Novell Swings Back at Ballmer

Jeff.Ingalls writes "Novell Inc has issued a response to Microsoft Corp CEO Steve Ballmer's recent anti-Linux memo, using the same reports cited by Ballmer in defense of the open source operating system."

Comments

Before it gets /.ed

[mirko]

3 Nov 2004, 09:46 GMT -
Ballmer's memo was sent to Microsoft customers and partners last week, and criticized Linux's record on security, total cost of ownership and indemnification, among other things. Ballmer referenced a number of analyst reports that have long been the weapons in its Get The Facts campaign against Linux.

Now Waltham, Massachusetts-based Novell has accused Ballmer of being selective with the truth. "The points made by Mr Ballmer leverage only those statements in its commissioned studies that reflect most positively on Microsoft," Novell said in its response. "A broader look paints a much more objective picture, one more favorable to Linux."

The Linux and identity management software vendor continued to list a number of areas in which Ballmer had been selective in his choice of references from these reports.

For example, referring to a Yankee Group report called 'Linux, Unix and Windows TCO comparison', Ballmer noted: "Yankee's study concluded that, in large enterprises, a significant Linux deployment or total switch from Windows to Linux would be three to four times more expensive - and take three times as long to deploy - as an upgrade from one version of Windows to a newer release".

What he failed to point out, according to Novell, was Yankee's statement: "In summary, the Yankee Group's TCO survey found that Linux does offer compelling cost savings, economies of scale and technical advantages, as many a satisfied user will attest...Ultimately, the TCO and ROI of Linux may be less than, comparable to, or more expensive than Unix or Windows depending on the individual corporate deployment circumstances."

Novell's response also tackles once again a report from Forrester entitled "Is Linux More Secure than Windows" that has already been chewed over several times by the open source and security communities, pointing out that Ballmer failed to note that the report attributed Windows with the highest number of critical flaws compared to Novell's SuSE, Red Hat, Debian, and MandrakeSoft.

With regards to indemnification, Novell notes that while Ballmer stated that "it is rare for open source software to provide customers with any indemnification at all", if he were to check his own slides used in an address to the Massachusetts Software Council in September, he would see that Novell was attributed with offering indemnification.

The response also goes on to tackle Ballmer's statements regarding benchmark tests, training requirements, and migration costs, comparing each with publicly available research reports and surveys.

Finally, Novell dismisses Ballmer's conclusion that "It's pretty clear that the facts show that Windows provides a lower total cost of ownership than Linux; the number of security vulnerabilities is lower on Windows, and Windows' responsiveness on security is better than Linux; and Microsoft provides uncapped IP indemnification of their products, while no such comprehensive offering is available for Linux or open source."

"The facts do not show this at all," Novell retorts, "read the complete reports on Microsoft's site, not just Microsoft's chosen sound bites. Given the increased adoption rates of Linux by customers, many of them also appear to disagree with Mr Ballmer's negative assessment of Linux."

Re:Before it gets /.ed

[Swamii]

Ultimately, the TCO and ROI of Linux may be less than, comparable to, or more expensive than Unix or Windows depending on the individual corporate deployment circumstances.

I also predict the number of replies to this post will be less than, equal to, or greater than the number of mod points this post receives.

Re:Before it gets /.ed

[mdfst13]

Unfortunately, I think that you will have to modify the step 2 from the original Yankee group version:

1. Make ambiguous statement.
2. Sell it to Microsoft.
3. Profit!

I don't think that Microsoft will be willing to pay you for your prediction.

Sorry.

Why, Ballmer, Why?

[Le Marteau]

Why does Ballmer do this? Why does he make such idiotic, easy-to-refute statements? For example, from the article:

Ballmer noted: "Yankee's study concluded that, in large enterprises, a significant Linux deployment or total switch from Windows to Linux would be three to four times more expensive - and take three times as long to deploy - as an upgrade from one version of Windows to a newer release".

