> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:29:40 -0600
> From: Dave Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [clug-talk] MS Presentation
> To: 'CLUG General' <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hi All,
>
> Great analysis Gustin,
>
> As Szemir mentioned both he and I were there in the morning as well as a
> couple of CLUGites that I recognized. Overall it seemed that most of the
> presentation was aimed at either creating uncertainty and doubt OR that
> when
> comparing Linux to Windows it was "generally a wash".
>
> Both Szemir and I challenged Barnaby on a few points where he seemed to be
> content to back off or reiterate that "it was a wash". I do wish that some
> of the more learned and vocal members of LUG had attended. I am certainly
> not an expert on Linux or Linux advocacy and would have liked to see the
> comments had others been there.
>
> FWIW,
>
> Dave Watkins
> VP CLUG
I was at the morning session and couldn’t get a word in between Szemir and Dave ;>) Actually I just went to listen since I heard this was the new Microsoft approach to fighting OSS.
Microsoft is obviously targeting this at folks who don’t know a lot about OSS but maybe thinking of trying it. The speaker came across as very credible and most of the points were plausible if not true on the surface. He positioned it as Microsoft clearing up the confusion about OSS (and thereby implanting their own view of OSS). The only thing worse than a lie is a half truth – and that’s what was delivered, but I think for a lot of the business audience they will take away the half truth and extrapolate it in Microsoft’s favour, at least for a while.
As a “Microsoft business customer”, here’s what I heard:
- There are no financial savings is switching to commercial Linux unless you are switching from proprietary Unix where there can be significant support and hardware savings.
- Commercial Linux (RHEL SuSe etc) is actually more complicated to manage (licenses, distributions, features, integrations, etc) than Windows in anything more than a standalone server.
- You need to become an OS developer/supporter/integrator to successfully implement OSS. Unless your company has extreme OS needs like Google, stick to your business and let Microsoft be your OS provider.
- Microsoft is learning from OSS and adjusting – releasing “shared source” and open source tools, contributing to sourceforge, evaluating interoperability of Linux and other OSS software in a lab, making it’s software more modular.
- Microsoft can provide superior support due to the integrated nature of the products and the 600 million user base, dedicated support structure, and centralized bug tracking services. The OSS world is supported by small loosely integrated teams, usually on staff at major companies, each pulling development in ways that benefit those companies, not necessarily yours.
- Microsoft Windows Server 2003 is just as good as OSS, is certified on more hardware, and costs about the same so don’t bother evaluating OSS or considering switching to it.
I talked to a couple of folks I knew after the event and they were impressed with the smoothness of Microsoft’s message. They felt it was much more effective than overtly slamming OSSes with negative benchmark results or threatening intellectual property violations. It appears objective and well reasoned. It will be harder to refute because it is mostly half truths. Apparently these “IT Pro advisors” sole job is the keep tabs on the competition and evangelize Microsoft. They attend all the OSS conferences and even LUGs, gather info, and dispel any “half truths” or inaccuracies that come up about Microsoft itself. Nice job.
I felt good after the event. Microsoft is now acknowledging competition, talking about interoperating, and trying to head off companies who may be thinking they should look into this “Linux thing”. Interestingly Microsoft talks about price but never about freedom. As more and more folks get released from the Microsoft jail, the word will spread that freedom may cost the same as Microsoft (probably less) and is well worth it. This type of presentation may delay, but will not stop, the spread of OSS. It is a very clever tactic and I’m sure there is more to come. Microsoft will not give an inch without a fight.
My advice – sell Microsoft.
Regards, Greg
_______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
