Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Found Guilty of Misleading Advertising

gtoomey writes "The UK Advertising Standards Authority has upheld complaints that Microsoft misled consumers by running advertisements claiming Linux is 10 times more expensive than Windows. The print advertisements used "independent research" to compare the cost of Linux on an expensive mainframe to Windows on a PC."

608 comments

  1. Marketing slime... by kmmatthews · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From TFA:

    The advert appeared in an IT magazine and was headed: "Weighing the cost of Linux vs Windows? Let's review the facts". The ad contained a graph comparing the cost in US dollars between a Linux images running on two z900 mainframe CPUs and a Windows Server 2003 image running two 900MHz Intel Xeons chips.

    Hmm, who wants to help me do some "independent research" of our own? We could compare Linux running on a WRT54G versus the cost of, say, a dual CPU P4 XEON system with 4 gbs RAM, SCSI array, redundant everything, and dual 19" LCD monitors.

    Lesse, that makes linux roughly 100 times cheaper (70$ vs. 7000$). Didn't I also see this ad on slashdot and in Linux Journal?

    Not intended to be a flamebait, it's not just a Microsoft problem - all marketing people are evil. Perhaps we should enact the death penalty for marketing droids?

    --
    feh. stuff.
    1. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      " all marketing people are evil. Perhaps we should enact the death penalty for marketing droids?"

      Douglas Adams had it right. I have my rifle ready for when the revolution comes.

    2. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Marketing Dept.
      Microsoft UK
      Reading

      Dear Microsoft,

      Go stick your head in a pig.

      Signed your chums,
      The Advertising Standards Authority.

    3. Re:Marketing slime... by pottymouth · · Score: 5, Funny

      "First, kill all the lawyers" .. then we can do the marketing dept and then, just for fun, lets go after the accountants. They're like fish in a barrel anyway.

    4. Re:Marketing slime... by Jesrad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why settle with just the marketing droids ? What about them lawyers, IRS people, CIA higher-ups, credit salesmen, etc...

      Vote C'thulhu for President !

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    5. Re:Marketing slime... by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hmm, who wants to help me do some "independent research" of our own? We could compare Linux running on a WRT54G

      Unfortunately it wouldn't do too well on the capabilities side of the equation. To be fair Microsoft does somewhat have a point as IBM, one of the foremost advocates of Linux, is pushing the virtual-Linux-on-a-mainframe concept, and a lot of people are buying. It seems that Microsoft was tageting that competitor rather than Linux-running-on-obsoleted-developer-PC.

      I didn't bother checking, but most advertising boards are self-regulating groups that actually have zero real authority.

    6. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well my list for those against the wall when the revolution comes are:

      - The marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation
      - Politicans
      - Lawyers
      - Journalists

      I guess I can put the other marketing people on too.

    7. Re:Marketing slime... by Epistax · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be fair Microsoft does somewhat have a point as IBM, one of the foremost advocates of Linux, is pushing the virtual-Linux-on-a-mainframe concept, and a lot of people are buying. It seems that Microsoft was tageting that competitor rather than Linux-running-on-obsoleted-developer-PC.

      Right, and Microsoft clearly states this whenever they make any outrageous claim.
      ... no wait

    8. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I didn't bother checking, but most advertising boards are self-regulating groups that actually have zero real authority.

      The ASA is indeed a self-regulating body. On the bright side, however, it is generally taken fairly seriously in the UK, and when it upholds a complaint the offending advert is almost invariably withdrawn.

    9. Re:Marketing slime... by rben · · Score: 5, Insightful
      To be fair Microsoft does somewhat have a point as IBM, one of the foremost advocates of Linux, is pushing the virtual-Linux-on-a-mainframe concept, and a lot of people are buying. It seems that Microsoft was tageting that competitor rather than Linux-running-on-obsoleted-developer-PC.

      In fact, what IBM is pushing is running hundreds of virtual Linux machines on a single IBM mainframe. This substantially reduces the cost of maintaining a large Linux installation. What would have been fair would have been a comparison between an IBM mainframe running hundreds of virtual Linux servers and hundreds of PC's running Windows.

      Oh wait... That is the kind of comparison that IBM is using to sell such systems...

      --

      -All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
      www.ra

    10. Re:Marketing slime... by DeusExMalex · · Score: 1

      dont' you mean "cthulhu for president!" ?

    11. Re:Marketing slime... by Halo- · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Unfortunately it wouldn't do too well on the capabilities side of the equation. To be fair Microsoft does somewhat have a point as IBM, one of the foremost advocates of Linux, is pushing the virtual-Linux-on-a-mainframe concept, and a lot of people are buying. It seems that Microsoft was tageting that competitor rather than Linux-running-on-obsoleted-developer-PC.

      Yeah, but how many virtual Linux machines can one z/OS mainframe run at once? (I beleive that even the mid-range boxes can run thousands without noticable impact) How many copies of Windows can you run simulatanously on a development PC? (I guess two or three if you go the VMWare route, but that drive cost up, and the performace would be the sux0r)

      So if I was say, a webhosting company which gave out "full root access accounts" (or their Windows equiv) I suspect the price difference between a z/OS mainframe running a thousand Linux LPARs vs. a room full of a thousand commodity PC's running Windows would be pretty hard to calculate. There are so many factors. For example:

      You've got one very expensive , but bulletproof box vs. 1000 cheap, but all-too-failable PCs. If the mainframe never croaks, you've saved money. But some fluke electrical event fries the mainframe, you're totally fsck'ed. I'm not even gonna try to guess at the difference in electrical and facilities costs because I don't know crap about the costs of either option, but I suspect they both would be interesting numbers. (1000 PC's is a lot of heat and electricity, but a z/OS prolly needs special power and the environment needs to be controlled as well...)
    12. Re:Marketing slime... by Analogy+Man · · Score: 1

      Throw in political campaign managers....the truth is an ellusive thing when trying to hide from it.

      --
      When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
    13. Re:Marketing slime... by Errtu76 · · Score: 0

      all marketing people are evil. Perhaps we should enact the death penalty for marketing droids?

      I know i should ignore this comment. Everything in me says to ignore it... But since i have a gf who's in marketing i can't help but reply. And since i don't give a flying f*ck about my karma, here's my comment:

      You had a very valid comment. Very well thought, and provided the information you acquired on the internet to back you up. But then you preceed your final sentence by "Not intended to be a flamebait", as if everything you say afterwards should be taken as 'optional reading'. I mean, death penalty for marketing droids? So my gf should die because you hate marketing. And she *has* to die, because according to you, she's evil. And all evil should die.

    14. Re:Marketing slime... by julesh · · Score: 4, Informative

      I didn't bother checking, but most advertising boards are self-regulating groups that actually have zero real authority.

      The UK's ASA is a government sponsored body that has the power to levy fines and issue orders that specific advertisements not be used in future.

    15. Re:Marketing slime... by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The UK's ASA is a government sponsored body that has the power to levy fines and issue orders that specific advertisements not be used in future.

      Sigh. No, the ASA is an industry body whose sanctions basically amount to loudly saying that what you're doing is misleading, and by members possibly punishing a violator by refusing to do business with them. It's all clearly there on their own webpage.

      Who They Are
      Sanctions

    16. Re:Marketing slime... by Mark_in_Brazil · · Score: 5, Insightful
      all marketing people are evil. Perhaps we should enact the death penalty for marketing droids?
      Sigh...

      Marketing is not the same as advertising. In fact, the most important functions of marketing are not from the company to the customer, but the other way around. A good marketing department listens to the market or the customer, determines what the market or customer needs, and helps orient production within the company to produce products that meet some identified need.
      I am in the process of starting a company that will be heavily dependent on its marketing department. I expect the top marketing exec in the company (in Brazil, I think it's more appropriate to use the title of Director than VP) to be the second-most influential person in the company after the "big boss" (probably with the title of Director-President), who is writing this post. Some special things in our business model will allow us to do some marketing things in innovative ways. But you wanna know something? I think advertising might not end up under marketing. To me it seems that advertising, as communication from the company to the market/customer, belongs more with sales than with marketing.
      I think of it this way: Sales is responsible for communicating from the company to the market in order to sell the product or service, and Marketing is responsible for the communication in the other direction, from the market to the company.
      In any case, wherever advertising ends up falling in the company I'm starting, it certainly won't be the main activity for the marketing department.
      Marketing people are not all evil. Competent marketing people can help companies provide the products and services customers want or need. That's not only not evil, it's good!
      On the other hand, many advertising people are evil, and seek to mislead the customer. But a good marketing department can obviate the need for deceptive advertising, because a company with a good marketing department doesn't need to deceive the customer- it really is making what the customer wants or needs and simply needs to communicate that in its advertising.
      By the way, I guess I should mention that my background is technical - I have a PhD in physics and had a career doing technical things (and the technical part of sales) in IT companies. So I'm not a "marketing droid" defending his profession. I'm just a person who has studied some marketing on his own time and understood how a well-run marketing department can benefit not just a company, but also that company's customers.

      --Mark
      --
      "It is nice to know that the computer understands the problem. But I would like to understand it too." --Eugene Wigner
    17. Re:Marketing slime... by DrJay · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While we're at this, what does "less capable" mean in this context? Less capable of being shot-put across the room? Less capable of having an "Intel Inside" label on it?

      --
      ______ This mind intentionally left blank.
    18. Re:Marketing slime... by combcox · · Score: 0

      add mother in law to that list

    19. Re:Marketing slime... by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      Damn frames. You can see the sanctions as a section of the CAP Code. Basically it amounts to negative publicity, and if you're really bad other members of the ASA might refuse to do business with you.

    20. Re:Marketing slime... by chez69 · · Score: 1

      you can run linux on an LPAR, but it is mostly run in VM mode.

      a mainframe has a limited amount of LPARs (harware partitions) available, while you can run as many VM'ed operating systems that you want, as long as the resources are available.

      --
      PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
    21. Re:Marketing slime... by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

      You left out:

      -Overly opinionated /. readers ;P

    22. Re:Marketing slime... by AviLazar · · Score: 3, Informative

      They don't have to blatently state it in big bold letters. It is part of the underlying document that is attached to the *. It is up to the viewer to verify the research.
      This is not uncommon to say the least - companies do this all the time. Notice that every movie is given awesome reviews by someone, that almost every book is on some best seller list, and that every brand is the "best" brand out there.
      Marketers know what they are doing, and after they are done it goes through the legal department for checks and balances.
      Also, since words like "best", "most effective", etc are vague, they can and do utilize these statements. So when Microsoft says "We have the BEST OS on the market" they are not wrong, they just didn't state who thinks they are the "BEST", and they do not have to.
      To help give a real example, years ago Bayer got sued for slanderous advertising. They were accused of stating that other companies dilute their headache medicine with water in their advertisements. Bayer turned around and said - no we did not say that, we just said that we do not use water to dilute our headache medicine. - (paraphrase obviously). Their statement has a blatent hidden meaning, but it doesn't break the literal meaning.
      Its marketing - kill the marketers.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    23. Re:Marketing slime... by Tassach · · Score: 4, Insightful
      But some fluke electrical event fries the mainframe, you're totally fsck'ed.
      1. If it's a mission critical system, you don't just buy one -- you buy two and (preferably) have them installed in geographically seperated areas.
      2. If one does buy the farm through some freak catastrophy, you're not the one who's fsck'ed -- the vendor and/or your insurance company is.
      If you rely on a multi-million dollar piece of equipment to run your business and don't have redundancy, insurance, and service contracts, you deserve whatever happens to you.
      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    24. Re:Marketing slime... by bannerman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let me introduce you to these new (as of uh.. well.. when was writing first invented?) concepts called "backups". And "insurance". And "service". How long would it actually take, in the case of catastrophic natural phenomenon, to replace your z900? How long would it take to replace your thousands of PCs?

      --
      I keep forgetting my place. Jesus is for losers. Why do I still play to the crowd?
    25. Re:Marketing slime... by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      And I've seen 'virtual windows on a server' as a concept. I think it was from Sun. It really didn't save you anything on the hardware or software, but it would let you sit down at any thin client and pull up *your* desktop, without the mess that is roaming profiles. It would also let the administrators update the systems very easily.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    26. Re:Marketing slime... by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Yea, but what happends when those Marketing people demand that that the tech people make bad decisions based on what customers think they need.

    27. Re:Marketing slime... by Total_Wimp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Microsoft does have a directly competing product. They have Windows 2000/2003 Data Center Edition. It spawns off virtual machines. If MS wanted to do an apples to apples comparison, that's the box they need to test.

      TW

    28. Re:Marketing slime... by The_Mr_Flibble · · Score: 1

      In recent tests it was found that our company windows server performed 100% better than our new linux server, that has no cpu, hard drive, cd rom, os... (ok were thinking about ordering the parts)

      Do you think I could get a job working for M$?

    29. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This stuff about "thousands" of Linux VMs is a bunch of hooey. In theory, maybe. In practice, a handful on a production system, at most.

      Look at Google, who literally does run thousands of Linux installations. Do they use a Mainframe? No -- they've got 1000s of PCs on a rack.

      IBM's Mainframe Linux PR is mostly aimed at existing mainframe customers. That's because even IBM can't cost-justify it against PC hardware or even larger UNIX boxes.

    30. Re:Marketing slime... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Perhaps we should revise the old saying:

      there will be no justice in this world until the last lawyer is strangled with the entrails of the last marketing droid

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    31. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which they should. Something like an HP Superdome would pound the mainframe to shit in price/performance, no matter which OS you chose for it (Windows or Linux).

    32. Re:Marketing slime... by cavemanf16 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "First, kill all the lawyers"

      Consider the flip side of that coin...

      If you killed all the lawyers, who'd be there to protect your interests from all the freakin' jerks suing you and the power-grubbing politicians trying to take away your rights?

    33. Re:Marketing slime... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Better yet. Lets to a comparison between a MAC truck and a station wagon. We are going to include tests like parallel parking, zero to 60mph speed, and braking distance.

      Ignoring completely, of course, that they are two different vehicles designed for 2 completely different purposes.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    34. Re:Marketing slime... by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, to start such a revolution, you would need financial backing. You would probably go to a banker, and then you have just undermined your entire revolution.

    35. Re:Marketing slime... by Jesrad · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The very fact that my post was modded +5, Insightful gives insight on how most slashdoters see politics. And somehow I don't think this is a phenomenon limited to the US.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    36. Re:Marketing slime... by slackerboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Many of the best marketing people are the ones who actually know something about the underlying technology and are also willing to tell the customer that it won't work. These people really do exist and they tend to be very successful and end up driving customer loyalty for the company. The marketing people shouldn't just have a degree in advertising.

      --
      Things to do today: See list of things to do yesterday
    37. Re:Marketing slime... by pknoll · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Tassach: Exactly, these rare events are what DR is for. You clearly understand enterprise computing.

      Halo: I'm guessing you haven't done much enterprise-level computing. That same "freak electrical event" could fry 1000's of PCs too (I assume it's something that blows past your PDU-supplied redundant power and line conditioning... right?? I mean, that could happen...)

      If that's the case, I'd rather restore -one- system at my DR site than 100, or 500, or whatever.

    38. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now now now, let's not be too hasty. Methinks you still owe us $699.

      -- D. McBride and B. Stowell

    39. Re:Marketing slime... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 3, Informative

      In England they take truth in advertising very seriously. Not like here in the US, where in commercials it's OK to show a truck tumble off a cliff, yet it doesn't so much as have a scratch on it afterwards. :/

    40. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How to kill marketing: don't buy.

      Of course, that's not going to happen when the population salivates at the sound of a bell like a Pavlovian dog. Is it Pavlov's fault the dog is wired that way?

    41. Re:Marketing slime... by login.pl · · Score: 0

      Well, if there weren't any lawyers, then they would have a lawyer either. I don't see a problem with that.

    42. Re:Marketing slime... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      You own Damn self perhaps.

      Without "Lawyers" as a special breed and a distict language, The business of sorting out who is right and wrong would by necessity be conducted, not in latin, but in the same language as the people, who by all reckoning, are charged with understanding the law in the first place.

      The purpose of law is to create equality.

      The purpose of lawyers is to create priveledge for rich people.

      Lawyers are an anathima to the law.

      In criminal cases, the interest of freedom should be representated by an independant counter-prosector. The defendant should speak for himself or not as he chooses. But every defendant should have the same counter-prosecutor.

      AIK

    43. Re:Marketing slime... by strider44 · · Score: 1

      Steriotypes!! Get your steriotypes!

      Personally I've met quite a few lawyers (have a couple in my extended family even) and none of them have been evil in any way. IRS people are just doing their job. CIA higher-ups are employed by (assuming you're american) you to protect you.

      However, credit salesmen are evil. Totally evil.

    44. Re:Marketing slime... by GreyPoopon · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you killed all the lawyers, who'd be there to protect your interests from all the freakin' jerks suing you...

      If we killed off all the lawyers, how would you expect somebody to sue me?? On their own? At least then we are on even playing ground and not paying out tons of legal fees.

      ...the power-grubbing politicians trying to take away your rights?

      Power-grubbing politicians are nothing without lawyers to stand behind. It would be different if they could actually agree with each other and get organized, but I doubt that's likely to happen.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    45. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, windows server perform 100% better then something that has 0% performance.

    46. Re:Marketing slime... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      IRS people are people with secure government jobs, bennies, healthcare etc who are involved in taking money away from people whose job, or the profitable part of it anyway, has been exported to guatemala, their healthcare costs are staggering, and they have decided to put off having kids until the economy improves.

      Meanwhile IRS employees can pretty much do as they like without concern for the problems caused by the government they nurse from.

      AIK

    47. Re:Marketing slime... by strider44 · · Score: 1

      I have no qualm with them giving linux better hardware, as long as they give speed results as well. Then again, they'll probably test how fast the OS' cooperate with Windows instead of . . . umm . . . speed (*cough* veritest *cough*)

    48. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do it by inclusion? Let's just eliminate everyone but the nerds!

    49. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If one does buy the farm through some freak catastrophy, you're not the one who's fsck'ed -- the vendor and/or your insurance company is"

      Right, and when I miss my deadline because of the server being down and the time to market gets pushed back, then I am the one fucked.

    50. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and then you use both of them to balance your checkbook.

    51. Re:Marketing slime... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2, Informative

      some quick braging:

      our EDC over 1000 servers not huge but still large:
      Windows uptime 98.65%
      Unix uptime 99.998%
      Linux portion of Unix uptime 100%

      of course now that I'm braging about it something is going to crash. 18moths of over 75 Linux servers running several diffrent applications like tomcat, websphear, Oracle, plust several diffrent specialized apps. And now we get to add another 75 in the next 3 months.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    52. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Advertising Standards Authority. United Kingdom Reading Dear ASA, We have been doing so since 1975. Signed your chums, Marketing Dept., Microsoft UK

    53. Re:Marketing slime... by Epistax · · Score: 1

      You're right. They don't have to say anything. Just the same I don't have to respond to your message in an intelligent manner, but I will anyway. Call it a moral obligation or simply a courtesy, but whenin any form it is ignored, I get angry. Advertising to mislead is certainly not very nice, however legal it might be in the US.

    54. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      If you killed all the lawyers, who'd be there to protect your interests from all the freakin' jerks suing you

      The lawyers are the freakin' jerks suing you.

    55. Re:Marketing slime... by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
      I didn't bother checking, but most advertising boards are self-regulating groups that actually have zero real authority.
      I was wondering that. What kind of penalty will be/can be enforced on them for this? Or is this just one of those, "We just want to officially state for the record that you are a big poop head and did a no-no." things?
      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    56. Re:Marketing slime... by cavemanf16 · · Score: 1

      ROFL! Wow, my little off-the-cuff semi-funny comment really generated plenty of animosity. I am really impressed with the amount of real-world, well thought out responses and examples of reasons why we would all be better off without lawyers, period.

      And no, lawyers don't go around suing people for the fun of it, or to make people rich ALL OF THE TIME. They represent you in a court of law, where the wording and minute "legalese" of every little thing escapes people like me. You think your precious mp3 p2p downloading is safe from big corporations without lawyers? You think you can adequately represent yourself in court against someone who has studied the law for many years and knows how to rip apart every one of your arguments or statements, no matter how "solid" you think they are? Good luck! You're gonna need it!

      Yes, it's true, lawyers like all the rest of us are big fat failures and make mistakes, sometimes even intentionally being malicious, but they're not all bad and out to do everyone harm. If they were, then being a "lawyer" would be considered illegal and absolutely no one would want them around. You super-anarchist types make me cringe with your lack of logical thought.

    57. Re:Marketing slime... by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      the people, who by all reckoning, are charged with understanding the law in the first place..

      Do you understand the tax code? What about negligence in a tort action? Or can you explain to me why the computer you own is "yours" (and no, paying for it does not make it yours e.g., if the person that sold it to you stole it). I'm guessing the answer is no, you don't. Lawyers are like mechanics. Sure, everyone could spend all their time learning how to fix their car, but then they wouldn't spend time doing other things that make them productive. Instead, lawyers spend the time, energy,and money to figure out the law so you can sit at your desk and program whatever it is you program (or manage, or whatever).

      The purpose of law is to create equality.

      Eh, the general purpose is more to provide remedies to those that have been wronged and to deter those that do wrong, but true that it is supposed to serve these functions equally among all.

      The purpose of lawyers is to create priveledge for rich people.

      Which is why no lawyers do pro bono work, right? What about the EFF's lawyers? Are they doing it for the rich?

      In criminal cases, the interest of freedom should be representated by an independant counter-prosector. The defendant should speak for himself or not as he chooses. But every defendant should have the same counter-prosecutor.

      Truthfully, I don't even understand this. Are you making the case for the appointment of a public defender? As for defendant's representing themself, that's silly. He may say things he does not need to say, be confused or not remember clearly, making him look more guilty than he is, or he may just not be a good speaker. I mean, who is a jury more likely to believe or sympathize with: "Yo' Honah, I didn' dewit. I wuz at muh friend's haas" or "No, your Honor, I did not commit the crime in question, and I have an alibi." Sam statement, bu the latter is more sympathetic and believeable.

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    58. Re:Marketing slime... by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Moral obligation? What is that? Where does it state that a company has to be nice to you? They just have to follow the law. Realize this, 'moral obligation' does not drive the bottom line for industries. To expect companies to behave in a moral and courteous manner is naive. They are not going to - this is not limited to MS.
      Advertising to mislead is actually against the law, however, companies tread a very fine line. They do plenty of research (this is one of the reasons why marketing is so expensive) into their advertisements. They will exaggerate, lie, mislead and do whatever it takes to get you to buy their product, however, they will do it in such a method that when you try and sue them they will be able to put a lot of spin on it to make them seem innocent.
      When you hear statements like "9 out of 10 doctors recommend our product", you gotta wonder, which group of 10 did they utilize? They might have had 20 groups of 10, and when 9 members in a group agreed that the product worked well you get things like "9 out of 10". Forget the fact that they other 190 doctors hated the product...
      You don't have to like it, I sure don't, but you have to accept that it is reality and you have to do your research when buying your product. The alternative is to be a politician and come up with a solution that others have not found.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    59. Re:Marketing slime... by Anthony+Boyd · · Score: 1
      Marketing is not the same as advertising. In fact, the most important functions of marketing are not from the company to the customer, but the other way around. A good marketing department listens to the market or the customer, determines what the market or customer needs, and helps orient production within the company to produce products that meet some identified need.

      No. Marketing is advertising. What you describe is Product Marketing, typically a very technical department populated by PMMs (Product Marketing Managers). PMMs do not work for the Marketing department.

      I think advertising might not end up under marketing. To me it seems that advertising, as communication from the company to the market/customer, belongs more with sales than with marketing.

      Then you are not representative of the norm for most companies.

    60. Re:Marketing slime... by jayp00001 · · Score: 1

      Actually it reduces hardware and infrastructure costs. It actually increases maintanance costs by 1 system. This may be a fair tradeoff

    61. Re:Marketing slime... by LifesABeach · · Score: 0

      Those dirty fatherless children in marketing. So, ummmmmm, marketing runs microsoft?

    62. Re:Marketing slime... by akadruid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Lawyers are like mechanics

      (Not all mechanics are weasels)

      A lawyer will not be like a mechanic until:
      - You require a mechanic to do anything with car, including opening the door and driving it.
      - It takes 3 months of study to understand opening a bonnet/hood.
      - Your mechanic bills you for answering the phone, taking a tea break, and billing you.
      - Your take a car with a flat tyre to garage, and pay the same regardless of whether the tyre is successfully changed.
      - Anyone born into the right family is automatically assured a life of ease and wealth as they attend mechanic school for many years and graduate into a position in a top garage which pays a salary that would support a small 3rd world country for 10 hours work per week.
      - I could go on.

      The point is not that there should be all lawyers be executed and everyone else spend 10 years learning how to be lawyers, but that lawyers should not be necessary. Laws should be clear, simple and brief - otherwise how can the general population be expected not to break them to start with? These are good laws:
      - No murder
      - No stealing
      - No copying anything written in the last 10 years
      Laws like that are easy to understand.

      --
      "Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." (attrib. Joseph Stalin)
    63. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, advertising is usually a task for marketing. The reason is as follows. The two major areas are sales and marketing. They might be separate functions (each has a VP) or sales might work for marketing. You have to put advertising under one of their controls.

      But you typically don't want salespeople writing ads. Marketing is more about strategy and sales is more about tactics. Salespeople are typically motivated by profit/commission and that alone. Marketers are usually concerned with the higher level goals.

      The two absolutely need to work together, but I would keep advertising (and maybe sales) working for marketing.

    64. Re:Marketing slime... by Epistax · · Score: 1

      Where does it state that a company has to be nice to you?
      You are completely missing the point of the concept of being nice. If you have to do it, it's no longer being nice, it's abiding by the rules/laws.

      Advertising to mislead isn't illegal in the united states because part of it is that what you are saying is true (after a fashion). What you are implying is not. This is not tolerated as much in the EU and I really wish we'd get more strict about it.

      Anyway you're trying to argue the same point that I have, just through a different means.

    65. Re:Marketing slime... by joggle · · Score: 1
      Public defenders are not 'counter-prosecutors'. Prosecutors always have more experience and are paid better than public defenders. Prosecutors (as well as judges) also have the ability to coerce people into pleading guilty using threats of extreme punishment if the case goes to trial. The public defender has no tool to counter this (nor any desire since they are encouraged to keep cases from going to trial).

      Ever heard of the 'plea-bargaining system'. It's the system where the great majority of people plea-bargain, ie, plead guilty to lesser charges so that they can get out of jail quickly and avoid severe punishment. For people who are truly guilty, they generally get punished less than they would if the case went to trial. For the innocent, they get punished for a crime they didn't commit (while the guilty person gets off scot free of course) and, if it's a felony, will have difficulty getting another job and will lose some of their Constitutional rights (such as voting). BTW, this is the system in place currently in the US.

    66. Re:Marketing slime... by xmod2 · · Score: 1

      Just please don't harm the telephone cleaners.

    67. Re:Marketing slime... by Zangief · · Score: 1

      Most politicians are lawyers.

    68. Re:Marketing slime... by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Anyway you're trying to argue the same point that I have, just through a different means.
      Isn't it always the case? I do agree with you, it would be nice to see these companies do the "right" thing. The problem is that the information is so subjective - it all depends how you view it. That is why I make fun of advertisements, and I don't believe half of what they say - no matter how benign it seems.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    69. Re:Marketing slime... by SoTuA · · Score: 2, Insightful
      No murder

      So, how is it different when gang-bangers blast off each other and you shooting an intruder in your own home? Maybe we should say "No murder, and by murder we mean...". What about self defense?

      One-liner laws would leave us either wide-open, or with a code strict as hammurabi's...

    70. Re:Marketing slime... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The fact that I cannot understand the tax code - for example - if my wife were from Mexico and we sent support to her family - that would be deductable, hoowever; she is from Kiev, and as such the support we provide is not deductable. I don't understand how that and the fourteenth amendment can exist inside the same legal system.
      - Is no reason to justify making the rest of my life incomprehensible.

      Law = equality.
      Law is the alternative to the rule of Kings, tyrants, dictators, overlords, knights, fiefs, sherrifs, priests, prophets, judges, and in so many words - "men".

      "men" tend to favor some at the expense of others and use the capricious and arbitrary natuure of ruling by continuim - or in short "making up the rules as they go."

      Law - on the other hand is the idea that the rules are written in the language of the people and they are only held to answer for rules which are published prior to the actions taken. It is in a word - intended to make every person an equal.

      Lawyers - as a practice - enable a government to create overly complicated rules - which in the end eroode the purpose of the law - which is that people are entitled to be informed of the rules before being held to answer for their failure to keep them.

