"Get the Facts" Campaign Working 499
brontus3927 writes "According to a Reseller Advocate Magazine write-up, Microsoft seems to be winning its war against Linux. Info-Tech Research Group recently ran a survey that is now being used on Microsoft's Get The Facts campaign. In it were some surprising results. 'After polling 1,400 IT managers and CIOs in SMB corporations, his group found that 48% were not interested in Linux, 15% were not sure about Linux, and only 10% plan to evaluate Linux." Despite this, two-thirds of all webservers run Linux. The disparity in these numbers comes from the fact that most smaller companies' websites are hosted by service providers running Linux servers even if the company itself isn't."
No discrepency (Score:4, Insightful)
Apache != Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
I think Linux is the cat's pajamas, the bee's knees; it does not need to steal credit from BSD and other projects in order to deserve praise.
Re:Hey now, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No discrepency (Score:2, Insightful)
Most of the people I know that are Hobbyists don't run a dedicated webserver... They run their site from their own machine, which for other reasons (games/office/etc) also runs on windows...
besides... many hobbists don't even know you can install apache on windows...
Re:No discrepency (Score:5, Insightful)
Back when I was a youngster, IBM held dominance in the marketplace. Every CIO (they didn't call themselves that back then) that had a data center ran IBM. They seemed unbeatable. But then the PC came along and beat the pants off the old mainframe systems. This happened because users were demanding more capability than your average mainframe could deliver. It wasn't a matter of computing capacity, but rather the MIS department's ability to deliver applications in a timely manner. I worked on a project where we dumped a $50,000 app that we had written with a much more capable system on a PC built on Excel. Our customer (in this case another group in our organization) was very happy and we saved ourselves a lot of cash in the process. This new way of thinking wasn't driven by the CIO, but rather by the technologists who knew how to put this stuff together. It was collaborative and creative.
Fast forward to today. Corporations don't really drive the marketplace. Sure they have influence, but to think that by taking care of a very limited group of CIOs that somehow you're going to dominate the marketplace is a ridiculous idea. There are literally millions of small businesses that drive the economy and they don't consult their CIO when making a buying decision. They'll usually talk to another small business owner or their geeky nephew or some other "lowly" technologist. The CIO is nowhere to be seen.
Personally I don't know why Microsoft or any other company chases after large corporations like they do, other than that they're a large corporation themselves and know how to service that marketplace. Sure Microsoft has made billions on this market, but the question is whether or not it's sustainable. Once things become commodities (as software is fast becoming), large customers become very price conscious and beat you up for the last $. So unless they're a prestige account or you get some economy of scale, they're pretty much useless from a profit perspective. You're much better off servicing small to medium sized customers who either don't have the leverage or aren't as price sensitive.
If I'm looking to the real future of computing, I'd rather know what a bunch of geeks in high school think about technology than some random group of CIOs. They'll have the greatest degree of influence over it in the long haul.
Re:No discrepency (Score:3, Insightful)
Like any other company selling a product, Microsoft pursues large firms because, for each dollar spent on marketing and sales, they get the greatest return (marginal return). The effort to sell to a medium-sized firm is nearly the same as for a large firm, but the payoff from the large firm is much bigger.
Secon
I don't agree... (Score:3, Insightful)
Adolecents are very bad at determining anything that is going to last a long time. There's a lot of quick, off the cuff, rebel without a cause, I just want to be different attitude. High schoolers may determine fads, but not long term statistics. As for the other group, the over
Re:No discrepency (Score:3, Insightful)
Slowing adoption (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Insightful)
At my job we are NOT considering Linux, and probably will not anytime in the foreseeable future.
We have 10+ years of infrastructure built on Windows. We have over a dozen servers all running Windows, talking to each other, running programs built for them.
We have 10+ years of expertise (well, 4 people with at least 6 year each)
Switching now would be insane.
It's not a choice of which one is 'better' (for one of any number of reasons) but which one works best for us.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Insightful)
It starts out small. You say to yourself - Why are we paying Microsoft $5000 just to serve files for 20 people? You dink around with a Linux/*BSD box and manage to barely get Samba working. It takes you a day, but after that it works! A year later, you notice that you haven't had to reboot it or 'fix' it, or virus scan it, service pack it, change the CAL licenceing
It starts out small.
But it is infectious.... after all it's 'viral' according to Balmer
Pro-Choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft's big plus is in making consumers think that there are no choices. It is scared of people getting the chance to make a choice and even more scared of consumers making an INFORMED choice.
