Microsoft To Start Running Anti-Unix Ads 1133
PhreakinPenguin writes: "According to this article on News.com, Microsoft and Unisys are preparing to pay for a slew of ads to 'undermine' Unix with the theme of 'We have the way out.' They are apparently hyping that Unix is an expensive money trap. One ad states, 'No wonder Unix makes you feel boxed in. It ties you to an inflexible system. It requires you to pay for expensive experts. It makes you struggle daily with a server environment that's more complex than ever.' Unisys is apparently putting up $25 million and Microsoft won't say how much they're chipping in but you can bet it's more than Unisys." As the article notes, this comes after floundering attempts to sell (through Dell, Compaq and Hewlett-Packard) the high-end Unisys machines pushed by these ads.
No such thing as a cheap expert. (Score:4, Interesting)
Either you pay someone who really knows what they are doing well for the job, or you pay some jerk who only thinks he knows what he is doing next to nothing. Guess which one costs you more in the long run. Why don't businesses look to the long run? (I really want to know)
nahtanoj
Educate the decision makers (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft MAY have a point... (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess what I'm saying is that Unix is losing more and more market share to operating systems like Linux. (Linux is NOT unix, although it's quite similar) This is especially true administrators (rather than corporate commitees) get to pick the operating system to use.
A good case in point is the market share and mind share of Solaris and Linux. Sun Microsystems just recently released the source code of Solaris under a "community license" (which is NOT the same thing as GPL, but it's the best we can expect from Sun Microsystems). Did Sun have to release the source code? Not really. But it knows it would lose MORE mind share to Linux if it didn't.
We'll still use unix for webservers... (Score:5, Interesting)
The site www.wehavethewayout.com [wehavethewayout.com] is running [netcraft.com] Rapidsite/Apa-1.3.14 (Unix) FrontPage/4.0.4.3 mod_ssl/2.7.1 OpenSSL/0.9.5a on FreeBSD [freebsd.org].
Lock and key (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, and if hiring a sysadmin is expensive, I guess they haven't taken a look at the going rate for MSCEs lately, have they? Just because a 15 year old kid could administer your machines for Mountain Dew and Pizza doesn't mean you should run your business like that.
I wish someone like IBM or Solaris would do a similar ad against Microsoft.
Re:Expensive experts (Score:2, Interesting)
barking up the wrong tree... (Score:3, Interesting)
Not only is it the wrong tactic, but it will hurt them in the enterprise services world. There's a reason the stock market uses Sybase ASE and not sql server. No matter how much money microsoft puts into getting high TCP numbers, real DBA's know the difference. Here's to hoping microsoft continues this line of advertising and continue to shoot themselves in the foot in the enterprise services world.
Re:perplexed (Score:5, Interesting)
There's nothing illegal here, they just look at where they can expand their revenue like every other corporation in America. There's big money in the server market - when I worked in that industry 6-7 years ago, a M$ server with MS-SQL (bundled, the only way you could get it, which might still be true) cost about $10000 for the low end machine. That was basically a version of Windows with an unlimited connection license and MS-SQL on a fairly mediocre machine. Hardwarewise, I'm guessing about $2000, so that's $8000 in software and profit, most of the development of the OS software was paid for in the consumer version of Windows, so either MS-SQL cost a lot to make, or some hefty profits were being made.
Phase Three (Score:2, Interesting)
It gets better! (Score:4, Interesting)
1. it's using Java Server Pages (notice the
2. it's using IIS 4.0 on NT4....no W2K/IIS5....
This is entirely too funny.
Re:The campaign website runs FreeBSD (Score:3, Interesting)
Once you've divided your enemies and picked off or embraced the ones you can, you're left with the ones you can't buy or beat. And when all else fails and you find out that you really can't buy or beat your enemy, you might as well slander them, right?