What he failed to point out, according to Novell, was Yankee's statement: "In summary, the Yankee Group's TCO survey found that Linux does offer compelling cost savings, economies of scale and technical advantages, as many a satisfied user will attest...

I can't believe that guy is a top executive of a major corporation. He makes Darl look like a business genius in comparison. He impresses me as some kind of jackass, who just HAPPENED to be in the right place at the right time, and is where he is DESPITE rather than BECAUSE of his business acumen.

It seems that you almost have to have your head up your ass as firmly as Ballmer or Darl to get anywhere in corporate america.
It's examples like this which prove to me that I will never be an executive of any company but my own. I am just too attracted to honesty and integrity.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[BaldGhoti]

Why does he do this?

Because he has the biggest soapbox and no one's loud enough to shout him down.

Ever seen a streetcorner preacher before?

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[DeepHurtn!]

I disagree; simplified, easily digestible sound-bites -- even if factually incorrect -- sell. People like them, because if all of their information is derived from them they just don't have to think. It's the basis of mainstream private media. No doubt about it, Ballmer got to be where he is because he understands that the system rewards bullshit.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[lottameez]

Executives are there to sell and spin, not admit that their product is more deficient than the competition. It's like politics...he's selectively using this report to give his entrenched constituency something to spout when the Linux fanatics start slobbering over themselves.

And, yes. I'm relatively new here.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not because he's dumb. Assuming he does it because he's dumb blinds you to the method he's using. It goes like this: throw a neverending stream of utter bullshit about how great things are going and how anybody not on your side is wrong about everything. You'll get laughed at for a while, but if you just keep spewing, eventually even those "objective" reporters will let a lot of egregious bullshit pass by, which will eventually get regarded as "common sense."

This method unquestionably works in U.S. Politics.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[bannerman]

Because sound bytes are what sell right now. When Ballmer released his memo, the key phrases were gobbled up by oodles of gullible execs. How many people are going to see the rebuttal? The rebuttal will repair less than the original memo hurt. Ballmer wins. Again.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[FearUncertaintyDoubt]

I disagree; simplified, easily digestible sound-bites -- even if factually incorrect -- sell. People like them, because if all of their information is derived from them they just don't have to think. It's the basis of mainstream private media. No doubt about it, Ballmer got to be where he is because he understands that the system rewards bullshit.

Yeah, fine, but it's not like you could get elected President using that kind of...oh, wait.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[say]

The problem however, is that this works best on uneducated people.

This chart pretty much proves that point :-)

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

If he hadn't been BG's college roommate, he never would have been more than a middle manager at some dwindling rust-belt company.

Hmm... in that case I can imagine the scene at a quarterly department meeting:

"PUNCH PRESS OPERATORS!!! PUNCH PRESS OPERATORS!!! PUNCH PRESS OPERATORS!!!"

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[Nahor]

he understands that the system rewards bullshit

You mean that if Linux is taking market share it's because people are saying bullshit about it?

It doesn't matter if it's bullshit or not. The system rewards what looks appealing, not what *is* appealing.
So a simple speech that looks good is better rewarded than either a long speech that looks good or a short speech that looks bad.
And nothing is better than saying "we have 99% of the marker so that means we are the best".

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Google is working with the Chinese government to implement search solutions that pro-actively censor things that the Chinese gov't doesn't want its citizens to see.

That is just as bad as Cisco working with the Chinese gov't to create the great firewall of China. Fuck google and fuck all the naive fanboys who cannot see google for what it really is, just another corporation.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[grcumb]

"I think what you will never get over is your own arrogance."

It's not arrogance when you're right.

Now, before you write this off as a flame, hear me out. Throughout history, people with unpopular views have believed that if they could just get the information out, their message would be accepted and acted on.

Elsewhere in this thread, someone said that Ballmer was like a street preacher, spouting tales of Armageddon from his soapbox pulpit. That's not true. He is a cardinal in his robes, descending from on high with the Word.

