you don't have to go to that bloody route again. it sounds like the early 2000's. MS already embraced(?) OSS that's why they partnered with Novell and are now acquiring startups that are using LAMP. why not use MS's own whitepaper[1] about windows and Linux interoperability instead? if they're going to be convinced by that and don't want to use SuSe, then you can introduce them to some of the popular distros. that way, you'll encounter less resistance.
but if you really want to go into a feature-by-feature match, be sure to know what matters to the applications you're using otherwise, it would be just a waste of time since there's now way for you to keep the score. and who know's, it might all be about money after all which brings you back to the topic of TCO :) [1] http://www.moreinterop.com/ On Feb 9, 2008 3:33 PM, Victor Sien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > im mostly interested in defensible technical arguments that point differences > between linux and windows, not general statements.. im not interested in > business issues such as TCO, etc.. if someone can point me resources, that > wouldbe very helpful.. i'd be very happy to hear your ideas as well. i found > out how hard it has become to get reliable info regarding this matter since > linux-vs-windows is understandly an emotional topic as it technical (try > google on the matter =).. > > thanks! > > Vic _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
