...Time to pull all my investments off the LSE!
So I'm reading my (Sn)otmail, and I see this propaganda ad come up.
I thought, "Alright. Lets just see how valid this is." Had a look and I see nothing mentioned of the fact that Microsoft supports software patents, or the huge kickbacks the LSE must have taken to be part of this ad campaign. Just a bunch of so-called studies and comparisons. Most of which look like they've been done by people who aren't all that savvy on *NiX at all. You know - accountants, marketeers, and the odd (sic) chemist or two. Are they really "facts" if the study is commissioned?
I'm sure that pound for pound Server 2003 is as good as Linux at it's job, and TCO might be cheaper if your company hates employing people who's sole purpose is to keep the crap hardware that they cheap-out on going. BUT, the true beauty in Linux is something that you'd never hear the marketeers at M$ mention: If your don't like something your distro does, you change it. With M$, they can slap you around and do anything they want with your server, because after all - it's actually their server, you're just borrowing it for $800/a. |