Just because you use Windows and have always used Windows does not mean that is the best choice for
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know, because Windows Server 2003, standard edition, with 10 CALs, is around $500.
"A year later, you notice that you haven't had to reboot it or 'fix' it, or virus scan it, service pack it"
Bullshit. Patching is a necessary part of any OS. Hell, there have been major holes in SSH, the kernel, Apache, and Samba in the last year. Windows is not unique in this regard.
We run Windows because it integrates well with our systems. IIS
Re:Slow adoption and the cure (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Interesting)
I was installing some (Linux based) networking kit at a reasonably big customer a few weeks ago.
Now, from my perspective, if someone told me that one of my Linux systems had been compromised I'd say "oh shit" and be dropping everything to take it offline and reinstall, or at least clean it ASAP. (Yep, compromises _do_ happen on Linux kit but are reasonably infrequent if you keep stuff up to date, and 9 times out of 10 are caused my human error such as forgetting to turn on scheduled yum updates or leaving a weak password on a server).
While I was doing this install, I had to inform the customer that it looked like one of his (many) windows servers had been hit by some worm (lots of network traffic hitting random addresses on the internet on obviously microsofty ports). The reaction kind of shocked me - it was pretty much "oh well, happens all the time, I'll fix it later".
I think this says a lot about Windows admins - they have so many security problems that a random exploit (which, for all they know, could be posting confidential data all over the place) is considered pretty much the norm and unimportant.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:3, Insightful)
Show me a virus for OpenBSD on Sparc and we'll talk.
Check those numbers one more time. (Score:5, Insightful)
48% are not interested in Linux.
52% are somewhat interested in Linux.
15% are not sure about Linux.
Which leaves 37% who have deployed Linux or are testing Linux for deployment.
The company I work for sounds similar to your's. We have LOTS of server apps that will only run on Windows. Except we have more servers.
Possibly. But "now" isn't "tomorrow".
The key issue is whether you're talking about an EXISTING installation or a NEW installation.
Because you have an existing installation, your company has already spent the money to evaluate and deploy that system.
But, at some time in the future, there will be an upgrade. And you will have to spend more money on your system.
There are 3 items to consider when evaluating a system.
#1. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) - how much does it cost to run this system day after day.
#2. Return on Investment (ROI) - How much revenue with this system allow us to generate?
#3. Migration cost - How much will it cost to deploy this system.
Now, even though Linux may have a far lower TCO and a far higher ROI, the migration cost can be too high to make a business case for it.
But when it is time to pay for the next upgrade, the migration costs need to be compared. So if it would cost $1 million to migrate today, but it would take the company 10 years to make that money back, no one would migrate.
But then you have to pay $500,000 for the next upgrade. Suddenly, the Linux system doesn't look so bad. Particularly if you're looking at ANOTHER upgrade within the next 5 years.
So you (being the pro-active guy you are) get in touch with the people working on the Linux systems. You have the time and they have the incentive. Can they cut the migration costs to $250,000 within the next 5 years (estimated time to your next upgrade)?
After all, it's just 0's and 1's.
If they can do that, then the next upgrade will cost MORE than the migration.
It's called a "migration plan". Only idiots or people with an agenda try to migrate ALL of their systems at once.
Start by learning Linux and seeing where it can be deployed, reasonably, in your existing network. We're running it for DNS/DHCP/backup/webpages/etc. I also have it protecting an old GroupWise system. I'm also trying to establish OpenLDAP as our standard directory service.
The longer you wait to start, the more proprietary infra-structure you'll have to migrate.
Your IT department needs a plan. Otherwise, you'll be driven by the vendors. And the vendors are only interested in getting more of your money into their pockets.
And "staying with Microsoft" is not a plan.
Re:Check those numbers one more time. (Score:3, Insightful)
I may have agree with your post, but it seemed to rely in great measure on the last sentence (which I just quoted above). And that sentence is not accurate, because staying with a solution is a plan.
Now, try to think freely, without cognitive dissonance: if Windows and other MS products do the job for a certain company, why would not "staying with Microsoft" be a plan? Really?
Re:Check those numbers one more time. (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite simply, it doesn't fit the the slashbots' ideals that everyone and his dog should be using some sort of open source solution even if said solution is the wrong one to use.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:4, Interesting)
Wow, your comments sounds just like my old company. They refused to look at modern technology because they had 200 (combined) years of experience with obsolete server software. They're bankrupt now..
