More Microsoft FUD

Microsoft continues to aggresively attack it’s competitors, and I continue to feel the urge to counter them as well as point out flaws in their arguments. I picked up the article Windows More Reliable Than Linux from BetaNews this morning, and got a good chuckle as I read it. Microsoft states the names of a few companies who chose to migrate from their legacy UNIX platforms to the Windows platform for it’s reliability. In their statement, Microsoft (for some reason) failed to mention the incentives that they and Intel offered these companies if they chose Windows and allowed M$ to use their names in press releases.

It gets even better though. Apparently, the suits in Redmond think that we, as consumers, are mathematically challenged:

Additionally, the company citied data from research firm IDC that showed Windows Server was the most popular platform for those migrating from legacy UNIX systems, with 45 percent turning to Windows.

It should be mentioned, however, that over half in the study did not choose Microsoft’s products — with 37 percent moving to Linux, and 16 percent choosing another UNIX variant.

So we’ve got 45% going from UNIX => Windows, 37% from UNIX => Linux, and another 16% from UNIX => UNIX . Now, I admit that I had to get my calculator out to do the math, but that looks to me like a total of 53% migrating to a new *nix-based system.

I read somewhere earlier this week or sometime last week that Windows servers stomped *nix servers in sales in 2005. That doesn’t surprise me. Has anyone ever seen Windows Server 2003? What a beast! We added two Linux servers at my place of employment in the past 18 months. Neither of them were purchased that way – how can they get statistics on that? Actually, both of those machines were “rebuilds” of some pre-existing machines. Not the latest and greatest hardware, but SuSE runs like a champ.

OK, I’ll shut-up now before I get labeled a Microsoft-hater, because I’m really not. Windows has it’s place on the desktop as well as a substantial place in the market for Servers (Active Directory is a fantastic piece of work IMHO), but I am sick and tired of reading all this crap that Redmond is slinging about Linux.

Edit: I just realized (almost 12 hours later) that Brandon beat me to posting about this story. He has a good comment too:

Listening to Microsoft claim that Windows is more reliable than Linux is like listening to this communist tell me how it is the best political system. In other words, there are so many examples that the claim is false that I don’t even know where to begin.