      Lawyers inform only the people who can afford their service, and they defend (generally) those in porportion to their ability to pay. One reason we watch celebrity justice is because we know that with enough money, the guilty rich will be treated better than the innocent poor.

      So in the final analysis, the lawyers role in the justice system is to improve the odds that poor black men will be put to death for crimes committed by rich white guys.

      Kind of like punishing the dog if someone farts.

      Until the system treats rich and poor, black and white "exactly and precisely" the same - it is more accurate to say that the legal system is an institution for upholding classism than to point to the rare and elegant exceptions - such as thurgood marshall and a few pro-bono cases - and say that it is otherwise.

      I'm not opposed to lawyers assisting their clients - but I am very much opposed to a legal system which is built for the benefit of lawyers and treats them as a priveledged class. Lawyers should be treated like interpreters - there for that purpose, but otherwise ignored.

      The Counter-prosecuter. It is a public defender, but not a personal defender. The counter-prosecutor would be elected and approved by the legislator, and would be made up of constitutional types like the ACLU who would argue in every case for the Constitution.

      "The people" he might say "Have a vested interest in protecting the right of free speech - in this case, the prosecutor has arrested a man for walking on a flag - but the Constitution intends to protect the act of opposing government - even when it is distasteful and unpopular - I recommend the court dismiss this case as protected speech etc . . . "

      Or as in your example "Your honor, the defendant has a verified alabi, and it is not in the interest of justice for us to put a man to death when there is any lingering doubt as to his guilt - if we do, there will come a day when we are wrong, and the result will be a declining willingness to punish criminals."

      As it is - we the public rely to heavily on a few rich people to excersize the rights in the Constitution.

      AIK

    71. Re:Marketing slime... by CaptainZapp · · Score: 2, Funny
      Your * comment reminds me somewhat of the angle that MAD magazine used to employ. Sort of like:

      WINDOWS

      really sucks, but if you need an operating system for grown ups then GNU/Linux

      IS REALLY GREAT AND

      as opposed to this proprietary redmond crap

      SAVES YOU A SHITLOAD OF MONEY

      Sigh, I miss Don Martin...

      --
      ich bin der musikant

      mit taschenrechner in der hand

      kraftwerk

    72. Re:Marketing slime... by frAme57 · · Score: 1
      I agree; I hate it when anyone tries to sell me something by using obvious doublespeak, obfuscation or exaggerations that border on lies. But we must remember that no company is under any moral obligation to anyone.

      Corporations have one overarching purpose and obligation: to increase share value. Any and all actions taken by a company must be examined in terms of what specific or intangible effects they will have on the share price; and that effect determines whether or not the action will be taken. Some call that immoral, some call it amoral - some even call it moral. I just call it the way business is done now.

      While idea this may not be literally true in every case, it is close enough to help make sense of many things that go on in the business world. And it helps me remember that that things that I care about, (truth in advertising, quality of a product, customer service, etc) are the last things that a company's mangers care about.

      I'm not really as bitter as that sounds - it just makes me more careful in how I spend money.

      --
      "In a hierarchy every employee will rise to his level of incompetence". The Peter Principle
    73. Re:Marketing slime... by Dravik · · Score: 1

      Your now getting into the difference between murder and killing. Murder is wrong. The question is, when you killed the intruder was it murder?

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    74. Re:Marketing slime... by mormop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The UK system is still pretty sucky. MS probably knew that they'd get nailed for their "independant research" but even if they get fined it means little to them as the meme has already been sown.

      The same technique was used by the conservative government against Labour councils in the 80's and is also used by the current labour mob who will arrange for their friends in the media to carry out character assassinations on their critics safe in the knowledge that by the time an independant body has reviewed the facts and ruled the original article to be a lie everyone's already soaked it up. When a retraction is printed it normally occupies about 1/2 a column inch and as it's not news anymore, no-one cares anyway.

      What should happen now is MS should be required to take out an advert of the same size as the original in all publications concerned along the lines of:

      WE LIED!! Yes folks it's true. We bullshitted the lot of you with a bogus piece of research that we paid a friendly (although not tieable to us) company to make up. What's more, now you know we're willing to buy biased reports to fool you into buying our products you can take it as a sign that we actually have little faith their superiority because lets face it, if they were that great we'd be selling them on their merits not treating you like the idiots we think you are (Newham?). Microsoft - Because you're too stupid to work it out for yourself!

      Same goes for the press when they print false or exaggerated information on people. The trouble is that those with the wealth and power to do anything about it are those who benefit.

      --
      Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    75. Re:Marketing slime... by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      Law is the alternative to the rule of Kings...

      Actually, US law, and all common law jurisdictions (as opposed to civil law) is derived from the law of the English King. Look up Matthew Hale if you're not inclined to believe wikipedia.

      Is no reason to justify making the rest of my life incomprehensible

      But that is exactly why the law is so complex: because life is. Here's an example: Let's say there is a statute that says "No vehicles in the park," and it was enacted 50 years ago. Very few people drive cars or airplanes through the park, so it's not really a big deal and the statute has never been challenged. Now let's say that someone on a bycycle runs over a pedestrian in the park? Vehicle? Well, probably not. Why was the statute enacted? To protect the quality of the grass and park in general? Well then a bike is fairly unobtrusive, so a bicycle is allowed. Or was the statute enacted to protect pedestrians in the park? If that is the case, and this guy just got bowled over, can he point to the statute and say "this guy did something forbidden!"?

      So the bike is sort of ambiguous, but probably would not be considered a "vehicle" per se. But what about a motorized scooter the kids use today? What about a Segway?

      Life is complicated and full of exceptions. Add on top of that that people feel differently. A majority of Texans may feel that carrying a gun in public is ok, so in Texas it's ok. A majority of Virginians may disagree, so it's not ok in VA. Now that's all fine and well for states and "the people" can understand the law where they are from. But how does this come into play when the nation chooses one way or the other? How do the Federal and the States resolve their different "feelings" about how the people should live and act? The law is complicated because life is.

      Lawyers - as a practice - enable a government to create overly complicated rules

      As I said, it's life that is complicated. You may say "anyone that runs over another in the park not only committed a tort of battery, but they should be fined for violating the statute." The guy that did the running over may agree that he committed a battery (or may not), but he will certainly contest that he violated the statute. You disagree, depsite the fact that the statute is in the language of the people.

      such as thurgood marshall and a few pro-bono cases

      A little factoid: It's not a few pro bono cases. Many states have policies encouraging/requiring lawyers to perform a certain amount of of pro bono work. Looking at the chart, many of them are 50 hrs. That's over a week of work that you do for free! In the big scheme is that a lot to ask of one person? No. But how many jobs do you know of that ask that of its employees? And to do it every year? That adds up to a lot of pro bono cases, per lawyer.

      Please provide the experiences you've had with lawyers. I work with them everyday and they really are not the bottom feeders everyone on /. makes them out to be. Yes there are bad apples. But there are bad doctors, bad programmers, and bad librarians, too, yet they are villified.

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    76. Re:Marketing slime... by Phragmen-Lindelof · · Score: 1

      Come on, use your real name Stef?

      oreilly.com: Stef, what's it like working with a bunch of geeks who don't appreciate the importance of marketing?
      Stef: Remember the last time you had a hemorrhoidal flare-up? Same experience.

    77. Re:Marketing slime... by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1

      And that's why laws are complicated. Because life/human interaction is.

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    78. Re:Marketing slime... by Nplugd · · Score: 1
      You know, we should try not to forget that politicians are also people in the 1st place. If you're not happy with what they're doing, and there's noone you'd feel like voting for, you might wanna considere getting in the game yourself.
      Of course, there'd be a point in doing that provided that :
      • you live in a democracy
      • this democracy is not bloated yet with various form of corruption (and no, I'm not thinking of some small African republic when I say that).
      --
      Je n'ai pas d'avenir Je n'ai qu'un destin Celui de n'être qu'un souvenir C'est pour demain
    79. Re:Marketing slime... by lrwx · · Score: 0

      We could compare Linux running on a WRT54G versus ... OpenWRT is a better solution. They've moved their web site to openwrt.org .

      --
      KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!!
    80. Re:Marketing slime... by Anna+Merikin · · Score: 2, Insightful



      With due respect, I believe ypou make the same error here as Socrates did in estimating the characters of himself and others -- namely projection.

      Socrates was known for believing that everyone would do the right if s/he only knew what it was.

      As Anna Freud pointed out, the two major escapes from reality are projection (everyone is just like me) and identification (I am just like everyone else.)

      The truth is, for every ten youths who see Star Wars, at least one will want to be Darth Vader and do as much evil as possible.

      And several others will not care a whit either way.

      I suspect the more of these types a society has, the more lawyers it needs.

    81. Re:Marketing slime... by Halo- · · Score: 1
      I'm a fan of big iron, but any time you concentrate value, you concentrate risk.

      If a small accident knocks out a PC, the replacement cost is small. If the same accident knocks out your mainframe, you're looking at big bucks to replace/repair it. DR is an afterthought. I'm talking about how much it costs to fix when something goes wrong.

      People serious enough to have DR plans which might actually work are not exactly the norm. Think about your local municipal government, a small college, or medium sized factory.

      To address your haven't done much enterprise-level computing. remark:

      I've worked on some fairly heavy-duty financial networks. Geographically redundant, EMC boxes in the middle, and regular failover drills.

      And I've still seen customers get bitten.

      The truth is that a lot of people don't really know how to properly do DR. I was talking to an EMC guy this weekend and he was lamenting that it was so hard to get customers to not do a failover drill by first quiescing the system and stopping processes.

    82. Re:Marketing slime... by Halo- · · Score: 1
      Hey, I agree, but remember there is a mid-range too.

      A decent-sized p/Series box is between 20-100K, and a lot of smaller places (think libraries, mid-sized offices, etc) use them. They might spring for tape drives, and might even periodically check the tapes for errors, but I doubt they are going to invest in redundant hardware.

      When it goes down, maybe they have insurance or an SLA, but that doesn't keep them from not being able to do anything until a replacement arrives. If they have a bunch of smaller machines, maybe accounting is down, but the replacement time is quicker, and the impact is less.

      And yes, any one who relies on a multi-million dollar piece of equipment to run their business and doesn't have redundancy, insurance, and service contracts, deserves exactly whatever happens to them. :)

    83. Re:Marketing slime... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      In Reverse Order,

      Experiences.
      Right now I'm defending myself after being arrested for picking up litter.

      Our state, like most counts Street Spam as illegal litter, but the local sheriff - who won his election on $10,000 worth of street spam thinks otherwise - so he arrested my on a law from 2 centuries ago - knowing its litter, but hoping i would plead out rather than pony up for a lawyer or risk a half year in jail for picking up litter.

      Local DA has 600 cases per session, and only ever gets to the cases that plead.

      - Pro Bono - I like the idea of service taxes. I think we should all contribute to this country in work rather than money because work cannot be expatriated like jobs and money.

      Are you suggesting in that one week, we have reversed the state of affairs in which the rich get a different level of justice than the poor? That's great news - i hadn't realized. Be sure the minorities released from death row on the basis of DNA tests know that we've fixed the system.

      Doctors don't make medicine more expensive (Lawyers do)
      Librarians don't make books more expensive.
      Programmers don't make software more expensive - they make it more available.
      Lawyers do not make justiice more available - they make it more elite - less abailable, more expensive, and more likely to produce positive outcome for rich clients.

      Life is complicated.
      OK - and we have a great country because we have a bteer system of justice than the rest of the world - if you're a lawyer and you're looking for cudos - that's it. That said, The justice system is good, the lawyers are the least good part, and the role of lawyers is to tilt the table for the rich - that should be criticised.

      "Vehicles in the park"
      easy: adopt a legal dictionary - use it when you write the law, and use the same one when you interpret it. If there is a disagreement about the definition of bike - you give the benefit of the doubt to the non-moving party.

      Derived from the "Law of the Kings"

      That's right - there is a difference between the "Rule" of law, and the "Rule" of a person, be it a king, czar, priest. If the King decides to adopt a system of "law" this is an excellent choice. But Laws predate the English King. Presumably they predate the Ten Commandments since Moses didn't need to explain the meaning to the jews. A Rigid system of law is fair, which the rule of a king, absent such a system is capricious. Laws can exists in combination with Presidents, kings, directors, the question really is which of the two prevail in a conflict. If the King can render a unique judgement in a given case, than the law is merely a decoration of monarchy, but if the king is prevented by the law, or more important, if the army is likely to consult the law before carrying out an order, then we have the rule of law. In practice, most systems of law are executed as systems of human authority with checks and balances.

      AIK

    84. Re:Marketing slime... by tandr · · Score: 1

      Akadruid for President!

      (now if you will do same with taxes, your second term is written is stone already)

    85. Re:Marketing slime... by pknoll · · Score: 1
      I'm a fan of big iron, but any time you concentrate value, you concentrate risk.

      Agreed, which is why you must take reasonable precaution. "Reasonable" gets bigger and more expensive the more you concentrate on a mainframe, cluster, or LPAR frame.

      I've worked on some fairly heavy-duty financial networks. Geographically redundant, EMC boxes in the middle, and regular failover drills.
      And I've still seen customers get bitten.

      Fair enough. I've seen them get bitten, too, but only when they don't listen to suggestions as to how to improve their redundancy, failover/cluster/HA, and/or DR plans (and test them). They can be as protected as they like from risks that vary from common to incredibly unlikely, it just costs more. =)

      My main objection to your previous post was that the risk you illustrated wasn't very likely, if one took reasonable precaution to protect the machine.

    86. Re:Marketing slime... by SoTuA · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What? Why do we need two different words for ending a human life? hmmm... maybe because human interactions are too complex to be regulated by one-liner laws?

      That's why we need precisely defined "murder". Extrapolating from here to all matters that need to be regulated in society, the need for lawyers arises: laws that are precise enough are too big and complex for anybody to just go to court after a fast scan of the pertinent code of laws. I don't expect to be able to fix my TV after a fast scan of a service manual, nor do I expect my boss to be able to jump in and understand my Java/Perl/Whatever code after skimming "Java/Perl/Whatever in a nutshell".

      Of course, ambulance chasers/frivolous lawsuit specialists are another matter entirely... people who look to find the slightest loophole in the fabric of law that can be exploited for personal gain (hmmm, that sounds like an analogy for blackhats :)

    87. Re:Marketing slime... by RetroGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most politicians are lawyers.

      And there lies the problem.

      Lawyers have no sense of right or wrong (at least not in the traditional sense).

      If the laywer wins in court, he is right. If the lawyer loses in court he is wrong. That is all that matters.

      And then we elect these people.

      They do what they want. If they are not found out, they are right. If they are found out, well, there is always the NEXT election, where they lie and promise their way into power.

      I guess this turned into a rant....

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    88. Re:Marketing slime... by Rudisaurus · · Score: 1
      The UK's ASA is a government sponsored body that has the power to levy fines and issue orders that specific advertisements not be used in future.
      "Damn, Bill -- we're on the hook for another £500. Yeah, they caught us fluffing the numbers again!"
      --
      licet differant, aequabitur
    89. Re:Marketing slime... by Stripe7 · · Score: 1

      I am not surprised that M$ would something like this. M$ has proved time and again that they are no longer an innovative software company. Their marketing pukes reflect this, they have no concept of the internet and its ability to dispel FUD with actual facts. They have yet to realize that all the FUD they come up with comes back at them negatively within hours not days. If they actually spend all those $$$ dumped into FUD campaigns into R&D they would do a lot better.

    90. Re:Marketing slime... by panaceaa · · Score: 1

      You should take a class in marketing. I did, and I learned that the grandparent post is exactly correct. I realized that the company I work for, a Fortune-500 software company, is organized exactly the way he imagines. But we're not alone. P&G is organized the same way.

      Unfortunately "Marketing" is a dirty word because so many people equate it with advertising. But any business person that still has that mental connection is living in the 1970s with a production mentality. Things have changed.

    91. Re:Marketing slime... by WNight · · Score: 1

      If the law wasn't written by lawyers it wouldn't be that hard to understand.

      Perhaps it should be the duty of a government to write laws that its citizens can understand. If the law can't be understood by a majority (90% maybe?) of free-school graduates (at whatever level the government stops paying the whole bill) then it should be simplified or the schools should improve and potentially the age of consent should be changed to reflect that we don't think people are capable of understanding the laws which govern them without twenty years of schooling.

      It takes a truly stupid person to say "ignorance is the law is no excuse" with a straight face, when the law is written in such a way that arguably *nobody* understands it fully.

    92. Re:Marketing slime... by WNight · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Quite right, but hundreds of thousands of words don't suddenly create clarity either.

      Laws need to be complex enough to deal with all the variables, yet simple enough to understand.

      Perhaps what we could do is have a policy of removing as many laws as possible, or consolidating them. Everyone has seen to silly examples of laws from the early 1900s, like it being illegal to put ice-cream in your pockets, or put a donkey in a bathtub. I'm sure there was a purpose for these at one time or another, but surely they could have either been dropped by now, or rolled into larger laws.

      If donkeys break their legs in bathtubs it's probably worth rolling into an animal cruelty law. We don't need to list every possibility for harm, just as theft laws don't have to list every type of car that you can't steal.

      If you've got six laws banning various automatic rifles, perhaps you could consolidate that into one law which bans a wider range?

      It's also possible to start with "Don't kill anyone (see section 1 for exceptions)". That way people know that by default, killing someone is against the law. They then look in section 1 and it says "Exceptions fall into two areas, 1) the person is threatening you or your property (see section 1.1 for details) or 2) they are a fugitive (see section 3.2) and you're a legally appointed police officer (4.1), prison guard (4.2), or bounty hunter (4.3)."

      That way you partition off the legal mumbo jumbo. It's there if needed, but organized that you can probably go a minimum number of levels and have an absolute answer. Laws these days seem to be written backwards, with the basic rules hidden in paragraphs of exceptions and definitions.

    93. Re:Marketing slime... by jdhutchins · · Score: 1

      No one forces you to agree to a plea bargin. If you're innocent, go to trial and defend yourself. If you're guilty, it provides an oppertunity to save everyone some trouble, and show that you may be willing to reform yourself.

    94. Re:Marketing slime... by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      A few small points (bummer about the litter. I too have seen the unfun side of local "justice," so I do feel for you. really.)

      Local DA has 600 cases per session, and only ever gets to the cases that plead

      Sounds like you need more lawyers. ;-)

      Be sure the minorities released from death row on the basis of DNA tests know that we've fixed the system.

      No, it isn't fixed, and it never will be because humans and juries make mistakes. But those that have been freed, see it working. They aren't dead and that's an improvement. We're getting there.

      Doctors don't make medicine more expensive (Lawyers do)

      Bull, bull, bull, bull. I hate this argument. "It's the lawyers fault that insurance premiums are so high." Like lawyers filled this vaccuum of malpractice litigation that never would have happened without them. Bull. Here's how a malpractice case goes down:
      A) Doctor FUCKS UP. Maybe a little, maybe a lot. And when it is a lot...
      B) Patient's life is made harder. Maybe a little, Maybe a lot. Like the doctor leaves a 13" piece of metal in the guy's stomach, it casuses necrosis, and the guy has a gaping hole in his belly.(can't find a link but it was on dateline or something once)
      C) Lawyer steps in to help the guy with the hole in his stomach since, by your own assertion, the doctor is rich and already has a great lawyer. Now I'm not naive. There are plenty of lawyers that would chomp at he bit because of the settlement this guy would get, and the lawyer takes a part of it. But if the rich doctor/insurance company has a great lawyer, should the guy who has a hole in his stomach??

      But malpractice is one of the most severe screw ups a person can have done to them. A friend of mine who works in the insurance industry was appalled that a woman at a Red Sox game sued after being hit in the face with a ball goin over a 100 miles an hour. She says she would have sat somewhere different if she had know about the dangers. Whether you believe her or not, or think the court decided correctly (for Fenway Park), the point is she got hit in the FACE with a baseball going 100 mph and is now PERMANENTLY DISFIGURED. She had 1.07 seconds to react after the foul ball came off the bat. At least let her tell her side of the story.

      Sorry, but this mantra that malpractice suits are all lawyers' faults is one of my big buttons because you can't have one without a doctor that messed up and a patient willing to sue.

      Programmers don't make software more expensive - they make it more available

      When I was a software engineer, my company charged a pretty decent hourly rate for me to cover my salary. The number one expense when determining software price is the salary you had to pay to create it. It ain't the packaging or the media.

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    95. Re:Marketing slime... by WaterBottle · · Score: 1

      What's your definition of uptime? Or do you not patch your Linux servers? Is this Service Uptime or Server Uptime? Just curious.

    96. Re:Marketing slime... by killjoe · · Score: 1

      When 9/11 hit many financial institutions got back to work in less then a day. You know why? It's because they didn't trust their mission critical infrastructure to PC grade hardware running windows that's why.

      P.S order for VMS went up dramatically after 9/11, that ought to tell you something.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    97. Re:Marketing slime... by joggle · · Score: 1

      They can't force you, but a judge can make statements like "If this goes to trial and you're found guilty, I will recommend maximum punishment." Also, if the person can't afford bail they have to wait in jail for months before the trial whereas they can get out the next day (or so they're told) if they take the plea-bargain, little realizing that they will have to pay relatively large fees (most people in this situation are very poor) on probation for a substantial amount of time. And a poor, uneducated person simply has virtually no chance in defending themselves in court. And when paired with a unmotivated public defender has little chance of victory, regardless of innocence or guilt unless there's a substantial amount of evidence proving their innocence, the complete opposite of the way it should be.

    98. Re:Marketing slime... by Spoing · · Score: 1
      1. What's your definition of uptime? Or do you not patch your Linux servers? Is this Service Uptime or Server Uptime? Just curious.

      I can't speak for ArsonSmith, though if you carefully seperate the servers from each other at the router/vlan, you have limited services running and properly tuned, security is not as much of an issue.

      If these systems are exposed to areas that can not be completely trusted, the need to patch them is increased. That said, I tend to trust nothing and update to cover known security defects very very often (on a test server first).

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    99. Re:Marketing slime... by sjames · · Score: 1

      But we must remember that no company is under any moral obligation to anyone.

      How so? Moral and ethical obligations don't go away just because you incorporate. They apply to everyone singly and collectively.

      I agree that many companies (not all by any means) behave as if your statement is true.

    100. Re:Marketing slime... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "The point is not that there should be all lawyers be executed and everyone else spend 10 years learning how to be lawyers, but that lawyers should not be necessary. Laws should be clear, simple and brief - otherwise how can the general population be expected not to break them to start with?"

      I remember reading an account by someone living in.. ummm what is variously called 'the holy land', 'palestine', and 'israel' at around the time of Christ.

      His comment was that the Law (referring to the Jewish Tora law) was so complex that its only concievable purpose was the employment it provided; people had to visit (and pay) a specialist just to figure out if it was Lawful to open a bakery nextdoor to a laundry (my example).

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    101. Re:Marketing slime... by sjames · · Score: 1

      IBM's Mainframe Linux PR is mostly aimed at existing mainframe customers. That's because even IBM can't cost-justify it against PC hardware or even larger UNIX boxes.

      That's true for the most part. The mainframe running many virtual Linux boxes will likely be more expensive than having that many Linux servers UNLESS you have a situation where downtime is very expensive AND your application doesn't adapt well to a failover arrangement.

      Naturally, if you already have the mainframe for those reasons, it will be much cheaper to use it's extra capacity to run a few virtual Linux servers while you're at it.

    102. Re:Marketing slime... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 1

      "Marketers know what they are doing, and after they are done it goes through the legal department for checks and balances."

      I wonder how they were found guilty then...

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    103. Re:Marketing slime... by akadruid · · Score: 1

      "One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?"
      "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." Mark 12 28-31 (NIV)

      The difficult bit is enforcing them.

      --
      "Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." (attrib. Joseph Stalin)
    104. Re:Marketing slime... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "The difficult bit is enforcing them."

      Since Jesus exhorts us to love, isn't this why we have 'hate crimes'?

      :-/

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    105. Re:Marketing slime... by dcam · · Score: 1

      I come from a family that has two lawyers in it, so I may be a little biased.

      I consider lawyers to be indispensible transalators. That is, you bring two groups of people together who are essentially speaking different languages and the lawyers translate for them. Even writing legal documents falls under this definition, they are translating for future generations.

      Being a translator is open for abuse, as you don't speak the language, but that does not mean that the role of translator is invalid, or that all translators abuse that role.

      And before you get angry about why the law is so complicated that it needs translators, consider how difficult standards of communication between different IT systems are. In IT terms lawyers are middleware.

      --
      meh
    106. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The basis for the feelings that "everyone is just like me" and "I am just like everyone else" is called empathy and is a fondamental part of human nature.

      Empathy is hardly an escape from reality, it is the basis of human(e) reality.

      Socrates reasoned that his fellows Greeks were humans like himself, and tried to understand them and their nature accordingly.

      I don't know who is Anna Freud (the daughter or great-daughter or Sigmund ?) and I don't care much to know.

    107. Re:Marketing slime... by Fallen_Knight · · Score: 1

      1 liners are bad, but 100 page laws are alwso bad.

      laws as they stand are to complex. i'ml sure the parent was exagerateing with the 1 liner but you get the idea.

      something like murder could be easily and complety defined within a paragraph and then posted on the web for all to look up and UNDERSTAND, no lawyer lingo, no "interprete the law exactly as its worded"

    108. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > it will be much cheaper to use it's extra capacity to run a few virtual Linux servers while you're at it.

      Nope -- on mainframes, you pay annually for capacity. The goal of every mainframe manager is to run continually at 98% to keep costs down. If there's overhead available for Linux installs, something is very wrong.

      Just another reason frames are ridculously more expensive than other systems (and 10x is probably not out of whack. We're talking about systems where text editors cost 1000s per year).

    109. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about self defense?

      Self defense is not murder. If it were, there would be no need to call it "self defense". We'd just call it "murder".

      Simple definition (like those at, say, dictionary.com) are enough. We don't need:

      Murder in the first degree
      Murder in the second degree
      Murder in the 3rd degree
      Murder in the forth degree
      Manslaughter 1
      Manslaughter 2
      Manslaughter 3
      Manslaughter 4
      Homicide
      Wrongful death

      etc, etc, etc.

      Murder / Not murder. That's all it should be.

    110. Re:Marketing slime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that is exactly why the law is so complex: because life is. Here's an example: Let's say there is a statute that says "No vehicles in the park," and it was enacted 50 years ago. Very few people drive cars or airplanes through the park, so it's not really a big deal and the statute has never been challenged. Now let's say that someone on a bycycle runs over a pedestrian in the park? Vehicle? Well, probably not. Why was the statute enacted? To protect the quality of the grass and park in general? Well then a bike is fairly unobtrusive, so a bicycle is allowed. Or was the statute enacted to protect pedestrians in the park?

      Good question. The law should have the answer already in it.

      "A well maintained turf, being necessary to the enjoyment of a free park..."

      Oops, th slipped into Second Amandment mode there. But the point remains- the law should state it's goal. If it doesn't it should be rewritten.

      So the bike is sort of ambiguous, but probably would not be considered a "vehicle" per se. But what about a motorized scooter the kids use today? What about a Segway?

      Simple- do they meet the 'official' definition of a 'vehicle'? For instance, if we used dictionary.com as the 'official' source of definitions*, it says a vehicle is "A device or structure for transporting persons or things; a conveyance". So, YES, scooters and Segways are vehicles. So is a bike. Now, if you wanted to allow bikes, but not motorized vehicles, then you would have that spelled out in the original law.
      Again, it's very simple. And not a single lawyer needed!

      *Of course, we probably wouldnt' use that source. But you get my point.

    111. Re:Marketing slime... by sjames · · Score: 1

      Nope -- on mainframes, you pay annually for capacity. The goal of every mainframe manager is to run continually at 98% to keep costs down. If there's overhead available for Linux installs, something is very wrong.

      Naturally, but the capacity you pay for is grainy. if you're at 96%, but the next step down you can pay for would put you at 102% (that is, not enough), wouldn't you rather run a few extra linux servers rather than have idle cycles?

    112. Re:Marketing slime... by frAme57 · · Score: 1
      >> But we must remember that no company is under any moral obligation to anyone.

      How so? Moral and ethical obligations don't go away just because you incorporate. They apply to everyone singly and collectively.

      I'm not saying incorporation = carte blanche. The statement that you quote just reflects my belief that no qualities are inherent in any object, entity or idea. All qualities exist soley in the mind of observers of the object/entity/idea and only exist when some action is performed on or with the o/e/i. You do not need to agree with that belief, just understand that it exists in my head and affects how I see the world.

