. This is true. However Windows, while being a product that is sold as "designed with smooth surfaces where things are integrated and work together" really only has smooth surfaces. Lots and lots and LOTS of things don't work together in Windows. That is, of course, unless you buy every single app you use from Microsoft. Oh! I get it! If I buy any particular app from anyone else, I've broken the chain and therefore am not entitled to have things work together. My bad. Quoting:From a commercial software position, it’s critical you understand your customers, and design and build what they need. And it’s important there’s consistency and a measure of quality. We have things like the Windows Hardware Quality Labs, and that kind of infrastructure takes a lot of time and effort to build. If measure of quality is so imprtant, then why is it that vulnerabilities and stability continue to be an issue for Windows? Certainly one could argue that XP is more stable than 2000 and MUCH more stable than 98. While that may be true, it sounds an awful "it's cleaner than it was" when telling your teenager to clean his/her room. As for vulnerabilities, although Microsoft claims it's less vulnerable than Linux, it's simply not true. Anyone who has managed both Operating System at the same time knows that. Quoting:In my mind, it’s been “the year of Linux on the desktop” for three years and I haven’t really seen much actual traction there. I guess I do have to cut him some slack here. The interviewer did ask him what his opinion was. However, the notion that it's been "the year of Linux on the desktop" for three years can best be described as frickin' ludicrous. Remember, just because a headline exists doesn't make the story true. [in response to "Is every customer going to use a Windows desktop?"] Quoting:No, but I would like to understand the motivation behind a decision to consider using Linux on the desktop, as my experience is that customers fundamentally want to make pragmatic decisions about technology. Brilliantly worded, I must say. The subtext is that anybody who decides to use Linux on the desktop, isn't being pragmatic. The sad part is that the average person is a subtext sponge. They'll take a line like that in and spit it out as their own thought. Boss: What about Linux? IT Wonk: Well sir, we want to be pragmatic here...... |
| Aussie_Bear Jan 10, 2006 9:48 AM EDT |
Quoting:In my mind, it’s been “the year of Linux on the desktop” for three years and I haven’t really seen much actual traction there. How long has Linux been on the desktop compared to Windows? How long did Windows take to an acceptable level? The MS weenie is comparing a toddler to a young adult and saying the adult is better! Microsoft has a good 10 yr headstart on Linux in the desktop market. In the last three years, its starting to take notice among those who want to leave Windows! What do you say about that? Tech enthusiasts are starting to see an alternative, and you know it, Mr Microsoft. I hope the effect trickles down to the less technically inclined! I've noticed more and more people, as well as organisations are starting to take notice of Linux...So much so, that some Govt depts around the world are looking at Linux as a direct replacement for infrastructure. Has this person even seen Xandros, Linspire, OpenSUSE, PCLinuxOS, Fox Desktop Linux, Ubuntu (and its variations), etc? Give them time, and I guarantee you will be singing a very different tune. But alas, you current enemy is Apple's OS X. And its bloody obvious when your next OS looks reminiscent of their GUI! Innovation is right out the window for Microsoft, isn't it? Quoting:What are the trade-offs in Windows versus Linux? The TRUTH. (1) Microsoft's Security => Its a joke. Not only doesn't Microsoft provide solutions, they provide nice convenient band-aid workarounds to delay the inevitable...MS Antispyware anyone? (What happen to SOLVING problems? No wait...Solving problems wastes time...Time that MS doesn't have.) When Linux has a security issue, the spread is pretty minimal. (as most admins know WTF they're doing!)