Re:Oooh, I'm scared (Score:2, Interesting)
Please, leave the zealotry at home. (Score:1, Interesting)
Don't like MS, fine. But come on slashdot - GROW UP! This is business! These are largely subjective issues, and we know that MS will exaggerate every possible flaw with Unix systems. This strategy is nothing unique to MS. Leave America and stop supporting American businesses if you don't like it. Stop looking like brainless reactionary zealots. I'm telling you, the MS folks laugh when stories like this appear on slash. If you ever want to gain mindshare for Linux, you need get an open mind and stop appealing to the "bunch of hippies" stereotype. Try to look at things from the bigger picture. Unless these ads are illegal, we should've brushed this news off no different then the launch of a new Cheerios marketing campaign against "generic wanna be cheerios".
What are MS biggest money losing products? (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's have a poll on this subject. Who can name the MS products that have produced the smallest revenue compared to the money that MS invested in development and marketing. Two of the biggest money pits at MS have been:
(1) Windows DataCenter. This product has thoroughly bombed. Last year it was rumored that only a couple dozen had made it out the door.
(2) MS BizTalk Server. Another "MS Enterprise" computing product that despite _immense_ marketing spend, is really sucking ass.
MS is doing this marketing campaign because their enterprise computing strategies have thus far fallen off a cliff. This is just more money thrown to the wind. People aren't buying MS enterprise computing product.
Oh, and give aways like IE don't count for this poll.
Pot calling the kettle black? (Score:2, Interesting)
Sun responded to the campaign in a statement. "Sun still does not see Microsoft as a real threat in the datacenter market where reliability, availability, serviceability and security are key," the company said. "As for Unix being 'inflexible,' 'expensive,' and 'complex,' we feel those are terms much better suited to the closed and proprietary world of Windows."
Like Solaris never had security holes, their source code is widely available for anyone to download, and their systems are made from standardized and off-the-self hardware components that don't cost a lot to replace. Oh yeah, and Solaris doesn't cost a lot, either.
Re:Please, leave the zealotry at home. (Score:2, Interesting)
All I'm saying is this:
IBM has donated oodles of money to the OSS cause. However, all of their ads are rather modest. IBM has EVERY right to come out swinging with anti-microsoft ads. They could be bastards, too, but -- as always -- Microsoft beat them to the bastard boat.
What's happening is this:
Microsoft is getting the shit beat out of them in the server market (or, rather, they see the onslaught approaching) and they're floundering, doing anything they can to prolong the inevitable.
I agree, what they're doing isn't illegal.
It's just lame.
Re:Logical Fallacy: Re:Expensive experts (Score:2, Interesting)
Have you ben thorugh the process for a RHCE? Do you know what the test is like? I haven't done it personally, but I have talked with those who have.
You can't just regurgitate some book learning. You need to know how to setup servers and handle a computer. They actually have you troubleshoot a purposefully broken computer. If you can't diagnose it, you don't pass.
That sounds a bit of a more practical exam then: "what are seven layers of the OSDI model of networking?" Just because you know the answer to that, does not mean you can setup a DHCP network, let alone one that has NIS authentication on local clients.
Where I work, we have several MSCE's and MCP's. I wouldn't trust them to find thier own ass with two hands and a set of mirrors.
Re:Logical Fallacy: Re:Expensive experts (Score:5, Interesting)
What?!??!? This is a troll right? Have you ever spent any time with computationally intensive work? I'm talking calculations that take hours, days, weeks. Even W2k, while improved cannot work with 4GB or more of RAM, crunch on an algorhithm for two or three days, and not have problems. Hell the W98 box I replaced with our W2k 2.2Ghz box would crash multiple times a day.
The SGI Octane on the other hand can work for weeks at a time on a calculation and still be able to respond to queries, launch new processes etc... without ever becoming unstable. My OSX box (while not as fast as the Octane and not as much RAM as the Octane) will crunch happily on problems while letting me write papers in Word, surf the web, serve web pages, download new data and allow me to examine it, and plug in a Firewire hard drive to upload data to ALL AT THE SAME TIME!!! The W2k Dell box chokes badly every time attempting this sort of thing and there is no way you can say that Windows can compete here.
