Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Found Guilty of Misleading Advertising

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the everybody-play-nicely dept.

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."

35 of 608 comments (clear)

  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: 5, Funny

      Marketing Dept.
      Microsoft UK
      Reading

      Dear Microsoft,

      Go stick your head in a pig.

      Signed your chums,
      The Advertising Standards Authority.

    2. 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.

    3. 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

    4. 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

    5. 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...)
    6. 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
  2. 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 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.
    2. 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

  3. 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.
  4. 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 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

  5. 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.

  6. 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 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.
    2. 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!
  7. 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.

    --
    I appear to have a blog. Odd.
  8. Fark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think Slashdot needs an "Obvious" tag.

  9. 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.

  10. 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

  11. 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 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.
  12. 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
  13. 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*
  14. 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.
  15. Not the first time... by shigelojoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hell, Microsoft was guilty of false advertising when they released Microsoft Works.

  16. 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!

  17. 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.

  18. 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?

  19. 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

  20. 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.
  21. 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?