Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Continuing War Against Microsoft's "Facts" Campaign

Posted by timothy on from the sometimes-they-come-back dept.

davidmwilliams writes "I've been rallying against Microsoft's so-called 'Get the Facts' site for the last fortnight in my blog. Rather than give any legitimate comparison facing off Windows Server vs similarly spec'd Linux options, the Microsoft spin doctors opt for bunkum and hogwash with sensational headlines that don't have any substance underneath. Here's the state of play, including an update on my request to Microsoft PR to do something about the blatant lack of integrity displayed. I also go over the latest case study put up by Microsoft: they promise to show why people are choosing Windows Server 2008 over Linux using the City of Uppsala as an example."

5 of 316 comments (clear)

  1. Re:who cares? by value_added · · Score: 5, Informative
    people will choose the software they feel suits their needs best. shockingly it's not always going to be linux.

    For your benefit and others who similarly haven't read the article or missed its point entirely, the case study cited in the article involves the city of Upssala that has two networks, one a 150-server Windows network, and the second a 100-server Windows network with some Linux and Netware thrown in. Virus outbreaks and a need for increased control were cited as motivating factors for a change.

    The case study goes on about how TrueSec and the city participated in the Microsoft Rapid Deployment Program in order to get Windows Server 2008 pre-release version early. They made a test network, they purchased new hardware, they made a pilot deployment in January 2008 in the city administration network and things are looking ok so far.

    So, what do we learn? Firstly, the existing platform was far more of a Windows environment than a Linux one. The Windows-exclusive network was insecure. A third-party company who maintained the network - and who were a Microsoft partner - recommended new features in Windows Server 2008 that would help. So far, the Windows-exclusive network has been partially upgraded.

    Hang on? Where's the Linux aspect? Why is this on Microsoft's site? Weren't we promised we'd be told why customers are choosing Windows Server 2008 over Linux?

    Oh yeah, there was a single reference hidden away. "If you go with Linux, you can never be sure of what kind of support you're going to get" a server technician said. "Maybe the product is free, but you still have to put in the staff hours to basically support the product yourself."

    If there's a "suit one's needs" aspect to any of this, it certainly isn't in the article.
  2. Re:who cares? by NickFortune · · Score: 5, Informative

    this guy is clearly out to sway the audience in favour of his preffered os

    Which is a fair point if you assume that anyone with an opinion is automatically a liar by the very fact of their advocacy. I don't think that necessarily follows.

    Certainly it doesn't seem to be the case in this instance. I can't see anything that looks to be untrue, or even deliberately misleading the article. Mr. Williams even goes so far as acknowledge that one case, (the Hi China story) actually reflected well on Microsoft. So you can't really paint him as being just as dishonest as the corporation he is challenging.

    A deeper point is this: do we really want to live in a world where lies and deception are regarded as the norm, and where all opinions are automatically worthless simply by virtue of their being opinions? I can't see that polluting the world's data flow like that is a good thing, personally. I think we need people who are willing to challenge spin and propaganda wherever they find it. Williams seems to be doing that, and personally, I applaud him for his efforts.

    --
    Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
  3. Decision abdicated to Certified Gold Partners by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you read the article, there was no comparison done. The decision was outsourced to MS resellers who, surprise, peddled more MS wares. Comparison of other technologies never happened.

    Oh, that and MS Sweden couldn't be bothered to look up any of the dozens of regional companies that provide support for non-MS systems and packages. That 'no support' argument worked in the early 1990's but not anymore.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  4. Re:Microsoft bashing is outdated by Lincolnshire+Poacher · · Score: 5, Informative

    Follow-up.

    SQL Server remains off-limits for benchmarking. From the EULA for SS2005 Std / Ent:

    5. BENCHMARK TESTING. You must obtain Microsoft's prior written approval to disclose to a third party the results of any benchmark test of the software.

    However the company has now changed its restrictions for .Net benchmarking. One can release results according to certain ( sane ) requirements on the condition that Microsoft can reciprocally benchmark your software:

    Benchmark Testing, Microsoft .NET Framework

    Still glad I don't use proprietary software.

  5. Re:who cares? by domatic · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/ms_tuncom/major/mtc-00030631_ex4.htm