      So if we look at a basic definition of a corporation: A legal entity that has rights, privleges and responsibilities distinct from those of its members (yourdictionary.com), and subject it to my belief in projected - not inherent - qualities, we arrive at my statement.

      From there the next conclusion is that moral obligations of corporations can exist in other contexts; in the laws governing corporations, the founding documents of each corp. and in peoples' perception of corporations. But unless they are explicitly detailed in the law or a corporation's charter they do not, for all practical purposes, exist.

      I'm not saying that I think it's right. I think there are a lot of problems with the way business is done now. In fact, I even find the idea of a corporate death penalty intriguing. But what a company's responsibilites should be and how we can enact them is a topic for another day.

      --
      "In a hierarchy every employee will rise to his level of incompetence". The Peter Principle
    113. Re:Marketing slime... by frAme57 · · Score: 1
      Niel Bornstein also does a good job explaining it:

      The Corporate Death Penalty

      --
      "In a hierarchy every employee will rise to his level of incompetence". The Peter Principle
    114. Re:Marketing slime... by Aexia · · Score: 1

      Self defense is not murder. If it were, there would be no need to call it "self defense". We'd just call it "murder".

      So how do you distinguish self-defense from murder? If only there were some way to lay down guidelines...

      Murder / Not murder. That's all it should be.

      So you feel there's no need to distinguish between the following situations? Tell us then. Death penalty or should they be set free? Remember, there's nothing in between.

      A woman comes home to find her husband fucking her best friend. In a rage, she beats him with a heavy object. He ends up dying from the injuries though she didn't intend to kill him.

      A woman finds out her husband's cheating on her, goes out, buys a gun and several days later guns him down in cold blood.

      A woman finds out her husband's cheating on her, goes out, gets drunk and hits a pedestrian on her way home, killing him.

      A woman hires someone to kill her husband, who is cheating on her.

      A woman suffering from a brain cancer that's affecting her reasoning centers kills her husband who in her dementia she believes is cheating on her.

      Upset from finding out her husband is cheating on her, a woman accidently hits and kills a pedestrian with her car.

      A woman, upset that her husband is cheating on her, screws up at her job, resulting in the death of a co-worker.

      A woman screws up at her job, resulting in the death of a co-worker.

      A woman cuts corners on the job, resulting in death of a co-worker.

      A woman turns a blind-eye to a co-worker who's cutting corners, which results in the death of another co-worker.

      Murder or not murder. Either we blow her brains out or she's let go without punishment.

      It's a cliche but the world is not black and white. There are many shades of grey and that's why we have varying degrees of murder and manslaughter with accompanying penalties.

    115. Re:Marketing slime... by haruchai · · Score: 1

      We, the Linux fanboys, are impressed that you managed to remove your tongue from Bill Gates' asshole long enough to type 2 sentences.
      Thank you.
      Now, please go back to what you were doing; it's not nice to keep Mr. Gates waiting. After all, the world's wealthiest hypocrite can hardly be expected to wipe his own ass.
      And, rightly so, when he has so many willing sycophants.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    116. Re:Marketing slime... by Anna+Merikin · · Score: 1
      "The basis for the feelings that "everyone is just like me" and "I am just like everyone else" is called empathy and is a fondamental part of human nature."

      Um, in a most polite way, no. Empathy is a different beast. It is not generalized, it is specific. "If I were that person, how would I feel?" is an empathetic question. It is an escape when it becomes "That person must feel just like me -- anyone would!" or even "I would feel just like that person does -- whatever that feeling may be -- anyone would."

      The reality we are "escaping" from appears to be that each of us is unique in a unique world of our own perceptions. That may seem obvious, but it is often ignored.

      Socrates was, I think and believe, wrong when he "reasoned that his fellow Greeks were humans like himself. They were unique Greeks, each unlike him. That was exactly my point.

      It is historically generally recognized that Socrates rationalized his teaching by claiming that "each man would do the right if he only knew it" and reason, he taught, was the tool with which to determine the right.

      I dunno whether my namesake is Ziggy's daughter or granddaugther, and since neither of us cares, f'sck it...

      The original post was about Microsot's marketing, and my comment was about the prevalence of lawyers in societies that allow deceptive marketing.

      And your point is...?

    117. Re:Marketing slime... by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      But the point is is that to do what you are suggesting, make the exception that is, you have to revisit the law every time some new piece of technology comes out. Does a moped fit your definition? It can be used without engaging the motor. Therefore is it motorized? Assuming the law is "no motorized vehicles in the park" does that mean I can drive a footpedaled version of a Hum-V through the park? Hey, not motorized.

      To your point about well-maintained, well maintained by whose standards? Yours? Mine? A horticulturalist? Laws are just words and no amount of words will ever truly convey an idea. The best you can hope for is, like you said, try to establish some lexicon that all know and are aware of. But that lexicon must then be revised on a regular basis. And take into account all the nuances that we encounter as life progresses.

      You make it sound as if there is some magical simple solution when in reality there isn't. It's like a previous poster points out: "Thou shalt not kill" blooms into "Thou shalt not kill, except in self-defense and during self-defense you have a duty to retreat, unless you're in your own home, and even in those cases only if you have no clear path to an exit."

      A simple law is an unpredictable one. And if you don't have lawyers to write or interpret them, who's going to judge the facts against them?

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    118. Re:Marketing slime... by rastos1 · · Score: 1
      As the grand parent said: "No murder"

      If I catch an intruder in my own home, should I be free to kill him? Or should I try any other way beforehand? I can't imagine a situation when I'm _forced_ to kill him. But even if I am, it is up to judge to say what is the punishment.

    119. Re:Marketing slime... by sjames · · Score: 1

      It looks like what we have here is primarily a terminology confusion rather than substantially differing opinions.

      As a side note, I believe that ethics may in some sense be viewed as a sort of shorthand for sometimes difficult to codify rules whose general nature is to improve social interaction for the common benefit. In that sense, if it is not possible for a corporation to exhibit the quality of 'ethical', that is adhering to those only somewhat codifiable rules, then it necessarily does a harm to society. While it may in other ways present a benefit, it would have to be quite a benefit to offset that harm.

      The far greater harm is that our courts, and society as a whole to a great extent, have forgotten that unlike individuals, corporations have no specific 'right' to exist for their own sake. But it seems that here, I'm preaching to the choir.

    120. Re:Marketing slime... by SoTuA · · Score: 1
      That's exactly the problem.

      If the law isn't clear enough on WHAT IS murder, we are at the mercy of a subjective judgement, even more subjective than the current system.

      Imagine I shot an intruder, who was hopped to his ears on drugs and wanted to kill me, just because. Imagine that I get a jury of twelve people like you, that can't imagine a situation where I'd be forced to kill the intruder (*). If the law doesn't clearly define murder and/or self defense, the jury is going to convict me for murder (never mind the guy was going to kill me), because of what they THINK murder is. That's me going to jail for the same crime the drugged-up fuckhead who was trying to kill me would go in for. Now, if the law defines self-defense and/or excludes my act from the definition of murder, the jury is going to let me go, because the law says I had compelling reasons, even though all the jury thinks that I should not have killed the guy.

      OTOH, I might have executed him in cold blood AFTER I stopped him in my house, but a jury of "shoot first ask later" people would find me within my rights, and let me go, even though what I did was wrong, if the law wasn't precise enough to describe my act as wrong.

      (*) Meaning they don't see any justification to killing, no matter what.

      Laws to be understood by the layman are as utopian as computer science understood by the layman. You might study quite a bit on your own, but you usually can't compare the work of a self-taught amateur with work done by a trained pro.

    121. Re:Marketing slime... by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Because lawyers are not perfect and they do make mistakes. Lawyers are also not the judges, and while one lawyer may think that his answer is correct - the judge may disagree (or the opposing lawyer may have found a flaw in the logic).
      The law is subjective.
      Does that answer your question?

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    122. Re:Marketing slime... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 1

      "Does that answer your question?"

      No. The question was rhetorical. Microsoft is well known for playing dirty and this was just another example of that well documented behavior.

      --
      The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    123. Re:Marketing slime... by Anthony+Boyd · · Score: 1
      You should take a class in marketing.

      Yeah, you're right. I guess having a decade of real-world experience working in Marketing for 3 different companies makes me much less qualified to speak than someone who took a class.

    124. Re:Marketing slime... by rastos1 · · Score: 1
      1. I'm not a US citizen, but my understanding of US law is that the jury decides 'guilty or not' and judge decides whether you spend in jail lifetime (because you are a gang member) or a week (because you acted in self-defence).

      2. regardless of that, I find it frustrating ... hell absurd! ... that a regular citizen is not expected to understand the law. Just yesterday I saw news report about middle level state employee, that believed something to be within rights of his post, but the law said otherwise. He lost job and got punished. That can happen to anybody in any situation - because the law is so damn complicated. Another story was that someone is going to be dragged to court because he had 6 car-insurance agreements and claimed the damage in 6 insurence companies. Apparently 5 is fine. It is ridiculous. How can you live a life, when you have no idea for what you can land at court? Yeah. Right you can get a lowyer to tell you if you can do each step. Unless hiring a lawyer to do that, is ilegal.

    125. Re:Marketing slime... by SoTuA · · Score: 1
      1. I'm not a US citizen, but my understanding of US law is that the jury decides 'guilty or not' and judge decides whether you spend in jail lifetime (because you are a gang member) or a week (because you acted in self-defence).

      Yes, but the jury can find you guilty of breaking the law. If the law isn't precise enough, you could either walk or go to jail unfairly on the opinions of the jury. More precise laws limit the impact that the jury has on the outcome. Ditto the judge: he has a range of punishment that he can apply to a certain crime. If you don't specify, the judge can let the gang-banger walk a way or put the good guy in jail. How to avoid that? Specify what circumstances of "no murder" get wich penalty => we're back at having all very specified, "manslaughter, murder1..4, etc", but in the punishment section instead.

      Just yesterday I saw news report about middle level state employee, that believed something to be within rights of his post, but the law said otherwise. He lost job and got punished.

      Ignorance of the law is no excuse. If you allow it, the prosecutor has to prove the criminal DID KNOW it is against the law.

      FWIW, I'm not a US Citizen either, and IANAL, but IMAHL (I Married A Hot Lawyer :).

    126. Re:Marketing slime... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      The installations are bare minimal for the application, service are usually open to only two ports, ssh and the application. access is through a firewall. There have been no remote exploites so far in the few packages that are installed. The only thing that has been even a minor concern is a local privlage escilarion. the only people with shell access are limited to sysadmins, dbadmins, and application admins, usually less than 5 people who are all trusted with root access anyway. Some systems have no user access except through a web proxy server. Zero downtime of Linux I mean the boxes have not been rebooted, restarted, or inaccessable for even one second over the past year. Their applications on the other had have been stopped started updated etc with no impact to the underlining OS>

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    127. Re:Marketing slime... by strider44 · · Score: 1

      sorry for my complete ignorance.

      Anyways since I'm australian I just translate IRS into Tax Office. Those guys really aren't that bad when you get down to it, just they're evil for taking my money.

    128. Re:Marketing slime... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      Your claim is that Lawyers add value to the system by making it fair - the numbers however suggest that Lawyers add cost to the system by extracting far more money for themselves, than the value they add.

      I'm not suggesting that malpractice should be discouraged and addressed, but that system is best in which the doctor pays for his mistake, and the poor sap who is hurt receives a majority of the benefit - that is equity. When the lawyers involved walk away with most of the money - everyone loses.

      Lawyers could work for improvements in the effeciency of courts - the use of IM for example - rather than expensive court reporters - but the fact is the courts now have made little progress in productivity because effeciency means less percentage for the lawyers.

      That is my perspective.

      You seem to be a programmed gone lawyer - i'm not so far behind - representing myself in 2 criminal 2 civil and 1 patent application.

      I understand the hard work, the value of thought - the enterprising philosophy - but I also see the waste and lack of progress, and with repect to the criminal courts a lack of concern over the pre-trial detention caused by endless delays and a blatent refusal to address a motion.

      I also see judges ignoring the law, civil rights, and making the business of moving on to the next case ASAP a priority.

      Increase of production at the expense of quality is not progress - as a class, lawyers are overpaid and not compelled by market forces to compete - this is more tru of lawyers who become judges, and DA than private practice of course.

      AIK

    129. Re:Marketing slime... by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      When the lawyers involved walk away with most of the money - everyone loses.

      I don't buy that lawyers walk away with "most" of the money. There are definitely lawyers that take 1/3 of the award, and I personally think that, like you said, does not work toward compensating the injured party. But realize that some lwayers, during a trial for their clients, put their employment and lives on hold. If a lawyer is working on one case, on contingency, and one case only, for say, 6 months, and he loses, then he just worked 6 months for free. Imagine if you did not get a paycheck for half the year, yet worked 60+ hour weeks during that time. Just something to think about.

      The court system is overworked. I won't deny that. Judges have to crank through cases to get them done. But what is the solution? Tell person X they deserve a trial but person Y does not? To person Y their case is just as important and their rights have been just as damaged.

      as a class, lawyers are overpaid and not compelled by market forces to compete

      This is simply not true. Lawyers have to fight like dogs to keep existing clients and recruit new ones. Their are always lawyers out there that will do the same job and for less money. The only thing I see that is different business-wise when I was a software engineer and now is that in a law firm, I don't have to worry about the work being outsourced. I've watched more than a handful of clients leave our firm since I started (not long ago) because they found the work for cheaper. And you cannot say "lawyers as a class" because there are 100 different kinds of lawyers. There are the DAs in Rochester, NY who made, at least a couple years ago, less than I did as an intern at IBM in the same area (30k). There are also the IP litigator partners who make a million+ a year. You can't say "lawyers as a class" because that is like saying "Scientists as a class" where some of the scientists are in the lab making agarose prep mediums while some are heading huge R&D projects. You need to narrow it down before you say "X type of lawyers make too much money."

      You seem to be a programmed gone lawyer

      "What if we're still doing this in fifty years?" That and my interest in the whole Napster episode really made me decide that banging out code for the rest of my life is not what I was looking for. Sad to say, but Office Space changed my life.

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    130. Re:Marketing slime... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      What bothers me most - is that as a non-lawyer representing myself - I am treated to a different level of expediency. I believe every defendant should have their cause heard in some non-arbitrary order whether they pay for represention or not. Lawyers seem to come and go through different doors, and they have a different level of access to the court. That is wrong - it should be the people's court - if a person is represented - that should not change in any way how affairs are conducted - nor the amount of prejudgement courtroom-detention.

      If one side charges 1/3 and the other side charges the same fee to defend, than the total cost is 4/3 of the judgement, of which the lawyers get half - plus or minus. That is most of the money.

      And moreover it is increasingly true of class action suits that the lawyers and ONLY the lawyers benefit.

      A Typical Microsoft class action suit in which a million people are entitled to a redeemable coupon discount of $5 off their next purchase - while the lawyer pocket serious hard cash.

      I think a Blockbuster case is the actual example.

      Lawyers need to clean up their act - not all - i understand - but the greedy ones make the other 2% look bad.

      Interesting you mention Napster - I was working at cornerstone research - an IP litigation experts house - and we got the napster case. I left to travel europe after that and left securities foresics to go into imaging.

      But I understand your thinking - I also bet you have never met a lawyer with a better grasp of logic than you had as a programmer practiced in hard unforgiving determinism - and with search engines - its much less of a memory game.

      One question: - Do you enjoy the work? When I'm in court I think - I don't like all the wasted time - this would be a hellish existence sitting in a room waiting to be called.

      AIK

    131. Re:Marketing slime... by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      I'm not a lawyer yet, I'm still in school. I enjoy the work, but most of it is not in the court. Many, many lawyers never see the inside of a court room. My real estate lawyer in fact hasn't. Funny/sad that I, as a non-lawyer working in IP, have a higher billing rate than she did as a 3rd year associate.

      That all being said, I think I will enjoy the work. Though I definitely have a more balanced view of IP than when I entered ("Damn corporations!"), I still think I'd like to end up doing something like the EFF lawyers do. I want to make a comfortable living, but I'm not looking to be a star litigator that makes a bazillion dollars an hour. But though you see wasted time, I guarantee the lawyer is looking at it as a chance to go over his schpiel one more time. Gotta get it right. Gotta nail. I mean, that's what they're paid for, right?

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    132. Re:Marketing slime... by Merovign · · Score: 1


      1) Lawyers don't sue to make YOU rich, they sue to make THEM rich.

      2) The very fact that we have a class of people whose job is to ensure that technique triumphs over reality is sick.

      3) As always when it comes to law and politics, logic is defined as protecting your own ox from being gored. Sad.

    133. Re:Marketing slime... by Merovign · · Score: 1

      Power-grubbing politicians are almost always lawyers, BTW.

      (at least on the "large scale," i.e. technically if you run for dog-catcher you're a politican - but look at Congress).

    134. Re:Marketing slime... by Merovign · · Score: 1

      Whoops I was redundant a minute ago, so I'll just add:

      They write the law.
      The adjudicate the law.
      They enforce the law (prosecutorially speaking).
      They represent both sides of the argument, in virtually all cases.

      And to top it off they review the law when challenged!

      What a racket!

    135. Re:Marketing slime... by cavemanf16 · · Score: 1

      Sadly, you obviously know little of the legal profession as a whole. The ambulance chasers may sue to get rich, and most lawyers abhor any lawyer who advertises on TV. Many lawsuits do not have to be settled in a court of law. In fact, sueing someone for monetary damages is usually justified in one way or another, but there's ALWAYS two or more sides to the story, which is why both a plaintiff and a defendant need a lawyer to work FOR their position.

      Having seen my wife go through law school has opened my eyes even wider to the absolute need for a lawyer in so many situations where it'd be extremely easy to get screwed over by a company, individual, or a government. If you honestly think everyone else has a little angel inside of them that only wants to do what's right, then you are WOEFULLY mistaken about every single human's depraved nature.

    136. Re:Marketing slime... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      Yeah - if its just the tenor of your speach that's fine - but when you want to research - the court is a bad place to do it.

      Also I can't use our 20x30 color printer when i'm at the court to print evidence displays.

      If I went into law (again) I would be interested in improveing the effeciency.

      Effeciency of a system is usually described as the difference between what a thing actually has to cost = and what you paid for it.

      Lawyers see that as profit - bit I see it as a form of classism. Kobe just got off - as much because his lawyers could stick it to the man and much or more than the other way round. If Kobe was a local kid with a PD - I suppose the outcome would be different.

      the PD wouldn't have caught the DA on every slip-up, some unwashed hands in the lab would not have poisened the jury pool etc . . .

      Soo is Kobe more innocent than the 100s that same DA has prosecuted successfully and are right now behind bars - maybe his other cases were tainted.

      Maybe there are a few dozen people in his jail right now how are there because of sloppy DNA evidence which the PD failed to detect.

      I think its unacceptable that we punish people because they are poor, and a justice system so obviously scewe in favor of the rich is just that - a way to punish the poor.

      AIK

  2. Hurrah! by MikeDX · · Score: 0, Troll

    About time they (standards council) did something useful with tax payers money.

  3. Shocking News about Statistics by stecoop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are you surprised that statistics can be bought and bartered? Everyone knows that the person paying for the data can make it show whatever they want.

    1. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'm waiting to hear back on my grant application which will allow me to study why Slashdot Posters can not close tags properly and are incapable of using Preview. I'll let you know how it goes!

    2. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are you surprised that statistics can be bought and bartered?

      No, we're surprised that a government agency saw through the bullshit and has done something about it.

      Incidentally, the ASA is one of Britain's better agencies. It seems to have - some - real power, and doesn't seem to abuse it. Another poster has already mentioned Apple's tussles with the ASA (re: 64bit CPUs, IIRC) and other corporations have also been shouted down by the ASA. I'm sure they've made some bad calls in the past, but I'd be hard-pressed to recall any.

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    3. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is exactly why I refuse to participate in surveys - They seem to intentially target a specific focus group and also seem to ask questions in such as to get a desired response.

    4. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Incidentally, the ASA is one of Britain's better agencies. It seems to have - some - real power, and doesn't seem to abuse it.

      The ASA is the industries own self-regulating group, and its "real power" is basically a loud voice. Self-regulating groups are usually setup with the intent of keeping the government out by implying that the industry needs no external control.

      http://www.asa.org.uk/index.asp

    5. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by crtfdgk · · Score: 0

      It's nice to finally see a government agency working against a major corporation effectively. The ASA's case against Apple was a prime example, they might have been right, but a., they had no documentation, and b., there are too many ways in which an entire computer can be the "fastest of them all". Of course, the ASA did agree they broke the 4gb ram barrier, and that it was the first 64bit computer. So Apple deserves some credit.

      --

      $> man woman
      $> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
    6. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

      Self-regulating groups are usually setup with the intent of keeping the government out by implying that the industry needs no external control.

      I'm normally fairly cynical, but in this case self-regulation seems to work. However - it probably doesn't hurt that it's Corporation A and not Advertising Agency B that's getting the flak, though - free publicity for Microsoft, and very little attention paid to the marketdroids responsible.

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    7. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      But msft hides the fact that they are paying. Msft claims these studies to be independant.

    8. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by kfg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nine out of ten doctors recommend acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin (tm)) as the pain killer to take on a desert island if you could only have one.

      Frankly I'm suprised it isn't ten out of ten. Aspirin is an anti-inflamatory. Acetomeniphin (Tylenol)isn't. Under the restrictions it's the clear choice.

      I wonder what the results would be if the survey had asked what the doctors recommend for a headache while "stranded" in a pharmacy?

      If you get to make up the questions you can also "make up" the answers, particularly if you can also actually make up the answers in the form of multiple choice check boxes.

      Note that the questions are never published, let alone the range of allowed answers.

      KFG

    9. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

      It's nice to finally see a government agency...

      Sorry, my mistake (corrected by another poster): the ASA is an industry body, not part of gov.uk.

      Incidentally, the "first 64bit computer" part of the Apple debacle was one part I never understood - surely we've had 64bit (UltraSparc) workstations since the mid-90s? Slightly less seriously, I've got a 128bit "computer" right now (Play Station 2) - surely that would count against Apple's claim?

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    10. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      So WTF are Alphas, MIPS, UltraSPARCS, Opterons and other 64 bit processors?

      Apple wasn't the first by a long shot.

    11. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by nyquility · · Score: 1

      As Benjamin Disraeli would say if he was around today "There are four kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, statistics and the crap IT marketing puts out there."
      (Although if Disreali would use the word crap is another question)

    12. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by andreMA · · Score: 2, Informative
      Incidentally, the "first 64bit computer" part of the Apple debacle was one part I never understood - surely we've had 64bit (UltraSparc) workstations since the mid-90s?
      As I recall it, the claim that Apple was taken to task for was more like "First 64-bit desktop" -- which led to a lot of reasonable debate concerning what a "Desktop" was vs. what a "Workstation" was.

      I'm an Apple fan, but they should have done a mea culpa on that one and blamed the different standards UK v. US for confusion and moved on.

    13. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Yaztromo · · Score: 2, Funny
      Everyone knows that the person paying for the data can make it show whatever they want.

      Oddly enough, only 14% of people know this.

      Yaz.

    14. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Bertrum · · Score: 1

      I'd be hard-pressed to recall any
      How about them banning the Renault Megane ad with the arse wiggling until afer 9pm so that small children wouldn't copy it in the playground?
      And then changing their mind...

    15. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Armchair+Dissident · · Score: 1

      The ASA is the industries own self-regulating group, and its "real power" is basically a loud voice.

      It's "real power" is actually the Office of Fair Trading who are a government body and who can apply for a court injunction to prohibit the display of an advert.

      The ASA works because the UK law is behind it, and advertisers know if they don't abide by the ruling they risk being taken to court.

      --

      The ways of gods are mysteriously indistinguishable from chance.
    16. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, the "first 64bit computer" part of the Apple debacle was one part I never understood - surely we've had 64bit (UltraSparc) workstations since the mid-90s? Slightly less seriously, I've got a 128bit "computer" right now (Play Station 2) - surely that would count against Apple's claim?

      And I have a 256 bit graphics card--the Radeon 9000, though it's not quite clear how graphics card companies calculate this.

      The Emotion Engine is 128 bit only in the sense that it's SIMD unit is 128 bits wide. This width is also shared with SSE and altivec.

      Sometimes, the bitness refers to the address bus-- but the powerPC 970 only has a 42 bit address bus.

    17. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      The ASA works because the UK law is behind it, and advertisers know if they don't abide by the ruling they risk being taken to court.

      This is like saying that I can act as an official movie censor because I can ultimately complain to the government if the industry doesn't follow my decrees. In other words I have no power beyond a loud voice.

      It's even more ridiculous in this case because industry groups generally enforce a much more restrictive set of contraints on their membership than the government does - an advertisement might be legally acceptable (for instance the Microsoft advert would if they properly disclaimed it and gave the appropriate references - let the buyer beware), but morally questionable or of dubious content. Industry groups work to control that to maintain a good name and basically to avoid the legal side of the equation from encroaching on their industry with restrictive regulations. If there were such restrictive regulations, the ASA wouldn't even exist.

    18. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by crtfdgk · · Score: 0

      Apple's official claim was the first 64 bit personal computer. I forgot to mention that

      surely we've had 64bit (UltraSparc) workstations since the mid-90s?

      Of course Ultrasparc workstations aren't designed with grandma and grandpa in mind. Then again neither is the Apple G5. (I'm flipflopping more than Kerry on Iraq on this) In fact anyone using 64bit "proSESEES" (as Jobs likes to pronounce it), could use probably be using an ultrasparc...

      I've got a 128bit "computer" right now (Play Station 2) - surely that would count against Apple's claim?

      Its a good point, and game consoles today are certainly computers in my mind...I have no idea about that one.

      --

      $> man woman
      $> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
    19. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Frankly I'm suprised it isn't ten out of ten. Aspirin is an anti-inflamatory. Acetomeniphin (Tylenol)isn't. Under the restrictions it's the clear choice."

      Probably because some people are allergic to aspirin. In that case it would be a very bad choice.

    20. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's "poppycock"

    21. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Armchair+Dissident · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except that if you actually were an official movie censor your opinion would carry far more weight in deciding whether to prosecute than if you were an unofficial movie censor.

      The ASA carries a big stick in this regard. Because they are the official trade organisation for advertising, a referral to the OFT from the ASA is far more likely to be prosecuted than a referral from a private individual. This is where their weight comes from. Add into the mix that the ASA actually has the funds to investigate whether a claim is misleading, and you have a far more powerful body than one that simply says "please don't do that".

      Going back to your censor analogy: if you are an unofficial censor, then you have to get the funds to build a case against someone if you want to prosecute them. If you area an official censor, you have a bigger stick: you (usually) have better funding, better legal advice, and your voice carries more weight with those making the final descision.

      --

      The ways of gods are mysteriously indistinguishable from chance.
    22. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

      I hear you, brother. I suspect the boxes you mention were considered "workstations" as opposed to "desktops" (I seem to remember Apple them as desktops?) but that strikes me as... well, as being economical with the actualities.

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    23. Re:Shocking News about Statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Aspirin is quite hard on the lining of the stomach, and also the kidneys. Ibuprofin (Advil, Motrin) is generally considered the drug of choice for mild to moderate pain control, since you have to be taking a lot of it for a rather long time before the dangerous side effects crop up, and it has the same anti-inflammatory and anagelisic effects of aspirin.

      Acetemenophin (Tylenol) is somewhat more effective as a pain reliever, but isn't an anti-inflammatory, and is hard on the liver. However, it is effective in combination with many drugs, and combining it with others can allow lower doses of both acetemenophin and the other. I.e. darvocets are a mixture of darvon (a narcotic painkiller) and acetemenophin. For over the counter use, taking tylenol and ibuprofin together is effective (but that's more than the one drug we get on our desert island).

      Given the studies results, I doubt that ibuprofin was on the checkbox list.

  4. What about back across the pond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What's stopping your guys complaining to your government agencies?

    1. Re:What about back across the pond? by Anita+Coney · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the US the government works FOR corporations, not against them.

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    2. Re:What about back across the pond? by cs02rm0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In the US the government works FOR corporations, not against them.

      This is working FOR corporations... for the hundreds of corporations, that could bring about some competitive innovation, that there would be room in the market for if Microsoft weren't sitting on a monopoly.

    3. Re:What about back across the pond? by hph · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We don't believe in government. Yes, MS lies in its ads. So what? Caveat empor, as they say.

    4. Re:What about back across the pond? by benito27uk · · Score: 1

      Or even Caveat emptor

    5. Re:What about back across the pond? by jridley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Rephrase:
      In the US the government works for the corporations that shovel the most money into the re-election campaigns (if not directly into the pockets) of the politicians.

