Darkelve Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 (edited) Summary: "Microsoft has begun the new year with a Linux knocking publicity campaign under the slogan "Get the Facts." A series of advertisements is due to run for six months in major IT publications, and will direct readers to the company's landing page for the campaign." (The Reg.) Article from The Register: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/34734.html Actual ms website: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts/default.asp Doesn't this mean more 'free' (as in beer) publicity for Linux? I'm kind of hoping they'll get even more paranoid and publish something like this in mainstream media... that'll be the day! Edited January 7, 2004 by Darkelve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulSe Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 There is no such thing as bad publicity, but only if you are dealing with intelligent audiences. Your average Joe in the street will swallow whatever shit Microshaft feeds them. Hopefully someone like IBM will launch a counter-campaign, but it wouldn't be as wide-spread. My big hope is that these ads will back-fire and create an interest in Linux, but it is going to require users such as us to get the REAL facts out there. Microsoft's argument revolves around Linux costing more in human resources and requiring more money to be spent on expertise, so they are basically conceding that Linux is more l33t, but that means nothing to the end-user. The 'facts' presented are bogus, Linux is easier to administer then Windows Server IMO. Any IT professional will not take these ads seriously... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest anon Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 What they fail to mention, (and of course they won't) is that around 80% of the worlds web servers run on Linux. Not because its cheaper, but because its proven to be more stable and reliable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linux_learner Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 M$ talks about tco, and concludes their the cheapest. what they fail to publish (and wont), is that in the long haul, linux is more stable and and more secure. i havent even gotten into backwards compatibility yet. linux isnt that hard to set up, for an IT guy, should be at least as hard as windows. at work we run NT 4.0 sp6. i am not in IT (although i wish i were). i keep pointing out to IT various security vulnerabilities (i can get to the registry editor several different ways). one of the ways involved OE. i suggested they disable it, or lock down the permissions. they said due to the java script various sites use, that would cripple alot of IE's functionality. so they'd rather live with "a few insecurities", than take the time to secure it right. linux doesnt face this problem, the permissions can be set as i suggested above with out hampering a browsers functionality. updates can (usually) be applied with out breaking the entire system. the other day in #musb i asked one of the users to hack me (i needed an app watched, so he could kill a run away app if my pc locked up). he could not get in at all. i could tighten it down more, but i havent had the time to do so yet. it took me one day to install and set the permissions and iptables to be properly configured, since then i havent had to mess with it. i do my updates, and thats about it. linux is less likely to crash than windows is, and thats cause linux is modular. i once was working on X, and it crashed. i had to delete the XFree86.config file and run XFdrake. no big deal. i have had apps crash, but linux itself rarely crashes. when you take the time to figure in the TCO in the long run, linux always wins. i would think, any self respecting IT person, would see right through these adds. to see them for what they are....propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melon2003 Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 Actual ms website: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts/default.asp but PLEEEEEASE, WHAT A CRAP!!! Friend of mine is running a small business - just as I do. We are not at the same market, but both we use Internet servers, running small local nets. For some reason, every time we meet he makes a long, boring talk about how wonderful windows servers are, how stable windows desktop is. He's always very exited about another new m$ promotion, letting him run server and ten desktops for _whole one year_ longer for such _small cost_ like my whole server's hardware (for many years). For chrissakes - are THOSE PEOPLE BLIND??? Or is this me that missing something? Obviously not the fact, that my friend's net and server is buggy and insecure, causing him non-stop problems. But he is still seems to be happy! The other fact is, he is not programmer, not computer engineer. He's just a guy who like to click a mouse and call it 'administrating server'. Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyv Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 What they fail to mention, (and of course they won't) is that around 80% of the worlds web servers run on Linux. Not because its cheaper, but because its proven to be more stable and reliable. I think "Not because its cheaper" should be replaced by "Not just because its cheaper" ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulSe Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 I once setup a Windows 2000 server which would control a domain, run a DHCP server and do some routing for around 15 clients... sounds simple right? After a week of trying to get this thing running, it just wouldn't work! Everything appeared to be setup properly, but it just didn't run, not properly anyway. I finally convinced the powers that be to use Linux for the server... two hours later it was up and running... so how exactly is Windows Server easier? What could be easier then running a Mandrake or Redhat server and using something like Webmin (as poof as it is) to admin it? Easy as pie! M$'s blatant lies won't hold water with serious users. And as for Windows beig cheaper ?!?!? Windows Server costs a shit-load and only comes with 5 licenses... so for a company with like 20 computers, it costs the Earth! Microshaft would be sued for false advertising and lose if any Linux company decided to pursue the matter... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarissi Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 So I see Microsoft's FUD campaign is getting louder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capnkirby Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 And of course the funny part to me is the "Independent studies show..." yeah, right, independently funded by microstiff that is.... Don't they always have some group trying to prove their worth over linux, it's amazing the numbers and "facts" that one can come up with when presented the right amount of cash..... Capn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted January 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 (edited) 1. First they ignore you (Linux, what Linux?) 2. Then they FUD you (do you really need an example) 3. Then they sue you (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_v._IBM_Linux_lawsuit) 4. Then you win (hey, does that mean we've almost won? ) Edited January 7, 2004 by Darkelve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melon2003 Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 I noticed it's hard (i possible at all) to find any of m$ pages - especially those mentioned in this topic - where it would be possible to place some kind of 'users' comment' or 'your opinion about this article'. Wonder why... For our good - most links to that pages comes from places like this forum - and already well commented ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMage Posted January 7, 2004 Report Share Posted January 7, 2004 For the best rebuttal about how "independent" those experts are, go to this link http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1426514,00.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melon2003 Posted January 8, 2004 Report Share Posted January 8, 2004 I am sorry to be such ignorant in english language - I'm just forced to use it because of lack of information in my native language. What is FUD (from 'get the FUD')? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzatch Posted January 8, 2004 Report Share Posted January 8, 2004 F***ed Up Data. Mostly. Or False Untrue Data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted January 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2004 (edited) FUD is an abbreviation of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Often used by big companies as a marketing tactic. The tactic consists of spreading feelings of fear, uncertainty, etc. In other words: spreading lies, semi-truths, unproven 'facts', or bending the truth in order to make someone else look bad. A more complete reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FUD Edited January 8, 2004 by Darkelve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.