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:3, Insightful)
It takes 4 people to run 12+ servers (each probably dedicated to a single task, as usually recommended for Windows)? Glad it's your company's money, not mine. I guess it helps the unemployment picture though.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Informative)
I spend 90% of my time programming...and about 10% maintaining the 4 servers that I use. That includes keeping users FTP accounts up to date.
We have thousands of users, and one of the people maintains the filesharing/e-mail servers, while supporting those users in using them.
We sell products, and use a webserver/database server/firewall for that system. Maintaining the servers is a small part- keeping the site with shopping cart running/secure/up-to-date is more important.
Actually for only 4 people, we get a ton of work done- and our administrative overhead is very low. That's why we wouldn't be switching anytime soon- I would have to re-write a lot of what I've done. We would have to switch tons of user accounts, get a new e-mail system, etc. etc. We do real stuff...not just some stupid administrative tasks that could be automated...those are the people who will soon see the unemployment line.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Interesting)
My parents had 2 windows PC's. They were constantly infected with viruses, pop-ups and other problems that caused my father, in particular, a lot of data loss. Every couple of months they'd take it in to the local repair shop. There, they would either re-install the OS (blowing away any data my dad forgot to back up) or occasionally sell my dad an "upgraded component" like more RAM, faster CPU, etc. "to help with the speed problems".
For years I tried to get my parents to buy a Mac. 90% of what they do is platform agnostic and they aren't gamers. For years my dad kept saying, "yeah, macs might be pretty good - I've heard good things about them, but this works better for me". WTF? How is it working better for you, dad? What you mean is that you are familiar with it. You fear change. The thought of a little pain for a world of gain frightens you, and besides, you have all this money and time invested in your current equipment. Which, by the way, you've paid for 10 times over in repair/upgrade fees, lost productivity, and heartache.
Two years ago I bit the bullet and paid for a G4 iBook out of my own pocket. I configured everything for what I knew they would need including VPC for the one PC-only, gotta-have app my dad uses. I gave it to them to as a gift, spent a few hours with them walking them through the differences to make sure they could do some basic troubleshooting, etc. and sent them on their way. About 6 months later I got a call from my dad saying he was having problems. I thought "crap! this wasn't supposed to happen". It turned out that his virtual PC image had gotten infected with malware (I told him not to surf from within VPC!) and it was "having the same problems his other computers were".
Phew! Fortunately, I had made a backup image of his VPC drive and had configured all his PC apps to use shared space (on the mac volume for saving data). I old him to drag the bad image to the trash, go to the "backups" folder and Option-drag the Windows2K file back into the VPC Folder. He was impressed. Now he does all his "critical windows stuff" on his mac. I've almost even got him convinced to install Linux (either Xandros or Kubuntu) on his PC's.
How does this relate to the Parent Poster? All my dad knew, all he'd invested in financially, time-wise, pain-wise, was Windows. And he said "It works better for me". What is that supposed to mean? Better than what? Does my daughter's Daewoo Nubira work better than my Mercedes? Just how would you have to define "better" to make it fit. She's never even driven my Mercedes. Does her car work for her? Yes. Does that mean that, if I were to give her my car, and let her get a chance to get used to it that it wouldn't in the long term work better for her? What are the chances that 10 years down the road she'd be still driving the Nubira? How about the Mercedes (well, assuming I gave it to her :-)?
At work we still have several servers running RH 6.2 on old, but high-quality hardware. I keep them patched, almost never have to re-boot them (except for the occasional kernel patch), keep the firewalls tuned, and forget them. BTW, they were my first Linux boxes, coming from an all-Windows background. It was a steep learning curve (especially back then, before the simple, graphical installation we have now. But I made the choice to take the risk and it has paid off in spades. 75% of our critical infrastructure has been migrated away from windows. We still use windows where it makes sense. We still have an Active Directory Domain which we will be upgrading to Win2K3 this summer. But, we are beginning to implement OpenLDAP and plan on letting that slowly take over the AD duties wherever we can. We are rolling out OpenOffice/NeoOffice and FireFox on all new computers by default.
I can say which OS's in which
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:4, Interesting)
Then I get hired at the first company and I write an application, using Linux and other open source technologies, that saves them about half a million dollars in the first year. Guess what, that company is now using Linux and has hired a small team of Linux developers.
The second company is now using Linux on many of its desktops for the same reason.
The funny thing is that the CIO/CTO of both companies had nothing to do with the decision. It was driven by an engineer who knew what he was doing (in this case me) and an application or service that the company came to rely upon.