    6. Re:What about back across the pond? by hph · · Score: 0

      Duh. *slaps forehead*

    7. Re:What about back across the pond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ASA isn't a government agency.

    8. Re:What about back across the pond? by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We "guys" don't have a government, hence no government agencies. The corporations do. It's a free market for the masses, but rock-solid socialism for medium to large American businesses. As one poster said, we guys have to rely on "caveat emptor".

      About 100 million Americans will demonstrate their lack of understanding of this in November, and will either cast their votes for the pro-business and anti-labor Republican, or pro-business and anti-labor Democrat. {sigh}

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    9. Re:What about back across the pond? by johnnyb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "About 100 million Americans will demonstrate their lack of understanding of this in November, and will either cast their votes for the pro-business and anti-labor Republican, or pro-business and anti-labor Democrat."

      Two things:

      1) Please don't call it "pro-business". Pro-corporation is a better term. EVERYONE is involved in business. Being pro-business simply means allowing people to conduct their own business (whether financial or otherwise) freely, while being pro-corporation means taking a socialist/mercantilistic approach, and favoring corporations (especially powerful corporations) above the general population.

      2) I'm not sure I agree with your idea that Americans don't understand this. Most of them do, they just aren't sure what to do about it. They pick an R or D system, not because it matches who they are, but because it doesn't go as far outside as the other. In order to correct the situation, it would require funding. That requires bankers, which just undermines the whole concept from the start.

    10. Re:What about back across the pond? by toriver · · Score: 1

      There are more to choose from, including TWO parties dedicated to the reinstatement of Prohibition, and four socialist ones. The Christian Phanalgist party is luckily out of the race, though.

    11. Re:What about back across the pond? by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      EVERYONE is involved in business.

      Yes, I think you're right, and I was too succinct. I am from the Elbert Hubbard school of Capitalism, in which Capitalism is the natural consequence of people having homes and savings. By implied definition from that, everyone is in business (or should be).

      As for your 2nd point, I stand by my statement. I come across enough voters, and I can clearly see that people still think there's a difference between the 2 major parties (insofar as it affects domestic economy and foreign relations).

      Hell, to illustrate further misunderstanding, people still commonly levy the attack phrase "tax-and-spend Democrats" but still refuse to acknowledge the mainstream Republicans are "borrow-and-spend" types. Also, the common denominator is that both major classes of pols overspend constantly, but still that is ignored. Millions of people will cast their votes out of ignorance, much willful ignorance, and just plain ol' fear and loathing. Nothing good can come from that.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    12. Re:What about back across the pond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And to top it all off, the Republican "Big Guy" in the USA, is a failed businessman.

      Look up Harken Energy/Bush on Google, for some high amusement.

    13. Re:What about back across the pond? by Jollyeugene · · Score: 1

      In Italy this was called Corporatism, or Facism. The world being coined by Benito Mussolini. Today, corporations and neo-cons have convinced the Bible thumpers that support them that corporate facism is really free-enterprise. Sad...

    14. Re:What about back across the pond? by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Not to defend Bush/Cheney {spit}, but we have to acknowledge that business failures in America don't carry the social stigma that is experienced in Europe. Someone with only a couple of Bush's failures under their belt would still be capable of going on to another opportunity (in hopes they don't screw that up also). I suppose, grudgingly, I have to give the system of American capitalism {shudder} credit where it's due: you can recover from failure.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    15. Re:What about back across the pond? by killjoe · · Score: 1

      What's particularly sick is that not only have we accepted this but that we actually seem to like it.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    16. Re:What about back across the pond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can recover from failure

      Only if you are already a member of The Club. If not, then sorry mate, but no second act for you. BTW, if you are an American and don't understand what I mean by The Club, then you really do need to go out and educate yourself.

    17. Re:What about back across the pond? by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Membership in the "old boy network" (I hardly need a lecture on oligarchy from you) is never a consideration when you place an order for products or services using real money. You can always recapitalize to some level and then re-enter the entrepreneurial game. Oligarch-ically, you probably won't be able to get a share of the Texas Rangers team, but you will be able to start a thriving business.

      Cash is still king. You don't need to be Neil Bush to start a computer business.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  5. independent research? by Lostie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's interesting that the ASA slapped Microsoft on the wrists for running the comparison on both different HARDWARE and software.
    They should have also enquired into this "independent research" - Microsoft has a history of funding "independant researchers" itself, which coincidentally always come out in favour for Microsoft.

    1. Re:independent research? by scsirob · · Score: 5, Funny

      The outcome makes sense. Microsofts claim is very similar to claiming that Diesel is 10 times as expensive as gas/petrol to travel 100km, when testing a 40 tonne Diesel truck and a 650 Kg Nissan Micra.

      --
      To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
    2. Re:independent research? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having dealt with the ASA in the past, I reckon we did well to get them to slap M$ for as much as they did.
      The ASA doesn't exist to protect consumers from dishonest advertisers, it exists to protect advertisers from the risk of having legally-binding controls on their lying, which would be far better for the rest of the population.
      Normally they'll go to amazing lengths to accept the excuses advertisers come up with, so this must have been blatant even by their standards.

    3. Re:independent research? by danheskett · · Score: 2, Funny

      Microsoft has a history of funding "independant researchers" itself, which coincidentally always come out in favour for Microsoft.
      This isn't exactly true. Let's say you funded 50 studies of yourself, to find out all kinds of interesting things. 25 come back positive, 25 come back negative.

      Which ones will you tell women about when hitting on them at the bars?

    4. Re:independent research? by sucker_muts · · Score: 0

      It's not certain what amount of research findings they keep in their closet when the data doesn't come out goed enough (or even completely negative for them)...

      --
      Dependency hell? => /bin/there/done/that
    5. Re:independent research? by kfg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      . . .always come out in favour for Microsoft.

      Actually, this isn't true. What happens is that when a private party funds "research" such as this it's a work for hire, the funding party owns the results and the researcher is bound and gagged by an NDA.

      When the results don't come out as they like, which is fairly common, they simply don't publish those results.

      It's pretty easy for me to prove that I can always flip a coin to land heads if each flip is taken to be an independant test and I only publish the tests that came up heads.

      KFG

    6. Re:independent research? by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I seem to recall that drug companies got into the same pickle. Just googling for "drug companies research skewed" brings back 33,000 hits. http://www.google.com/search?q=drug+companies+rese arch+skewed

      Mind you, adding goatse to the query brings back 14 hits: http://www.google.com/search?q=drug+companies+rese arch+skewed+goatse, the first of which is http://slashdot.org/articles/04/01/28/073253.shtml ?tid=109&tid=126&tid=163&tid=187&tid=98&tid=99 Microsoft-funded Linux Studies Benefit ... Microsoft

    7. Re:independent research? by EulerX07 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Let me get this straight, you fund studies about yourself to be able to pick up women in bars? What's your line, "I know I might seem like a geek, but these studies clearly state that I'm a stud and you should come home with me"?

    8. Re:independent research? by danheskett · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Studies indicate that 74% of women find my equipment to reliable, durable, and ultimately worth the investment of time, energy, and booze."

    9. Re:independent research? by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      Which ones will you tell women about when hitting on them at the bars?

      I know of very few successful pickup lines that start with the phrase, "Did you know I was the subject of dozens of research studies?"

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    10. Re:independent research? by DrJimbo · · Score: 1
      Which ones will you tell women about when hitting on them at the bars?

      In Soviet Russia, women at bars hit you!

      --
      We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
      -- Anais Nin
  6. LOL. by numbski · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm tired. It's early.

    Morning M$ bashing article.

    Microsoft did something stupid. *sip*

    Ooh. Megatokyo has a pretty cool DPD up!

    ^^^Life with AADD. Gotta love it.

    I wish I had linux on a mainframe! :)

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    1. Re:LOL. by haijak · · Score: 1

      ADD, and Firefox loading Slashdot, The Register, and Megatokyo in tabs on startup.

      We are very alike.

      --
      Don't judge me by my spelling
  7. Garbage in, Garbage out... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Clearly, when you compare the operating cost of a mainframe to the operating cost of a PC, it doesn't matter what OS you put on either system, the mainframe is going to cost more to own.

    The research may have been conducted indepenently and fairly, but the conclusion it came to should have surprised nobody because the test they were running didn't put the two operating systems on a level playing field in the first place.

    Try running both OSes on identical hardware and then see what kind of results you get...

    1. Re:Garbage in, Garbage out... by datadriven · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't think windows will run on a mainframe.

    2. Re:Garbage in, Garbage out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you Mr. Obvious. I believe that was the point of the article.

    3. Re:Garbage in, Garbage out... by LousyPhreak · · Score: 1

      i guess windows wont "run" on any hardware

      --
      -- Karma: beyond good and evil - mostly affected by posting political
    4. Re:Garbage in, Garbage out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I don't think windows will run on a mainframe.

      http://www.unisys.com/products/clearpath__servers/ clearpath__plus__os__2200/operating__system.htm
      That is if you consider Unisys a Mainframe company.

    5. Re:Garbage in, Garbage out... by (H)elix1 · · Score: 1

      I don't think windows will run on a mainframe.

      Sure it will. The form factor is much smaller than it use to be, but I have enough room on top for a couple x86 boxes, a Sun box, and room left over for a hidden cache of nerf guns. Tall ceilings are a must...

    6. Re:Garbage in, Garbage out... by VE3MTM · · Score: 1

      Try running both OSes on identical hardware and then see what kind of results you get...

      Simple: they already know the results of that survey.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Whoops, silly middle mouse button...
    7. Re:Garbage in, Garbage out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, Windows shouldn't run on a mainframe ;-)

  8. Link to adjudication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a link to the adjudication at the Advertising Standards Authority.

    This is the same agency that has nailed Apple to the wall several times in the past.

    1. Re:Link to adjudication by bitswapper · · Score: 0

      In the link above, three complaints were leved agaist Apple. Only one was upheld - "world's fastest computer". How can a statement like that not be a lie?

      "Linux is 10 time more expensive" - same thing - how can *that* not be a lie? They might as well have said something like "linux is a bijillion times worse that windows". Acts of a frightened corporation, it would seem. They're afraid of the wrong thing, however.

      Marketing is the root of all deception.

    2. Re:Link to adjudication by CountBrass · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't see how you can claim they "nailed" Apple several times when a) there's only one case and b) two out of three of the complaints were rejected: The G5 was the world's first 64 bit personal computer and the first to break the 4GB memory limit.

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    3. Re:Link to adjudication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how you can claim that there's only one case when there's actually three.

    4. Re:Link to adjudication by the_proton · · Score: 1

      Maybe because they can read?

      9th June 2004: 3 complaints, 1 upheld
      19th December 2001: 1 complaint, not upheld
      10th March 1999: 1 complaint, not upheld

      - proton

    5. Re:Link to adjudication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've just proved that there are 3 cases by linking to them. That the complaints in the two other cases were not upheld doesn't mean that the cases suddenly cease to exist.

  9. nonsense by kg_o.O · · Score: 5, Funny

    Linux is as cheap as Windows. Windows is as cheap as Linux. They both cost ~one CD-R.

    1. Re:nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should be taken out and hung with the rest of the pirates, Blackbeard. ;)

    2. Re:nonsense by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, Linux is more expensive. Most distros take up three or four CD-Rs these days.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    3. Re:nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but the cost of getting caught downloading 4 Linux iso's beats the cost of downloading 1 Windows iso by magnitudes.

    4. Re:nonsense by meringuoid · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding? SCO will never forgive you for that download! They'll sue you into the dirt, they never lose!

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    5. Re:nonsense by kg_o.O · · Score: 4, Funny

      >You should be taken out and hung with the rest of the pirates, Blackbeard. ;)

      Why me? This is a result of an independant research :P

    6. Re:nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right you are, you independent pirate. :)

    7. Re:nonsense by merme · · Score: 1

      No Linux is more expensive 3-5 CD-R's on mosts distros.

    8. Re:nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOu have a good point there :) Damn SCO, damn them to hell.

    9. Re:nonsense by Justin205 · · Score: 1

      Which would cost you several thousand dollars of legal fees for Windows.

      Or $699 to be able to use Linux with SCO's authorization. But since you're pirating Windows, lets just assume you wouldn't care about this either. ;)

      --
      "Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you."
    10. Re:nonsense by fluch · · Score: 2, Funny

      Debian needs 13 CD-R in the new upcoming release. Makes it then 13 times more expensive than Windows...

    11. Re:nonsense by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Well, Linux can easily be installed without using a CDR atall, and you can use an old installation cd or floppy to connect to the network and install the latest versions anyway..

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    12. Re:nonsense by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hmmm....

      08/14/2004 06:09AM 35,634,061 linux-2.6.8.tar.bz2

      Nope... Linux seems to fit on one disc... doesn't seem like it's doing a whole hell of a lot though.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    13. Re:nonsense by Bert64 · · Score: 5, Informative

      But think how many CDR's you'd need in order to pirate all the equivalent apps for windows aswell..

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    14. Re:nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because you haven't gotten the fixed 2.6.8.1 version! ;-P

    15. Re:nonsense by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure one CD and a net connection will do just fine. Of course, you then have to factor in the cost of the net connection...

    16. Re:nonsense by julesh · · Score: 1

      I recently downloaded an ISO of SuSE personal, which fits on one CD (including source). The scope of the distribution is a little limited (e.g. there were very few development tools), but it would suit most people who just want a word processor + internet access platform.

      It certainly included at least one of every kind of application that's on the Windows CD.

    17. Re:nonsense by Ubi_NL · · Score: 1

      And then think of the amount of porn ads you'll be coming accross finding all those crackz

      --

      If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
    18. Re:nonsense by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Funny
      Actually, Linux is more expensive. Most distros take up three or four CD-Rs these days.

      That depends if you use the smaller European CD-Rs as opposed to the larger African CD-Rs. :)

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    19. Re:nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no XP requires more cost. Time to find XPkey.exe so you can generate a working key for that XPProCorp CD iso you have. (and that has none of the call-home crap in it.)

      after that you can distribute your new ISO (with SP2 slipstreamed in it) to everyone you know.

      oh and for all you MS employees trolling...

      Arrrrr!

    20. Re:nonsense by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      Umm, Why would he want a patched beta/test release?

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
  10. No real surprises by farnz · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Having seen the advert, I'm not surprised they got told off; the gist of it was that Linux had to be worse than Windows, since Windows on a dual Xeon was as fast as Linux on an S/390 mainframe, but at 1/10th the cost.

    If you didn't read the website the advert pointed you at very carefully, you would be led to believe that Linux needed much more expensive hardware than Windows to even match capabilities; in fact, the study made no such claims.

    1. Re:No real surprises by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What the study results really show is that for a typical usage patern, the IBM Mainframe product running Linux is a complete waste of money because the typical user needs only a typical PC worth of resources on their server. The fact that the two machines being compared ran different operating systems was more or less incidential.

    2. Re:No real surprises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, you are kidding arn't you? For a start you'd better define "typical user" their kid, because there sure are a hell of a lot of companies running Z series mainframes. Gee, do you think they might have a good reason for spending millions on hardware and support for those mainframes? Do you think they might have a need for the capabilities and processing power of those mainframes?

      All the study shows is that the Meta Group make handy "Independent Research" whores when Microsoft needs them. All your post shows is that you're an idiot who has likely never worked in a real business environment.

    3. Re:No real surprises by spookymonster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ...the IBM Mainframe product running Linux is a complete waste of money because the typical user needs only a typical PC worth of resources on their server.

      The true benefit of Linux on the mainframe comes from server consolidation. Using an entire z900 mainframe to run just one Linux image at a time is a huge waste of resources. Running 16 images at the same time (native, so as not to incur a performance penalty from a VM) is far more efficient and cost effective.

      Using a $1M(USD) CPU for a desktop replacement is indeed a waste. Using it as a server-farm-in-a-box isn't.

      --
      - Despite popular opinion, I am not perfect.
    4. Re:No real surprises by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      What the study results really show is that for a typical usage patern, the IBM Mainframe product running Linux is a complete waste of money because the typical user needs only a typical PC worth of resources on their server. The fact that the two machines being compared ran different operating systems was more or less incidential.

      So was this an advertisement or a public service announcement? I thought Microsoft was a software company, not a PC vendor.

      Oh, BTW slash coders, why doesn't the "Exclude Stories from the Homepage" feature work anymore? I accidentally got sucked into this M$ article, but I have checked to exclude all M$ related stories. And why is Science listed twice?

    5. Re:No real surprises by anti-trojan · · Score: 1

      Why? They both had "900" CPUs (two z900 vs two Xeon 900). After all, the most important aspect of a computer is the number on its CPUs, isn't it?

    6. Re:No real surprises by danila · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. Was a typical usage pattern one IBM Mainframe running Linux per employee?

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  11. Fark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think Slashdot needs an "Obvious" tag.

  12. Will Others Follow? by grunt107 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since it has been shown time after time (sorry Ms. Lauper) that EU != US, will MS get smacked here?
    Probably the only outcome would be a forced disclaimer like the fast talking legal-speak in car commercials: 'Whencomparedbetweendislikesystemsbypaidresearchco nsultants.realresultsmayvarybasedonuseandhardwarep urchases.notresponsibleforvirusesandothersoftwarem alfunctions.seeresellersfordetails'

    1. Re:Will Others Follow? by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The US has much more liberal standards for what we allow advertisers to get away with. To get in trouble here, your ad has to contain "false" information, over there, it's a much weaker standard of being "misleading"... which is to say the information in the ad can be all true, but if an average reader will use your information to reach a false conclusion you're still in trouble there but not here.

      Silly First Amendment coming back to bite us when in the hands of a megacorp again... :)

    2. Re:Will Others Follow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turns out, it isn't just ads which are treated as such, but any information distributed.....

    3. Re:Will Others Follow? by WilyCoder · · Score: 1

      "And remember, if it doesn't say MicroMachines, it's not the real thing!"

    4. Re:Will Others Follow? by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Silly First Amendment coming back to bite us when in the hands of a megacorp again... :)

      Close, but it's the silly court precedent that treats corporations the same as people that bites us in the ass every day.

  13. Surprising by StevenHenderson · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm surprised Microsoft didn't go ahead and factor in an SCO license to the "cost" of Linux.

    1. Re:Surprising by sad_ · · Score: 1

      Don't give them any more ideas!

      --
      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  14. In essence... by Biotech9 · · Score: 4, Funny

    MS compared server 2003 on dual 900 MHz Xeons to Linux on an IBM z900 mainframe.

    By my own similar method of comparison I can conclude Apples Mac OS X is 2000 times cheaper than MS server 2003*.

    * Mac OS X running on a dual G5 Xserve. MS sever 2003 running on a quad quantum cyberdine systems X-9000 with gold plated tri-lithium cooled case and diamond studded cup holder.

    1. Re:In essence... by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 2, Funny


      "* Mac OS X running on a dual G5 Xserve. MS sever 2003 running on a quad quantum cyberdine systems X-9000 with gold plated tri-lithium cooled case and diamond studded cup holder."

      Sounds like a nice system, but I have two questions.
      1) does it run linux?
      2) Can I get a beowulf cluster?

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
    2. Re:In essence... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Or how about windows running on the mainframe* vs linux running on the dual xeon, compared on price and performance. Or how about running linux on a quad opteron instead, a machine which windows doesn't fully support yet.

      * Since windows won't run natively on the mainframe, we would need to run it under an emulation environment such as bochs

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:In essence... by phauxfinnish · · Score: 0, Redundant
      diamond studded cup holder
      A cup-holder! Thats what the little sliding tray is for! THANK YOU!
    4. Re:In essence... by LordPixie · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      By my own similar method of comparison I can conclude Apples Mac OS X is 2000 times cheaper than MS server 2003*. * Mac OS X running on a dual G5 Xserve. MS sever 2003 running on a quad quantum cyberdine systems X-9000 with gold plated tri-lithium cooled case and diamond studded cup holder.

      Ermm...given the exorbitant prices of Macs...I think the Apple machine is only about four times cheaper than the Microsoft one. Maybe five. =)


      --LordPixie

    5. Re:In essence... by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      a quad quantum cyberdine systems X-9000 with gold plated tri-lithium cooled case and diamond studded cup holder

      Hello, I am an average CIO, and this equipment excites me. Where can I get one? Boy, with one of those babies, I can really get one over on the guys at the country club. Besides, I broke the cup holder on our last server and the administrator kicked me out of my own datacenter for it! I fired him, of course. It was just a cup holder. But the diamonds ... ohhh, yeah, that'll do the trick.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    6. Re:In essence... by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      Insightful?!?

      INSIGHTFUL?!!?

      That's not insightful! That's funny, you dumb shits!!!

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    7. Re:In essence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * Mac OS X running on a dual G5 Xserve. MS sever 2003 running on a quad quantum cyberdine systems X-9000 with gold plated tri-lithium cooled case and diamond studded cup holder.

      Aha! Gotcha! You hired idiots to do the study. Everyone knows it is not a "diamond studded cup holder" but a "diamond studded CD tray".

    8. Re:In essence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Will it run Longhorn?
      2) ???
      3) Will it run Duke Nukem Forever?

  15. But don't kill.... by 9-bits.tk · · Score: 4, Informative
    The open-source marketing droids.

    If we had some of Microsoft's droids working for us, the open-source community in promoting open-source software, we may possibly have a big market share (as if we haven't got a growing one already).

    Fine, Linux may be expensive in the short-term, i.e. upgrading and replacing some incompatible hardware, training staff, etc. but as ESR says, pay-per-seat Microsoft licensing fees are forever.

    Just my two pence.

    1. Re:But don't kill.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we had some of Microsoft's droids working for us, the open-source community in promoting open-source software, we may possibly have a big market share (as if we haven't got a growing one already).

      why would you want to pollute the open source community and open source software by having marketing droids on our side? they would only bring us down by resorting to the same kind of BS that MS uses.

      instead of fighting fire with fire (and getting burned in the process), imagine what would happen if neither MS nor we had marketing. in this happy, imaginary little world, the best software would win on its merits alone, and in many cases, that would be FOSS.

    2. Re:But don't kill.... by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1
      Which leads back to the thread about that company's future role and how or if that fits into F/OSS.

      If you ask me, it should go with where its domain expertise is and drop the pretense of being anything other than a marketing company. Focus only on marketing.

      That would kill two birds with one stone. It'd put an end to major security, maintenance budget nightmares at the same time it would allow F/OSS or any group with the money to have the world's strongest marketing.

      --
      Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    3. Re:But don't kill.... by LousyPhreak · · Score: 1

      ...upgrading and replacing some incompatible hardware...

      as linux runs on (almost) everything (i'm still trying to get binaries fo my toaster) replacement/upgrading wont be an issue

      --
      -- Karma: beyond good and evil - mostly affected by posting political
    4. Re:But don't kill.... by 9-bits.tk · · Score: 1
      If I may clarify myself, not necessarily market share, but a wider audience than what we already have. It may be growing, but it could grow faster.

      I reckon somebody should take out full-page ads in all the computer mags. "Get the REAL facts"?

  16. The Adjudication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    no karma required
    from http://www.asa.org.uk/ [ironically running on IIS with .asp]
    -- - - - - -

    Microsoft Ltd

    Microsoft Campus
    Thames Valley Park
    Reading
    Berkshire
    RG6 1WG

    Date: 25th August 2004

    Media: Magazine

    Sector: Computers and telecommunications

    Agency: McCann Erickson

    Public Complaints From: Liverpool, Surrey, Wiltshire
    Complaint:
    Objections to a specialist magazine advertisement, for a computer operating system, that was headed "WEIGHING THE COST OF LINUX VS. WINDOWS? LET'S REVIEW THE FACTS." A graph compared the cost (US$) per Megabit per second of "One Linux image running on two z900 mainframe CPUs" with "One Windows Server 2003 image running on two 900 MHz Intel Xeon CPUs". Underneath it stated "Linux was found to be over 10 times more expensive than Windows? Serverâ 2003 in a recent study ⦠audited by leading independent research analyst META Group, measured costs of Linux running on IBM's z900 mainframe for Windows-comparable functions of file serving and Web serving. The results showed that IBM z900 mainframe running Linux is much less capable and vastly more expensive than Windows Server 2003 as a platform for server consolidation.* To get the full study and other third-party findings, visit Microsoft.com/uk/getthefacts." The asterisk linked to a footnote that stated "Results may vary outside the United States â¦". The complainants challenged whether the comparison was misleading, because the operating systems were run on different hardware.

    Codes Section: 3.1, 7.1, 18.1, 18.2, 18.3 (Ed 11)
    Adjudication:

    Complaints upheld
    The advertisers said they intended the advertisement to compare competing file-serving set-ups that met the same needs and were intended for the same purposes. They said they had prepared the advertisement in response to an advertising campaign by IBM in which Linux running on an IBM mainframe was tested for file serving and web serving. They said their advertisement was based on results from a benchmark study and the advertisement informed the public of the results from that study about the relative performance and cost of one Linux image running on IBM's z900 mainframe CPUs and Windows Server 2003 image running on two 900MHz Xeon CPUs. The advertisers said the benchmark study was a network load performance test that was neither hardware specific nor operating system specific; they said the fact that the hardware and operating systems were different was irrelevant. They pointed out that the client PC did not determine the server used and that the server workloads were the same and were functionally equivalent. The advertisers explained that each server was tested to deal with increasing numbers of functions from client PCs. They said they took measurements from the client PCs to assess how fast the server would respond. They asserted that the study was audited by Meta, an independent consultancy firm, who reported that the study was a fair comparison.

    The Authority noted the advertisers intended the advertisement to compare competing file serving set-ups that met the same needs and had the same function. It noted the study was audited and was a fair comparison of the operating systems on different hardware. The Authority considered, however, that because the advertisement stated " ⦠WEIGHING THE COST OF LINUX VS. WINDOWS ⦠Linux was found to be over 10 times more expensive than Windows ⦠" it implied the comparison was between Linux and Windows operating systems only, and not about the performance of operating systems on different hardware. It took expert advice. It understood that the study measured the cost of Linux, running on IBM's z900 mainframe, to a Windows Server 2003 image, running on 900 MHz Intel Xeon CPUs, and was therefore a comparison that demonstrated the price and performance between IBM zSeries hardware and Intel Xeon CPUs. It understood that the pri

  17. Not that simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly, when you compare the operating cost of a mainframe to the operating cost of a PC, it doesn't matter what OS you put on either system, the mainframe is going to cost more to own.

    Actually the problem with the comparison has nothing to do with the hardware, it has everything to do with how the hardware is intended to be used. NO ONE buys a mainframe to run a single instance of Linux. The whole point is being able to partition the hardware amongst several different os images allowing you to do things like run server "farms" and redundant images on a single piece of hardware. The more appropriate comparison would have been to take a server farm of 16-32 machines and compare the costs and performance (and not just useless spec numbers, but something that will test say web server throughput with various user loads, etc).

  18. What about number of users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My newest MS product is Win2K. Only because the laptop manufacturer would not refund that portion of the purchase price.

    Win2K is a SINGLE USER OS!

    Not so for LInux.

    SO, on identical hardware, my laptop, I can have hundreds of LInux users but only ONE Win2K user. This makes Win2K 100's times more expensive per user!

    ZZ

    1. Re:What about number of users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite accurate. Workstation version of Windows are usually limited to serving like 5 or so people. You're still free to install things like Apache or 3rd-party FTP servers (obviously, one would prefer a Linux or the more mature *BSD).

    2. Re:What about number of users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite accurate.
      Try logging more than one user at at time onto a win2k box. It's not possible. My linux box can have hundereds of users all at the same time. As a server, the MS OS runs multiuser applications but the max number of users is still ONE. With LInux, the OS is multiuser.

      With win2K it exacerbates the security issue as well. People run as administrator because everytime they need the OS to perform a privileged task the must log off as user, on as admin, off as admin, and back on as user.

      It's really inefficient from an admin perspective as well because it's not possible to admin desktop boxes while the user is logged in. How the hell do you watch his problem?

      ZZ

    3. Re:What about number of users? by Gsus411 · · Score: 1

      That's not entirely accurate. Ever heard of something called Terminal Services? I know it isn't in 2000 Professional, but 2000 Server had it. Multiple people can use the same computer at the same time over the network by using Remote Desktop. At school, we actually use this for the Mac users so they can use the few Windows-only programs we use.

  19. Re:You might want to check out by MikeDX · · Score: 1

    Or accidentally ticking the "Post Anonymously" checkbox? :)

  20. Re:Statistics by Walterk · · Score: 3, Funny

    In related news, usage of statistics is up 60%. After a fall last year of 40% on the usage of statistics this came as quite a surprise to the Internation Statistics Council (ISC).

    "We are delighted with the increase of the usage of statistics, " said Chris Banana, the CEO of the ISC, "after the decline of previous year we have campained 150% more to encourage a 76% increase in statistics usage."

