Microsoft's Magical 'Myth-Busting' Tour 649
Mz6 writes "Microsoft has launched its 'Get the Facts' road show -- the tech equivalent of a political battle bus -- to tour the country and convince the wavering that Redmond is as at least cheap and as secure as its open-source rival and to spread the word that Windows is better than Linux. Nick McGrath, Microsoft's head of platform strategy, described the campaign as 'a reality check we're bringing out', aiming to tackle the 'myths' surrounding Linux. Microsoft's road show will be in Edinburgh on June 17, Manchester on June 29 and Newport on July 7."
windows cheap ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Cheap as in heineken ? Or cheap as in Duvel promo ?
Compatability checklist. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm thinking stuff like .ogg, etc.
OTOH, if we want to play like msft who probably counts ".doc" and ".ppt" as file formats, we should probably count .fvwmrc, .bashrc, sendmail.cf as well. :)
Anyone notice... (Score:5, Interesting)
So who will be the first? (Score:5, Interesting)
Source code is their only IP? (Score:5, Interesting)
"Our source code is our only intellectual property," said [MS spokesman] Barley
So have all of their thousands of software patents been invalidated, or are they about to donate them to the public domain?
who are they trying to convince (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Don't discount this because they say 'Myth' (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Cool! (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
If things continue as they are, this would only be a small obstacle for Linux and other alternatives.
I think, however, that Microsoft is just using as much marketing as they can to hold of Linux until Longhorn can come out. With .NET's browser apps, if they can just keep most of their current customers for the time being and transition them over to this, lock-in is assured.
Linux really needs a better graphics toolkit and GUI framework. Otherwise, people will be going with XAML a lot of the time. Hopefully something can be done about it. Hardware support is part of the problem, but the glitches in toolkits such as GTK+ and Mozilla XUL are also a big part of the problem. QT is crystal clear and lightning fast, but because of its licensing Sun isn't promoting a PLAF for QT. Too bad.
I think Trolltech should give serious consideration to the idea of putting QT under the LGPL. It would allow their platform to grow a lot, and they could start selling development tools and maybe extra controls instead.
In any case, Microsoft won't switch me, nor a lot of Linux devs over to Longhorn. I could see them making my job tough though.
MS Practices mind-control? (Score:3, Interesting)
A LOT of companies have testbed installs out to see for themselves what the TCO is. You would expect them to believe their own results in their own company more than a magic MS fud-bus.
I'm also not so sure that the non-tech managers would appreciate the implied 'you wouldn't know good TCO or ROI if it bit you' message.
Re:Don't discount this because they say 'Myth' (Score:3, Interesting)
Isn't IBM doing this kind of promotion for Linux? Maybe they're not spending quite as much money for that as MS does for their stuff, but anyway.
Other companies also do it in smaller scales; I've seen HP's Linux server advertisements in front cover of Finland's largest business daily for several times. But sure, there are still MS adverts, too...
Re:Hmm ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Truth be told (Score:5, Interesting)
It certainly does. There is this myth that Microsoft products do not require training. This is just not true. The transitions from NT4 to Win2K or XP, for example, are significant, especially for administrators. For users, the change between different MS Office versions have often been highly troublesome, both in terms of interfaces and add-on/script migration. These are expensive matters. A significant issue for corporate clients of Microsoft is that the licencing and support enforces upgrades.
My point is that over a 5-10 year period, the training requirements enforced by Microsoft licencing combined with OS changes could well be much worse than the cost of migration and training for a Linux desktop; a decision which allows a break from the hardware/software upgrade cycle, and can lead to significant cost savings in the long term.
Linux will increase significantly in viability against Microsoft systems because it has rapidly increasing support from companies who have the resources to ensure that it does: Companies like Sun, Novell, HP and RedHat are putting huge resources into making Linux an even better desktop system.
Re:Hmm ... (Score:5, Interesting)
"Is Linux More Secure Than Windows?"
Laura Koetzle with Charles Rutstein, Natalie Lambert, and Stephan Wenninger
Forrester Research
After collecting a year's worth of vulnerability data, Forrester analyzed Windows and four key Linux distributors on key metrics of responsiveness to vulnerabilities, severity of vulnerabilities, and thoroughness in fixing flaws.
* Responsiveness: On average, Microsoft had a fix available 25 days after a security issue was publicly disclosed.
* Thoroughness: Microsoft was the only vendor to have corrected 100% of the publicly known flaws during the study's time period.
* Relative Severity: Windows has the fewest vulnerabilities and the fewest "high severity" vulnerabilities of any platform measured.
Re:Don't discount this because they say 'Myth' (Score:2, Interesting)
So, what if we (/.ers, linux geeks, open source gurus, what have you) kindly asked the people at Google to display on their page in plain sight something to the effect of "Powered by Linux"?
Who needs a silly bus when you have Google?
Just a thought.