If your company hired someone like me, you would be running Linux within six months without so much as a meeting to discuss the matter.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:3, Insightful)
Be afraid, Gates, ... be VERY afraid.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, NT 3.5, 4.0, 2000, XP, 2003 are all different, and so the skills needed to administer and use each is slightly different. Which means that your statement of `exact same skill set' is technically accurate, though extremely misleading.
In reality, people install NT 3.5, then upgraded to NT 4.0, and updated their skill sets somewhat to add any needed NT 4.0 knowledge. Then Windows 2000 comes out, they upgrade, and upgrade their skill sets. The incremental knowledge upgrades are relatively minor. And while somebody who knew everything there was to know about NT 3.5 would be somewhat lost with Windows 2003, he'd pick it up quickly enough. (And while I'm mostly a *nix guy, I know enough about Windows here to know what I'm talking about, even going back to NT 3.5 and even earlier.)
The same is true with Linux, or any other OS. If somebody who was familiar with Redhat 1.0 suddenly was confronted with Fedora Core 3, they'd be lost ... for a little while. Then they'd be OK as things started falling into place. (And remember, NT 3.5 came out slightly before Redhat 1.0 (both in 1994.))
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:3, Insightful)
Because we are running the same software that 85% of the world is running, and about 99% of our industry is running...we are dinosaurs.
We should move over the the software that runs about 8% of the world's computers (being generous here) even though in our industry that would make us the only ones incompatible with everyone else.
Good thinking- I would love to hire you as a consultant..because as
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't totally agree with the conclusions, but there's nothing really wrong with pointing out the price tag of WebSphere and Oracle.
There's a certain amount of FUD here on slashdot where MS is the expensive vendor and Linux users all run Debian & Postgres for free. The reality is that Linux is being positioned as a high-end Enterprise product and is priced accordingly. I don't see any movement from RedHat and Novell to sell Linux to Small/Medium Businesses.
Re:Slowing adoption (Score:5, Informative)
Some movement right here [novell.com].
All that for under $500.
I'm offended (Score:5, Funny)
Err... (Score:5, Informative)
No. Two-thirds [netcraft.com] of all publicly visible web servers found by netcraft run Apache, but this includes many [freebsd.org] other [openbsd.org] operating [apple.com] systems [microsoft.com].
WinApache (Score:2)
Two-thirds of all publicly visible web servers found by netcraft run Apache, but this includes many [bsd] other [bsd] operating [bsd on mach] systems [windows].
*BSD I can deal with, but how many actual web sites running on Windows servers use Apache rather than IIS?
Re:WinApache (Score:2)
With more and more companies using Subversion for revision control, you can expect even more of them start using Apache httpd for other things as well. Of course, one may just just use svnserve instead of via Apache httpd.
Re:WinApache (Score:2)
Some, for sure. However PHP has *massive* performance problems on windows, so anyone running PHP should be using Linux. ZEND even sells a suite which claims that it brings windows PHP performance up to linux levels.
Re:Err... (Score:2)
Re:Err... (Score:4, Informative)
Many of the largest domain registrars use Windows based servers for placeholders because IIS does a good job serving static content.
Netcraft occasionally publishes statistics on active websites. The percentages are the same or maybe are even higher for Apache.
One single positive thing.. (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems the IT journalists are no longer taking what Microsoft says as gospel.. you read any Microsoft vs Linux type article or report and you'll see that the press regularly question Microsofts reasonings behind its attacks on Linux. In fact, apart from the handful of sites that seem to be permanently pro Microsoft, the majority seem sceptical about Microsoft! The BBC especially does a superb job on giving fair balance in its reports.
Clearly Linux is beginning to get a major foothold, and I still genuinely feel Microsoft is worried and getting more so every day.
Re:One single positive thing.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:One single positive thing.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't sell them "Linux"
Sell the mom and pop company a "File Server" and a "Web Server" and an "Email Server"
Don't sell them a Gentoo box with Samba, Apache and Postfix. They'll say "WTF?!?!"
MS products generate so much revenue.
MS Products would generate a lot of revenue, but free software generates a lot more income for us.
Re:One single positive thing.. (Score:2)
I would too, if you try to sell Gentoo to a Mom and Pop shop. Much better to sell them SuSE (bought by Novell) or some other commercial distribution. I'm sure Debian is fine too.
Of course, OpenbSD, FreeBSD and NetBSD are excellent choises too if you want stability.
Re:One single positive thing.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Mom and pop pay some nice people $20 a month for their business's webserver and email, and they're more than willing to eat that cost if it means someone else looks after the computer (which includes the hardware and the net connectivity as well).