    Independent inquiries with the goal of producing statistics have also risen 45% according to an independent study issued by the ISC.

    "We are extremely grateful for the 5000% increate in funding we received from Microsoft in order to make this all possible", according to Chris.

  21. mud, mud, glorious mud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately throw enough mud and some of it will stick. The campaign this ad was based on appeared on the Register, for instance, a while ago. It appears at the "Get the Microsoft propaganda" site here, and so on. You'd think no-one would believe them but I'm not so sure. Think how many people accept the argument that Java is the route of their performance problems when its actually in the code.

  22. Re:+1 to my pride of being from the UK by meringuoid · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    to Americans: shut up, listen, and learn.

    Ooh, you guys have some great ideas over there...

    RIP act - nice! D-Notices to press - very handy! Fair Use - nonexistent! And I tell you what, these notes we've been taking on some of Blunkett's ideas, well Ashcroft's gonna love them!

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  23. I remember seeing this ad... by wtom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...and thinking, how much more stupid can it be? I saw the ad in a publication aimed at IT professionals (e-week, I think). Now granted, I know a lot of CIOs and other IT executive types might see it, but at least with the magazine I saw it in, I would think the target base would have enough tech savvy to know that a mainframe is going to cost more to run than a dual-xeon system.

    --

    Styrofoam IS biodegradable, you're just impatient!
    1. Re:I remember seeing this ad... by rvw · · Score: 1
      I would think the target base would have enough tech savvy to know that a mainframe is going to cost more to run than a dual-xeon system.

      The ad is not just stupid by itself, it also shows how MS thinks of it customers: so stupid that they will believe everything MS tells.

    2. Re:I remember seeing this ad... by dragonp12 · · Score: 1

      The ad is not just stupid by itself, it also shows how MS thinks of it customers: so stupid that they will believe everything MS tells.

      The sad thing is, they're right.

      --
      This is me. Don't like it? That's unlucky.
    3. Re:I remember seeing this ad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw this not two days ago HERE ON SLASHDOT!!! I thought it rather amusing then - it'd have been really funny if it had shown up in this story...

  24. Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Windows 98 setup it said,"You simply plug in a USB device and your system automatically configures itself. You don't even have to restart your computer"
    I've plugged in USB devices that prompted for a reboot.

    Windows 98 setup also said that "Windows 98 is Year 2000 ready." But later Microsoft issued two patches to correct y2k problems in Windows 98.

    1. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, it even happens when you plug in your (Microsoft) sidewinder usb-joystick...

    2. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by Squozen · · Score: 1

      I've had to reboot when installing a driver, but not when plugging in a USB device that already has a driver installed.

    3. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Funny
      In Windows 98 setup it said,"You simply plug in a USB device and your system automatically configures itself. You don't even have to restart your computer"

      As Bill Gates said when demonstrating this, 'Well, uh, you just plug it in and uh-oh....' (enormous round of laughter from audience) '...well, I guess that's why we're not releasing it quite yet!'

      Best-timed BSOD ever ;-)

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    4. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1
      In Windows 98 setup it said,"You simply plug in a USB device and your system automatically configures itself. You don't even have to restart your computer"
      Which is true. USB is hot-pluggable, meaning those devices can work the instant they are plugged in.

      I've plugged in USB devices that prompted for a reboot.
      That's a problem with device manufacturers requiring a "specialized" driver rather than attempting to use the more generalized system that is guarenteed to work. (The same was done with the batch of WinModems - they required a specialized driver to work under Windows.)

      If anything, those manufacturers probably didn't design their driver correctly - probably by including a file that is tagged by Windows as "reboot" only. Later versions of Windows may have fixed this either by requiring a new set of drivers that comply to new standards, or by finding a way to squeeze the improper driver into memory. Problems like these are fixed by manufacturers actually testing their products on a completely new system.

      Windows 98 setup also said that "Windows 98 is Year 2000 ready." But later Microsoft issued two patches to correct y2k problems in Windows 98.
      Microsoft is correct here as well. Even on unpatched computers, Windows 98 does not mysteriously explode past the magical year 2000.

      The only thing the patches do is correct minor issues - however, just because those minor issues couldn't handle dates past 2000 doesn't mean that the entire product isn't year 2000 ready. Why? Cause "Year 2000" was hyped as the doomsday where computers all over the world would explode in a shower of sparks, causing powersurges throughout humans. The Year 2000 Ready thing just simply indicates that the computer won't create these kind of nuclear accidents.

      Even the copy of Windows 95 on the living room computer (Pentium 133Mhz) is working without problem - and it's an unpatched first-edition product. Hell, even MS-DOS works fine after all these years.

      (BTW, Y2K was blown out of proportion anyway - it seems that any date that happens to have a two digit year was declared incompatable, even if it was a 4 digit year displayed as 2 digits. The only instance where a millenial shift caused problems would be Y-Zero-K, causing certain religious figures had to stay a night in a stable.)

    5. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1

      I was about to say the same thing.

      The initial installation does often require a reboot, but subsequent times you plug the device in you don't have to.
      This does mean that, unlike a PCI card, technically you "don't have to restart" to change your hardware.

      Having said that, if they did phrase the advertising this way then it was somewhat misleading and could easily have opened themselves up to people complainign that they had to reboot the first time.

      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    6. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Y2K is still a headache.

      I run a volunteer website, and people being the completely inept carbon bags of mostly water, they can't remember a password more complicated than their birthday.

      Well some folks, despite explicit instructions, type their birthdate in using 2 digit years. Depending on what mood the various scripting and database components are in, the system turns 47-05-12 into either 2047-05-12 or 1947-05-12. Of course, Finagle's law being what it is, the system seems to default to the mode that reaks the most havok on the system.

      Of course I managed to run the system for years with no problems. It's just this year that I started getting a crop of 2 digit dummies.

      I HATE USERS!!!!

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    7. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by HarvardAce · · Score: 2, Informative

      Link to a video showing the aforementioned BSOD: http://www.windowscrash.com/albums/movies/gates_30 _240.mov

      --
      Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
    8. Re:Microsoft used false advertising for Windows 98 by sharkey · · Score: 1

      When installing Windows 95, Microsoft pops up the bold statement that "Everything You Do Will Be Faster and More Fun."


      It's been 9 years and they STILL haven't delivered.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  25. But don't kill by 9-bits.tk · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... the Open-source marketing droids. If we managed to get some of Microsoft's marketing department staff into open-source, and have them promoting it, we would have a faster-growing marketshare than what we have now. The problem with Microsoft is that the so-called "Independent Studies" aren't independent, and they only look at the short-term expenses. Migrating to Linux may be expensive for a business, e.g. buying new hardware if the selection you have is incompatible, training staff to use the new system, etc. but if you look at the long term benefits, you'll find that costs are reduced dramatically. Windows IIS web servers are more likely to be defaced than Apache servers, although IIS is a small fraction of the servers on port 80 out of the entire internet! Security? Pah! The only reason that there is more security patches is that they are found and fixed quicker. I am using Mandrake 10.0 and I download the updates in bulk. There is a batch every to download and when I have finished there is no more to download for the rest of the week! Read http://opensource.org/, ESR's article Get The FUD in the Halloween documents section. Its just brilliant.

    1. Re:But don't kill by 9-bits.tk · · Score: 1

      Accidental. I thought the first one didn't go. When I posted the original, it threw up an error message.

  26. He's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >>Linux images running on two z900 mainframe CPUs and a Windows Server 2003 image running two 900MHz Intel Xeons chips.
    >>Linux is 10 times more expensive than Windows

    he is comparing price of z900 with Xeon 900 machines.

  27. ./ Banner Ads by bubba_ry · · Score: 0, Troll

    Think we'll see those Windows vs. Linux banner adds on ./ anymore?

    1. Re:./ Banner Ads by Justin205 · · Score: 1

      You mean the annoying flash-based ones I seem to find on all too many articles, including this one? Yeah, it was the one that popped up when I loaded it...

      Yeh, talk about irony...

      And even more ironic is the fact that when I click "Get the facts" on it it simply refers me to Microsoft's main Canadian page. No facts in sight.

      --
      "Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you."
    2. Re:./ Banner Ads by torzsok · · Score: 0

      Come on people, we all knew it was bullshit. I don't say it was obvious bullshit for everyone, but it was not that difficult to find out. Now they will come up with something esle that will be a bit more subtle. I did click and follow the link from time to time though, assuming that MS pays for each click. It just felt so good knowing that I'm giving MS money to Slashdot! I can't wait clicking the next geddaafacks link on slashdot!

    3. Re:./ Banner Ads by Devi0s · · Score: 1

      Nope. Just article after article with argument after argument summarized by:

      Linux is cheaper! No license needed and runs a hell of a lot more stable that Windows.

      Windows is cheaper! Setup tools require less experienced admins, setup/configuration takes less time, and everything in the network talks to each other without tweaking!

      Linux requires expensive admins, but the good admins will ensure more stability/security, and the experienced staff will be able to solve problems more quickly.

      Windows has 24/7 support, but MS tech support needs at least 24 hours to remove their heads from their asses and give a solution other than "just re-install; we don't know".

      Linux has poor architeture-wide support/configuration/management tools; only those who buy big business versions of Linux from IBM, etc. will have tools that even come close to enterprise management tools.

      Linux in the small-medium business requires custom management scripts and tools, but more experienced admins can take care of this easily with shell scripting and perl, rsync, gold box mentality, and good IT/IS practices.

      It all boils down to: Get what you prefer, but use it correctly and in combination with good IT/IS people and practices.

      --
      - Have you ever noticed that the more you learn about technology, the more stupid you sound trying to explain it?
    4. Re:./ Banner Ads by Stevyn · · Score: 1

      Who cares? So Microsoft is paying for ad space on this website. I'd rather they pay than me. Consider it my return on investment.

    5. Re:./ Banner Ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wont. Firefox's Adblock extension is a niiiice thing.

  28. Only 1 Linux image on a mainframe is inefficient by spookymonster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real cost savings in running Linux on a zSeries mainframe comes from consolidating multiple server images under one box - either 16 servers running in native LPARs or 20+ under z/VM virtual machines.

    --
    - Despite popular opinion, I am not perfect.
  29. Advertising. by malkavian · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to work in an advertising company. Oddly, the one that held the Microsoft account in 1995, when MS released Windows 95.
    At that time, there were a few 'jinks' planned for the release that were not, strictly speaking, legal.
    They knew that they'd get their wrists slapped, perhaps fined heavily.
    The company take on it? They knew they may get caught up for it, and slapped hard. But these jinks would get the 'message' across in a spectacular way.
    Nobody looked too hard at the slapdown and retractions, because they simply avoided the limelight. They had to look apologetic to the right people in private, and it was all forgotten.
    But people at large simply remembered the original advertising stunt.

    In this, it's the same thing again. They knew they'd be held up by the ASA, and torn down a strip, and forced to stop the advertisement.
    However, they also know that the tech-unsure IT Managers and CIOs and so on will probably see it, and start saying "See, this Linux thing isn't so cheap after all! Stay with MS".
    Advertising like that is meant to stay in the head along with the words 'survey' and masquerade as fact, so that in a future discussion that's on the subject, they won't say "I saw an advert that said Linux is more expensive than Windows", they'll say "I saw a SURVEY that showed how windows was cheaper to run than Linux".
    Damage already done. Although the lie has been caught it's already spread, masquerading as fact.
    They've earned their money, MS will pay any required fines (they've probably already been built into the pitch before it was released), and MS will be smiling all the way as the flung mud sticks, as it always does.

    1. Re:Advertising. by dunstan · · Score: 1

      I don't know how it will work in the US, but I would have thought that while this tactic is fine for the advertiser it's not so great for the advertising agency. I don't work in advertising, but in most similar fields an adverse ruling from the watchdog body is a serious issue, and affect the reputations of the agency and the executive running the campaign long after the advertiser themselves have moved on.

      Being a voluntary body, the ASA can only issue a ruling, but as soon as self regulation by the industry starts to be undermined by intentionally misleading campaigns, as you describe, there will be pressure on and from government to introduce statutory regulation.

      D.

      --
      The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
    2. Re:Advertising. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Punishment should be to run advertisements of the same size and in the same magazines as the original ad to retract the claims. That way, it gets the same exposure as the original ad.

      Sounds fair to me.

    3. Re:Advertising. by malkavian · · Score: 1

      Advertising is all about following a line that's a lie, but has a fragment of truth in it (such as basing the comparison on different hardware for an OS comparison).
      It's not an outright lie, in which case, the agency would be slammed, and lose face.
      The distortion of the truth is directly proportional to the depth of the pocket of the commissioning company. By the time your agency has the clout to advertise for microsoft, you'll be able to take a few extra liberties (and the experience to know just how far you can go to get a mere slap on the wrist).
      After all, if you've shown that you'll sell your integrity for a message that on the whole succeeds at doing what your sponsoring company wishes (generating a particular perception within the target market), and only generate invisible ripples, you'll keep the account. Which is worth big money.
      And perhaps draw other similar big hitters to you.
      It really is a fine line, and it's sometimes deliberately crossed. But just often enough that it stays in the realms of fines and wrist slaps, not increased regulation.

      As for pressuring the government to regulate the industry, nobody in industry wants advertising regulated more heavily, as that's what generates their income.
      Most people don't know that the advertising is misleading, or wrong (otherwise it'd fail, and thus not do it's job, and so the hiring companies would take their money elsewhere), and the few people that pick up on it aren't enough to make a big enough splash to get heard in the first place.
      Don't expect the Media to pick up on that one, as Advertising is one of the things that pays their bills too..

    4. Re:Advertising. by sicking · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Unfortunatly I'm sure this happens all the time. The basic problem is of course that the punishment is smaller then what is gain when commiting the crime. It's the exact same thing when Microsoft breaks antitrust regulations all over the globe, it's simply a business decision.

      The cure of course is to increase the punishment of these crimes. When it comes to adverticement, it would be very efficient if the company had to run ads saying "sorry, our last ad was found to not be true. Linux isn't 10 times as expensive after all becuase we didn't run a fair test".

      With punishments like that I'm sure companies would think twice before lying in ads.

      Another pretty interesting approach was taken recently in sweden by an anti-smoking group. They ran ads saying things like "smoking will reduce the size of your penis" and "smoking makes girls dumb". The purpose of the campain was to show how tobaco companies lied in their ads. The ads did have a small text pointing to the campains homepage where it all was explained.

      Wouldn't you just love ads by red-hat saying "Microsoft purposly put security holes in windows so they could sell support time when your systems crash" or "Microsoft Word was written in sweatshops in tanzania" :-)

      --
      Failing to learn from history dooms you to repeat it.
    5. Re:Advertising. by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Any 5 year old will tell you it's easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    6. Re:Advertising. by Kadmos · · Score: 1
      They knew that they'd get their wrists slapped, perhaps fined heavily.
      The company take on it? They knew they may get caught up for it, and slapped hard. But these jinks would get the 'message' across in a spectacular way.


      A good standards board would make Microsoft to fund an ad campaign which points out their decpetive conduct/mistake (in a manner equal to the original campaign) and offer compensation (determined by the standards board) to all affected customers.

      I think this is the reason I don't see many Microsoft ads in Australia...
  30. Re:+1 to my pride of being from the UK by hachete · · Score: 1

    You can have him. Take him. Please. Now. I'll pay you. Anything. Go ransom his guide dog. Anything to stop the miserable little1928x343nx- nm

    --
    Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
  31. Not surprising it came from the UK by antifoidulus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    weren't they also the ones that slammed Apple for claiming the g5 was the fastest personal computer on earth?

    1. Re:Not surprising it came from the UK by mccalli · · Score: 4, Interesting
      weren't they also the ones that slammed Apple for claiming the g5 was the fastest personal computer on earth?

      Yes, they were.

      I've also had good experiences with the ASA on a non-computing related matter (well, only tangentially related anyway). There were adverts for an online gambling site's poker service put up in Tube trains, with titles like "Sucker", "Gullible" and "Greedy", each one having an arrow pointing straight down at whoever was unfortunate enough to be sat on the seat beneath.

      Which included me.

      Unwilling to be called gullible purely for the sake of some slimy gambling joint grabbing more cash, I went via the ASA website and complained. Apparently I wasn't the only one, and it took just three weeks for the adverts to be withdrawn. A good result I think.

      Oh, and yes - you'll have heard of these cretins should you be unlucky enough to see pop-up ads still. I'm certainly not giving them any free publicity by mentioning their name here though.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    2. Re:Not surprising it came from the UK by mccalli · · Score: 4, Insightful
      So are you gonna call the cops if I call you gullible to your face?

      If you're doing it for commercial gain, yes. If it's your genuine opinion about me - nothing I can do except try to refute it.

      That's the difference. This was commercial speech, not personal. It is not an advert's place to put a blanket insult pointing at a random person using a public space.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    3. Re:Not surprising it came from the UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      titles like "Sucker", "Gullible" and "Greedy", each one having an arrow pointing straight down at whoever was unfortunate enough to be sat on the seat beneath.

      Which included me.

      Unwilling to be called gullible purely for the sake of some slimy gambling joint grabbing more cash, I went via the ASA website and complained ... it took just three weeks for the adverts to be withdrawn
      to be replaced with ones that said "smart arse", presumably.
    4. Re:Not surprising it came from the UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a gullible sucker of a pussy you are.

  32. Still misleading... by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They should have run the two operating systems on identical (PC) hardware. After all, the x86 platform is the original platform of Linux too, and probably the best supported. So this would be fair to both systems.
    Thus, the hardware costs would be a draw and the cost comparison would actually be about software.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
    1. Re:Still misleading... by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh I entirely and completely agree that it is misleading - what they compared wasn't Linux versus Windows, it was Linux-as-IBM-would-have-you-have-it versus Windows which is quite a different beast altogether.

    2. Re:Still misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can they even RUN Windows 2003, on a mainframe computer?

    3. Re:Still misleading... by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
      Thus, the hardware costs would be a draw and the cost comparison would actually be about software.
      You underestimate the creativity of the marketing mind. There are still outs, like for their test in that situation, they would "purchase" their version of Windows Server 2003 at their OEM discount rate of $50 or whatever, while buying their version of Red Hat Enterprise Whiz-bang Edition with 10 year on-site support contract for $5,000 or something.
      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    4. Re:Still misleading... by unoengborg · · Score: 1
      You underestimate the creativity of the marketing mind.

      How true. I'm still waiting for:
      The hourly cost of a person doing windows is much less than the hourly cost of a Linux sys admin.

      --
      God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
    5. Re:Still misleading... by groovemaneuver · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That actually IS part of the stupid "get the facts straight" campaign. What this and other silly comparisons always conveniently leave out is the fact that a good Linux admin can handle 50-100 boxes (more in an identical cluster situation), whereas a good windows admin can handle 20-30 boxes.

      How about some math:
      (these salaries are made up and meant to illustrate that even if your Linux admin makes DOUBLE what your Windows admins make, it's still a better deal.)

      Linux admin: $80K, Win admin: $40K

      30 machines: Linux $80K, Win $40K
      30-100: Linux $80K, Win $160K
      100-200: Linux $160K, Win: $280K

      So now let's try it with closer to real figures:
      Linux admin: $50K, Win admin: $45K
      30 boxes: Linux $50K, Win $45K
      30-100: Linux $50K, Win $180K
      100-200: Linux $100K, Win $315

      If Windows admins are in fact paid less, Windows can only come out ahead in small operations. Furthermore, the closer Win and Linux admin salaries are, the better the savings are in a large operation when you go with Linux.

      Also as an admin, if you see that even Microsoft is saying that Linux admins make more money, why would you waste your time learning their system? Show me the MONEY!

    6. Re:Still misleading... by groovemaneuver · · Score: 1
    7. Re:Still misleading... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      What turned it into a lie is that this context was not mentioned in the advertising. It just nebuously referred to the research report.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    8. Re:Still misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would say something in Microsoft's defense here, only my brain isn't made of pudding.

    9. Re:Still misleading... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Given that most Linux sysadmins go "ewww yuck! microsoft!" when asked to do some work on a windows machine, and most Windows sysadmins go "ewww yuck! linux!" when asked to do some work on a Linux machine, there is obviously some profit to be made by those that can work with both without making pansy "ewwww yuck!" noises.

      :)

      Theres a point at which anal retentive pedantry stops paying off.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    10. Re:Still misleading... by groovemaneuver · · Score: 1

      I definitely agree that knowing both is only a benefit to a good sysadmin. However, I think as time goes on, you tend towards one or the other.

      The problem with wearing both caps is that you end up being a jack of trades serving two masters. (How's that for screwed-up, mixed metaphor?)

  33. "Results may vary outside the United States" by sczimme · · Score: 4, Interesting


    Douglas Adams described the Vogons as "not being above bribery and corruption in the same way that the sea is not above the clouds" (something like that - I'm working from memory). For some odd reason that phrase popped into my head as I read the article.

    Another interesting bit:

    "...The results showed that IBM z900 mainframe running Linux is much less capable and vastly more expensive than Windows Server 2003 as a platform for server consolidation.*" The ASA said the asterisk linked to a footnote that said: "Results may vary outside the United States".

    I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean: is Linux less capable in Abu Dhabi than it is in the US? Are the results are reversed in the southern hemisphere? One might think that - if the study were conducted properly (big if) - the figures would remain proportional even after pricing for markets and conversion of currency (exchange rates).

    --
    I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
    1. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, didn't you know that for loops run in the other direction in the southern hemisphere?

    2. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux is less capable here in the US because we're running on good ol' 60hz power instead of the 50hz power found in other countries. That works out to fewer computations per cycle.

    3. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Douglas Adams described the Vogons as "not being above bribery and corruption in the same way that the sea is not above the clouds"

      I'm not sure that makes sense, though. Seems to me it would mean that the Vogons ARE above bribery. The sea is not above the clouds, so that part is true. So it simplifies to Not Above Bribery = True.

      Oh wait, never mind.

    4. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by autophile · · Score: 5, Funny
      ...The results showed that IBM z900 mainframe running Linux is much less capable and vastly more expensive than Windows Server 2003 as a platform for server consolidation.*" The ASA said the asterisk linked to a footnote that said: "Results may vary outside the United States".

      Because the higher the voltage at the outlet, the faster the electrons in the CPU go.

      --Rob

      --
      Towards the Singularity.
    5. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One might think that - if the study were conducted properly (big if) - the figures would remain proportional even after pricing for markets and conversion of currency (exchange rates)

      Uhh, this has nothing to do with the study and everything to do with how IBM & Microsoft prices things in different markets. Of course they won't remain exactly proportional everywhere.

    6. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by timmi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Methinks the difference is the dirt cheap prices M$ sells its software for in countries that don't respect US copyright

    7. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by jinxidoru · · Score: 1

      You see, in the southern hemisphere hard-drives spin in the opposite direction.

    8. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by timeOday · · Score: 4, Funny
      The ASA said the asterisk linked to a footnote that said: "Results may vary outside the United States".

      I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean: is Linux less capable in Abu Dhabi than it is in the US?

      it means "dont sue us if you happen to read this in a country that has enforceable truth in advertising laws"
    9. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by jhines · · Score: 1

      Legalese, MS wants some kind of protection against the laws that other countries have against these types of claims.

    10. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's also overlook the fact that linux on a $2.2 million dollar machine is more expensive than windows on a $2000.00 PC?

      I really want some of those drugs MS employees get....

    11. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by mehgul · · Score: 1

      What did the mods really think when they modded this "interesting" ? Really that the speed of electrons varies with outlet voltage or what ?
      Oh well, at least it wasn't modded insghtful.

    12. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by Wizarth · · Score: 1

      Reults may vary because MS varies their licencing costs in different countries, not just based on exchange rate. Every time there is a currency conversion, some marketer thinks its a good idea to round up a few digits.

      "Oh, it converts to $741 Australian? Lets make it a nice round $800."

    13. Re:"Results may vary outside the United States" by sanermind · · Score: 1

      Do they? ...While I'll never!

      --

      ---
      the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
  34. zLinux more expensive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm actually surprised the TCO of a Windows box is still not higher than that of mainframe zLinux. I would have thought it would have been (though I doubt they looked at TCO).

    1. Re:zLinux more expensive? by UglyMike · · Score: 1

      My guess is the 'single Linux image' that did it. Compare it to running a single treaded process on the NEC Earth simulator and then saying "See, it's not all that fast, is it?" Mainframes do not have blistering fast CPUs. They do have very bg pipes

  35. well, I guess that sounded better than... by blue_adept · · Score: 1

    "Windows Found To Be Infinintely More Expensive Than Linux"

    --

    "Is this just useless, or is it expensive as well?"
  36. No no no, this is good news by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    If running Linux on a mainframe is just 10 times more expensive than running Windows on a crappy PC then I bet most managers would favor Linux straight away. More scalable, more reliable, what do you want more?

    Having said that, you'd be even better off if you could find a way to let your application run on a bunch of PC Linux boxes that together meet the scalability and reliability of z900 systems.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
    1. Re:No no no, this is good news by spookymonster · · Score: 3, Informative

      Having said that, you'd be even better off if you could find a way to let your application run on a bunch of PC Linux boxes that together meet the scalability and reliability of z900 systems.

      Just to clear up some misconceptions about the mainframe:

      Mainframes don't just get their power from having faster CPUs:

      - The z/Series I/O architecture is far more efficient, requiring significantly less CPU overhead than x86 designs.

      - IBM implements bleeding-edge tech into their hardware designs, things that are a good 2-5 years ahead of the consumer market. Of course, you wind up paying a premium for the priviledge...

      - The most recent designs are geared toward grid computing and server-farm-in-a-box implementations. Sysplex and the coupling facility (think Beowulf clusters), shared kernels, and so on.

      For an interesting overview of the benefits of using a z/Series mainframe as a server farm, I'd suggest reading this article -
      http://eservercomputing.com/mainframe/articles/ind ex.asp?id=252

      --
      - Despite popular opinion, I am not perfect.
  37. advertising IS BAD ! by rozz · · Score: 4, Interesting
    advertising IS THE REAL EVIL ... PERIOD.
    advertisers calculate ~like this :

    a lot of people are too lazy to do their own reserch

    a lot of people are too dumb to do their own reserch

    about the remained ~5%, we don't care

    and the obvious conclusion - it don' matter what crap you tell them, make it sound nice and they'll buy

    as about stigmatising MS for this .. i don' wanna say they are the nicest company, but ANY big company that ever did advertising, had at least one similar campaign

    or think about this sample AFAIR, Carlsberg ran a spot saying "Carlsberg - probably the best beer in the world"
    think about the uproar after a "Windows - probably the best OS in the world"

    advertising is the real bad-guy here, not MS ... advertising takes away your freedom of choice by exploiting your lazyness or dumbness ... and they do it so good, most of people even enjoy it!

    --
    "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
    1. Re:advertising IS BAD ! by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      IBM runs linux server adverts, as lame as some advertising is you can't really ban it (they did say _probably_ the best beer right?) i say let them all fight it out, the OSS community is about producing good software which is why its not even on the same playing feild as microsoft (which is about selling software) - companies that sell linux are the ones that have to compete with MS not kernel.org so sit back and let them..

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    2. Re:advertising IS BAD ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which explains why dubya and Kerry are neck and neck in the polls. People are too stupid to do their own research, and believe whatever their television (or in this case, magazine) tells them.

      Just as this fake ad is debunked and eyes roll among the intelligent observant, there are still stupid people out there, and when you challenge them on it, they'll believe so strongly in their false position that they will say "oh, you heard it on slashdot? I bet Linus says it too"

      Infuriating. The biggest problem these days is willful ignorance. Oh yeah, dubya is the worst president... ever.

    3. Re:advertising IS BAD ! by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      Part of the problem comes from the fact that ethics are not taught in school. In order for something like this to come off, you have to have ethical failures by at least three distinct parties: Microsoft, their advertising agency, and whatever media the advertising was displayed in. If zero out of three institutions have the moral clarity to get rid of this nonsense, I don't think we can attribute it to the advertisers, I think it's part of the general lack of ethical standards and me-based morality of our generation. To these three entities, all of this was ethical because it benefitted them.

    4. Re:advertising IS BAD ! by rozz · · Score: 1

      sorry but my post is supposed to be way more profound then a simple MS vs OSS fight .. and i have nothing against the idea of competition ... but some of the methods are disturbing
      anyway, thx for the input

      --
      "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
    5. Re:advertising IS BAD ! by rozz · · Score: 1
      Part of the problem comes from the fact that ethics are not taught in school

      u r right, the education system evolved in the wrong direction in the last few centuries .. instead of trying to produce nice human beings, now they produce "specialists" ... what good is an amazing assembler expert if the guy can't even speak with a girl, or decide what food is good for his health?