For the agnostics in the audience, those who can see that prima facie his statements are false, their immediate urge is to point out the untruths. In their world, the right information is all that's required to correct false reason.

But there is a significant proportion of the population whose world is not ruled by that same empiricism. For those people, it's more important to follow the appropriate leader than to be right. There are really good reasons to act this way, not the least of which is that it keeps one from being singled out. The only trouble these people experience is shared by everyone. Nonetheless, this drives the empiricists crazy. Their world cannot permit behaviour like this.

Worse, being 'comfortably wrong' (i.e. following the dominant mantra) can prove extremely destructive at times. So the rationalists feel compelled to shout the truth loudly. Problem is, the truth is useless to those who don't operate in a world driven by logic. This is nothing new; the Iliad tells us about Cassandra, doomed to know the future, and never to be believed.

None of this is to excuse those who rant at the 'stupidity' of the majority. Nor is this an attempt to excuse people who will not be swayed by reason. All I'm trying to do is to point out that there are two languages being spoken most of the time. Both may sound like English, but their purposes and means of expression are only close enough to cause confusion.

Again: There is nothing arrogant about being right, and letting the world know it. Arrogance comes when you continue insisting that you're right long after you've been proven wrong.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[AvantLegion]

>> Bush deliberately used factually incorrect soundbites to beat Anne Richards and later Gore and finally Kerry.

Sound like he's been taking technique notes from watching Michael Moore movies. Cut, paste, rearrange, and even doctor to make anything fit your "message".

It's not at all limited to one side of the political spectrum.

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[808140]

Also, don't confuse democracy with the bill of rights.

A political system that allows the people to choose its leaders or make decisions on issues may tend towards freedom, but this tendancy is not absolute. As Hermann Goering insightfully noted,

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

While any comparison of the state of affairs in the US today to the situation in Germany under the Third Reich is inappropriate, flaimbait and in violation of Godwin's Law, I think it's important to note that, regardless of how decisions are made, the powerful are in a unique position to influence the decisions of the electorate.

Democracy is most certainly a great and noble thing, and preferable to many of the other systems available, but it is not a panacea. In the US, we have a democratic republic founded on the principle of civil rights. It is this combination of values which the OP was projecting on the Chinese government, not democracy in itself.

For example, many democracies do not grant absolute freedom of speech, and some have attempted to censor hate speech on the internet when they felt it was appropriate.

What most people find reprehensible about Chinese government censorship is the combination of censorship and totalitarianism. Because arguably, if the French or Germans decide that they don't want their people looking at Nazi propaganda, say, it is with the consent of the people that this speech is censored.

A place that respects civil rights (or has historically, at any rate, and continues to do so today, despite the looming threat of crackdown) but is not democratic is Hong Kong.

I know you know all of this, but I think it's important that we use words in a manner consistant with their meaning, because there are exceptions to the generalization "all democracies are against censorship", and to its converse, "all governments against censorship are democracies."

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[808140]

With respect, his anecdotal evidence and your anecdotal evidence are both irrelevant. Anecdotal evidence often is.

I know a number of intelligent Bush supporters, and I know a number of rather dumb Kerry-supporters. Dumb supporters on both sides of the equation are usually sheep. That is, they can't take the time to form their own political opinions, and so they absorb the opinions of those around them, and end up voting someone else's conscience.

The thing is, intelligent Bush supporters seem to fall into two camps. The wealthy elite support Bush because he serves their own interests; working in investment I know quite a number of them. They make more money when he's in office, and so voting for him is a no-brainer. These people aren't stupid, but their values are not in-line with the majority of the world's -- they live on a different planet.

The other group of intelligent Bush supporters are mostly middle class, educated white folks who aren't the wealthy elite but hope to be. They see the support of tax-cutting, wealthy-favoring government as being a long-term investment -- they're ambitious and expect to eventually be in a position to benefit from the political climate created by the GOP.