As for your argument about well-trained administrators familiar with MICROSOFT PRODUCTS. That's what we thought we were getting and paying for. The point is that Microsoft products are third rate. They don't scale, they are not as stable as other offerings, they do NOT have the same flexibility versus UNIX, and the ease of use of the OSX flavor of UNIX is unbeatable. This is the problem with people that have been raised on Microsofts nipple. They don't know anything else and they make assumptions about the rest of the computer world without having the appropriate knowledge. Try using other environments before saying that Microsoft can do anything UNIX can do.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Unix is an expensive money trap? (Score:2, Interesting)
And the election in the US was extremely questionable too.
Note "UNIX" instead of Linux, and Unisys should... (Score:2, Interesting)
But I can see why they won't say "Linux"
1. Linux is flexible. It runs on everything from Tivos through mainframes.
2. Experts are available on newsgroups or IRC for free with possible delay, and each part is documented with plenty of howtos.
3. Windows is one huge complex blob. Their "Pocket guide" to W2K Systems administration is larger than most epic novels. You apparently need wide as well as deep pockets
OS X! and other BSDies) are componentized. Upgrading or completely changing the mail system doesn't require even one reboot, nor affects anything else. Any apparent complexity in Linux/BSD/etc is only because of the many parts, each of which is independent. Windows (the browser is part of the operating system) is worse because it is only one part - were it a car, the battery and transmission would be welded to the engine.
Finally, Unisys seems to have some very cool big-iron hardware. And it is even x86 based. Unisys could port Linux and probably have a very cool enterprise server. But instead they want to tout Windows (how much is Microsoft paying them? Is their balance sheet that bad so they would be a good short candidate).
Unisys - the power of two: Bill Gates and the CEO of Unisys.
Linux - the power of hundreds of thousands: on the internet.
MCSE Bashing (Score:3, Interesting)
If you hire a MCSE because 'they are cheap' then you'll get what you deserve... I, for example, am a well qualified MCSE, but I don't come cheap.
Re:Please, leave the zealotry at home. (Score:3, Interesting)
And as I've written - there is a reason why not a single company - Dell, Compaq, HP - wants to re-sell Unisys solution..
Security? (Score:2, Interesting)
1
Security = -------------------
Convenience
There is just no such thing as a secure Windows box. Well, I take that back... Unplug it.
This is both amusing and sad......... (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh, and I don't claim to know a damned thing about the *nix flavor of OS's, but how the hell can Microsoft badmouth Unix?! It's been around since forever, I rarely hear *nix admins complain about stability or security issues / flaws........ rather amusing, methinks. As far as the "expensive experts" go, somebody already said it -- just because a person is MS-certified doesn't mean he's worth a red cent. In college, I always tested rather poorly, compared with the quality of material I wrote in CS labs or independent projects. As such, the material I developed when not under duress was always a poor indication of my knowledge of the subject matter. On the flip side, ALL (5 so far) of my previous employers have told me that the person I was replacing was MS-certified (I'm not yet, but I have 4+ yrs _experience_), but couldn't work independently, cranked out shoddy code (which I have to rewrite now anyway) and was a pain in the ass to deal with in terms of basic communications skills! And these guys were billing out at $30-$50/hr!!
As with all things, I have no problem spending money, as long as it's WELL SPENT. Developing and maintaining scalable, stable, complex business applications / systems will always be an expensive endeavor, as a lot of resources and effort are require to run such an operation. But you're throwing your money away if you think that hiring people with exorbitant rates, fluffy resumes, stamped certifications and even college degrees is the same as hiring talented, diligent, knowledgable individuals. One of my best friends dropped out of college to code, and despite the fact that I have a background/degree/honors in CS and have exactly the same amount of work experience has him, he's still every bit as good as I am as a developer.