      --
      "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
  38. rofl by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    sounds like the sort of crap you hear down tottenham court rd - "ah yeah i've tried linux its not so good, but if you buy windows XP from here, for an extra 50 quid we'll give you a 10 year warrenty incase your urm OS er breaks down!" i've heard that windows 2003 server on a 2.4GHz pentium 4 runs 10 times faster than a top-of-the-range 1964 IBM mainframe!

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  39. Americans by jb.hl.com · · Score: 4, Informative

    For all you Americans, this serves as an introduction. This here is what we call "regulation". It stops businesses being dicks by not bending over backwards to them at every opportunity. Our economy has not yet collapsed. Amazing, that.

    --
    By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    1. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought he was being ironically funny. :-( Don't worry as the American east coast mods get to work (and start surfing /.) this will be modded flamebait.

    2. Re:Americans by Thrymm · · Score: 1

      I guess there are no unmoral companies operating outside the USA then? No corruption? Must be nice.

    3. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Our economy has not yet collapsed.

      Nor has it produced much of anything worthwhile. MS was not formed in the UK. Neither was SUN, Netscape, Ford, etc...

    4. Re:Americans by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      However, we did invent the railway and start the Industrial Revolution.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    5. Re:Americans by l4m3z0r · · Score: 1
      Nor has it produced much of anything worthwhile. MS was not formed in the UK. Neither was SUN, Netscape, Ford, etc...

      This implies that the companies you listed are worthwhile. Furthermore, the parent is right but mostly being a troll. Your point actually proves his argument. Why would a company want to be based in a country that will side with consumers over said corporation. All them companies were founded in america for a reason. Because they toss money at the US government and presidential candidates and then in turn officials/presidents look the other way while these scumbags run to the bank.

      There is no way in hell I'd start a business in the UK, its too damn hard to be evil there. In america evil is encouraged/rewarded.

    6. Re:Americans by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      The word you were struggling for was immoral or perhaps amoral.

      And nope you're right, there are no immoral or amoral companies outside of the US.

      What a silly bunt.

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    7. Re:Americans by Larsing · · Score: 1

      What, the British ot the American..? ;-)

      --
      Ethics is what you say you do. Morals is what you actually do.
    8. Re:Americans by shish · · Score: 1
      I guess there are no unmoral companies operating outside the USA then? No corruption? Must be nice.

      it is :D

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    9. Re:Americans by Larsing · · Score: 1

      Nice indeed! We've got unionised labour too, and public healthcare, and free Viagra...

      --
      Ethics is what you say you do. Morals is what you actually do.
    10. Re:Americans by quietlysubversive · · Score: 1

      you might note that you only did that during an age of very limited regulation.

      food for thought.

      --
      ----(o)----
    11. Re:Americans by DAldredge · · Score: 0, Troll

      Remind me, is #10 still trying to get rid of Double Jeorpady and are they still have their lawyers argue that those that defend their homes are threats to robbers and should not be given probation because they might hurt someone breaking into their home?

    12. Re:Americans by jb.hl.com · · Score: 0

      erhaps because there was fuck all to regulate?

      It wasn't until past the beginning of the revolution that corporations started acting like jackasses in the way they do now.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    13. Re:Americans by G00F · · Score: 0

      lol, some people just are clueless, and plame everything thye can

      Ford was a mechanic.
      bill gates college drop out. (granted his daddy owns a law firm)
      Netscape, college students and a teacher.

      Not to mention, each of them live in the USA. But the really deap pockets are from from Europe. Lots of old powerfull companies. Lets talk about the natzi companies who used/abused slave jews. I think that financial mess is still being work on.(law suits from the jews who worked there etc) We can also talk about the mafia's. They have a lot more power, and are a lot more bold back in the old countries(even more so in polland, russia, etc).

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    14. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, we did invent the railway and start the Industrial Revolution.

      Past accomplishments shouldn't be used as excuses to stop and rest.... and they shouldn't prevent you from continuing onward with the same vigor....

    15. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remind me, are you still shooting the shit out of each other at every opportunity?

      Yes? Excellent. Carry on.

    16. Re:Americans by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      We cloned them sheep too. And invented the WWW.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    17. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      For all you Americans, this serves as an introduction.

      Hey, I don't need an introduction. We have regulations too. Sometimes they are pretty good. Sometimes they are protectionism. Sometimes they are very lacking. As in this case, where in America it's legal to mislead and deceive people in advertising. You can't out right lie, but the effect is the same. I think constant deceptive advertising on TV is destroying our moral values, but the party of "moral family values" doesn't care about lying by companies. They only care about sex (and lying about sex by the opposition).

    18. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why must you continue this tribalism?? Are you being an intentional troll? If so good job, if not, wtf!

    19. Re:Americans by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      The Brits :D

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    20. Re:Americans by Oddly_Drac · · Score: 1

      "We can also talk about the mafia's."

      We could, but that would mean checking into the historical precedence behind Las Vegas, and that could be a painful process. Also the Cosa Nostra was more of a family enterprise until someone boosted their ability to run various scams during the 20s by banning booze and raping the stockmarket. Incidentally, there's this thing called 'corruption' which was rampant during that time and involved everyone to the extent where the 'untouchables' were formed as the few guys that were truly untouchable by the mob.

      'Russian mafias' are fairly egregarious group which arose in the relative power vacuum left by the collapse of the KGB and before the FSB called in as many contacts as it could. The KGB was involved in numerous black bag operations which *required* access to the black market to use weakness as a lever. The KGB operated many black markets as a method of control, and when the legitimate money stopped flowing, it made sense for the operators to go dark.

      On the other hand, I loved your allusion to 'nazi companies', because Ford, GM and Chrysler were supplying Germany up until Germany declared war on the US; this wasn't just vehicles, but also included aero engines for the Luftwaffe. The car plants were hurriedly converted in 1939 to boost the aviation production.

      The cute thing is that Ford and GM demanded reparations for damage to these plants from the government and got them.

      IBMs work with the census calculation machines is well known, Henry Ford's antisemitism was legendary and he never returned the medal given to him by two Reich Officers that came to Michigan for the purpose.

      "But the really deap pockets are from from Europe. Lots of old powerfull companies."

      Were. Bear in mind that the rise of facism disenfranchised a great deal of wealth in the form of confiscated holdings, let alone the necessary rebuilding that had to take place after the levelling of many of the cities. America stepped into the breach left by a war damaged europe and significantly cleaned up, despite having De Gaulle call in old debts and nicking America's gold reserves.

      But on the whole you failed to see the point where laws in Europe are placed to regulate companies that behave in amoral ways, whereas laws in the US appear to be placed to protect special interest groups which claim to represent voters. Go look up 'plutocracy'.

      --
      Oddly Draconis
      Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
    21. Re:Americans by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      But regulation stands in the way of Hypercapitalism ("predatory" or "looting" capitalism). The British to me represent a lot of "old money" ... they underwent their Hypercapitalistic phase in their Empire, looting other regions mercilessly, and now it's over. In America -- an Empire still -- a lot of wealth is up for grabs. Standing in the way of the grab is what Americans complain about.

      Americans don't want regulation. They want looting. They want the positive virtues of a violent Empire: fraud, deceit and trickery. Your UK had enjoyed that for a long time. Now it's America's turn (before NYC is nuked, at least).

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    22. Re:Americans by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Are you still trying to arrest those butchers who want to sell their meat in Lbs?

    23. Re:Americans by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      Actually, a lot of regulation _helps_ predatory capitalism. When you have a lot of regulations, then the only companies that have the capital to make a profit are the existing entities that caused you so much trouble you had to start regulating in the first place. The only new companies who can overcome this are large, monied companies. This leaves small, value-based, ethical companies completely out of the picture, so, at best you wind up with a regulated immorality, rather than a free morality.

      What really needs to happen is for free citizens to stand up and start NOT BUYING PRODUCTS from people who are obviously grossly immoral.

    24. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like MS or Apple cares. They did the adverts in the first place and new that they would get slapped. They don't care since the punishment is trivial.

    25. Re:Americans by G00F · · Score: 1

      My point was to the person I was replying to. That those companies was not started with big money, and that they didn't chose to go to USA. And that other contries have dirt as well.

      American Law came from england. Cept 1 major change wich has completely disapeared from our books. All people have rights that shall not be infrindge.

      I pretty much fail to see the point of your post, kind of pulled mine way OT with it.

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    26. Re:Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free viagra?
      That's sticking it to the man!

    27. Re:Americans by Oddly_Drac · · Score: 1

      "My point was to the person I was replying to."

      And horribly public, too. ;o)

      "And that other contries have dirt as well."

      Absolutely. One of the best criterion for someone not totally jingoistic is the ability to find and accept that every country on the planet has it's dirty little secrets, including the one whose flag you fly. The thing that annoys most people east of Manhatten is the sheer ignorance of these things that an increasing number display. I can see that you're a discerning individual, though, and don't get caught up in fallacious beliefs.

      "American Law came from england."

      No it didn't. The concepts came from England, but your government structure is different, your judicial system is different and it's mutated faster than bacteria on strontium. About the only thing that is the same is the overall concept of property, and it differs wildly between the UK and US.

      "All people have rights that shall not be infrindge."

      The UN declaration of human rights pretty much codifies that, but I understand that you're naturally worried about the UN coming in and stealing your women.

      "I pretty much fail to see the point of your post"

      I was calling you on your rhetoric. I consider it a form of sport to hold mirrors up and enagage people on the things that they try to sidestep.

      Incidentally, you didn't really answer anything in my post, just complained.

      --
      Oddly Draconis
      Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
  40. This seems like desparation .. by Peter_JS_Blue · · Score: 2, Interesting
    .. from a company who knows its years are numbered. Perhaps one day someone will do a proper "shoot-out" between WindowsXP, Linux and the BSDs, however I read somewhere that you could violate your Win EULA if you made the results public - can anyone confirm that ?.

    I have also been watching the WinXP-SP2 saga play out and it just seems like "business as usual" to me. I'm sure they will get it right in the end - just in time to start the whole process all over again with "LongHaul" - opps sorry, Longhorn.

    --
    Art Makers Just an excuse to show photos of naked women !!
  41. Duh! by RLW · · Score: 2, Funny

    DDDDDDuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!
    Finally we have proof that government does watch TV.
    Oh, right the Jackson thingy, well I guess now we have proof that the governemnt watches TV even when boobs are not on display.

  42. Re:/. Found guilty of Misleading Advertising by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    Well, aside from the fact that slashdot is just peoples opinions and isn't commercial advertisements..
    If sun were to start publishing untrue statements about star office then yes, you would have grounds for complaint..
    As for the truth of the statement, for many functions openoffice is viable, for some it is not.. It is totally subjective to your needs.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  43. When will they really be punished? by DrugCheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most government have heavy laws to try and help protect people from corporations. Yet if a person is brought in to court on so many charges in a time frame the court adds them all up hoping to get a better view of how the person is acting in (and hurting) the society. But giant corporations, they can get hauled to court constantly even over the same charge again and again and courts treat them all as seperate cases. Why not look at the big picture and see what these giants are doing to society and pass judgement trying to change something rather then trying to say something the corperations obviously aren't going to listen to?

    --
    *DrugCheese rants*
    1. Re:When will they really be punished? by BigGar' · · Score: 1

      Two words: Class action

      --


      Shop smart, Shop S-Mart.
  44. Advertisement of new product by Effofx · · Score: 1, Funny


    BJD Enterprises has a new penis-envy gel called "Micro/Soft." Rumor has it, their advertisement is misleading, but I highly doubt it.

    --
    - Gentlemen, start your hybrids!
    1. Re:Advertisement of new product by Thrymm · · Score: 1

      It's the corporate world we live in. A lot of companies will mislead in order to claim their piece of the pie. MS probably isnt even sorry they were found guilty, they still won in many circles probably just by getting their propoganda out there in the first place.

    2. Re:Advertisement of new product by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      Hell yeah, just remember - if [cost of lawsuit] [money made from actions] then its good! the negative publicity is nothing because only /. readers will findout and they already hate MS.

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    3. Re:Advertisement of new product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there should have been a less-than sign there, stupid slashdot:\

  45. As Vic Reeves said... by StoatBringer · · Score: 0

    88.2% of statistics are made up on the spot.

    --
    Cress, cress, lovely lovely cress
  46. Re:Ok..Show Me by vettemph · · Score: 1

    Show me the false claims with specificity.

    --
    The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
  47. the Bikini thing by Abundantes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As my old math prof said:

    Statistics are like a Bikini: showing interesting details but hiding the important stuff.

    --
    This is good for nothing. Ignore it or send it to the Customer Care Dept.
    1. Re:the Bikini thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More then him have said that..

      Statistics are like bikinis; What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.

    2. Re:the Bikini thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mine used to say "people use statistic like a drunk uses a lamp post, more for support than for illumination!"

  48. Microsoft Math... by artemis67 · · Score: 1

    10 x 0 = $2000

    Wow, no wonder their software is so buggy!

  49. It's simple really... by Glock27 · · Score: 2, Funny
    How do you know the marketing guy is lying?

    His lips are moving.

    (Or, in this case, his fingers are typing.;)

    --
    Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
    Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    1. Re:It's simple really... by BCW2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Marketing - selling the un-neccesary for an un-reasonable amount, to people that have no use for it.

      I almost got a marketing degree, then I figured out I wasn't qualified, I had a conscience!

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  50. The Webserver Example by Halo- · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The whole idea of generically computing TCO is fraught with problems. The "total cost" is going to greatly depend on what the platform is used for and by whom.

    I think you've got to look at common examples where the profit margin is thin, highly competitive, and tightly linked to actual operating overhead. If you an price web hosting, a Windows/IIS solution is more expensive than a Unix-based one. The cheapest hosts are always Unix-based, and ironically they tend to also be the most "reliable" (according to uptime....)

    I'm sure there are examples of where the TCO of Windows on the same hardware is cheaper than something Unix-based, but for most serious work, Unix still rules.

    1. Re:The Webserver Example by G00F · · Score: 1

      "I'm sure there are examples of where the TCO of Windows on the same hardware is cheaper than something Unix-based, but for most serious work, Unix still rules."

      Not to be a troll, but desktop is cheaper TCO. Mostly because getting mass market computers cost the same w/ or w/o. Also lots of aps. Can't say linux, not when you have to upgrade 10 diffeent lib packages when you only want to upgraid gaim.

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    2. Re:The Webserver Example by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

      You never heard of urmpi ?

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  51. Not the first time... by shigelojoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hell, Microsoft was guilty of false advertising when they released Microsoft Works.

  52. took longer then expected.. by auzy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    considering my home server running windows cost $100 for the windows copy, and my linux server cost $0 for the software, hmm, I wonder whats cheaper

    1. Re:took longer then expected.. by qray · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is more to cost than the software. My time is worth at least $50 an hour. And so if I have to muck around with a free piece of software more than commercial it can quickly become more "expensive" than its commercial counterpart.

      Would you take a free car if it cost $1000 for gas and maintenance?

    2. Re:took longer then expected.. by laird · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's an interesting hypothetical statement. Let's inject some actual data.

      Windows not only costs more to purchase, in my experience it also costs for more to administer. I ran a huge farm of servers (hundreds of 4-CPU servers) that could run both NT and UNIX, and it took 4x as many sysadmin's per server to keep the _same_ servers running under NT than UNIX. On top of that, we could tune the UNIX environment to the application far better than NT, so we also got 2x the performance on the same app's under UNIX than NT (so we had to run the same app on 2x as many servers). This meant that in large scale production, we consistently (several years) measured NT as costing 8x as much as UNIX to run. Of course, you also have to factor in NT's relative instability as a server environment (try running ASP's with DLL's), but that hardly helps NT's case.

      So let's rephrase your statement as: "There is more to cost than the software. My time is worth at least $50 an hour. And so if I have to muck around with a commercial piece of software more than free it can quickly become even more "expensive" than its free counterpart.

      Would you take a commercial car if it cost $1,000 for gas and maintenance?"

      There, that's better.

    3. Re:took longer then expected.. by qray · · Score: 1

      The equation I was driving at is valid, software + hardware + setup + maintenance = cost. In my particular case Windows won out. I've been using Windows since Win286, so I know it well. I've used UNIX on and off over the years so I'm not nearly as versed in it. So another component that I would get out of this discussion, is that using Windows guru's to admin UNIX/Linux system is expensive as would be using UNIX guru's to admin Window servers. It's similar to the UI arguments on the Mac. I've been around a lot of Mac users who swear by the UI. After having a Power book for a couple of years I just ended up swearing at it.

    4. Re:took longer then expected.. by auzy · · Score: 1

      I can see how it could, i just think that there is no possible way that 10X more costs could be accumulated on a small server anyway, especially considering its not the os itself that causes most the cost, but rather the programs you use in it, and to me, theres probably no easy way to measure that

    5. Re:took longer then expected.. by laird · · Score: 1

      The equation is certainly valid -- I don't think that anyone would argue that the cost of administering software shouldn't be part of the TCO. But from having managed experienced teams of sysadmin's running both UNIX and NT systems, I've never seen the costs for administering NT be even close to UNIX. The fundamental issue (IMO, of course) is that UNIX was designed to be an efficient server OS, administered by professionals in large server farms, while NT is really a desktop OS designed to be administered by GUI desktop users. So the GUI tools, registry, etc., that make NT administration for individual boxes a bit easier for junior sysadmin's ends up making it very, very hard to administer large production NT systems.

      That being said, I admire the underlying OS in NT -- if you ran the core OS, and removed all of the GUI and Windows API layers, it'd be a very nice, efficient, stable server OS. NT embedded is modular, and could probably be stripped down to be a good server OS, but that's not what MS wants to sell as a server OS.

  53. MOD ABUSE ALERT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this a troll? Slashdot has had anti-Linux ads for a LONG LONG time and the editors and OSDN has long refused to answer any questions and whenever someone mentions it here on Slashdot, it seems to get censored by the moderators.

    Are we so beyond the capability to discuss this that we just instantly mod it down and hope no one sees it? If so, that is a very sad state of affairs.

  54. Re:Only 1 Linux image on a mainframe is inefficien by id09542 · · Score: 1

    I agree with additions, consolidating 100 Linux systems and needing fewer sysadmins in a shop that already has a z infrastructure can save a lot $$$$$.

  55. Fool by Smuttley · · Score: 2, Informative

    How is the system funded?

    The ASA's work is funded by a small levy on display advertising and direct mail expenditure. In order for the ASA to preserve its independence from the advertising industry, a separate body, the Advertising Standards Board of Finance, collects this income. The only cost to consumers is the price of a stamp, or the time spent online, to send a complaint. The ASA's budget for the year 2003 is just over £4 million.

  56. Obligatory Homer Simpson quote: by walterbyrd · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. 14% of people know that."

  57. Micro$oft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... bought the U.S. Federal Government in the 2000 election.

    Next Question?

  58. Marketing example! by bs_02_06_02 · · Score: 1, Funny

    My favorite marketing examples take place in movie advertising:

    You see quotes like,
    "Fantastic!" -- Boston Globe
    Then you see the movie, and you realize that the critic said, "Fantastic waste of money!" and the marketing types couldn't be bothered to include the entire statement in their ad blurb.

    Marketing pukes that do this stuff should be taken out to Death Valley during high season and left there. Tell them to be creative, and maybe they'll get out alive.

    --
    -- No sig for you!
    1. Re:Marketing example! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is unfortunately very true.

      Not often, but occasionally, studio publicists will take the appropriate words out of a critic*s review or soundbite and fit them into a context more befitting of their product. Ebert is a frequent target for misquote, finding sentences like *a series of slapstick comedy adventures* from his one-and-a-half star review of See Spot Run or *Funny* slapped across ads for Adam Sandler*s Little Nicky, which was also met with negativity.

      http://efilmcritic.com/feature.php?feature=525

  59. The Damage Is Done by rinkjustice · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Now that Microsoft has been "found guilty" of misleading advertising, I wonder what their punishment will be? Life sentence at a hard labour camp? Confinement in a maximum security prison? Did the Gates family weep as the sentence was handed down?

    Seriously, the UK Advertising Standards Authority have no authority, and there are likely no repercussions for Microsoft. Many whom have read those false claims and erroneous statements (and especially the poor saps that bought into it) will likely never hear the truth. The lies have been perpetrated and spread. It's like the old man who climbs to the top of a mountain and releases a bag of feathers to a mighty gust of wind. Those feathers are like lies: they spread to the four corners of the earth and are impossible to retract.

    1. Re:The Damage Is Done by Armchair+Dissident · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the most obvious penalty that Microsft faces is that to the trade press this is news. There's often no need to require advertisers to print a retraction of their claims, as the headlines will say it all.

      How many people in the IT industry, for example, are not aware that Apple were forced to withdraw their G5 claims?

      --

      The ways of gods are mysteriously indistinguishable from chance.
    2. Re:The Damage Is Done by erik_norgaard · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, so they spend millions misleading people through their advertisment, how about they spend the same amount denouncing their adds in the same media: "We are sorry, we lied to you... Microsoft".

    3. Re:The Damage Is Done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the most obvious penalty that Microsft faces is that to the trade press this is news

      This isn't a penalty because the IT industry already knows that MS costs more and G5's aren't that fast. The adverts were not directed at the people that know it was a lie in the first place. There is no penalty to this type of action or they wouldn't be doing it.

  60. Consolidation by dunstan · · Score: 1

    But rather than running multiple OS images in z900 domains, it will be even more cost effective to run a single Solaris 10 (SPARC or X86) image with applications running in zones.

    D.

    --
    The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
    1. Re:Consolidation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or even an IBM RS/6000 (pseries).

      Basically the Mainframe "Server Consolidation" line is bunk -- nobody does it except the True Blue customers that are already walking around like Mr Goatse: "Oh wow! With Linux IBM is only sticking one fist in my ass instead of two! Linux is so great!!!"

    2. Re:Consolidation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mr. Goatse is a bad example. He's an inch freak, what can I say.

  61. Advertising Standards Authority? by nwbvt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Man, its a good thing we don't have that here, or else what fun would political campaigns be?

    --
    Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    1. Re:Advertising Standards Authority? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Amusingly enough (IIRC), political advertising is exempt from ASA rules - i.e. they ARE allowed to lie.

    2. Re:Advertising Standards Authority? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason being that the ASA does not want to involve itself in politics, or be seen as favouring one party/candidate over another.

  62. Your Link DOES NOT ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...support your assertion. Rather, the "nailed Apple" link is to a page wherein the ASA dismisses two of the three complaints. Are you a Republican apologist? The improper behavior is the same.

  63. Microsoft had a valid point by ajs · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The original reason for the research was to counter IBM's claims that you could reduce your TCO more by converting to Linux on a mainframe than to Windows on PC farms.

    BOTH OF THEM WERE CORRECT.

    In the IBM case, they were looking at it from the point of view that you already had mainframes, and you wanted to make them cheaper to maintain and keep up with modern software trends. They were correct.

    In the Microsoft case, they were analyzing what it would take to convert over to mainframes or start from scratch. They were correct.

    Where MS went horribly, horribly wrong was when their marketing folks took this, perfectly reasonable, research and referenced it in ads to the general computing community without any indication that it was a comparison relevant only to a particular niche market!

    MS did some good research here, but the applied it unethically. Let's be clear on what we're coming down on them for!

    1. Re:Microsoft had a valid point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're right, they had a point:
      if they can get a z900 for 10x the price of a Xeon box + win tax, I want a z900 too.

    2. Re:Microsoft had a valid point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      MS did some good research here, but the applied it unethically.


      No...the MS marketing department applied it unethically, which is what they are paid to do. And they probably have a bit of an excuse since they aren't tech people.

      "The tech guys just sent us this report saying it would cost a lot to convert to Linux. Man...this stuff just writes itself!"

    3. Re:Microsoft had a valid point by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      That's the standard way to get away with lying - say something that is true only in one particular narrow context, and then repeat it incessantly without repeating the context, to people who hadn't heard the original context. When someone calls you on it, you can get all indignant and accuse them of taking your statement out of context, when actually you're the one removing the context and they're just calling you on it.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    4. Re:Microsoft had a valid point by BillyBlaze · · Score: 1

      Ignorance is not an excuse for acting unethically. Even being paid is not an excuse for acting unethically. They're evil, plain and simple (not that this is specific to Microsoft's marketing department).

  64. If you don't like the truth by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Then have someone invent it for you. Seems to be all the rage lately.

    Advertising has always played around the fringes of the truth, like system specs. But lately it's gone from stretching the truth to inventing it.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  65. I complained to OSDN by mpcooke3 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I saw these TCO ads running on slashdot I complained to OSDN. They didn't deny the ads were misleading but didn't seem to want to stop running them. Their argument basically revolved around the fact that slashdot users wouldn't take the ads seriously anyway.

    I stated at the time that I thought they would be in breach of UK advertising law.

    1. Re:I complained to OSDN by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      Yeah, after seeing a few moving shaking ads in the middle of the article. I decided to simply not see any more of them.

      At least I'm not costing them the bandwidth now.

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
  66. Microsoft must now put right their lie by bobblebob · · Score: 1, Funny

    So will Microsoft now be made to re-run the ad with an apology for misleading readers?

  67. exactly the same thing.... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ...governments do when they want to "sell" some political decision they have made or are about to make.

    Page one - MOBILE BIOWEAPONS WARFARE LABS FOUND!

    Page 87, several weeks later -Mobile bioweapons labs found to have been helium production units for weather baloons

    and etc.

    Over-sell the big lie up front, over and over, in as many ways as possible. Also helps if "you" are the ones tasked with later verification. This is a +1 bonus for governments. Hmm, lotta discrepancies in the war on terror and whatnot. Idea! Let's hand pick our own guys to investigate- us!

    That should-and did-work.

  68. Microsoft _is_ our government in the US. by GoMMiX · · Score: 1

    Well, co government - they sit alongside the RIAA and MPAA as dictators.

  69. Re:Ok..Show Me by CountBrass · · Score: 1

    RTFA!

    The claim that their ads were MISLEADING was upheld. It wasn't claimed that what they said was false.

    The reason it's misleading is because they were comparing chalk (1 Linux image running on some heavyweight iron that could take 20 times the load) versus cheese (some high-end PC hardware running 1 Windows image). They then used this to make a misleading claim.

    --
    Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
  70. False claims? by erroneus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You're joking right?

    Perhaps a little more than a year ago, I personally made the assertion that Linux is great...even unmatched on the server side, especially for the cost involved but even without costs considered, I think Linux does an amazingly good job. But I also said Liunx is not ready for the desktop as I found it slow, unstable and barely usable.

    What has changed? I have better hardware though that shouldn't have been the difference. We have newer X releases, new Open Office releases, GNOME wasn't even 2.0 at the time was it?

    In any case, what has changed is largely my lazy ass. One day I just decided it was time to learn to use the thing as more than a server. And without many failures (I have this little digital camera for which no Linux support exists), I haven't run into any task I couldn't complete with satisfaction under (currently) Fedora Core 2. (please, I know there are other distros and KDE "Kicks De Ess!" and all that, but I'm comfortable with GNOME and FC2)

    My point here is that at this point in time, I truly feel it's ready for prime time. More than that, I feel it's NEEDED prime time. The net has been getting a lot of attention for being unsafe for machines with a Microsoft OS. There are too many holes to plug even for experts in the field so I cannot imagine how helpless end users feel (though from my view they seem like helpless children getting f*cked up the ass and don't yet realize that this is immoral and wrong.)

    The only thing that needs to change at this point in time are the minds of users.

    But like the adoption of USB technology, it's a kind of chicken-egg thing. And ultimately, it was the makers of hardware that brought realization of the potential of USB. I suspect it will again be manufacturers (of PCs this time) that will bring realization of Linux's potential on the desktop.

    It's ready. It's just a matter of whether we can get the hardware people out there to support Linux better.

    1. Re:False claims? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point, I'd like too add..
      For those that claim Linux is not ready for the desktop. It is not Linux that is not ready, it is that YOU are not ready to run Linux on the desktop. My kids and i have been using Linux on the desktop for at least 3 yeas now. The games are lacking but I have a W2K machine for that.

  71. Okay. by mindaktiviti · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    mindaktiviti@yahoo.com It's worth a try. :B

    1. Re:Okay. by LighthouseJ · · Score: 1

      I got a returned email saying a user with that username doesn't exist, did you type it incorrectly? Reply here with a correct email to claim the invite.

  72. Re:+1 to my pride of being from the UK by pjt33 · · Score: 1
    Fair Use - nonexistent!
    Sorry, were you talking about the UK or the US?
  73. Well for that matter... by donscarletti · · Score: 1
    EU != UK

    So why do you mention the EU?