Excellent Opportunity (Score:5, Interesting)
Signs such as "Windows is CHEAP, Linux is Inexpensive." should be used liberally as well.
Oh, the irony... (Score:4, Interesting)
When I try to load it under Mozilla Firebird 0.7, I get redirected to http://www.microsoft.com/info/customerror.htm, with the error "We're sorry, we were unable to service your request. As an option, you may visit any of the pages below for information about Microsoft services and products."
Doesn't only showing the page to the people using your product kind of beat the purpose?
And bumblebees can't fly... (Score:5, Interesting)
There used to be a site called alldas.de where crackers submitted links to the sites they defaced. Apache had, and still has, at least three sites in the web for each site based on a Microsoft server. Yet, when I checked, Microsoft had four defaced sites for each defaced Apache site in alldas. So, the practical reality says Microsoft is about twelve times more insecure than Apache.
Re:how are those figures fudged? (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Deploying on Linux is very easy, especially with a little kickstart and dhcp.
2) Patching in Linux is easier, especially with tools like yum and what not. It's nice to patch all the apps too, not like MS with just the OS. If you want to patch Office you need to have a cd and all that bullshit.
3) Retraining is a must regardless, every few years MS crams another version of Office down your throat. Hell why bother to retrain, get a few cheap $40 licenses for Crossover, still cheaper than an MS desktop and use the existing Word licenses.
4) Hire? I don't get it...
5) With scripting and yum I can deploy a new app on an entire 200 cluster in less than a minute. Try doing that with Windows!
Re:Oblig (Score:3, Interesting)
http://secunia.com/advisories/8955/
Sounds secure to me. They could at least be above board and not lie to the world about security.
Re:Truth be told (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hmm ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Truth be told (Score:3, Interesting)
I would add that Linux admins are usually well able to figure out (eventually) how to configure Windows because they tend to be adaptable. However, put a Windows admin in front of Linux.....
And bumblebees can fly... (Score:4, Interesting)
"It doesn't mean bees can't fly, or that engineers say they can't fly. It just means that insect flight is very complicated and, even with computers, our fluid dynamic modeling techniques aren't yet able to quite handle such a complicated problem. Then there's the problem of verification. If you can't measure the pressures and velocities around a wing, how can you verify your calculations?"
At least says Dr. Galapagos [ftexploring.com]
tell the truth to your "filesystem" (Score:5, Interesting)
If Microsoft is telling the truth about the end result of a business choosing their products is security and TCO equal to or better than Linux - the bottom line, so to speak - what a business will actually experience - then I fully support an individual's right to choose whichever software platform they think is best for themselves or for their business.
But if what happens here is that some data gets fed to potential customers, and those potential customers choose to choose Windows, and then five years later they realize that their TCO and their security was not what they thought it would be - the bottom line, that is - then the customers will realize that the data they were fed was wrong, and Microsoft will lose customers.
So in a sense, this is an experiment that will take perhaps a decade. If this information is not suitable or not of the accuracy and appropriateness necessary to help businesses make informed decisions about security and TCO -- the bottom line, the end result for the business -- then while Microsoft might make a sale today, the word of mouth and customer experiences in the future will do significant damage to Microsoft's reputation.
You see how so many people already don't take them seriously and how everyone makes fun of this already. If those folks are correct, which as it has been pointed out, the studies are comparing apples and oranges, then this situation is only going to get worse, and the computer illiterate will begin to not trust Microsoft.
So while it might be easy to fool a computer illiterate person once, it is going to be next to physically impossible to re-gain that person's trust once that trust has been lost. And if you think about it, I don't see how we can expect there to be only one major OS vendor in the world anyway. Maybe when computers were a new thing, when computers were just a new-fangled toy, but as computers become a part of our lives, and as computers become something similar to cars, something that we use every day and something that is a serious part of our everyday lives, I just don't see how we can move forward, given this widespread adoption of computers, with having only one proprietary OS vendor dominant. It's simply unrealistic.
It appears that MS is, unbeknownst to itself, laying the groundwork for a massive alienation of its own customer base. The way that they can prevent this, or at least mitigate it, is to tell the truth. But what IS the truth, and can they even say it?
My favorite MS Lie (Score:5, Interesting)
I did this 2 days ago. Rebuilding a fried box, reinstalling Windows took about 3 hours (including a 45 minute search for my legitimate license key), I had to constantly babysit the computer for a each prompt, and when it was finally complete, did not work properly. Rather than waste the rest of the night trying to troubleshoot the damned thing and get it all working I gave up, stuck in the Lindows cd I got for free, clicked I agree and started smoking a cigarette. Before I was done smoking the install was completed and was waiting for me to reboot. Now all I have to do is apt-get the programs I want to use (already using the windows version of just about every GNU/Linux software anyone needs on a pc) and I'll be done.