Linux is a fine desktop, and does great on the server. Web surfing, check, email, check, web serving check, databases, check. It does lousy on the mid-end. Appointments? Billing? Bookkeeping? Where do you start? Freshmeat?
What about other companies? (Score:5, Funny)
What about the NFS & AFP corporations? Not everyone runs CIFS.
Two thirds run Apache! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Two thirds run Apache! (Score:2)
Old news (Score:5, Informative)
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/08/ 224225&tid=163 [slashdot.org]
Re:Old news (Score:2)
Re:Old news (Score:2, Insightful)
What's changed since this same report was discussed last month?
Unfortunately, nothing here as the editors are still letting rewrites and reposts through as news.
OR, "CREATE" the facts? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately Microsoft may be winning the war. And more scary in my opinion is Microsoft has shifted to more subtle means. What could be less intimidating than a web site dedicated to gently walking managers through the maze of technical issues ostensibly improving their (the managers) effectiveness?
For me, all I need to do to consider which platform costs less to manage is look back over the span of my career... I've managed Windows and Unix systems for over twenty years (which means I've managed Windows systems for "x" years -- you pick when you first think that might be -- I know it hasn't been twenty years). And when I weigh how much I invest to keep systems running, Unix (linux included) always wins, easily.
Of course, I found it unusual for management to ask me or any of my technical peers for recommendations, they typically get/got most of their advice gladhanding on the golf course, or from nice glossy brochures, and now, from slick benevolent web sites.
Microsoft is one of the best at PR, and their "Get the Facts" campaign may be one of their most impressive successes (oh that Microsoft would be so successful developing and creating safe and secure software). But, Microsoft knows perception is 90% of reality. What they say only has to feel true and assuage the fears of managers justifying manager's choices to stay with Microsoft. Unfortunately it has become a Nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft world (remember when it was IBM?), and with Microsoft's huge lead and head start in controlling the marketplace I don't see this changing any time soon.
What bugs me is when it bleeds into my area (I prefer doing my work in the Unix world...). For example, the time our team got a new member -- a new sysadmin who previously had been working and support Windows machines at our company. Our main server was a workhorse Sun Server and I had with reverence watched it chug away doing good work with an up time that had finally exceeded 550 days (not a huge record in the Unix world, but it was fun to see it go...). The Monday of week two of our new admin I was dismayed to see that our trusty Sun server now only had an uptime of less than two days. Sigh. Wasn't sure why, but reboots/crashes happen. Before I could do any more checking, "Bob" (not his real name) dropped by positively beaming and let me know he had noticed that luna (the server) had not been rebooted for a long time so over the weekend he had rebooted it for us! Universes collide! Sigh, again.
I'd love to see good technology prevail -- unfortunately today the combination of effective PR and FUD campaigns combined with Microsoft's products turns out to be good cough enough.
Clueless &^%$#@ Window Admin (Score:2)
We have a couple of windows admins that regularly reboots Unix platforms. It took a management directives to tell them "hands-off, buzzards!"
These souless guys (and gals) don't have a clue what Telecom industry have been touting for so long, the holy grail of six 9s (99.9999%) uptime.
Re:OR, "CREATE" the facts? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:OR, "CREATE" the facts? (Score:2)
Re:OR, "CREATE" the facts? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:OR, "CREATE" the facts? (Score:3, Interesting)
As any hacker knows, social engineering is an order of magnitude easier and more effective than any technical effort.
Re:OR, "CREATE" the facts? (Score:3, Insightful)
Software should run forever. If it doesn't, regular rebooting hides problems that ought to be fixed, rather than worked around by you. You should already know anything you can discover on a reboot.
Part of the confusion on this seems to be a difference between people running production, multiuser systems and those running noncritical single-user ones. Production admins generally try to make their changes first on testbed machines to catch the whoppers.
In your case, how would regular rebooting have s
Re:No, it doesn't need to be.. (Score:3, Informative)
You're missing his point - it's a good idea to reboot machines now and then just to make sure they reboot cleanly, with all necessary services running. Better to find out something is broken in a maintenance window than after a power failure at 3am Saturday morning or smack bang in the middle of production time.
Re:No, it doesn't need to be.. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you patch software that is started at boot time it should be enough to just restart the services. That's why you have the
"Winning the War" (Score:2, Insightful)
Slashdot a handy tool for FUD group? (Score:5, Informative)
It looks like the same "study".
Thanks, Slashdot, for giving the lame "study" more legs and contributing to Linux FUD.