Now, with due respect, most people that don't fall into these two categories are sheep. Many of them superficially resemble the second group of intelligent supporters, in the sense that they support Bush's aid to the wealthy because they dream of being wealthy themselves someday -- it's the myth of the American dream, and its the cornerstone of American political and social rhetoric. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary (based on social studies of social mobility in American society), people do believe that they can be born on the streets and lift themselves up to the top through hard work.

Unfortunately, the days of that being true are mostly behind us.

The sheep in this case, unlike their intelligent counterparts, don't truly understand the nature of the "fiscally conservative" measures being taken by the Party, but believe that, while they may be hurt in the short term, they will somehow live to see the benefits. They aspire to be wealthy landowning oil barons like Dubya. He represents what they want to be -- and why not? He seems like a simple guy, not overly intelligent or good looking, but just an average joe. If he can do it, why can't I? It's part of what makes him so popular. He seems just like you and me.

Of course, rather like Clinton (a Rhodes scholar who went to Oxford) and his affected southern drawl, it's all an act. Bush went to Yale, grew up in a rich political family, and is essentially the same kind of elitist bastard that made everyone (including myself) dislike Kerry so much. The difference is, Bush knew how to hide this from the American people, but Kerry didn't.

Now, Kerry supporters also can be easily divided into the intelligent and the, shall we say, less than intelligent. Among the poor and uneducated, people supporting the left probably think the idea of greater social benefits doesn't sound half bad, and we lefties make a point of using this to our advantage when trying to recruit votes. These people are no different in terms of education or wealth, essentially, than the "trailer trash Bush supporter" we all love to hate.

But they come overwhelmingly from minorities, and minorities, having been shafted by the system for generations, gobble up the myth of the American Dream with less readiness than poor whites from the midwest, who aren't constantly reminded that everyone in a position of power has a different skin color, ethnicity, or religion than they do.

My personal opinion in all of this is that idiots exist on both sides of the equation, and each party really knows how to play this to their advantage. Democrats play on the disenfranchised minority vote that would benefit most from social aid; Republicans play on the disenfranchised poor white vote by propogating the idea that "if you just wo

Re:Why, Ballmer, Why?

[grcumb]

"Being arrogant and right is a pretty quick way of making everyone hate you."

Good. At least you've got their attention.

For countless years, women fighting for equality have had to cope with being characterised as 'bitches' whenever they tried to be heard. Why? They were ignored until they shouted so loud that people were forced to take notice.

For countless years, African Americans were persecuted, beaten, murdered for being 'uppity'. Anyone who spoke out in even the mildest fashion was subject to extreme punishment.

These days, one of the most significant issues in electronic communication is its abuse by people who systematically spread disinformation and suppress truth. The motives for doing so are manifold. In Microsoft's case, it's likely because the truth is fatal to their way of doing business.

People in a position to know better first assumed that the problem was that others just didn't have access to the right information. They packaged up the data in the proper format, and presented it to the world. They were largely ignored.

Still believing that the word just wasn't getting out, they tried harder, spoke a little more forcefully, worked harder at discrediting the other sources.

At a certain point, the propagandists realised that they could not win the argument on merit. So they attacked the source. They ascribed their own dubious motives to others (Linus 'stole' Linux), they made baseless threats (SCO). And now, they try to kill the messenger, not because of the message, but because he was shouting when he delivered it.

Your post seems to say, 'You may be right, but you're a prick, so nobody's going to believe you.' Problem is: Nobody listened before. Sometimes, there's no option but to be pushy. This fact has given us arrogant pricks from Galileo to Patrick Henry to Martin Luther King.

'Nevertheless, it moves.'

It's fun to watch the fray...

[Anonymous Coward]

But ultimately this is all just noise. I think we can all foresee the rise of FOSS and the gradual decline of Windows over the next decade or so. Ballmer was right: developers, developers, developers. And guess what? Developers like freedom.

