Windows Cheaper When Studied by MSFT Analysts

richdun writes "Here is a study done by an independent research firm which claims that under certain circumstances, it is cheaper to develop applications and enterprise solutions for Windows than for Linux. They cite costs from more education, time developing, etc. Of course, the story is quick to state that the whole study was funded and commissioned by our favorite Redmond, WA based software giant. "

Comments

SCO's magic bag of nothing.

[kfg]

While arguing about all of this it might be well to keep in mind that UNIX code has been in court once before.

When USL(AT&T) sued BSDI their first step was to seek an injunction against the distribution of "their" code.

The judge refused this injunction, throwing out all complaints except those regarding a mere six files while offering the opinion that it was likely that AT&T held no propriatary rights to UNIX at all, since they had freely distributed, and allowed others to freely distribute, said code for over a decade. ( Bear in mind that copyright law was very different then).

Oh yeah, the judge also found that there had actually been stealing going on. AT&T had, in fact, been stealing code from BSD. Very embaressing.

AT&T, the agressor in the case, was then forced to apply to BSDI for a settlement on terms very favorable to them rather than procede and have it formaly adjudicated that they owned nothing.

http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/bsdis ui t.html

This is why BSD code is free, because it's likely that the code SCO claims such strong ownership of has little to no ownership at all, upon judicial review.

The cynic might come to the conclusion that this is the reason that the only actual suit SCO has filed so far is for contract violation, not copyright infringement, since filing such a suit might well result in a determination that SCO owns squat all.

You don't have an explicit contract with SCO?

Well, as my dear old granny used to say:

"Fuck 'em."

KFG