I'm kinda lazy and cheap, but not stupid.
Do I pick Windows (Pain in the ass to install, Hell to operate and protect, and expensive to buy and get support for, which needs to be periodically reinstalled when it stops working for no apparent reason)
Or do I pick Linux (easy to install, free to get, and millions of developers that give you the info you need to keep things going for free on a stable platform that can be trusted not to inexplicably decide not to work)?
-Yeah, I know I picked Lindows in this example, but I've tried installing other distros, and they were all easier and faster than the Windows Reinstall Hell I've been through many times.
-Yes I do still use windows, they have some of my important data locked up in some of their apps that I can't use without their platform. I've learned from this mistake and am going through the painful transition of RECREATING the info in opensource formats.
-Damn. That last one let me know that Microsoft is right. It really is a complicated, expensive and painful procedure to transition from Windows to Linux: Complicated because you have to free your info from their locked-down shitty closed source applications-usually fixing a crapload of errors generated by these same apps, wasting a lot of time(=money), and wishing you never made the mistake of using Microsoft crap in the first place (painful).
Re:Reality check! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:So who will be the first? (Score:2, Interesting)
You are here (Score:2, Interesting)
2. then they laugh at you,
3. then they fight you, <--- you are here
4. then you win.
- Mahatma Ghandi
Re:Sorry Microsoft.. Experience beats FUD hands do (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, wait, you can script in Windows? Wonder why nobody does...
Maybe it's because it's so "command-line-like"?
Re:Both sides have their myths and FUD (Score:2, Interesting)
So far as I know, no GNU/Linux advocate has been convicted in a court of law of bending the market to their will in illegal ways.
An amazing admission from the Reg article. (Score:3, Interesting)
He said this "jihad about technology" between rival operating systems ignored the bigger problem that IT is badly regarded in the boardroom. "We need to better communicate the value of IT to business," he said.
Wow, he's admitted that his company's hype and poor performance has pissed on everyone.
Other than that, these "open and honest" Microsoft debates have the stink of a fake town meeting. The USSR had a few after Chernobyl and Bill Clinton never stopped having them. They were staged affairs with ringers in the crowd called to ask "insightful" prearranged questions. These questions were answered by a few talking heads who would blither on with distracting and meaningless abstractions, on the order of "wouldn't it be awful if we nuked the plannet." I can imagine the M$ equivalent, "we see your potential," (hand over your cash!) and, "Linux is Hanson's dissease."
Re:My favorite MS Lie (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't know... I've built custom computers for a good number of years and I swear that Windows has some "secret code" somewhere that causes it to self-destruct.
I've had Windows (95 and up) just suddently stop functioning correctly on a variety of hardware for no particularly good reason before... and this is even before it's shipped to the customer!
The odd thing is, in most of these cases where there isn't anything obviously wrong with the hardware a re-install usually works... go figure.
Anyways, just wanted to point out that it seems Windows can just decide to "corrupt itself because it has nothing better to do"... I've seen it happen and pulled out hair because of it.
Re:An amazing admission from the Reg article. (Score:1, Interesting)
I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Knoppix or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.
If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history [slashdot.org]. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.
To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check this [slashdot.org] post out. I mean, this is an article about email disclaimers, right? The parent of the post is complaining about the ads in the linked page and so on, and twitter actually goes off on a rant to blame it on Microsoft and recommend Lynx. WTF?
Here's another. In this post [slashdot.org] twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.
More? Just read though this [slashdot.org] post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own. Or this [slashdot.org]. Or this [slashdot.org].
More? Bad spelling in astounding conspiracy theories [slashdot.org], more [slashdot.org] offtopic [slashdot.org] FUD [slashdot.org] and uninformed "I'm right, look at me" rants [slashdot.org], promptly proven wrong. Worse even, twitter wants to be RMS [slashdot.org], apparently [slashdot.org] (that first one is a winner). I mean, really [slashdot.org]. You think [slashdot.org]?
FUD [slashdot.org], FUD [slashdot.org], FU [slashdot.org]
Re:Hmm ... (Score:2, Interesting)
after all, I think that Microsoft reps do not think they do corporate business at the county fair, especially given the fact that most of their FUD concerns total cost of ownership, admin costs etc.
No corporate buyer in its right mind would go to the higher up to justify buying MS server by saying: "Well, Bill gates said that the alternatives cost too much.".
Linux has come to be known outside the junkies, and THAT is the fact that MS is trying to fend off: Now, even the great unwashed ask: "have you considered Linux?"
So, if MS can measurably change the PERCEPTION of their product, (which now is basically: ms products=problems^users)in RELATIVE terms, they have won time. they cannot change the basic perception of their product, because everybody uses it, and no one is enthusiastic. That would not be a problem for any other monopoly, but the perceived quality for middle users has deteriorated over time, which by itself makes people willing to try an alternative(do you recall excel 4?).