Us tie wearers are not following IBM. They are following us. Actually, I
don't follow any name brand. If they are going my way, I'll use them. If
not, they are irrelevant.
Have a nice day.
On Tuesday 25 September 2001 13:47, you wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 11:01:07AM -0700, Seth Cohn wrote:
> > >Gartner's been really really bad about advocating
> > >Linux...
> >
> > Well, it's not like that's really their job anyway. It seems to me we
> > should be glad they're taking the bold step of saying "maybe IIS isn't
> > so hot after all", which would have been heresy to the tie-wearing crowd
> > not so long ago.
>
> But if you look at all of the previous noise from Gartner, they were often
> putting Linux down in many ways. Googling for Gartner and Linux (or even
> just search Slashdot for Gartner) finds a few dozen articles/reports, with
> such skewed issues as "Number of Servers shipping with Linux " (versus
> number _running_ Linux, since most don't ship with Linux, since most
> vendors aren't selling it that way).
>
> The problem I have with them is that for so long, they have been not just
> conservative, but outright biased. If they truly are looking out for their
> customers (which is why the customers pay them for the reports), they
> shouldn't have been caught so unaware and forced to (at this point)
> recommend dropping IIS. It's solely because of the M$ money that they've
> been so hostile, and I wonder what the backlash from Bill will be to this.
>
> I am happy to see it, but I don't think Gartner's rep is deserved
> anymore... too little too late.
> The tie wearing crowd follows IBM (among others) and IBM's been pushing the
> Apache ticket for some time now... they dropped their own webserver in
> favor of working with Apache.
--
Bob Crandell
Assured Computing
30004 Carol Ave.
Eugene, Ore 97402
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.assuredcomp.com
541-914-3985
