Windows Servers Beat Linux Servers

RobbeR49 writes "Windows Server 2003 was recently compared against Linux and Unix variants in a survey by the Yankee Group, with Windows having a higher annual uptime than Linux. Unix was the big winner, however, beating both Windows and Linux in annual uptime. From the article: 'Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and Linux distributions from "niche" open source vendors, are offline more and longer than either Windows or Unix competitors, the survey said. The reason: the scarcity of Linux and open source documentation.' Yankee Group is claiming no bias in the survey as they were not sponsored by any particular OS vendor."

Comments

Conclusions? More like wild speculation.

[blueZ3]

The frustration around these "studies" isn't defensiveness, it's that they're drawing conclusions based on... what? Random number pulled from a powerball machine? Paw prints their cat left on the hood of their car? Stats taken from a Diebold machine? Tea leaves in the dregs of a cuppa Earl Grey? We'll never know.

Saying that poor docs are the issue sounds correct to me (anecdotally) but there's nothing in the article to confirm this is more than FUD. The documentation issue is improving (it's still not good, or consistent, but getting better). That said, it's still easier to resolve issues by googling than by looking through TFM.

Reboots

[KidSock]

I don't see how any Windows machine could have an uptime of longer than a month if you have to reboot after every update. Unless you're not updating.