Posted on 11/23/2005 4:35:13 AM PST by StoneGiant
Opinion: New Linux study suggests fundamental Microsoft credibility problems
Nov. 17, 2005
Another day, another lame attempt by Microsoft to show that Windows is better than Linux.
This time around, Microsoft commissioned a study to show that Windows does a better job of serving e-commerce applications than Linux.
Of course, in the study, they didn't use the same e-commerce or back-engine DBMSs.
OK, right there, without saying another word, anyone who really knows anything about benchmarking knows that the study is fundamentally flawed. You're not comparing apples to apples; you're comparing apples and oranges.
It would be a different story, if you were trying to compare the transaction speed and reliability of e-commerce packages, but that's not the case here. Microsoft was trying to prove that Windows was better than Linux.
To do this "study," Microsoft hired Security Innovations Inc.. Paul Thurrott, a Windows journalist, describes the company as "highly regarded."
I prefer to use Security Innovations's own description of its relationship with Microsoft: "Security Innovation is a certified Microsoft partner for security services. We have both the Microsoft SWI and ACE certifications as an authorized professional services provider for Microsoft technologies."
What kind of idiots does Microsoft think we are, anyway?
In the, cough, study, which compared Windows Server System and Novell Inc.'s SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES), they simulated both the aforementioned e-commerce applications and an upgrade from Windows 2000 to Server 2003, and SLES 8 to SLES 9, and a year's worth of running, from July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2005.
What did Micros... oh I mean Security Innovations, find out?
Well, first, that by Microsoft's own admission the sample size of administrators was too small to provide conclusive statistical comparisons!
Is this amazing, or what? In the executive summary, Microsoft admits that they don't have real data!
So what conclusions did they reach?
They found that with Linux you could solve problems in a variety of ways, instead of one true, Microsoft way. OK, that's true enough. But, this, this is a problem?
Sorry, Microsoft, I don't buy that paying your prices for your integrated innovation solutions is any kind of real business win.
Go call me a capitalist, but I prefer open-source's competitive product approach to Microsoft's "our way or the highway" communism.
The study also found that Windows was dramatically more reliable.
Really?!
That's not the Windows I know. Server 2003 is a lot better than W2K, but in my experience, and with the companies I know, SLES still stays up longer than Server 2003.
You know, I also recall a few potential Windows security show-stoppers over that year. There was the SMB (Server Message Block) over TCP/IP exploit, and a whole slew of holes in TCP/IP -- and those are only a few of the ones that Microsoft has fixed.
Despite that, the study also found that the patch rate on Linux wasn't quite five times higher than Windows. The testers found that SuSE had 187 while Windows only had 39.
Hey, they finally got one right!
Yes, Novell, like any serious Linux vendor, fixes all its problems as fast as possible. Microsoft doesn't. Even when a problem is a potential system killer, sometimes the boys from Redmond drag their feet.
Oh, and funny this, but the SuSE patches tend to work, unlike some Microsoft patches like two recent critical Internet Explorer patches, or the infamous Windows 2000 patch that blew up ASP (Active Server Pages) pages that were running ISS (Internet Information Services).
Microsoft also claimed that Linux patches took twice as long to apply and broke applications.
What nonsense!
In my office lab, I run a W2K server, two Server 2003 servers, and a pair of SLES servers. As it happens I also, during this last year, updated a W2K server to Server 2003 and one of the SLES servers from 8 to 9.
On those systems, I've also installed a variety of server applications including SQL Server and MySQL.
You know what? First, the Linux patches always, always installed faster. And the only breakage I ever saw from either the Windows or the Linux systems was when I was working on W2K.
Do you know why I support Linux over Windows? Because I don't just write about operating systems. I actually use them, and Linux works better than Windows does.
Lest you think I'm only saying that because I know Linux better than Server 2003, think again.
I literally wrote several hundred pages on Server 2003 in an online reference guide to the operating system. You can see the most recent edition of that over at InformIT.
No, I know Linux. I know W2K and Server 2003. And the people who wrote this "independent" study of both certainly didn't know Linux well -- and I have my doubts about the Windows side, too.
--Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
"Slate is owned by Wash Post. Learn some facts before you even attempy further insult."
Apparently WaPo completed buying Slate less than a year ago. I was unaware that Microsoft no longer owns it. Microsoft USED TO own Slate. Thanks for showing your generous nature with that comment.
Interestingly, the article which contained the pic you posted
http://www.slate.com/id/2130798/
is about how Microsoft is wrong, and that Linux isn't Communism. The drawing is a SPOOF of that idea. Interestingly this has been an ongoing problem for you, such as the time you quoted a "fake" joke news story about Ballmer.