Re:It's fun to watch the fray...

[lowe0]

This particular developer likes feeding himself and his fiancee, having a roof over his head, gas in his tank, etc.

Whether the programming job that provides all of that also provides freedom is a distant concern by comparison.

Re:It's fun to watch the fray...

[dont_think_twice]

This particular developer likes feeding himself and his fiancee, having a roof over his head, gas in his tank, etc.

Whether the programming job that provides all of that also provides freedom is a distant concern by comparison.

Hey, I think I remember you. You were the guy in Boston in 1772 who was saying that the King provided security and jobs. You said revolting for our freedom was too risky.

Or wait, maybe you were the guy in Wittenburg in 1517 who told Martin Luther that he should not oppose the catholic church because they were backed by divine law, and provided comfort and help, and would even take away all your sins, for a small fee.

Or maybe, just maybe, that was you last week in Ohio saying that you were going to vote for George Bush because at least you know what he stands for. Who knows what Kerry stands for.

There is no reason that a software economy built on freedom will take away your job, just like there was no reason that a free America meant a loss of strength, or a freedom from a corrupt church meant a loss of spirituality. (Not sure about the third one - we wont know what a freedom from GW will mean for a while.) Pretty soon free software will provide such a strong backbone upon which to build that it will be crazy to start from scratch with closed source. Just like previous transitions, some parts will be rough, but when we are through it, everyone will look back and wonder how anyone could have conceived of doing it any other way. At least you will understand.

Moving the Groupwise/Suse

[brandonp]

I'm in the process of getting rid of our Windows 2000/Exchange server and moving to use Groupwise running off Suse Linux. We're planning to have it all done by January of next year.

I'm excited and anxious to get this done, I'm looking forward to a lower TCO.

Brandon Petersen
Get Firefox!

Re:Moving the Groupwise/Suse

[IgorMrBean]

We've just moved to Groupwise 6.5SP2 on SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9. As of today, Grpwise 6.5 on SLES9 is not officially, but you'll find 1 TID on Novell website giving you the first answer to the first problem you will encouter. Works pretty well. Novell plans to officially support SLES9 with Groupwise starting of SP3, which is scheduled to be relaese soon. The only frustrating think I find is that Novell has bought SUSE about 1 year ago, and not all Novell/SUSE/Ximian are yet compatible each other. I know it is a big/enormous job todo, but Novell has to merge all products really quick, if they want to enable OneNet fast, to shiht Microsoft where they failed. Per extrapolation, and personal opinion, I would say that Novell will achieve this by the second Q of 2005.. Come on Novell guys, lets go back to work

I just dunno

[Anonymous Coward]

Novell have done some good things recently and I will be eternally grateful but I'm still not convinced buying into their current mindset (esp re: Mono) isn't some faustian pact I'll later regret.

Life is so wierd these days....

[GeneralEmergency]

...with finding myself cheering on IBM and now Novell.

Hmmmm....maybe drinking might help.

Re:Life is so wierd these days....

[El]

Scary thought for the day: can you imagine a future in which one day we find ourselves cheering Microsoft? (Personally, I think history will remember Bill Gates much more for the charitable contributions of the Gates Foundation than for his role in founding Microsoft. Much like Andrew Carnegie, the original robber baron.)

That's some VERY high quality crack...

[apachetoolbox]

Ballmer's conclusion that "It's pretty clear that the facts show that Windows provides a lower total cost of ownership than Linux; the number of security vulnerabilities is lower on Windows, and Windows' responsiveness on security is better than Linux; and Microsoft provides uncapped IP indemnification of their products, while no such comprehensive offering is available for Linux or open source."

I have no idea where he came up with those points. He has no problems blantently lieing to everyone I see. Ballmer for president '08?

Re:That's some VERY high quality crack...

