Yankee Group Survey Says Windows, Linux TCO Equal

prostoalex writes "A new survey by Yankee Group analyst Laura DiDio shows Windows and Linux are viewed as equal by U.S. businesses. In the eternal OS wars, '88 percent of respondents said that the quality, performance and reliability of Windows was equal to or better than Linux.' Companies were also asked to rank the operating systems on security. On a scale of 1 to 10 'companies rated Microsoft's security at 7.6, double the rating in a similar survey conducted last year. Linux's rating was mostly the same at 8.3.' Conclusion? 'DiDio said that most companies -- whether large or small -- rarely take the huge step of replacing one operating system with another. Instead, they usually add a mix of Windows and Linux server software to expand functionality.' Microsoft used last year's Yankee Group survey results in their Get the facts campaign."

Comments

What are they using?

[fembots]

The survey needs to take into account what OS the respondents are currently using, that's the single most important factor.

You don't use an OS that you don't like, and if that's not true (e.g. you're forced to use a pre-installed OS), then you probably wouldn't know any better alternative if you've been using only one OS.

If a Linux-only user said Windows is better, or vice versa, what does that mean? How does he come to this conclusion? The most credible answers should be from Multi-OS users.

I'm not saying this study is inaccurate, but there are simly too many things to consider, and this may well lead to a simple conclusion - software choice is more on personal preference than anything else.

Re:What are they using?

[Zeinfeld]

Then again, this only works with people who know what they hell they are doing.

Which goes the same for pretty much any O/S. If you have a pinhead they will configure the machine insecurely.

No matter what I would never recommend Windows as a internet-facing server. I run a Windows 2003 server here in my home but it is just to learn it and host a small site with little traffic.

You mean even if the figures say that Windows is more secure you will never choose it? Or are you only referring to the current release?

Whatever, I think that Linux advocates should take a lesson from history, it is really hard to maintain an O/S distinction in the security area. The only reason Linux is any better is that UNIX machines have been Internet connected by default for about 15 years while with windows its only about 8. Read the CERT advisories from the 90s, they are almost all reports of UNIX vulnerabilities.

UNIX got cleaned up, Windows will be cleaned up. Back in the 90s UNIX was a byword for insecurity, people still used SUID scripts and shadow passwords were only used by a minority.

What is more interesting here is the derrivative. The perception of Windows is improving rapidly, the perception of Linux is pretty static. I don't see a heck of a lot of new security action going on in the Linux world. There is a heck of a lot going on in the Windows world.

Re:What are they using?

[AstroDrabb]

Why don't we look at this rationally. The Yankee Group doesn't do "studies" for free. The Yankee Group are a for-profit company. So basically someone paid the Yankee Group to do this "study".

Now, who could it be? Could it be Red Hat, SuSE, IBM or some other pro-Linux company? I have serious doubts about that. What about Microsoft? Well, MS has certainly paid for other "studies" to be done in the past. So I don't think there would be any major reason to not count MS in on this "study". Basically we just need to find out _who_ paid for this "study" to really see where the bias lays.

I remember last year I had a phone call from some unknown company that was doing a "study" about MS. I was asked how I felt about MS as a company. How I felt about the products put out by MS and if I "trusted" MS. As soon as I answered that I "did not trust MS as a company", I was told my "interview" was over and "thank you for your time". So it seems as soon as one of these companies get a negative response about the company that are footing the bill, the interview dies.

Does anyone know who _paid_ for this "study"?

Opinion Based

[Anonymous Coward]

'88 percent of respondents said that the quality, performance and reliability of Windows was equal to or better than Linux.' Companies were also asked to rank the operating systems on security. On a scale of 1 to 10 'companies rated Microsoft's security at 7.6, double the rating in a similar survey conducted last year. Linux's rating was mostly the same at 8.3.'

Notice, it doesn't say security professionals for security, it doesn't say economists for TCO, it says companies. I'm sorry, but the first thing to enter my mind in this situation is a "Pointy Haired Boss" filling these things out. It's basically an opinion survey, pointless in anything but spreading FUD.

Re:No comment...

[wasted]

From the Article: "Server operating systems are largely commoditized," DiDio said, adding that many companies were not tracking their operating costs closely enough to base their decisions on total cost of ownership, or TCO, the main cost metric when comparing Linux and Windows.

So, they ask the bosses "What is the TCO for Windows-based servers?"
"I don't know"

Then, they ask the bosses "What is the TCO for Linux-based servers?"
"I don't know"

Since "I don't know" equals "I don't know", the conclusion is that the operating systems have equal TCOs, at least in the eyes of the business managers.

Re:DiDio = Shill

[gnasher719]

Does she have credibility? About as much as Ken Brown ("A swedish student named Linux Torvald copied Linus from Minux which his professor Tannenbaum copied from Unix"), Rob PretEnderle (the one with the Ferrari Notebook that makes Vroom Vroom noises) and Maureen O' Gara (Linux is completely stolen from SCO) together. Minus infinity + Minus infinity + Minus infinity = Minus Infinity.

Not FUD!

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

I don't see how this survey can be considered FUD. They aren't saying anything either is better or worse than the other. They simply relay feelings of their respondants.

The whole point of this of course isn't to compare the platforms or make a suggestion on which is better, it just conveys the feelings of their respondants.

Should this be used as a basis for a decision for what to use? Of course not!!! Is this an interesting insight into the current thinking of corporate IT departments? Yes.

It isn't FUD and isn't pointless, but if you take any of this as FACT, thats your mistake. This is simply an interesting look at current thinking. If this thinking is correct or not isn't the point. Its like saying a poll finding 80% of people are against the war in Iraq is FUD. That poll wouldn't wouldn't mean we should or shouldn't be there (as the respondants may not really be qualified to know), it would just give an interesting view of what people are thinking.

Read this article as such.