"No wonder Oracle chose Solaris for the future, their largest Linux DB's were already on Sun hardware!"
Show proof that Oracle is moving away from Linux. They're moving TOWARDS it.
Interestingly, so is Sun. So much that they support it on their own hardware.
You're the only one who doesn't. Even people at Microsoft run linux. But no, not the purity driven yellow canary.
I don't speak for everyone here, just myself. You seem to have missed my point. What "true patriots" such as yourself need to learn is that this idea of domination you have is what killed the Roman Empire in the end. The US's "lead" wouldn't even be possible if it weren't for other countries helping us. Do you really think every piece of spaghetti code that is crammed through your processor is 100% american? Windows, in all its miserable, bloated glory, wouldn't even exist if it weren't for foreign contribution. Frankly, it disturbs me that to you, cooperating and sharing with other countries means defeat, we can't survive isolating ourselves, its that attitude that got us involved in WW2, we need allies to survive.
Also, you never answered a question I've seen at least four people ask you directly, how do you feel about MS letting China, I mean COMMUNIST China (so you better understand the effect you try to exhude) see the source code to windows for *gasp* FREE??? You sit here silently while the Communist Threat is reading the source to your OS, while you couldn't do it if you paid Microsoft. The fear must indeed be comatose, as you seem quite unable to discuss the matter.
Find it yourself, you obviously need to catch up on things if you didn't even know MS no longer owns slate. As for how I treat you guys, it will be with respect if you ever actually deserve it.
While I don't think it was wise for Microsoft to share their source with foreign governments, they obviously only did it as a response to linux. And, of course, allowing governments a peek at your source in no way equates to allowing them to copy, rename and resell without a dime back to anyone in the US.
for later
"Find it yourself, you obviously need to catch up on things if you didn't even know MS no longer owns slate. As for how I treat you guys, it will be with respect if you ever actually deserve it."
All the press releases show they are moving towards it.
PS, you're a jerk.
The Brass Eaglet get's funnier each time, don't he? I'm wondering if Gates is a freeper.....
Typical reaction of an egomaniac when his claims are proven wrong. One day, maybe, you'll actually get something right.
More name calling, since you can' t debate the facts. And downgrading the US to commie crapware is all linux pushers are about.
It's to Oracle's advantage to promote the idea of having its DB run on a dedicated, non-MS box. That way the DB runs on a stable platform which is not vulnerable to MS sabotage (making the platform favor MS DB's and cripple everybody else's)
" Typical reaction of an egomaniac when his claims are proven wrong. One day, maybe, you'll actually get something right."
You've provided no links - meanwhile I provided a recent press release that Oracle is moving away from it.\
"One day, maybe, you'll actually get something right."
This, coming from the guy who doesn't know the difference between POP and SMTP? This, coming from the guy who gets beaten down in every thread, and just because he won't admit it, maintains he's "right?" You, who do things like post images from articles that make the opposite point from what you're hoping to make, and who, asked for a quote of Ballmer criticizing China, posted a quote from a "The Onion" type story?
That's why you're a jerk. Calling others not worthy of respect, calling them an egomaniac when they've provided links to back up an argument when you haven't. You're projecting.
ROFL, you've never been right about anything that I recall.
This thread is just another perfect example, you didn't know the Washington Post owns Slate and are just as oblivious to the fact Oracle recently named Solaris x86 as their preferred 64 bit platform going forward.
Sling insults all you want, but it's obvious who the idiot is.
I was not aware he needed a cheering section but as his *initial claim* was hundreds of redhat developers I wam waiting for proof before we move on...
Liar, I already gave you a link which you still can't refute. And all it takes is one since you claimed they didn't contribute to kernel design when in fact my other link showed they contribute more than anyone else.
So not only did you lose the original point, now you're lying trying to cover it all up. Face it, you were tagged a sham long ago, and just because you have a small possee of other liars and sham artists trying to back you up, all you really are doing is bringing more deserved criticism on yourselves. Guys like you are exactly why Oracle just named Sun Solaris as the preferred platform for 64 bit servers, which are now the majority of x86 servers shipping, and only going up.
Since you claimed Oracle preffered status is why you were using Linux, when are you switching to Solaris, or was that just a lie too?
Did you see the guy that tried to justify socialist open source software with "we all live on the same planet"! At least he had the guts to admit his one-world leanings, unlike these scammers.
Right, let's all join hands with poor misunderstood Mao and Stalin and Hitler and Pot and Hussein and Khomeini and Kruschev, and dance to the strains of "We Are the World". Yeah, software makes it all okay. Those dictators will see the error of their ways and just beat their swords into plowshares... /SARCASM
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.