The Continuing War Against Microsoft's "Facts" Campaign 316
davidmwilliams writes "I've been rallying against Microsoft's so-called 'Get the Facts' site for the last fortnight in my blog. Rather than give any legitimate comparison facing off Windows Server vs similarly spec'd Linux options, the Microsoft spin doctors opt for bunkum and hogwash with sensational headlines that don't have any substance underneath. Here's the state of play, including an update on my request to Microsoft PR to do something about the blatant lack of integrity displayed. I also go over the latest case study put up by Microsoft: they promise to show why people are choosing Windows Server 2008 over Linux using the City of Uppsala as an example."
Re:who cares? (Score:5, Informative)
For your benefit and others who similarly haven't read the article or missed its point entirely, the case study cited in the article involves the city of Upssala that has two networks, one a 150-server Windows network, and the second a 100-server Windows network with some Linux and Netware thrown in. Virus outbreaks and a need for increased control were cited as motivating factors for a change.
If there's a "suit one's needs" aspect to any of this, it certainly isn't in the article.
M$'s "honesty" (Score:1, Informative)
I'm surprised the poster is surprised by M$'s dishonesty.
Jesus, M$ makes Apple look straight and honest....
Re:who cares? (Score:5, Informative)
Which is a fair point if you assume that anyone with an opinion is automatically a liar by the very fact of their advocacy. I don't think that necessarily follows.
Certainly it doesn't seem to be the case in this instance. I can't see anything that looks to be untrue, or even deliberately misleading the article. Mr. Williams even goes so far as acknowledge that one case, (the Hi China story) actually reflected well on Microsoft. So you can't really paint him as being just as dishonest as the corporation he is challenging.
A deeper point is this: do we really want to live in a world where lies and deception are regarded as the norm, and where all opinions are automatically worthless simply by virtue of their being opinions? I can't see that polluting the world's data flow like that is a good thing, personally. I think we need people who are willing to challenge spin and propaganda wherever they find it. Williams seems to be doing that, and personally, I applaud him for his efforts.
Decision abdicated to Certified Gold Partners (Score:5, Informative)
If you read the article, there was no comparison done. The decision was outsourced to MS resellers who, surprise, peddled more MS wares. Comparison of other technologies never happened.
Oh, that and MS Sweden couldn't be bothered to look up any of the dozens of regional companies that provide support for non-MS systems and packages. That 'no support' argument worked in the early 1990's but not anymore.
Re:Microsoft bashing is outdated (Score:5, Informative)
Follow-up.
SQL Server remains off-limits for benchmarking. From the EULA for SS2005 Std / Ent:
5. BENCHMARK TESTING. You must obtain Microsoft's prior written approval to disclose to a third party the results of any benchmark test of the software.
However the company has now changed its restrictions for .Net benchmarking. One can release results according to certain ( sane ) requirements on the condition that Microsoft can reciprocally benchmark your software:
Benchmark Testing, Microsoft .NET Framework [microsoft.com]
Still glad I don't use proprietary software.
Re:In India and many other countries (Score:5, Informative)
Even in rare instances of virus attacks etc, the firewall vendors provide the support and do the cleanup, not Microsoft. And this is the case despite Corporate Volume Licensing.
Re:Swedish public sector (Score:2, Informative)
People who actually read it should have a more nuanced view than the "Microsoft-philes".
Re:who cares? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:who cares? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:If you buy Windows, you don't know... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:correction.. (Score:3, Informative)
In some particular programming language, perhaps.
More generally, however, the GPP is correct.
In first order predicate calculus, and also in propositional calculi, and at least half a dozen other logical formalisms, a negated negation is an assertion. It's called 'principium tertii exclusi' [wikipedia.org] and is present in most western logics (although, interestingly, not in many classical bhuddist logics).
Re:who cares? (Score:4, Informative)
There are reasons for Microsoft's ubiquity. And after spending a week trying to talk a non-Unix co-worker through getting wireless and USB working on his Ubuntu desktop, it's pretty clear to me what those reasons are.
Re:who cares? LINUX SPINMASTER @ WORK, lol! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:who cares? (Score:1, Informative)