Doubtful Data (Score:2, Interesting)
Web servers... or web sites? (Score:2)
Re:Web servers... or web sites? (Score:2)
If you can realistically run more sites on a single server with Apache than with IIS and/or if the TCO of Linux/Apache means that more hosting companies use Linux/Apache, then it's reasonable that Apache should score higher.
Or look at it from the other point of view. Windows should not benefit from being less efficient, and therefore needing more servers to do the same job.
Makes you wonder... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Survey doesn't show how good MS's campaign is (Score:5, Insightful)
Summary (Score:3, Funny)
This may surprise you (Score:3, Insightful)
--Ryv
Yeah, you're making stuff up. (Score:4, Informative)
But even if you do the stripping yourself it's not that bad. Whenever you do something mainstream that lots of people do, you can do it the way everyone else does.
The dependencies for apache are clearly known by pretty much every distribution. There's even a project to build everything you need from scratch if you just want to start with nothing and build up. In short, if you have dependency problems when you're dealing with apache, you're using a pretty messed up distro to start with, since virtually all of them solve that problem first.
As far as kernel bloat...I don't know where you're getting this. Even a big kernel is tiny compared to any Windows kernel 95 or higher. Recompile the kernel, or download one of the many, many already created tiny kernels. It takes four minutes to configure and half an hour to recompile and install.
*Note: Poster may be someone looking to Slashdot to do his research for him, and I didn't want to do so. I will, however, say that the links for all the things I mentioned are available at freshmeat.
Where are you getting your numbers? (Score:4, Interesting)
So where do you see the decline in interest?
Okay. Stop. You're talking out of your ass.
I use Debian on servers. It is ultra-simple to install a bare system and then add on only what I specifically want.
And that isn't even counting recompiling the kernel or recompiling any packages. I'm sure you could get an extra 5-10% performance, but my systems are already on idle most of the time.
What "kruft"? Which OS's have less? Certainly not in Win2003, as you mentioned. You cannot remove services in that, just disable them.
Working? Perhaps for Linux. (Score:2)
The SMB space (especially the S part) often consists of small offices (20) that have grown organically from a workgroup configuration. The migration is often to a single MS-SBS server at the instance of a rent-a
Get up off the floor (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Get up off the floor (Score:2)
100-(48+15) = ??? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you do the equation above, you find that 37% of responses *AREN'T ACCOUNTED FOR*. Could it be that 37% of managers is using linux or PLANNING on using linux? Seems to be the logical conclusion to draw when 48% aren't planning on using linux, and 15% say they may evaluate it in the future.
Image is Everything (Score:3, Insightful)
The stereotypical image of Linux (smelly, overweight nerds wearing Star Trek T-shirts) compared to Microsoft (suit-wearing shmoozers with lunch budgets to burn) explains all this.
Decision makers tend to be more political and less technical in nature, that's how they got to be bosses.
Of course, this is not always true as there are companies that have tech-backgrounded managers that do a great job. Find one and work for them.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
And... ? (Score:2, Insightful)
And how much were locked-in using M$ ?
By the way, 10% seems a good start to me... When 10% would have switched, maybe 10 other percent might consider to switch.
FUD is not the real problem here (Score:3, Interesting)
Right now, Linux offers some advantages and has big disadvantages -- such as the lack of Windows compatibility. It would simply be impossible to replace it at my job, for instance, because many corporate applications that I use are only available for Windows (one is an ActiveX application, by the way). Obviously, Linux is not an option here.
The real danger from Microsoft is software, file format, protocol and especially hardware lock-in. Microsoft has enough power to make that happen. Of course, all of this borders on unfair competition, so they will have some legal obstacles in that arena.
The one with the most $ always wins (Score:2)
Be it honest or not, marketing is what wins the battle.
When was the last time you saw a linux commercial? When was the last time you saw a Microsoft commercial? Bet it was the microsoft one.
Guess which one sticks in the minds of conusmers?
This also goes for IT publications and IT consumers. The magazines are plastered with them. With very few linux ones ( mostly IBM ads )
GNU/Linux get the facts (Score:5, Interesting)
We should compile a list of reason why GNU/linux is better or why it's TCO is lower.
There are reasons why UNIX/Linux is better and there are also some arguments why "Windows" or closed source are good in some case.
I haven't seen a objective debate about this.
Microsoft lobbying (Score:2)
I think microsoft is a huge promoter of Linux, even where Linux does really compete with Windows Sure, users will switch to Linux. Everybody does. Just be realistic.