The Truth Will Prevail (Score:2, Interesting)
An important factor in Linux' cost is its maintenance. Linux requires a *lot* of maintenance, work doable only by the relatively few high-paid Linux administrators that put themselves - of course willingly - at a great place in the market. Linux seems to be needing maintenance continuously, to keep it from breaking down.
Add to this the cost of loss of data. Linux' native file system, EXT2FS, is known to lose data like a firehose spouts water when the file system isn't unmounted properly. Other unix file systems are much more tolerant towards unexpected crashes. An example is the FreeBSD file system, which with soft updates enabled, performance-wise blows EXT2FS out of the water, and doesn't have the negative drawback of extreme data loss in case of a system breakdown.
According to Linux advocates, an alternative to EXT2FS would be ReiserFS. Unfortunately, ReiserFS is still in beta stage. This means it is not intended for production use (although according to many Linux advocates this shouldn't be a problem, which makes me wonder how (little) valuable they find your data).
The other proposed 'solution', EXT3FS, is nothing more than an ugly hack to put journaling into the file system. All the drawbacks of the ancient EXT2FS file system remain in EXT3FS, for the sake of 'forward- and backward compatibility'. This is interesting, considering that the DOS heritage in the Windows 9x/ME series was considered a very bad thing by the Linux community, even though it provided what could be called one of the best examples of compatibility, ever. When it's about Linux, compatibility constraints don't seem to be that much of a problem for Linux advocates.
Back to Linux' cost. Factor in also the fact that crashes happen much more often on Linux than on other unices. On other unices, crashes usually are caused by external sources like power outages. Crashes in Linux are a regular thing, and nobody seems to know what causes them, internally. Linux advocates try to hide this fact by denying crashes ever happen. Instead, they have frequent "hardware problems".
The steep learning curve compared to about any other operating system out there is a major factor in Linux' cost. The system is a mix of features from all kinds of unices, but not one of them is implemented right. A Linux user has to live with badly coded tools which have low performance, mangle data seemingly at random and are not in line with their specification. On top of that a lot of them spit out the most childish and unprofessional messages, indicating that they were created by 14-year olds with too much time, no talent and a bad attitude.
I could go on and on and on, but the conclusion is clear. Linux is not an option for any one who seeks a professional OS with high performance, scalability, stability, adherence to standards, etc.
Re:Oooh, I'm scared (Score:1, Interesting)
Cant understand where M$ is coming from.. (Score:3, Interesting)
"They are apparently hyping that Unix is an expensive money trap."
I got my copy of IRIX for free from SGI, simply by giving them my workstation MAC address - I didnt have to pay for postage or anything, yet the following day IRIX 6.5 and the most recent updates appeared on my desk, 'courtesy of SGI'. I also believe that Sun offer Solaris 8 for free on both SPARC and x86 platforms - you can either download the ISO's or pay for postage to get the full box set (and you get a LOT for your money).
"No wonder Unix makes you feel boxed in. It ties you to an inflexible system."
Er - Unix is about the most flexible system I have ever known.. use it as a Firewall, Router, SQL server, Web server, Windows Domain Controller, NetWare Server, LDAP server.. even a COFFEE machine for heavens sake.. its all possible on UNIX. To get any kind of flexibility out of Windows, you have to keep forking $$$'s over to Bill & his buddies.
"It requires you to pay for expensive experts."
Oh - so that smarmy prick we have to keep getting down from , at a cost of £1000 per day ($1300'ish), to do work on our NT based Finance server, is not expensive? Purlease....
"It makes you struggle daily with a server environment that's more complex than ever."
Oh - so Windows has got easier to use. Let me put it this way.. I learn what I do by experimenting. Install it, read about it, play around with it.. I managed to do this for a number of UNIX based applications & daemons - indeed for UNIX itself. Yet has anyone ever tried configuring a Windows 2000 Active Directory server, or tried installing their crappy ISA2000 server? Jesus - talk about overkill.. their old MS Proxy software was a doddle compared to their new generation.. nasty nasty.
