Contridiction of words here. A monopoly would be 100% share.
Posted on 02/06/2002 2:49:10 PM PST by Justa
Contridiction of words here. A monopoly would be 100% share.
mo·nop·o·ly (m-np-l)
n. pl. mo·nop·o·lies
Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: “Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals” (Milton Friedman).
Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.
A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
A commodity or service so controlled.
Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth.
Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly.
From just a sheer cost perspective this is a great win for any government agency or private company for that matter. Windows is not going to go away, but the writing is on the wall for it to be the sole choice... IT will be slow, and steady growth for Linux as it has been, provided the project doesn't self destruct from inside, it will continue to grow.
And for the record, I trust good opensource projects far and above MS... MS's problem is not that they don't have good developers.. they do, they have some amazing people... They just are generally hogtied by marketing.
This comment alone shows the sheer lack of knowledge you hold in this industry, the sheer depth of ignorance is proven undoubtably by this statement. First off, Windows place in mission critical server market is paltry, on the desktop great.. in business the hard core machines (servers) are more often than not something other than Windows (Unix or Linux of some sort) Secondly, as a person who has first hand been involved with large corporations deploying mission critical systems on the Linux OS I can tell you that it is not a college dorm OS.
MS Server OS's are crap, they cost easily twice as much to deploy a system on, and generally require 33% to 100% more physical hardware to run sites than Linux based equivalent PC's. They are more costly to maintain, run and administer, the general calibre of administrators on the Windows OS is lower, and therefor finding a REALLY good one is much more difficult than a highly skilled SA on Unix/Linux. On the desktop for downloading poran and IMing... Windows dominates, but when you need sheer horsepower and performance and mission critical, most people do not run MS products, and for good reason, believe me.
Linux is anything but "communist software." It allows users to take charge of their own computers. It is open for extension by any enterprising developer. It ensures the success of the best products by letting users make their own choices.
Now, Windows, on the other hand...
Pssst: BTW a federal judge in the anti-trust case ruled that MS was a monopoly nearly two years ago.
It's appears to they're going to be porting to .Net nothing else. It makes sense actually. Like Star Office supporting MS's .doc or Linux supporting .bmps. Just so long as a PC is built on Open Source I could care less what MS code they port or add to the platform.
As for "FUD" well, you tell me then why MS is going with a dynamic, closed-source BIOS and OS comm driver for .Net, because they don't use a DOS driver anymore. Functionality? Yeah, right.
Just keepin' it real, my brotha.
On the strength. One.
As long as Mono and the PCs it runs on are based on open source software I could care less what MS code they port to or support. The issue is keeping platforms from being proprietized and therefore monopolized. Something MS excels at due to their use of closed source software.
Based on endless personal and second hand evidence. I've written and studied many internal reports for many firms, and Linux always beats windows hands down in terms of cost.
Its not rocket science, but here's the nutshell, Windows costs: $200 or more per license.. Linux is Free, or if you want to buy it, you can purchase versions. Even purchased copies are no more than $100, and are not limited to the number of machines they may be installed onto. (Windows 1 license per box).
Now, the hardware cost is the same regardless of OS... so you are already starting out with a $200 per machine cost savings. Now, if I am installing a cluster of 10 servers, I just saved 2k minimal.. and this is being nice with the numbers believe me. Now, To my second point, I can push more data through a server running linux than I can a PC running Windows NT or 2000, they just handle loads better and can accomplish more with the same hardware. Generally a server can perform 33%-100% better with Linux or a version of i386 Unix verses a comparative NT/2000 box. So what I can do with 10 Linux/I386 boxes will require 13-20 NT/2000 boxes So I have saved another $600-2000 right off the bat.
Now as to maintenance costs, deploying a complex mission critical application on a Windows environment traditionally takes anywhere from 25%-100% longer to accomplish. My savings here are 25% to 100% of my man hour cost. This doesn't even get into the neverending security patching that anything running on MS will require, which also all have a $ cost to perform. And lets not even get into the nefarious "BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH" issues... (stability) every time a server goes down $$ is spent, and NT/2000 reliability while far superior to the desktop versions of windows, cannot compare to Unix based systems, especially when under constant use and heavy load.
Windows has its place, and in some organizations it makes sense, but if you have a mission critical, cannot go down, high traffic high processing server, running the Windows OS is not the right decision.
Now as for my knowledge, lets just say I have built, deployed and maintained a site or two in the last 8 years, including several fortune 100's and internet upstarts. If you are going to deploy servers on the i386 platform, Linux or FreeBSD are supurb choices. Linux gets more press, but FreeBSD is solid as a ROCK! Windows is a reasonable choice depending on the organization and use, but it doesn't scale, isn't as stable and cannot perform as well in these environments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.