Mindbridge Saves "Bunches of Money" In Switch To Linux

While Mindbridge didn't start out as an open source company, it has since managed to save what they can only describe as "bunches of money" by switching to Linux. "Today, Mindbridge has repurposed itself as an open-source-friendly company, and revamped its infrastructure to run completely on Linux and other open source software. 'Having deployed [Linux servers] to our customers, we turned around and said, we can do the same thing internally and save bunches of money. We began a systematic but slow flipping of servers from the Microsoft world over to predominantly Linux — although there are a few BSD boxes around as well,' Christian says. 'It's to the point that today I only have two production Windows servers left, out of 15 or so.'"

Headline

[thebear05]

Mindbridge Switches to Linux Saves Bunches of Money is it me or is this headline a wet dream for most slashdot posters ?

Linux...

[Nozsd]

Fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on your operational cost.

what the....

[Anonymous Coward]

Was this thing written by a 4 year old? I was expecting to see OMG PONIEZZZ!! at the end.

Real company - just 15 servers?

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

two production Windows servers left, out of 15 or so

Is this "Mindbridge" a real company? I know geeks with 15 servers in their basement...

Re:Linux...

[doxology]

So easy, even a caveman (read: RMS) can do it!

Re:Headline

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm done.

Was it good for you?

Technical question

[nickthecook]

Are those metric bunches?

Re:Linux...

[Maxo-Texas]

Like a good server... Linux is there.

Re:Linux...

[eln]

There's no way RMS could convert to Linux in 15 minutes or less. Hell, he'd spend at least 15 days trying to convince people to call it GNU/Linux before he would even begin the install.

Re:Headline

[bulliver]

This story is utterly pointless.

You just trying to continue the theme with your post?

Re:This story has no credibility

[JoelKatz]

*Absolutely* true. While that obviously justifies pointing out when Microsoft's case studies are erroneous, self-serving, or both, it doesn't justify other people using the same tactics.

Not that I'm saying this article is as bad as most of those articles. It's not. No specifics is a lot better than completely false and misleading specifics pulled out of your corporate ass or intentionally deceptive test methodologies you pick but then get a "neutral third-party" to perform so they will "fairly and without bias" find that your product is best.

Microsoft: We didn't do these tests, Braincraft did. They found that our products were better.

Us: Did you pay them?

Microsoft: Well, yeah.

Us: Did you tell them what tests to perform and exactly how to perform?

Microsoft: Well, yeah.

Us: And did you already do those tests and carefully select the ones that make your product look the best without any regard for what thoses tests have to do with reality?

Microsoft: Well, that's all the time we have.

Re:I, for one

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, have never heard of greenguy.