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    1. Re:Well for that matter... by strider44 · · Score: 1

      I think he meant EU as in Europe. Don't be so picky.

      Anyways it reminds me of the G5 commercial that said "The first and fastest 64 bit desktop processor". AMD had two things to say about that one!

  74. Well what do yuo know..... by Rusty+Nuts · · Score: 0, Troll

    Linux runs on a PC and an expensive mainframe? Wow, sounds pretty flexible to me. I mean, if I were looking for an OS to bet my company on, which would I choose, one that runs only on PCs or one that runs on PCs, mid range computers, high end clusters and mainframes? Wait, do I even have to ask? Sheesh!

    --
    Team Rusty Nuts
    You can't rush procrastination!
  75. Irony? by loconet · · Score: 1

    Once again I read this article as I see a "Windows 2003 outperformed every Red Hat Linux configuration tested -- source: Veritest" ad. ..

    --
    [alk]
  76. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by ThePiMan2003 · · Score: 1

    Might as well try akavan@huskerglass.com

  77. Microdot by Hassman · · Score: 1

    Wow. 3 stories about MS on the main page. A MS ad on the top of the page now...

    Amazing. Can we change the tag line from "news for nerds" to "news about MS"?

    --
    -Mark
    Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
  78. So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not unlike Apple and many other companies...

    What's the big deal this time? Simply that it is Microsoft?

  79. Exorcise the Demons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly, we've got a surplus of MBA's in this country. I say everyone start drawing pentagrams, and we'll make like the Aztecs.

    "OUT! OUT, YOU DEMONS OF STUPIDITY!"

  80. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gerard_sweeney@hotmail.com

    And if it results in more spam, then the more the merrier into my junk email box :-P

  81. Mod parent up by StringBlade · · Score: 1
    Exactly!

    Why would you want to tarnish the "knight in shining armor" Windows alternative image of F/OSS with some scummy, low-life, underhanded marketing tactics just to turn some heads?

    I feel dirty just thinking about it...where's my brain floss?

    --
    ...and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
  82. Mirror... by matz62 · · Score: 0

    Microsoft slammed over misleading Windows Linux claims

    Compared a mainframe to a dual 900MHz Xeon kit

    By INQUIRER staff: Wednesday 25 August 2004, 08:24
    THE UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld a series of public complaints over an advert in a magazine comparing the cost of Linux versus Microsoft Windows.

    An advert it ran compared the two operating systems to each other, but Windows was running on a measly dual 900MHz Xeon configuration, while Linux was running on a z900 IBM mainframe.

    The advert appeared in an IT magazine and was headed: "Weighing the cost of Linux vs Windows? Let's review the facts".

    The ad contained a graph comparing the cost in US dollars between a Linux images running on two z900 mainframe CPUs and a Windows Server 2003 image running two 900MHz Intel Xeons chips.

    The ad claimed: "Linux was found to be over 10 times more expensive than Windows? Servers". It said that "in a recent study audited by leading independent research analyst Meta Group, measured costs of Linux running on IBM's z900 mainframe for Windows-comparable functions of file serving and Web serving. The results showed that IBM z900 mainframe running Linux is much less capable and vastly more expensive than Windows Server 2003 as a platform for server consolidation.*"

    The ASA said the asterisk linked to a footnote that said: "Results may vary outside the United States". The people who complained challenged whether such a comparison was misleading, because the operating systems were run on different hardware.

    In its adjudication, the ASA upheld the complaints. While the ASA said the advertisers wanted to compare how competing file set ups were audited by Meta, it took expert advice. The IBM z900 running Linux was 10 times more expensive than running the Windows OS. It would have been possible to compare the two OSes on similar hardware.

    And the ASA ruled readers would infer the ad compared Linux and Windows OSes only.

    The ASA said: "Because the comparison included the hardware, as well as the operating system and therefore did not show that running a Linux operating system was ten times more expensive than running a Windows operating system, the Authority concluded that the advertisement was misleading." µ

  83. Trust by twitter · · Score: 1
    Sooner or later, people figure out they have been lied to and don't trust you anymore. Is there anyone who will take Microsoft's "facts" seriously?

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Trust by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      I used to believe that.

      But how do you explain the Republican party in the US? Or the Christian Right?

      There is an entire class of gullible people, who even when exposed to the truth, insist the propoganda they were fed was true.

      I just need to figure out how to tap they stupidity for my own purposes...

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    2. Re:Trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Old troll, EvilTwinSkippy, scratches his greed and says:

      I just need to figure out how to tap they stupidity for my own purposes...

      First you must understand your own purpose.

      Second, you need a grammar checker.

  84. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by xk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    bk_at_lasthop_dot_ca

  85. This Ad. was also hosted by Slashdot by DVega · · Score: 3, Funny

    I've seen the same ad. running on Slashdot in the recent past

    --
    MOD THE CHILD UP!
  86. Advertising IS BAD ! -- Wrong! by jacksdl · · Score: 2, Informative

    The real evil is the "lazyness or dumbness" you mention in your last sentence not advertising.

    Since we don't teaching critical thinking skills in schools, we aren't equipped for democracy and freedom in general. We need to arm our population with the tools to recognize bs when it is shoveled on them.

    1. Re:Advertising IS BAD ! -- Wrong! by rozz · · Score: 1
      you have some point ... but you are wrong

      no they are not .. people have a lot of defects ... it's the human nature and that's why we have education ... EXPLOITING this defects instead of helping to correct them is "the bad thing"

      --
      "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
  87. Don't feed... by Ignignot · · Score: 1

    This is such a clear troll, I wish I had some mod points to push it down. I might be doubtful if it weren't for his inciteful replies later on. Please don't respond to this anymore. We have no need for national tribalism.

    --
    I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
  88. OB Bill Hicks Quote by Halthar · · Score: 5, Funny

    "By the way, if anyone here is in advertising or marketing, kill yourself. Thank you, thank you. Just a little thought. I'm just trying to plant seeds. Maybe one day they'll take root. I don't know. You try. You do what you can. Kill yourselves. Seriously though, if you are, do. No really, there's no rationalisation for what you do, and you are Satan's little helpers, OK? Kill yourselves, seriously. You're the ruiner of all things good. Seriously, no, this is not a joke. "There's gonna be a joke coming..." There's no fucking joke coming, you are Satan's spawn, filling the world with bile and garbage, you are fucked and you are fucking us, kill yourselves, it's the only way to save your fucking soul. Kill yourself, kill yourself, kill yourself now. Now, back to the show."

    ""You know what Bill's doing now, he's going for the righteous indignation dollar, that's a big dollar, a lot of people are feeling that indignation, we've done research, huge market. He's doing a good thing." Godammit, I'm not doing that, you scumbags, quit putting a godamn dollar sign on every fucking thing on this planet!" ~ Bill Hicks

    1. Re:OB Bill Hicks Quote by jaymz-sid · · Score: 1

      Mod it up!! Whats this "Score: 1" BS??? Come on!

    2. Re:OB Bill Hicks Quote by JonLatane · · Score: 0
      quit putting a godamn dollar sign on every fucking thing on this planet!

      But I like Perl!

  89. Penguins and the ASPCA by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

    The ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) recently went to a linux solution. Here's a press release with the gist of the story. What they don't tell you is the reason the ASPCA went to the Linux solution is because the Microsoft Exchange server they were using was going down for several hours at least once a week. This was bad because the ASPCA needed it to exchange information with the Poison Control center and vetrinarians and couldn't when the server was down.

    The ASPCA went to the Linux solution and the server was up for 3 weeks before they rebooted it.

    Anybody else have details on the Windows to Linux migration by the ASPCA?

    --
    It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  90. Share and Enjoy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I expect this is Microsofts new Motto

    Now all they need is people to sing the song

    Maybe we can get 1000 Windows XP PC's to sing it

    1. Re:Share and Enjoy by Cat_Byte · · Score: 3, Funny

      It is definitely false advertising. I charge way more than 10X for my Linux consulting.

      --
      Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
    2. Re:Share and Enjoy by jayp00001 · · Score: 1

      If I only charged 10x more for Unix consulting I'd probably have to start buying domestic beer.

  91. Speaking as a marketing droid.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Personally, I don't like being marketed at myself. Unfortunately out in the real world, your competitor starts throwing mud and some starts to stick - fairly or unfairly. What are you going to do? Sit back and watch your market share shrink, smug in the knowledge that you are doing the right thing? Or do you retaliate - which leads into a spiral of fudged numbers and statistics and general confusion. Yes I know which I would prefer, but lets be real here. Companies, whether global domination types like Microsoft or mom and pops ice cream emporium - here's the shocker - HAVE TO MAKE A PROFIT. Deal with it ladies.

  92. A good step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A good first step would be to call this crap "deliberately lying to customers", rather than "misleading advertising".

  93. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by craig_film · · Score: 1

    chammond@dfjproductions.com

  94. Ironically a less biased news source reported... by Assmasher · · Score: 1

    ...that Microsoft was not slammed, but was warned that the ads were potentially misleading. The reason that the ads were not just deemed misleading is because the ad was made for the purpose of attacking a particular hardware niche in which the most common solution was a Z900 mainframe running Linux.

    The ads are no more misleading than every single Apple Computer add since the late 80's. Hey, did you know that Apple had the world's first 64-bit desktop? LOL...

    --
    Loading...
  95. OT: Love you dude... by VendettaMF · · Score: 1

    At laaaaasst! The Gig'o'mail is miiiiine!

    --
    kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
  96. Microsoft open sourcing... by nikkipolya · · Score: 1

    Well Steve/Josh..., whoever it was, ranting about MS open sourcing efforts. The first thing I would like to see MS open sourcing is the "Independent Research claims". If you are really serious about open sourcing first try to play it straight. Gain the confidence of the community that you wish to serve. Misleading the community with fake claims is like going orthogonal to your said goals. Remember, Open Source Software is built in the open, not behind veiled walls and half truths.

    Start trying to play straight and see the response.

  97. MS-Tunes To Eat the Apple Tunes Next Week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft will go public with their music store the end of next week, with MS Tunes or whatever they'll call the new itunes clone, Mediaplayer Ten, and extend and extinguish music choice all over Europe with an expansion

    Apple beware, you are about to get thrashed. Make friends and pound your enemies now!

  98. All advertising is misleading! by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

    I don't think I've ever seen an advertisement that hasn't been misleading.

    "Buy this, it's the best!", "We're number 1 amongst leading research!", "Approved by 4 out of 5 dentists!"

    All advertising is supposed to do is lead you to their product, or mislead you away from a competitor. It's simple Marketing101. And, depending on how you interpret the data you collect you can assert whatever it is that you want. "Percentage of cancer in newborns 50%, therefore cancer is due to aging."

    Advertising is interesting, but to fall for it - now that's dumb!

    --
    Live forever, or die trying.
    1. Re:All advertising is misleading! by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

      Correction: Percentage of cancer in newborns is less than 0.01%, percentage of cancer in 60-80 years olds is greater than 50%...

      --
      Live forever, or die trying.
  99. That's Microsoft done with, now how about.... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1
    ...the patronising Coca Cola advert where the black girl walks and sings down the street while she hands out free bottles of fizzy vegetable extract...

    ...the McDonalds/Burger King/KFC adverts where the pile of half-digested mush handed out to you by the bored teenager behind the counter looks nothing like the product handed out by the male/female model in the TV advert...

    ...Britney Spears drinks as much Pepsi as she sings about so that she ends up with no teeth, an obesity problem and a dissolved digestive system...

    ...the car advert that implies any Indian male (yes, racial sterotyping, now that's a first for advertising... NOT!) can take a hammer to any old piece of crap car and turn it into a Peugeot.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  100. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by ThePiMan2003 · · Score: 1

    Thanks a ton! Woot Gmail here I come.

  101. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by dragonp12 · · Score: 1

    gerard_sweeney@hotmail.com

    Ehhh, should have logged in first. Hope I'm still in time :-P

    --
    This is me. Don't like it? That's unlucky.
  102. a cancer to be dealt with by davidsyes · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Is what microsoft (lower-casing/deprecation intentional!) has been and is continuing to demonstrate itself as;

    hence why I describe them as:

    "-voracious (computing, real estate, banking, entertainment...)
    -omnivorous (buy up real or file fake patents)
    -belligerent (FUD, pre-empt moms & pops)
    -bellicose- (funding BSA, (no, not the Boy Scouts))
    -obtuse (pricing)
    -sprially spawning into numerous markets (see item above... let us hope they don't end up in airline cockpits)
    -prevaricators (faked video testimony, ROI, etc...)"

    in:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=119111&cid=1 00 60564

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  103. With this type of comparison... by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

    we should forget Windows and go with a Radio Shack TRaSh-80, which should be dirt cheap.

  104. You're right! by mindaktiviti · · Score: 1

    It's actually mindaktiviti@yahoo.ca (note the .ca at the end) I log in as "mindaktiviti@yahoo.com" and I barely use that email, so when I when I emailed myself from another account I realized "shit!". Thank you very much for the gmail account!

  105. OK, as long as we... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1
    We could compare Linux running on a WRT54G versus the cost of, say, a dual CPU P4 XEON system with 4 gbs RAM, SCSI array, redundant everything, and dual 19" LCD monitors.
    ...test this by putting twenty million random emails through the system, aimed at two million mailboxes plus 5% wrong addresses just in case. The WRT54G wouldn't even have room for the address mappings, the MS-Exchange box would be a puddle on the floor, and the IBM box would still be chugging along jess fahn.

    If testing as a webserver, I think putting a pair of $500 whiteboxes up against the IIS monster server would make the point nicely, no need to go all out here.

    If testing as a firewall, by all means use the WRT54G, it'll hammer the competition in bang for the buck.

    Now how about the rest of Microsoft's false advertising?
    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  106. Big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They pay the fine and it's over and done with. Just the cost of doing advertising. The damage is done. What Microsoft (and, indeed, all who perpetrate such fraudulent claims) should be forced to do, in addition to paying all the fines, is run another ad of exactly the same size, duration, and scope as the fraudulent one explaining that they tried to deceive the reader and were caught. That would be just punishment.

    1. Re:Big deal by bmrh · · Score: 1

      If you're in the US, and the normal style of advertising is to use exaggerated or misleading claims to get your attention, then your attention can *only* be grabbed by other misleading or exaggerated claims (or naked bodies of course)- and it means that you'll assume that any ad is misleading and exaggerated - so the one from Microsoft is no big deal.

      However, if you're in a country with stricter advertising laws, and you're used to seeing reasonable claims in ads, then why wouldn't you believe that the claims from Microsoft are real? You'd have no good reason to doubt those claims - and Microsoft shouldn't be able to make them because they are misleading.

      But the point is here: Microsoft broke the law by advertising this way in the UK. I'm assuming that the law is clearly there, advertisers in the UK need to pay attention to that, and Microsoft did not.

      --
      -- Brendan Hills
  107. bah, still happens in XP! by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 1

    I just bought a brand new dell laptop. it came with a dell USB memory stick. I plugged it in and it wanted a reboot.

    bah.

  108. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kind of similar to that scene in The Shining...

  109. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by karmatic · · Score: 1

    cyt0plas@gmail.com

  110. or Windows is infinitely more expensive than linux by burnin1965 · · Score: 1

    If you get caught then I think there is something like a $250,000 fine for violating Microsoft's copyright.

    So that would be $250,000 / $1.50 (a 3 CD distro) = 166,667 times more expensive to run Windows. And that's not considering lost revenue due to down time behind bars.

    But don't let that dissuade you. Do a risk assessment based on the probability of you getting caught and then make your decision.

    burnin

  111. Another thought on Linux Z by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many larger enerprise that find Linux on Z enticing already purchased that hardware many years ago. Factor in that the company probably saw a return on the inital investment of the box while it ran its mainframe application and they are merely looking at linux to extend that value further.

    Purchasing Windows most definily requires the purchase of new hardware.

    Another way to look at this is they might already have huge investments in back-end or infrastrcuture. That comes complete with the soft costs of operation.

    If said enterprise already has a large or larger investment in MF than they do in open systems, virtualizing those open applications on your existing back-end/infrastrcuture means you cut your theoretical support costs by half. Sure you still need your OS support people on the virtual nodes, but storage, network, etc.... live on 1 configuration.

    My guess is ultimately we will be using linux no matter what hardware platform while Microsoft goes into the mass market of coffee makers that integrate with your watch.

    my cowardly .02

  112. This just in.... by NIN1385 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft has killed an un-armed woman and her newborn child. Unfortunately the court system has a completely different legal system for corporations so they will be charging the mother for disturbing the peace.

    --

    If carrots got you drunk, rabbits would be fucked up. - Comedian Mitch Hedberg R.I.P. 03/30/68-2/24/05
  113. Quiznos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Anyone reminded of the Quiznos commercials? "The only way for the other guys to win...is to cheat."

  114. Yet another reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is yet another reason to get rid of Microsoft. Microsoft has done so many things that are either illegal or frowned upon. They lie to their customers, they fake evidence in court, they lie about TCO stistics, unlawful business practices, etc.

    How can anyone possibly trust a corporation which has performed in this manner? I wouldn't trust them with anything, and I will never use their products. It's too bad the panty-waist court system in this country won't do anything about it. I am hoping that someday someone in a position of real importance will actually punish MS for their behavior.

    I say we all stop using their products and let them go the way of the dodo... they deserve it.

  115. Besides... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
    Actually I would think that business managers would be more inclined to buy the WAY more expensive option. Isn't that Microsoft's and Oracle's bailywick already?

    Glad I work for a non-profit. Saving money is actually important. If only to have some fudge room for all the IT disasters other departments insist on having.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  116. What??? by Suriel · · Score: 0

    Yeah, that is misleading. Linux is 11+ times as expensive!

  117. I totally agree. by Azureflare · · Score: 1
    I've been saying this for a while on slashdot. I've tuned my box so I can make it do what I used to do on my windows box at work (which was a significant amount of applications / work).

    linux is ready for prime time. No doubt about it.

    People have a choice now; they just need to know about it. I suppose it's our job to let people know about it.

  118. Microsoft's test group... by FusionDragon2099 · · Score: 0

    ...probably consisted of gamers who had to hire freakin' HITMEN to get Transgaming to port their games.

  119. MegaCorporations run our government in the US by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    they shovel money to both Democratic and Republican canidates, so no matter who wins, the people lose.

    Microsoft shoveled enough money to get the DOJ off their backs.

    40 Wall street companies shoveled money to Bush, the same 40 companies also shoveled money to Kerry. Our government is already 0wned! :)

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  120. How can Linux cost more... by ShroomSolo · · Score: 1

    when its free to download and all you have to do is pick up a dead badger on the side of the road to install it on?

  121. that is not misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is outright lieing...

    false advertising...

  122. Damn, that's funny by Theatetus · · Score: 1

    And I had just used my mod points...

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
  123. Remember those Prego ads? by Lendrick · · Score: 1

    Prego Thick and Chunky spaghetti sauce is thicker and chunkier than Ragu Old World Style.

    Of course, god forbid they compare Prego Thick and Chunky with Ragu Thick and Chunky.

    "Hey, look, our thick spaghetti sauce is way thicker than our competiter's sauce that's specifically designed *not* to be thick!" It's the same kind of crap.

  124. Virtual Linux Severs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My company does exactly this, on cheap PC hardware. We can safely squeeze in about 20 instances of linux on a dual PIII 700 + 2G RAM 1RU, without noticeable performance hit.

    You don't need big expensive hardware to get lots of virtual machines running with fail-over options, these virtual instances are just a big file to the OS, we maintain backup copies of them on a backup server. If one of these physical hosts ever go down and take the 20 virtual hosts with it, we can quickly restore it by bringing up another cheap PC and slap the backup files on it.

  125. Bingo! (This is true in EVERY industry!) by Seng · · Score: 1

    I have yet to work for any company where the marketing people have half a clue as to the way things really work. I know of .one. company (A VoIP company - probably soon to go belly up with the feds trying to make VoIP tappable) that actually has salespeople with CCNE's that actually sell the network, submit a complete 'plan' for the system, and the engineers back home actually do the router/device configuration. I want to work there!

  126. Re:OT: 6 Gmail Invites To Hand Out by it_flix · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hey, Could I have one please? my email id is: jriaz77@yahoo.com

    --
    www.notesmax.com
  127. Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by rd_syringe · · Score: 1, Troll

    This is the 4th or so Microsoft article posted in the past 12 hours. Isn't there any cool Linux news other than its birthday? I know OSTG's employees are desperate to bash competitors using a "tech news" site it happens to own, but this is just overkill. I'm bored when I load the front page, and it's "Microsoft Is Evil," "Microsoft Does Something Stupid Again," "More Made-Up Microsoft Woes For You To Laugh At," and "Linux's 13th Birthday!"

    Just my opinion...feel free to disagree.

    1. Re:Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by Cobron · · Score: 2, Funny

      Agreed, the only times linux gets on slashdot is when there's something new or positive to talk about. Why can't we do that too wi...? ooow...

    2. Re:Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by Red+Alastor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft appeared on Slashdot when they released open source software. This was new, positive... and unexpected.

      --
      Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
    3. Re:Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm bored when I load the front page, ...
      Then why don't you just go away? Go read some other site like Microsoft.com or the like, since that's what you care about.

      Oh, that's right, you're only here to troll and cause problems. I forgot.
    4. Re:Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by WNight · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As long as Slashdot carries all the stories about the Monopoly that owns Linux trying to intentionally build incompatibilities into Linux to keep it from working with any other products. The stories about Linus dancing around shouting "Developers! Developers! Developers!". The stories about how Alan Cox was being flown around the world offering sweetheart deals to huge companies in order to keep them from considering alternatives.

      Oh, and don't forget about the exposes of how the Business Software Alliance performs unannounced searches of businesses, shutting down running machines and having untrained flunkies search for any unlicensed copies of Linux. Don't forget to detail how receipts for the product don't seem to count as proof of purchase - an unlicensed copy of Linux (one sold for different hardware doesn't count!) can cost your company $25k or more in "damages", which thankfully can be waived if you just sign the exclusive software purchase deal for the next ten years and agree to periodic audits...

      Also, how during the middle of a federal anti-trust lawsuit the people in charge of writing Linux wrote about using any means necessary to kill the competition.

      Oh yeah, Linus and Linux don't seem to generate that kind of news.

      Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe Microsoft has so many negative articles written about it because they actually do these things?

    5. Re:Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by Cobron · · Score: 1

      sarcasm
      n
      1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
      2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
      3. The use of sarcasm. See Synonyms at wit1.

    6. Re:Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by minion · · Score: 1

      I don't think I could have said it any better. That was great!

      --

      -- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
    7. Re:Rate of posted Microsoft articles on Slashdot by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Oh and don't forget about how Linus gave SCO 12 million dollars to sue MS.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  128. TOO MUCH COFFEE! by lcsjk · · Score: 1

    You went through cup 4 way too soon! Hold off till noon and you will get better!

  129. FUD and smear campaigns are ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the hot new advertising paradigm. Truth be damned - most people accept what they hear because they're used to people being basically honest. So it's time for some good old-fashioned exploitation. Lie through your teeth and if and when they catch you, the damage has been done.

  130. Let's get this done once and for all by erik_norgaard · · Score: 1

    Since we're at it, let's just once and for all finish the job, lets kill all those who don't shave them selves, and all those who shaves those who don't shave them selves, and all those who don't shave, and... If we have a good extintion program, we'll only have polar bears left when we're done... I'm a polar bear.

  131. Isn't it just great by Tonik,+the · · Score: 1

    Would you believe it? Microsoft basically helps popularise Linux. Not being a firm, an organization or a person, Linux can't spend money on ads. Microsoft helps it with its FUD campaigns, each of which is immediately proven bogus. People get to see what Linux and Microsoft are really all about.

  132. Misleading Advertisements? Can't be true by HateBreeder · · Score: 1

    ... Microsoft's conscious would never allow that!

    --
    Sigs are for the weak.
  133. The MS "Get the FUD" advert .. by Peter_JS_Blue · · Score: 1
    .. just shows how scared they are of Linux. They can't even test it on the same hardware - I wonder why not. Well done ASA for giving MS a good slap.

    The funny thing is that even if MS did beat Linux on the server front there is still FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD coming up behind.

    Be afraid MS, be very afraid

    --
    Art Makers Just an excuse to show photos of naked women !!
  134. Wait a minute... by hopethishelps · · Score: 1

    Have you ever seen a Microsoft ad that was not misleading? I haven't.

  135. Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it bother anybody else that Slashdot keeps running those "Windows is Faster than Linux" ads on Slashdot?

  136. Advertising is amoral by Loundry · · Score: 1

    advertising IS THE REAL EVIL ... PERIOD.
    # advertisers calculate ~like this : a lot of people are too lazy to do their own reserch
    # a lot of people are too dumb to do their own reserch
    # about the remained ~5%, we don't care


    Real evil? Okay. Consider this.

    I own a restaurant. I put an ad on the television or the radio that indicates what we do and where we are. People have come into our restaurant and enjoyed the experience as a result.

    This is "REAL EVIL" to you? Were those people who came to my restaurant somehow too stupid or lazy to "do their own research" on (God, I don't know) where they wanted to eat dinner? The fact remains that after several months of being open, I would guess (and I can only guess) that less that 10% of the people who would ever eat in our restaurant even know we exist. How can we get that number higher without advertising?

    I'd say there is a far cry from the ads we release to something more evil (like diet pills, for instance). Painting all adveritising as "evil" is shallow-minded of you.

    --
    I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
    1. Re:Advertising is amoral by rozz · · Score: 1
      so, you say that pushing your restaurant down my throat is a "good thing"?????

      how about nobody does advertising? ... and you get to be known in the old fashion - word of mouth... it's the most reliable source ever and all the involved parts are happy with it... if your restaurant is good it'll survive ... maybe it won't develop same as fast, but the ultimate purpose of a business is to be useful and enjoyable to everyone, not to make money "instantly" ...
      in fact, it's even simpler, the ultimate purpose is hapiness ... and the "get rich or die trying" program, executed at maximum speed is not exactly a hapiness generator.

      --
      "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
    2. Re:Advertising is amoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he's saying that not all advertising is evil, and he's right. Maybe you ought to re-read the post you are responding to?

  137. Only 10 times as expensive? by ohad_l · · Score: 4, Funny

    Damn, that's either a real cheap mainframe, or Windows is a helluva lot more expensive than I remember it to be.

    --
    If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
  138. Big deal by inkswamp · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I thought the UK's judgment against Apple for claiming that the G5 was the world's fastest PC was silly and (despite being ardently anti-Microsoft) I think this is silly as well.

    I mean, best of luck to the British for trying their best to keep advertisers honest. It's really the right attitude to have, but before pouring this much resources into this issue why not step back and think: it's freakin' advertising, fer fuck's sake! What do you expect? Hype and exaggeration are the bread-and-butter of marketing. They need to get your attention in a 20-second spot or a half-page ad or whatever. If they don't use half-naked women, they're going to make claims that cause you to do a double-take (although I think the half-naked women in computing ads concept has not yet been fully explored... hint, hint, Apple and Microsoft!)

    If you're really so thick-headed that you need someone else to point this out to you, that Linux may not be more expensive because a competitor's ad claims it, or that the G5 may not necessarily be the world's fastest PC, then you've got much bigger personal issues to deal with.

    --
    --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
  139. Wait! by Archimonde · · Score: 1

    But every defendant should have the same counter-prosecutor.

    You mean a lawyer? ;)

    I agree with the other points though.

    --
    Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
    1. Re:Wait! by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      A lawyer, like a priest, is a person tasked with explaining a forign tongue - a job rendered unecessisary by translators and school teachers. A literate society with access to translation has much less dependance of priests.

      The counter prosecuter's job is to defend the constitution - or the public's interest in a system of rights and immunities and should balance the efforts of the DA to provide a 1:1 ratio of crimes to people in prison without too much concern with who did what.

      The purpose of the CP is to compliment a system of justic in which every person is judged by an even playing field. If the state spends a dollar accusing, the CP should spend a dollar showing why the state may be trampling rights. No one should go to prison or not based substantially on the size of their purse, with respect to the size of the state's purse.

      AIK

    2. Re:Wait! by Archimonde · · Score: 1

      No one should go to prison or not based substantially on the size of their purse, with respect to the size of the state's purse.

      Ok. What if the defendants lawyer is paid the same amount of (state) money as the prosecutor is? That way, lawyers (I mean both sides) would take pride in doing their job, and the state at the same time can regulate the wages.

      --
      Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
    3. Re:Wait! by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      That would be closer to fairness certainly.

      But I believe that lawyers as the problem with law.

      Medicine should be excersized only be skilled practitioners because most people do not need to understand how a heart bypass is done,

      However, the theory of law, is first and foremost that the people can understand it.

