Microsoft has launched a direct attack on Linux through a new ad campaign they’ve started in the US that aims at companies considering Linux on servers.
The campaign directs information technology managers to “get the facts” about Linux before buying anything but Windows and points them to a website called Get The Facts on Windows and Linux that contains research on the cost benefits of licensing Microsoft’s Windows Server System instead of a Linux-based solution.
Of course, most of that research has been commissioned by Microsoft.
I’ve gone through some previously published research on this issue before, and i do agree that the claim that Linux is cheaper is false.
I also think the claims that Linux is more secure are false too. If Linux ever becomes as widely spread as Windows, you’d see how many bugs and security issues would come up.
I also think that the question of Product support is a very important one.
If you’re running critical business on your servers, you should be at least sure you’ll find someone to call when things go wrong, and that there’ll always be someone there working on that product guaranteeing continuity for you.
Anyway, Microsoft make more claims on their campaign’s site, and i think it’s worth reading.
I’m not pro-Microsoft or pro-Linux, i just believe in choosing the best solution for the case and the problem at hand.
Depending on the situation and the different parameters we have, the best choice could be Windows or Linux or why not even MacOS 😛
Anyway, this campaign, i think, is a bigger sign of how Linux is eating more and more into Microsoft’s share of Server systems, and how desperate Microsoft are becoming on shooting Linux down.
K, Looks like you
Hmmm, well you do have a point there bro…
But, still, something i want to point out is that you pay for hardware once and for IT staff salaries time and time again for as long as u need them.
So, in some cases i think it’s better to invest in a smaller number of powerful Windows boxes than a bigger number of Linux ones, because it’d be easier and you would need less IT people to administer it.
For example, let’s say you have a cluster of Windows boxes and another of Linux boxes; one person could administer the whole Windows cluster by making changes on one machine and having them mirrored automatically on the rest of the machines, while on Linux you’d need more people with higher skills and higher salaries 😉
Anyway, as i said i’m not pro-MS, and i actually really like Linux, and think that it is a great solution and platform.
All i’m trying to say is that it doesn’t always have to be the best solution.