Screw you Microsoft.. I hope you get screwed up the ass in court.. you and your little dog too.
Hotmail and FreeBSD (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Expensive experts (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, it can be annoying to change out hardware in windows (I once switched an IBM drive for a Maxtor drive and rendered my system completely unbootable in Win2k, my geuss is that Win2K had set up some sort of drive specific optimization that caused the driver to crash when it read the Maxtor), the FreeBSD half of the box didn't care (although it was configured to use the CTQ on the IBM, it had no problem turning the CTQ code off when it saw the Maxtor).
How to Blue-screen a Win2K box via Infrared (Score:5, Interesting)
Okay, I reproduced it. Simplicity itself, actually.
Just run the irdaping command provided by your favorite Linux distro while there's a Win2K system in range. Whatever it sends so horribly confuses the irda.sys program in Win2K that it crashes the whole system.
Re:perplexed (Score:1, Interesting)
We have linux print/file servers in the company I work for (being acessed by windows clients)... the admins said that they tested both and linux is much faster and reliable than windows boxes!
Windows's Black Kettle (Score:5, Interesting)
In short retort:
It's all about the fear, uncertainty, and doubt, and Microsoft's firm belief that the decision makers in a company are the ones in air so rarified as to know little enough about technology to be brought in to Microsoft's folds by this bunch of crap.
MS BOB (Score:3, Interesting)
Interesting story about BOB. You every wonder where you got that paperclip in Word? BOB. Ever wonder who the project lead for BOB was? Bill Gates' wife was responsible for the paper clip. Really, it's true.
Melinda French Gates was a project lead on MS Bob [post-gazette.com] (you have to remember MicroSoft Bob [strategymag.com] -- it was that cartoony software that slowed your machine to a crawl and insulted you while balancing your checkbook or reading email). When Bob was revealed to be the complete and utter turkey that it was always destined to be, guess what got some of the "usability and human interface" stuff? Office. Guess who happened to also be, ah, "seeing" The Boss? Melinda. Why wasn't Bob just canned, like any other project that wastes millions and failed completely? You have to wonder if Bill G wasn't getting pillow-talked into something. In fact, MS Bob was the first consumer product Bill Gates released personally. People do the strangest things for love.
Anyway, a lot of what Bob had to offer didn't get canned (as it should have). It got repuposed and wound up in other MS products. Take a look at the screenshot on this page [gratefuldad.com]. See that dog in the lower corner? That was Bob's dog Rex. (I wish they had a picture of the dragon named "Java"; I wonder if McNealy every knew about that?) Looks like that paper clip, eh? Bob's ghost is in other stuff, too. MS Agent had a re-incarnation [wired.com].
Well this is all way OT. But I think the Bob fiasco sheds some light on what goes on at MS. There's really no reason to wonder about the pape clip. I'm sure Melinda will insist on touchy-feely stuff being included in every MS product. I love it when someone thinks for me...
-B
You are so right, unfortunately. (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem is, the equations they use to determine "shareholder value" in thier heads are all skewed. In thier world, the "value" of something goes down exponentially with time. If they can make $1 million dollars today, or $1 billion dollars in five years, they always chose the quick million becuase in thier tiny pea-heads, they think that every day that passes between now and when they get thier cash divides the value of their return by some arbitratily high number.
its true... sorta (Score:1, Interesting)
The scarry thing is that Windows claims to be working on stabilizing and securing Windows. If you thought they would ONLY perform the FUD trick and actually ignore all the talk about how their products are notoriously unstable and unsecure, then you are in for a very rude awakening. MS plays very hard (and very nasty) ball, so you should be prepared for a nasty fight. UNIX might seem the inpenetrable citadel, but when you look at the problem from a managers perspective (at least a technical managers) you see how over the years UNIX has become rather stale while 'new' or at least neo-re-introduced technologies that work much better are introduced by third parties for Windoze all the time.