...Damage is limited. When Windows has a security issue, the spread is worldwide! If its enough systems, its a story on the International News circuit! Heck, some people still connect to the web, without realising their PCs are part of someone else's zombie network OR contributes to the crap floating on the web, continually appearing on firewall logs. (Did you know some ISPs in Australia had to cancel accounts of some of their users because they were the point of origin to a malware issue?) What's your response to that Martin Gregory? (2) Microsoft's response time to the zero-day threat => Again, a joke. According to at least one security research company, they had to send a large number of samples to make MS take notice of the exploits of their recent "WMF security issue". In summary... It was like talking to a brick wall. They just didn't get how critical things were until you shoved a 2000lb firecracker up their butt, lit it and ran. That's how big they've become...So big, that the "little guy" wanting to help is "white noise" to them. They're big, slow and have to be forced into a corner before they react. By that time...Its too late from a couple of thousand Windows users! (I find it ironic, that Bill Gates himself said MS can offer a turn-around time of 24hrs to security issues...In reality...NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!) (3) Microsoft's pointless anti-piracy measures and schemes that really do nothing but annoy people. The two infamous ones... Windows Product Activation => Which I call, Pointless 1.0 Windows Genuine Advantage => Pointless 1.5 Pointless 2.0 or higher will be for the DRM schemes in Vista. You've got to be prepared, you know. :) Either way, every one of those schemes have been broken! (4) Microsoft...Instability for prolong periods. I used WIn2k and XP (operative word was "used"), at one time. I have my systems running for months on end...Explain why I have to reboot every few days on a Windows box (because it feels slow after a while), and I don't have to do that on a Linux (or BSD) solution? You can't, can you? Your tech support's "solution to everything" is either to reboot or re-install. This ain't solving issues, this is running from them! (5) Microsoft: easy of use. This is the only part where MS wins in this debate. But for Linux, its highly dependent on the distro. Quoting:From a commercial software position, it’s critical you understand your customers, and design and build what they need. And it’s important there’s consistency and a measure of quality. We have things like the Windows Hardware Quality Labs, and that kind of infrastructure takes a lot of time and effort to build. What a load of verbal diarrhoea. Microsoft doesn't understand or listen to its customers. (1) If you ever get a visit from Microsoft reps and they find out you're running a BSD or Linux or some other solution, they will LIE about it and do anything to get you to use a Microsoft solution. (This includes free license for WIn2k3 server, etc). They don't listen if the current solution works for you...We had to kick them out of our office! Listen? Its more like they've fallen to deaf ears! (2) PDF support for Office 12 was add because of the "Massachusetts issue". Not because MS listened to its customers. Customers have been asking for PDF support since OpenOffice came to being. That's been more than 2 yrs. (3) Microsoft sends spies to selected organisations to study their "workflow" and to develop ideas. (trying to). Why not actually ask your customer face-to-face? Why do you need to sneak around? Is it hard for a multi-billion dollar company to ask what the customer wants? (4) Hardware Quality Labs? What a load of nonsense. People still click through the non-Windows Certified drivers anyway! They don't care if you've spent time and wasted money on a scheme to "certify drivers"...They just want the stinking thing to work! Linux has to face the fact that some hardware manufacturers: (a) Don't understand open-source. (eg : VIA and their Unichrome driver) (b) Don't have the resources to develop drivers on anothe platform (eg : ATi) (c) Don't want their secrets to be revealed. (We don't care of your secrets! We just want your hardware to work on Linux!) Quoting:Microsoft is about value for money and best fit for purpose. So, pick the best tools for the job. If there’s a product out there that’s lowest cost, most secure and more reliable, that’s the thing you should be using. Value for money? Charging students and the poor AUD$150+ for an OS or Office package is "value for money"? What kind of crack has he been smoking? (In Africa, the MS rep there says its not about money! Great! How can it be not about money when the average African gets paid less than $1 a day?) So this guy IS admitting that alternative solutions ARE more reliable and more secure than Microsoft solutions? Well, duh. It took me 40minutes to work that out...That's when I installed my first Linux box! The only thing this person has got right is that "best tools for the job" line. I don't doubt they got that from some forum who didn't want a total flamewar of OSs. They're just re-using that line from their Ch9 interview in regards to Microsoft's Unix/Linux/open-source research facility. (where they've hired and interviewed folks that have decided to work for the "Evil Empire")...You don't study your enemy to work with them...You study your enemy to DESTROY them. Look what Anakin did to the Jedi Council... |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!