[QuantumRiff]

Easy, Windows is an Operating system. By saying linux, he is refering to distributions, not the kernel. Of course, he doesn't mention the security venerabilities of Exchange, Outlook, Visual Studio, Sharepoint, and their many other products they sell, becuase they are not part of windows. With linux, it usually all comes in the same box, for the same price, whether you use it or not! He counts the security bugs of all OS Software that usually comes bundled with, An operating system.

Also, the study says its cheaper on TCO to upgrade windows than convert to Linux. Of course, cause people will need a bit of re-training. The windows interface they are already familiar with. Now an intersting study would be the cost of going from MacOS to linux/winodows, or maybe IBM Mainfraimes to linux/windows.

the response I am waiting for...

[BortQ]

So when is Novell going to put together a Linux inspired dance ensemble to counter Ballmer's moves?

Oh, the irony of it all

[r_j_prahad]

I find it absolutely hilarious that the ad running at the top of this article is for Microsoft's "Get the Facts" program itself. Whatever puts food on the table, eh Taco?

Re:Oh, the irony of it all

[ValourX]

Yes, it's pretty silly, isn't it? But the suckers are not OSTG or Rob Malda. The suckers are Microsoft for paying OSTG all this money to put those ads there, especially for articles like this one.

Hey, if Microsoft wanted to pay you a bunch of money to buy up your predetermined ad space, would you sell it to them? Ad space is there to make money, not to preach to people about morals and good business practices. You use *content* for that, when applicable.

-Jem

Re:Oh, the irony of it all

[drinkypoo]

I find it absolutely hilarious that you actually see the ads.

Re:Oh, the irony of it all

[RangerRick98]

As a Mozilla user, I can definitively state that we're holier-than-thou assholes even when we're not posting on discussion boards. :)

How about a link to Novell's actual response...

[phozz bare]

...instead of a news article about it?

here

phozz

Acutal response...

[crimson30]

Here.

A saleswoman once said..

[RealAlaskan]

A sales woman at a little value added retail computer shop I used to work for said (of me): ``Don't let him talk to the customers, he's an engineer, he'll tell them the truth!''

The customer doesn't want to hear the truth, he wants his hand held, and he wants to hear that spending his money is going to make it all better and life will be good. He may know its all lies, but he still needs to hear it or he won't feel good.

I guess it's not surprising that it was true for befuddled consumers and small businessmen buying what were, in 1985, expensive toys. The sad thing is that this seems to be equally true for CIOs of big corporations twenty years later.

I like the indemnification part

[erroneus]

Forget about indemnification from Microsoft. You'll be lucky if Microsoft acknowledges any problems of any kind at all.

The EULA clearly states that Microsoft does not assert their products' suitability for any purpose whatsoever. And if a mistake is made in keeping records of licensing, they are more likely to sue you than to indemnify you.

Does the Microsoft TCO factor in the wasted hours and paperwork associated with keeping track of various licenses?

Novell's response to MS's Get The Facts

[Azul]

Related with this, Novell has created Unbending the Truth, a web site discussing Microsoft's skewed Get The Facts Linux-bashing campaign.

Alejo.

*Cringe*

[JonKatzIsAnIdiot]

I just can't help cringing whenever I see Novell associated with Linux. For the past ten years, Novell has leapt onto every industry fad at it's peak, proclaimed it as the saviour of the company, then watched it die underneath them . Anyone else remember SuperNOS? How about 'Netware - the fastest Java execution environment'? Or the Wordperfect debacle? Maybe we should try getting Novell interested in the wonderfullness of .Net.

Here's hoping that Novell can break it's loosing streak - and not drag Linux down with it.

Re:*Cringe*

[NerveGas]

WordPerfect was a very good contender at the 6.0a level - until Corel took over, and Corel has a good history of making things mediocre. That was when it really started to sink, M$ gained more market share, and the nails were in the coffin.