To relate part of the problem, look at how many *nix, *bsd, Linux folk purposely obfuscate things, where Windows folks (including those that make stuff FOR windows platforms) try to make it as usable as possible. *nix folks are too busy shooting themselves in the foot (when not sticking their feet in their mouth) and trying to basically be 1337. I can't tell you how many times that even hard lines Unix folk will get frustrated at Unix tools that are flaky in use (features and interface) and documentation, yet get mad when they 'find' that a Windows solution is much quicker.
The thing that *nix supporters (and I include myself in this) need to remember is that no one except hobbiests are going to find the kludgy nature of Unix tools handy. Unix needs to keep the same level of stability it used to have, but take away the foolishness of thinking that obfuscation is helpful... that is like trying to keep a burger joint in business that costs just a bit less but requires the customer to kill the cow, pick the lettuce and bake the bread themselves before preparing the actual ingredients and assembling the end burger for themselves. Add to that the inconsistency between each joint and the elite and arrogant attitide of the burger joint workers and you will not have to worry about customers much longer because they will NEVER come back.
Re:What are MS biggest money losing products? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Please, leave the zealotry at home. (Score:1, Interesting)
Amiga users wanted Commodore to run anti-Mac ads.
Linux users want IBM to run anti-Microsoft ads.
Ford users want Ford to run anti-Chevy ads.
The problem is that those ads only appeal to the zealot faction and DON'T WORK.
Why waste money preaching to the choir? You can't appeal to the average IT dweeb with "Micro$oft Windoze" and "Blue Screen Heh Heh" and the other jihad crap that fills up Slashdot. Furthermore, if you already have Windows, these types of ads just say "Hey Pal -- You Suck!", which ain't the best way to sell your product.
As for MS/Unisys running anti-UNIX ads? I bet it won't sell a single system. IT Managers already know all about the costs of a Unix system, and aren't looking for the advice of a stupid ad. They are only doing it because the big Unisys machines aren't selling and they're desperate.
Training, attitude and experience (Score:3, Interesting)
The thing that gets on my nerves in this eternal Microsoft spin doctoring is the implicit denial of the simple fact that trained monkeys will not be able to run an all-Microsoft shop, and any company above mom-and-pop size will need to hire Really Good Geeks to get the work done. Learning Windows properly is at least as hard as learning Unix properly (screw user friendliness, a decent sized Windows shop needs folks who know what to tweak in the registry and what not to).
There is no amount of Microsoft support that will compensate for having experienced staff. Whatever OS you pick, there is no substitute for having employees who know their stuff. And that's the bottom line.
I'm blessed with a bunch of colleagues who know NT inside and out. They trust me to keep the border e-mail flowing, and I trust them to keep the users off my back. I don't want their jobs, not even if it could be moved to UNIX.
Now, back to the topic of this
In another few years, our guy will be as theoretically underpinned as the MCSE's are, but in the mean time, he's running the shop, and will move up or move on to another company where he can apply his talents and his experience. Those are the people you need, and they're hard to come by, and harder still to retain if they outgrow the position they were hired for.
Re:Counterpunch already in the works... (Score:3, Interesting)
Basically the video starts out with a kid flying in the air, with music playing that sounds like the M$ flying commercials music. An M$ employee sits there watching this on his workstation with a big smile on his face. All of a sudden, the flying kid starts falling for a second and the music sounds like it's an old record that hit a scratch. This happens over and over for like 3 seconds and then it shows an "illegal operation" in a WinXP style error box on one of the screens the guy is looking at. He furiously hits the enter key and the kid keeps going for a moment. Then the guy's jaw drops and the camera zooms in on a familiar BSOD, at which point the kid falls flat on his face. Then it fades out and it says, "For servers that only go down when they're brought down
It ends with the guy saying into a telephone in a very irritated phone "Well you can tell Mr Bill Gates to get down here to sublevel 6 and he can kiss my a" at which point the music starts up again, cutting off the last half of that word and the Novell logo pops up.
It's very funny, go watch it at the library or something.