One example: Miciosoft lobbying for softwae patents. Microsoft hires x different lobbying hats to lobby for patenting of software, but they all behave l
No admin, so relying on Microsoft (Score:2)
-russ
Small Businesses (Score:2, Insightful)
Also... (Score:3, Insightful)
Switching to Linux for most of these companies doesn't make sense.
Now, on the front end, the websites etc, the e-mail forwarding, they probably are serving up pages using Linux and getting services from Linux and they don't even know it.
We've got an IT mindset and I think it's a bit unrealistic. Those numbers actually look pretty reasonable to me, with or without the Get the Fud campeign.
Polling who? (Score:5, Insightful)
"polling 1,400 IT managers and CIOs"
Polling who? Trying polling the people that actually do things. Those CIOs and managers probably don't even know what Linux and Windows are.
Sun still hot (Score:5, Funny)
In unrelated news, a recent survey of scientists reveals that most believe that the sun is still pretty darned hot. "You wouldn't want that puppy in your pants" said one source who wished not to be identified. Moon worshipers worldwide were quick to point out that the sun survey was commissioned by sun worshipers. One source, who wished not to be identified, said "Sure the sun makes a pretty good sun, but it would make a lousy moon, but those sun fanboys fail to point that out." Both sides of this hot debate agreed that you needn't fresh or original content to get a bunch of page hits, you can simply rehash something on slashdot.
Why Microsoft should buy RedHat (Score:3, Interesting)
Clueless management Barbies and Kens could claim their total allegiance to dominant monopoly capitalism (every met one that wouldn't?) while the real corporate computer system network could be running with Linux under the control of the technocracy (which is you if you're reading this).
Microsoft Red Hat would provide the means for the Linux community to integrate competence and consistency into corporate computing while still testifying to senior management that they are still using the 'secure, stable, safe, and acceptable' Microsoft solution.
For all their talk, deep down senior management only cares that that their computers work. Fear of Linux is simply the general corporate fear of anything unknown.
May I still use Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
Does anyone really care about this "war"?
Linux probably already there (Score:3, Informative)
The nice thing is that these people don't have to "investigate" Linux, Linux is coming to them, piece by piece. In Capitalist America, you don't adopt Linux, Linux adopts you
Well, I got some facts (Score:5, Interesting)
Second Fact, I can often provide all the IT infrastructure my company needs without even requesting a PO. In fact, while ohter people get haggled every time they make a purchase, I rarely even get questioned - which I think is because I do way more with way less then my counterparts do.
Third fact, I really have few worries about an unwelcome visit from the BSA, and I don't mean boy scounts of america.
Frouth fact, I rarely need to deal with all the license headaches, and the annual renew crap and forced upgrades that my counterparts do. In fact, upgrades and improvements are not a chore, and I am not terrorized that every upgrade will break everything.
Fith fact, I get the pleasure of doing more RnD, because I don't need financial approval from a bean counter everytime I do something.
Sixth fact, I rarely pay extra for things like compilers, office productivity stuff, graphics programs, and visus scanning is't even a worry accept for scanning linux SMB servers for others.
Seventh fact, things like paravirtualisation, parallel clusters, email, databases, dns, web servers, and remore access to programs come standard in Linux.
Eight fact, I can literally rip a Linux box out of one x86 box and place it in another and run kudzu and it recovers ausomely. Have you ever tried this with Microsoft?
Ninth fact, those are all red herrings. What makes Linux vavuable is that it's not about technology, but freedom. People who talk about business and not freedom are cowards and ingrates to the culture and attitudes that made them successfull to begin with and over the long term they will certainly get what they deserve.
Linux documentation defeats Linux, not Microsoft (Score:4, Interesting)
today's status (Score:4, Interesting)
The question seems to be, is Microsoft winning 'the war'?
Oh, come now. All they are doing is fighting a rear-guard action. How could they possibly win in the long-term? The only way would be if we collectively stopped developing Linux and the applications which run on it, and go back to always buying Windows products. Does anyone really think that's going to happen?
I am currently consulting for a company which has a variety of systems and applications going. About half of their software development effort goes to in-house, never-to-be-published applications. The other half is specifically for the purpose of public consumption. You know what? The public consumption side is all running or being converted to Linux/Apache/Tomcat. The internal stuff is still up for grabs, but this is a cultural issue, not a question of the technical merits of MS vs the world.