The one possibility for Novell taking Linux seriously is the fact that Novell's market share just keeps shrinking and shrinking, and there's not much chance for it to ever come back to the glory days of old. If they want to keep being major players, they simply have to latch on to something, and do it right. Linux is an easy choice.

Steve

No F or D, just U

[charliesmagic]

The Yankee Group's TCO survey found "Ultimately, the TCO and ROI of Linux may be less than, comparable to, or more expensive than Unix or Windows depending on the individual corporate deployment circumstances."

... you gotta love the answers the high-priced consultants give, dontcha?

Not FUD, just CYA

A saleswoman once said..Fear Me!

[Anonymous Coward]

" A sales woman at a little value added retail computer shop I used to work for said (of me): ``Don't let him talk to the customers, he's an engineer, he'll tell them the truth!''"

I talked to customers all the time. Some transfered from sales. I didn't have to lie. I was however careful in the way I phrased the truth.

"The customer doesn't want to hear the truth, he wants his hand held, and he wants to hear that spending his money is going to make it all better and life will be good. He may know its all lies, but he still needs to hear it or he won't feel good."

Maybe instead of viewing this as a negative. You should see it as an incentive to produce a product that no one has to lie about?

"I guess it's not surprising that it was true for befuddled consumers and small businessmen buying what were, in 1985, expensive toys. The sad thing is that this seems to be equally true for CIOs of big corporations twenty years later."

Computers have come far, but they still haven't come far enough. That's why people feel nervous around computers.

Ballmer is getting desperate

[rseuhs]

Come on, even studies funded and published by Microsoft show good sides about Linux? Windows is becoming a harder sell every day.

Also just look at Microsoft's "strategy", it's merely prolonging the status-quo, they don't even try to sell Windows to for example the 80% of webmasters who don't run it. They know that every customer lost won't come back because in the long run Linux is a lot cheaper.

The history of Microsoft will be:

• 80's: Establishment of domination(DOS)
• 90's: Massive growth and huge profits(Windows)
• 00's: Stagnation and decline in non-core markets (like webservers)
• 10's: Decline in all marketsand end of domination

It will take some time, but Microsoft won't be able to stop Linux.

Free T-Shirts for unique anti-M$ FUD hud!

[Poetic Intensity]

You can read the real thing here. With a little more digging, I found you can even get your own Novell T-shirt if you can find / post any unique anti-M$ FUD stuff on the Internet. (unique = not already posted by Novell or Microsoft).

TCO?

[MeFromHolland]

I tought that in a windows world you did not own anything, so why al the TCO studies?

IQs, etc

[WebCowboy]

Wow, a web page cites a source so it must be true right?

Ummmmm no I'm afraid not. I need not refute the study based on its merits because the study was made up.

Check out the Wikipedia entry on the source. Scroll to the bottom. The authors never broke down IQ below national levels to get state IQs. The numbers cited in that chart came from a hoax--they were likely made up as a joke to make Gore supporters look smarter than Bush supporters from the previous election. Using the results of standardised tests show much less gap between the "smartest" and "dumbest" states and nearly no correlation with their voting preferences.

Also, contrary to the citation, that publication made use of multiple IQ tests conducted at different times (it did not rely predominately on one IQ test), and did some fudging to obtain its numbers (UK was set at 100 and the rest of the world adjusted accordingly, even though IQ tests generally regard the world average to be 100 instead of 90 as they calculated)

Re:Whatever Novell

[WebCowboy]

I use Windows Server 2003, I use Solaris. Novell can take SuSE Linux 9.x and Enterprise Server 8 and 9 and shove it up their ass, I am not going to change. i will change if i see a compelling reason to change, I dont see it, so i stay with what I like and what has proven time and time again for me to work very, very well

Must be nice to have so much money to throw away. The initial investment in your platforms of choice must've been quite impressively high.

For me, besides money, SQL slammer was enough to make me start wondering and Blaster and its varients were quite compelling reasons for me to look at changing.