[Linux-aus] Microsft a Reality? Get Over It?? - A followup

[Anthony Towns]

On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 06:53:02PM +1100, Con Zymaris wrote:
> > 	I have to disagree Con. "Speaking out" is what they want! [...]

Gah! Please set your mailer to wordwrap at 75 characters.

> I have an exercise for you. 
> I want you to go to your favourite search engine and type in "Linux
> Windows TCO" and look through the first 100 returns. 

I'm a sucker for stats.

Here are the first 20 links I get:

 1. Seeing through the Linux-Windows TCO comparisons (linuxworld.com)
 2. Linux vs Windows (www.cyber.com.au *cough*)
 3, 4. Linux Weekly News linking to 1.
 5, 6. O'Reilly Network linking to 7.
 7. ``Linux-Windows TCO contest 'a wash' for now'', that seems pretty
    pro Microsoft, carries some .NET ads, and then has quotes from
    Microsoft's Windows platform senior director like "We're not
    trying to say that Windows is the clear winner in [TCO]. It
    is close enough that customers ought to look at it as a
    wash." (searchwindowsmanageability.techtarget.com)
 8. [something in Foreign linking to cyber.com.au (oss.mri.co.jp)]
 9. techimo.com link to zdnet article "Linux TCO edge: Lower labor costs",
    which compares Solaris at $561k, Windows at $190k and Linux at $74k
    over three years.
10. [comment form, without any information, probably for 14]
11. Link to 7, from a blog, saying it overplays Windows. (paulbeard.no-ip.org)
12. TCO: Need some documentation to prove your case for Linux? 
    (enterpriselinux.org)
13. Same article as 7 (searchwin2000.techtarget.com)
14. Link from a blog to 1 (emergic.org)
15. [something else in Foreign, linuxfr.org]
16. ZDnet article linked from 9
17. Techweb article on the IDC survey, with comments from Bruce Perens, IBM,
    and IDC (techweb.com)
18. Another article about the IDC survey, that's pretty neutral [0]
    (computeruser.com)
19. Windows costs less than Linux. A bit. Sometimes - MS study (theregister)
20. Link to 1 from a mailing list post.

I used google, naturally.

> You will more than
> likely find that a majority of these are re-hashes of the press-release
> from the IDC TCO report that Microsoft funded late-last year. 

A lot of them are about it, but I wouldn't call any of them rehashes. They
don't seem too dreadfully biassed towards either Linux or Microsoft,
either. Maybe if I'd kept reading for 80 more links I'd've got some good
stuff, but if it takes that much effort, I'm not terribly worried for
Linux's reputation.

> By not speaking out on this manufactured 'reality' we are helping reduce
> our audience and our market. 

Of course, if no one had written anything good about Linux in response to
that report, the result would've been different. :)

Cheers,
aj

[0] Well, I think it's pretty neutral, maybe you might not.
    http://www.computeruser.com/articles/daily/8,6,1,1209,02.html 

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj at humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- 
        you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 350 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20030306/e9143dca/attachment-0001.pgp