      If ordinary people can't understand the law, it is too complicated - also, if a person is so unintelligent that he cannot understand the law, he likely shouldn't be held responsible anyway.

      Lawyers, as agents of private persons, permit the law to favor rich people, or said another way, they make accessing one's constitutional rights a question of cost.

      AIK

  140. What are you smoking? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    I don't want more market share. Linux is not an enterprise looking to obatin more market share.

    In any case, Linux popularity should increase only if it is helping people to solve specific problems. I want no marketroids bending the facts in order to obtain your fabled market share.

    If Linux was crap it would deserve to fall in disuse, to be an OS project does not give any application carte blanche to become popular.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  141. Obviously by El · · Score: 1

    They should have compared the cost of Linux running on a mainframe to Windows running on a mainframe... what's that? Windows doesn't run on a mainframe? Oh... so sorry!

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  142. Microsoft defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Officer in Charge
    The UK Advertising Standards Authority

    Dear sir,
    We would like to counter the charge that Microsoft used doctored report to falsify the result of cost comparison study against linux. Another outside, independent study has shown that Microsoft Windows indeed has lower TC0. For more info, contact the author,Dave Aitel, directly.

    Sincerely yours,
    Sir Bill Gates

  143. Hint: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insightful/Interesting give the poster karma. Funny doesn't. Can you guess why people first mod it up to +4 Interesting/Insightful and *then* +5 Funny?

  144. Shoot the lawyers (WAS:Marketing slime...) by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 1

    In criminal cases, the interest of freedom should be representated by an independant counter-prosector. The defendant should speak for himself or not as he chooses. But every defendant should have the same counter-prosecutor.


    Minor problem; prosecutors are lawyers too, your would-be counter-prosecutors are lawyers too.
    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:Shoot the lawyers (WAS:Marketing slime...) by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      Yeah, judges and politicians are lawyers generally as well.

      What I oppose, is the abiity of the rich to purchase a better lawyer to represent THIER PERSON.

      Companies, States, and Freedoms need proxies to speak for them. I'm not opposed to proxies speaking on behalf of abstractions. I am opposed to the rich buying themselves an unequal slice of the justice pie.

      or conversely the poor getting a thiner slice.

      The business of lawyering is not present in all historic systems. Socrates had to answer for himself. Like a draft which takes rich and poor alike - self representation has a more egalitarian appeal for me. Aditionally, we would tailor our laws to be more understandable if it were necessary for them to be understood.

      AIK

  145. Note to the MODS. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    It ain't a troll if it's true.

  146. lies, and D@mn lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There are lies, damned lies and statistics." Mark Twain

  147. Figures don't lie… by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My statistics professor used to say:

    "Figures don't lie. Liars figure."

  148. Silly Silly by superpulpsicle · · Score: 3, Funny

    Come on all, didn't you see that M$ commercial where the 19 year old looking IT kid saved the company a million dollars and ran the entire IT department with 1 windows 2003 server. All the managements were looking at the kid like "wow, can I worship you". This kid saved the company and $$$. I don't think even Linus himself could save a company with 1 windows license.

    1. Re:Silly Silly by dondelelcaro · · Score: 1
      I don't think even Linus himself could save a company with 1 windows license.
      Probably not... but he (or one of the tens of thousands of other GNU/Linux system administrators) could easily save a company with no windows licenses.
      --
      http://www.donarmstrong.com
    2. Re:Silly Silly by Fallen_Knight · · Score: 1

      Of course not! he would just put linux on some computer and save the company even mroe $$$!

      I do not belive for a second 1 windows 2003 server box could run a large companies IT department, and if so its pretty stupid, no redundancy (windows or otherwise for a large company you need that) and i assume it was a large company, with millions of $$$!

      In fact its more likely to happen when going from whatever -> linux then whatever -> windows, linux is free and only cost is setup with minimal matinance, windows is licenceing costs setup cost maintaing costs

      and while i think your post was trying to be funny someone modded it insightfull so bah! lol

  149. why not a death penalty for gullible people? by precogpunk · · Score: 1

    Working in advertising, I find it highly amusing when someone gets their undies in a bunch over mistruths in advertising. Have you EVER found advertising to be truthful, educational, balanced, or neutral? If the answer is yes, its obvious the advertising worked. Wither you are conditioned with an implied view of reality (drinking beer gets you laid) or bludgeoned over the head with a truth-stretching-statement the result is the same. So wake up, truth will not be handed to you on a silver plater. Advertising isn't about telling the truth (or lying), its about selling.

    1. Re:why not a death penalty for gullible people? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1


      Advertising isn't about telling the truth (or lying), its about selling.

      And "selling" does not require "lying". I have every right to get mad at someone who is lying to me and others. Absolutely. Being in advertising does not absolve you of the responsiblity to be an honest person. If you believe it does, then I say, respectully, up yours.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    2. Re:why not a death penalty for gullible people? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Working in advertising, I find it highly amusing when someone gets their undies in a bunch over mistruths in advertising.

      Do you also find it amusing when the 3-meter tall bodybuilder karateka, whose poor old mother you deceived out of the last of her money yesterday, comes to "talk" about the matter with you ?

      If you don't, then I suggest you rethink your moral values.

      Have you EVER found advertising to be truthful, educational, balanced, or neutral?

      No.

      That tells quite a lot about the people working in advertising, doesn't it ?

      So wake up, truth will not be handed to you on a silver plater. Advertising isn't about telling the truth (or lying), its about selling.

      If you lie to sell something, you are a liar and a treacherous swine and deserve to be beaten to a bloody pulp by those you deceived, after which you deserve to be put before court, stripped of any and all property and possessions to raise money to pay back to your victims their losses, after which you deserve to be thrown to jail.

      It never ceases to amaze me why people think that it's okay to do evil as long as you do it in the name of profit.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    3. Re:why not a death penalty for gullible people? by precogpunk · · Score: 1

      When you present something in its best light (which is to advertise it) people get disappointed when they find out that no, you didn't get transported to a utopian alternative state of existence. If I sell you that the can of coke with half the carbs, you'll complain that it's half empty. Even so, people keep buying for that conditioned temporary purchasing high.

      While I agree that flat-out lies have no place in advertising, you'll have to vote with your dollars about other 99% that falls into the grey area. Most people are casting the "I don't care vote", because those companies are still making money. Which bring me to my previous point:

      If people are too lazy to seek and out demand the truth in ALL areas of their life there's little chance of social improvement. If I present something in its best light you can brand me "deceptive", but I can consider you "sheep" for being too lazy to research the negative angles yourself. Those are the people who go to the mall and can't resist impulse buys, purchase a new car because they liked the television ad, or told the CTO to buy Microsoft because it costs less then Linux to maintain.

    4. Re:why not a death penalty for gullible people? by precogpunk · · Score: 1

      So when I talk about how "good" you'll feel after smoking is that deceptive because I didn't tell you that you can get cancer too? When I tell you how smooth the ride is in a SUV but neglect to mention all the people who are involved in rollovers burning to death -- is that deceptive? If I tell you Pepsi tastes right, but forget to mention that drinking 20 liters a day will make you diabetic, is that wrong? My point is, the facts are out there. Most advertising falls into the grey area, only talking about the product's benefits.

      My history has typically been promoting brands I believe in that do more good than harm. As a consumer, I know voting with my dollar is what matters most.

    5. Re:why not a death penalty for gullible people? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      In the alternate universe where OS purchases had no network effect on others, you're point would have made more sense - that people who make bad purchasing decisions reap what they sow, so screw 'em. But the problem is that, much like voting for a candidate for political office, when enough other people make a choice, I am affected by what they chose, regardless of whether or not I was one of the ones that made the same choice as them or not. The fact that others pick Windows means I have to deal with it too, like it or not.

      Much like with politics - you *don't* get what *you* deserve - you get what the majority deserve. You might not be a member of that majority. Given that, yes, it is my business if someone is lying in an ad. (And no, this was not just a case of MS presenting something in a somewhat eggagerated good light - this was a case of outright lying. When something is only true under one specific context, and you say it without supplying that context, you are making the false statement that it is universally true.)

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    6. Re:why not a death penalty for gullible people? by satans_advocate · · Score: 0

      Working in advertising, I find it highly amusing when someone gets their undies in a bunch over mistruths in advertising.

      Buy NewGlo uranium nightlight today! You won't need to buy another nightlight for 500,000 years! How many other nightlights offer that?

      Yes, you may have used those short-lived and safe nightlights before, but never again! Our NewGlo uranium nightlights come with a lifetime guarantee! The more you buy, the stronger your guarantee.

      But wait! There's more. Buy 3 NewGlo lights today and recieve a free carton of cigarettes!

    7. Re:why not a death penalty for gullible people? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      So when I talk about how "good" you'll feel after smoking is that deceptive because I didn't tell you that you can get cancer too?

      If you knew it, and thought it unlikely that I'd know it (if, for example, it was some trivia one would be unlikely to find unless one was already suspecting it), then yes, it is.

      A lie of omission is still a lie.

      When I tell you how smooth the ride is in a SUV but neglect to mention all the people who are involved in rollovers burning to death -- is that deceptive?

      If there's a good chance that the SUV will roll over and catch fire, and think that I don't know this, and don't mention it, then yes, you are being deceptive.

      If I tell you Pepsi tastes right, but forget to mention that drinking 20 liters a day will make you diabetic, is that wrong?

      No, because

      1. It is common knowledge that eating too much sugar constantly might trigger diabetes and
      2. It is pretty unlikely that anyone can drink 20 liters of Pepsi (or anything else for that matter) per day.

      Lying means intentionally deceiving someone. A lie of omission means leaving out something important to purposefully give a distorted picture of reality. It does not mean leaving out some completely useless trivia.

      Besides, it's impossible to predict every last stupidly dangerous thing someone might do with a given object, so listing them would be impossible too.

      My point is, the facts are out there.

      In your examples, yes. So why are you giving them as examples of deceptive marketing ?

      In any case, the original article mentioned an outright lie:

      "Linux was found to be over 10 times more expensive than Windows? Servers"

      In reality, of course, it wasn't Linux that was expensive but the hardware.

      Most advertising falls into the grey area, only talking about the product's benefits.

      Which is okay as long as any serious drawbacks are either public knowledge, obvious with a little bit of thought, or otherwise known to the customer.

      If they aren't, and you know this, and don't bother mentioning them, then you are a liar in the pitch-black area.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  150. hmm lets compare by josepha48 · · Score: 1
    apples and watermellons....

    I've had a GNU/Linux PC for almost 8 years now, and for each upgrade I've paid a couple of dollars, probably in total less than or around $50. I can't get a copy of any windows (except 3.1) for that price. The hardware is the same and once its setup it just works. So I don't get these win vs linux comparisons. They are both about the same today, it really depends on do you have windows admins or UNIX / BSD / Linux admins.

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!
    Does slashdot hate my posts?

    1. Re:hmm lets compare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      apples and watermellons....
      I guess, with spelling like that, you studied at Carneegy Mellon?
  151. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    500ml of Microsoft Vodka in a 1 liter bottle will get you just as drunk as 1 liter of Linux Vodka in a 10 liter bottle....

    This just in... Millions suffer hangovers after years of drinking Microsoft Vodka. Distilling techniques of Microsoft Vodka are now in question.

  152. Naive by Loundry · · Score: 1

    so, you say that pushing your restaurant down my throat is a "good thing"?????

    Since you believe all advertising is inherently evil and I obviously disagree, what made you think that a purely emotional and shrill argument like that would change my mind? You're going to have to use facts and reason if you want me to accept your point of view, not whining and multiple quotation marks.

    how about nobody does advertising? ... and you get to be known in the old fashion - word of mouth... it's the most reliable source ever and all the involved parts are happy with it... if your restaurant is good it'll survive ... maybe it won't develop same as fast, but the ultimate purpose of a business is to be useful and enjoyable to everyone, not to make money "instantly" ...

    You write things like this because you know very little about business. If my restaurant relied solely on word-of-mouth then it would have died in a matter of months.

    Allow me to illustrate. You admit that word of mouth will not bring business as quickly as other forms of advertising. While that slow form of advertising is taking its own sweet time to build up sales, the bills keep rolling in. Rent is $3500 per month. Power is $4000 per month. Payroll is $6000 per month. (Mind you, in all of this, I as the owner do not get paid.) I also have to have food prepped which costs money, liquor ready which is C.O.D., Internet charges, phone bills (which are orders of mangitude higher that the consumer bills that you're used to), insurance payments, cleaning charges, gas bills (again, orders of magnitude higher), and the list goes on and on. ALL of these bills have to be paid whether or not I have sales, and the bills come rolling in on day 1, not day "whenever I have enough sales to pay them."

    Now, according to you, I should solely rely on word-of-mouth advertising. Tell me, then, in the time that I have before word-of-mouth builds up, how am I supposed to pay all of those bills? Word-of-mouth can't do it fast enough! I don't have millions of dollars in the bank to support a money-losing business for years.

    So I have, according to you, two choices:

    1. Advertise and bring in business.

    2. Lose all my assets. Declare bankruptcy. Fire all of my employees. Destroy my credit. Disappoint all of my loyal customers.

    And I take it that you'll argue that #2 is the superior option because then I won't possibly inconvenience you with "evil" advertising. Quite frankly, since when was this about you and your petty feelings of rage, you self-indulgent little shit? God forbid that I deign advertise and allow this creation of mine to continue to provide for my employees, my customers, and (one day soon) my family for fear that I might inconvenience someone as important as you!

    This is not about "making money instantly." This is about making a business work. Most businesses don't just make money "instantly." (In fact, most restaurants that fail will do so within the first year. The fact that we have survived this long and are now breaking even is a success in an of itself.) Businesses take time to build, and, if you don't advertise, then all of the enormous amount of time, money, and stress that you poured into that business will most likely be wasted and you'll be much worse off for having tried. In your preferred world, where no one advertised, then only super-rich people would be able to start businesses because only they would have the capital built up to weather then necessary storm while word-of-mouth advertising built up business. Middle-class folks like me would never be able to do it.

    in fact, it's even simpler, the ultimate purpose is hapiness ... and the "get rich or die trying" program, executed at maximum speed is not exactly a hapiness generator.

    I don't count myself lucky that I have young, inexperienced people telling me how "simple" it all is. You hav

    --
    I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
    1. Re:Naive by rozz · · Score: 1

      you write a lot for a restaurant owner ... business slow? bad advertising maybe ? :)

      --
      "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
    2. Re:Naive by rozz · · Score: 1
      You're going to have to use facts and reason if you want me to accept your point of view, not whining and multiple quotation marks.
      my comment above your quote is a FACT and an ARGUMENT .. sorry about the "multiple marks", though

      You write things like this because you know very little about business.
      in fact i know too many things i dont like about this subject

      If my restaurant relied solely on word-of-mouth then it would have died in a matter of months.
      thanks for helping MY argument .. what u say only happens because everybody else uses advertising and people are lazy & dumb ... all other "arguments" from this section assume u r the only one that uses word-of-mouth ... wrong assumption, wrong conclusion(s)

      I don't count myself lucky that I have young, inexperienced people telling me how "simple" it all is.
      actually im not that young .. and btw, a proud business owner too.... not so many jobs provided but hopefully growing

      You have assumed falsely and childishly that anyone advertising is necessarily following a philosophy that they must get rich as fast as humanly possible or die.
      poor me, thinking that the only scope of advertising is to make more money, faster

      Did you also fail to consider that advertising isn't just about irritating your loftiness and filling (hah!) my coffers. It also pays the salaries of the writers, journalists, and editors in the newspapers in which we advertise. Just how did you think that those people got paid?
      so basically here's your "business model":
      "you pay some people to annoy me with your advertising"
      and you want me to agree, that's a "good thing" ... why stop here with the "good things"? why not paying someone to kill me? cause i bet i'm quite there in annoying u :)

      peace ... and let's both get some "real life", whatever that means

      --
      "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
    3. Re:Naive by rozz · · Score: 1

      i guess we are both strongheaded and none will convince the other, regardless of the arguments .. so lets just stop and hope we did not annoy too many people with this quite offtopic stuff

      --
      "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
  153. Minor terminology nitpick. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1


    it's not just a Microsoft problem - all marketing people are evil.

    This was an example of advertising, which is not exactly the same thing as marketing. In a way, marketing and advertising are opposites of each other:

    Advertising: Look at what your product line has, then try to get the marketplace to want it.

    Martketing: Look at what the marketplace wants, then try to get your products to provide it.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  154. So what you're saying is... by rd_syringe · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...Slashdot is a Microsoft news portal? My point was that I thought this place was a Linux tech news site. In the past two years, it's been little more than a Microsoft-bash site, complete with false headlines and stories.

    1. Re:So what you're saying is... by WNight · · Score: 1

      It's news for nerds. Microsoft's action, usually the type of things I listed above, are news because they impact nerds. Any everyone else, for that matter, even if they're unable to see it.

    2. Re:So what you're saying is... by Xaria · · Score: 1

      *sigh* The world isn't broken up into Linux and Microsoft. This is "News for Nerds" ... not every 'nerd' uses Linux. Some use Macs, some use FreeBSD, and a very large proportion use MS products. If you want a Linux-specific news site, look elsewhere. It also says "NEWS" not "TECH NEWS". You can find that all over the place. There are more stories on /. than make the front page, particularly some of the more esoteric tech ones - have a look in the appropriate sections.

      I shouldn't really need to point out why this is relevant to /. readers, particularly those after Linux news, but I will. This is relevant because the more it can be demonstrated that Linux is a viable alternative the more commercial funding it will receive. More commercial funding == more developers == better products. And because Linux is GPLed, that's always better for all the users. Take a look at some of the journaled filesystems as an example. AFAIK, none of them would have been developed without commercial (eg JFS) or military (ReiserFS) funding.

    3. Re:So what you're saying is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT. YHL. HAND.

      Love,
      rd_syringe (aka Overly Critical Guy aka bonch)

    4. Re:So what you're saying is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT. YHL. HAND.

      Love,
      rd_syringe (aka Overly Critical Guy aka bonch)

  155. Claime you're the best? Authorities: Prove it! by maggern · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here in Norway, if a company claims that their product(s) are the BEST, the official watchdogs ("marketing authorities") may ask the company for actual proof of this.

    One important aspect of this prosess is that you can't just footnote* something and then "it's up to the consumer to investigate". It is the first impression whithin a few seconds that counts! If the advertisment has the "ability to mislead" than the authorities may choose to ask for evidence.

    And the authorities don't accept no "bullshit-document" or study funded by the company where conclusions have been drawn in advance.

    If the "marketing authorities" aren't convinsed by the "evidence" presented to them, they effectivly forbid the company to state that their product(s) are the best.

    Punishment for breaking the prohibition is large fines (e.g. 80.000$) that cannot be appealed at any court. :-D

    Norwegian consumer-laws are very good :-)

    1. Re:Claime you're the best? Authorities: Prove it! by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Those laws are nice, however, I am sure there are a lot of loopholes.
      Scenario
      Soda Company: "We are the best soda company"
      Gov't: "Says who?"
      Company: "Ok, this independent study shows that we are best at customer service. So we say are the best. Plus the CEO says we are the best. Being the "best" is subjective."

      But if the Norwegian gov't is better at it, kudos - though I think the fine should match the offense and the company. 80,000 will kill a small company, but 80,000 to a company like MS is a joke.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    2. Re:Claime you're the best? Authorities: Prove it! by maggern · · Score: 1

      You have a point, sometimes it is hard to decide. In your scenario the gov't would ask a relevant question based on the initial 4'sec impression:

      Best? hmm, soda company sells soda-water, then they must mean that their soda-water is best?

      The gov't kinda "play" a "stupid" customer in order to get the first impression.

      Any company can be best at something, but it's their "essential" product that's the important thing.

      80.000 or even maxfine 150.000 dollar aren't that much, but we're only 4,5 million people in norway, så if you mulitiply with a population of 288 million (USA) it's up to 9,6 million dollars.(one advertisment could be enough)

  156. *Deep Breahting Noises* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anna...I am your father...

  157. Microsoft is Criminal, always has been by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft was built on the theft of intellectual property, depending, at first upon familial and business connections, and later on the influence purchased with their ill-gotten wealth, to evade the law.
    The number and frequency of clearly felonious behaviors by the company and its principles beggars belief. Any one of these actions is justification for revocation of the business license and trial and imprisonment of the corporate principals. The only things that have saved them is the greed and ignorance of the masses and the confusion of a corrupt plutocracy.
    And for those who think this is an unreasoned screed, let me just mention the name StackR. And consider your motivations that so easily blind you to the facts.

  158. Kettle, Pot by Edie+O'Teditor · · Score: 1
    Microsoft misled consumers by running advertisements claiming Linux is 10 times more expensive than Windows.
    Totally unlike the TCO & performance ones that appear regularly on slashdot, then?
    --
    If X is the new Y, and Y is "X is the new Y", solve for X.
  159. Didn't they advertise it was secure? by AllNicksWereTaken · · Score: 0

    Didn't they say more than once that their OS is secure.

    Now THAT's misleading advertising...

  160. bullshit by tasinet · · Score: 1

    Oh Please-You think we're stupid? I'm certain that the Microsoft Department that conducted the survey was indeed absolutelly independent from the Linux community.

  161. More comparison points between VirtServs and PCs by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1
    At a webhosting company you'd have to think about more than just the hardware costs between Mainframe and commodity PCs. You'd need to consider:
    • Talent pool
      • Unless you happen to have TSO/ISPF MVS/JCL experts on staff, you'll need a different kind of expert. And these are usually saddled with years of experience, salary history, families needing benefits, etc. Any High School outside of California (I hate CA's educational system) can give you PC techs. Running Linux is the easy part; z/OS is the mystery.
    • Per-instance capacity
      • On a single box you can cheaply put 80 GB, 1 GB RAM, and a AMD 2200 processor that will be underutilized like mad except for that one day /. points its pulsar beam your direction. Are you going to give each Virtual Linux server its own 80GB space? 1 GB RAM? How do you explain that, "of course the virtserv is at 100% use without any running services, power is allocated when its needed" without getting hung up on?
    • Capacity planning
      • Sure, one Mainframe can run many virtservs, but what happens when you have one more box than the Mainframe can handle -- buy a whole new second mainframe with all the space, power, cooling, safety infrastructure and personnel maintenance requirements for that one $99/mo additional sale? Gee, throwing yet another $400 commodity PC on a rack sure sounds good right about now...
      I'd love to see a webhost go z/OS with Linux servers. But one other problem is most of the successful webhosters offer their customers the choice of Windows, too. A commodity PC can be Linux, BSD or Windows relatively easily (Ghost). I haven't heard about Windows on z/OS quite yet...not even under Linux on a s/390.
    --
    -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
  162. MODS: TROLL ALERT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't be taken in by this idiot--he has accounts under the names bonch and Overly Critical Guy. He has a history of astroturfing for Microsoft, bashing anything Open Source, using lies and half-truths to get modded up, karma whoring, and the usual trolling (under his bonch account, he got a troll posted to the front page of Slashdot).

    All you have to do to check the veracity of this is to look at the posting history of his two old personnae (linked above) and his current one to figure it out.

    Please do not mod this jerk up--every time you do the Slashdot S/N ratio goes down while bonch/Overly Critical Guy/rd_syringe just laughs at you.

    This has been a public service announcement

  163. MODS: TROLL ALERT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't be taken in by this idiot--he has accounts under the names bonch and Overly Critical Guy. He has a history of astroturfingfor Microsoft, bashing anything Open Source, using lies and half-truths to get modded up, karma whoring, and the usual trolling (under his bonch account, he got a troll posted to the front page of Slashdot).

    All you have to do to check the veracity of this is to look at the posting history of his two old personnae (linked above) and his current one to figure it out.

    Please do not mod this jerk up--every time you do the Slashdot S/N ratio goes down while bonch/Overly Critical Guy/rd_syringe just laughs at you.

    This has been a public service announcement

  164. Ibm has a point that most people miss. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Running Linux on a Mainframe can be cheaper then running Microsoft on a PC server, IF YOU ALREADY HAVE A MAINFRAME.

    You see here we run a webserver. The webserver is based on IIS and runs scripts that hook into a MS SQL database on a different server.

    Customers log in, form queries on the webserver, the MS SQL database builds the queries and jobs are sent to a batch que on the S/390 mainframe in which we have a custom database that holds all the information that gets sold back to the customers.

    Now if the admins had their way we would be running a apache webserver on a MySQL database. But even normally the owners are cool about Linux (it runs the rest of the network including other web servers and firewalls and such.) They insisted on the MS SQL server for some odd reason.

    See the admins wanted to run the server in a partition on the actual Mainframe. Using Linux that would be possible and would cut down on a lot of the headaches and administration/infrastructure overhead that goes into keeping the MS SQL and IIS setup secure and running well.

    In various different situations it would be much cheaper to run a Linux server on a partition, then a whole room of crap needed to keep a seperate Windows setup going. If your already paying for the mainframe for other purposes. The demand on the webserver is small and it would barely affect the operation of the mainframe's normal task.

    If it did you would just call IBM and ask them to turn on the second cpu or speed the first cpu up a bit. Add a gig of ram, and that would still be cheaper then what we currently do. But they wanted to "stick to standards" (meaning MS SQL) or something weird like that.

  165. It's not the lawyers, its the law. by Requiem18th · · Score: 0
    If we killed off all the lawyers, how would you expect somebody to sue me?? On their own? At least then we are on even playing ground and not paying out tons of legal fees.

    No you won't be on equal grounds because laws are being currenty tailored for the rich through lobbying. Even without lawyers, as long as there are laws, there are are going to be lawsuits and lets face it, the big corps have the law on their side.

    Also, the assumption that ppl break the law because they don't understand it is stupid. Ppl usually know when they're breaking the laws, but they don't care. They don't care because they think the law is unfair, or because they are mad angry and can't think allright, or because they are psycopaths, or because they think they won't be catched.

    Ppl have plenty of reasons to break the law, sometimes because the law is actually wrong, sometimes it is the individual who's wrong.

    Power-grubbing politicians are nothing without lawyers to stand behind.

    Wrong again, lawyer don't sue, their clients do, not only that but you seem to think that lawyers are a separete breed of humans, they are not. If all current lawyers were killed. Companies and politicians will send their most law savvy employees to do the suing.

    You're fighting against the wrong thing, what you need to change is law, wich allows an obvious idea to be patented and monopolised.

    And I see you saying the law is made by lawyers. It is not, it is made by politicians; wich are choosen by the ppl and sponsored by corps... now, if you can't fight them in sponsoring, you can rise in arms if the situation urges it. Chances are you'll be mocked up by both, politicians and the ppl you defend. So, what you need is to make ppl follow you ideas.

    One last word, you can't expect laws that don't cater to the rich & welthy and support and economy system that does.

    --
    But... the future refused to change.
  166. Re:+1 to my pride of being from the UK by mattgorle · · Score: 1

    As a certified member of the "liberati", I must absolutely agree. The man is a loon.

    In fact, does anyone here know of a committee to unelect Blunkett?

    --
    Slackware user since 1997.
  167. They are not sure what to do about it? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Could the, *grasp*, vote for a different party?

    Holly cow, I have dicovered the holly grail of democracy!

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  168. Right on the money! by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    It is not like MS matters at all in the IT world.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  169. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aexia gets it.

  170. Re:More comparison points between VirtServs and PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > I'd love to see a webhost go z/OS with Linux
    > servers.

    Well, perhaps that number is zero.

    However, as I "professionally" am acquainted with the guys who make Linux-on-z99x possible, I'm in the position to ask *why* IBM thinks this is worth their time.

    The answer is deceptively simple: Because a lot of customers *who already have z99x's installed* want to run a Linux service to handle their web interface.

    Presto ! Couple of Linux servers running on vast z99x already installed and you never have to think again about inviting all this strange Intel hardware in your raised floor appartment ...

  171. Best .sig EVER! by eddd · · Score: 1

    -Styrofoam IS biodegradable, you're just impatient!

    Now THAT is funny!

  172. What do you expect by Tigershark2005 · · Score: 1

    That's what marketing is all about. Microsoft can concievably say that their statement about Linux compared to Microsoft is valid. It's basically a lie of omission. They left out the part about paying a whole lot on the computer used to support it. That's the point of a marketing committee, to find creative ways to get people to buy your product or follow your cause. It does come close on the line of ethics but most people will see, hey I will save money by buying from these people, a name that they already know very well.

  173. Re:Ok..Show Me by vettemph · · Score: 1

    RTFParent! My comment was not to the Article. I fully understand the article. My comment was to the parent post. Go find proper context for your chalk and cheese. Wash it down with a pee warm glass of STFU.
    thanks for playing.

    --
    The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.