I had a short timeframe to develop my current project, and I ended up going C# and
The Linux/Apache/Java side of the house is also grudgingly admitting we did a great job getting a fully-functional app out the door in a short timeframe. But they are also doing interesting things with Lucene and some other child projects of Apache.
The state of things now at the comapny are that getting the job done is Job #1, and the folks who write the checks don't care whether MS is in the loop or not. But, as more of our IT staff begin using open source tools, the more our tech staff will start saying to the bean counters, 'hey, we don't need to buy a Microsoft license for this or that project.' And the beanies are going to be happy to go along with that!
What's interesting to me, as a long-time Linux and FreeBSD guy, is that the quality of development tools that MS has had to create is a direct result of having to compete with the open source alternatives. And the quality and utility of those tools is accelerating.
The real story is that WE win.
Re:today's status (Score:3, Interesting)
Getthefacts site down (Score:3, Funny)
Looks like someone is busy running:
...in 32 parallel processes by running this:
Shhh, I weren't supposed to give people bad ideas ;)
Perspective - campaign is NOT WORKING! (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux has really jumped up out of nowhere, and is now being considered by quite a large percentage of businesses.
The 'facts' seem to show that Linux is growing in popularity at a phenomenal rate, and is battling extremely well against Microsoft's considering the lock-in/lock-out situation.
The world complained about stability, and Microsoft made Windows more stable.
The world complained about security, and Microsoft... well, it seems to be having a good try.
Now, the world is complaining about lock-in, and Microsoft... oh dear. Is Microsoft going to open its protocols, APIs and file formats? I think not.
As long as we're talking about businesses (Score:3, Interesting)
Then, be their competitor with an OSS solution. If it really makes a difference, you'll have the edge and it'll be that much easier to plow the other guy into the ground. Or they'll swicth over in order to survive.
Honestly, why does anybody care what OS businesses are running? A bank or something with my money in it, yeah, but really, what difference does it make for Generic Company X, Y, or Z?
how about this instead? (Score:3, Interesting)
how about the ugly reality of using Windows instead?
Aggressive, Mass-Mailed Sober.p Worm Poised To Smack Users
By Gregg Keizer, TechWeb News
Monday may be a very bad day, a security researcher said Friday as he warned that the aggressive Sober worm of early May is timed to download new code the first day of next workweek.
Sober.p, the mass-mailed worm that spread voraciously by virtue of its offer of free World Cup tickets, is poised to launch another attack Monday, said Dmitri Alperovitch, a research engineer with an Alpharetta, Ga.-based security firm CipherTrust"
whenever someone gets the urge to post another stupid article about how MS is winning the FUD war, they should just post another REAL worm/virus/update/phish article complete with catchy tagline, links to other important security sites, etc.
chris
Re:So let me get this straight (Score:4, Insightful)
There is a need to redouble our evangelisation efforts, to concerntrate on pointing out the flaws in Microsoft paid for studies, to extole the vitues of our software, in particular how these virtues impact the bottom line of the CIO's we are trying to convince.
As OSS advocates we should primarily be concerned with writing good code, filling bug reports and generally producing high quality software. But those of us who engage in marketing need to learn to push the right buttons the same way Microsoft pushes the right buttons. The difference being is we don't have to mislead to market.
Many of us balked and laughed when the Microsoft FUD guns were trained on Linux TCO. This study indicates we (myself included) were wrong to laugh, and we need to appreciate that Microsoft has suceeded in changing perception with thier marketing. We should stop complaining about how good Microsoft marketing is, stop dismissing Microsoft marketing as 'just marketing', and fight back against it.
Re:We tried this... (Score:5, Informative)
That guy is *A LOT* better off now than he was working for you, that much is clear. You are a terrible leader in the worst sense, someone who will cover their own ass at the expense of others.
You are lucky I am not *YOUR* boss... you'd be on the unemployment line right behind that guy... no, actually, only *YOU* would be on the unemployment line... I'd hire him back and get him a better boss too.
Re:We tried this... (Score:3, Funny)
And you haven't been fired? (Score:5, Insightful)
And you expected it to work?
I now systematically install Firefox as the default browser on all machines, but I first used it myself for several months (started with v. 0.7 I think, called Phoenix), and only recommended it to computer-savvy friends. Then I set it up for a few users (it was at version 0.9 by then), and waited a couple more months. Then I asked for their feedback, before deploying it to normal users. (The feedback was positive).
And that's for a simple web browser.
I understand why your employee isn't at that company anymore, but I don't understand why you didn't leave with him
Re:Linux providers are doing this to themselves. (Score:3, Insightful)