Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 6th Jun 2006 21:54 UTC, submitted by Ricus
Windows 2003 Server is a more reliable server operating system than Linux, a research firm said Monday. According to the Yankee Group's annual server reliability survey, only Unix operating systems such as HP-UX and Sun Solaris 10 beat Windows on uptime. Windows 2003 Server, in fact, led the popular Red Hat Enterprise Linux with nearly 20 percent more annual uptime. The Yankee Group made a point of stressing that the survey was not sponsored or supported by any server OS maker.
Thread beginning with comment 131262
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Some background on Laura DiDio
by DigitalAxis on Wed 7th Jun 2006 15:23
in reply to "RE[2]: Some background on Laura DiDio"
Member since:2005-08-28
It's Ann Coulter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter
RE[4]: Some background on Laura DiDio
by tomcat on Wed 7th Jun 2006 17:47
in reply to "RE[3]: Some background on Laura DiDio"
Member since:2006-01-06
The whole *point* of an analyst is to be impartial; look through the facts of both sides and produce a document/report showing the arguments on both sides, then summerising it as to either be one way or another, if there is insufficient evidence, then an impartial view of 'there is insufficient evidence to for either side to prove their stance on the matter" is required.
Maybe it's escaped your notice that practically nobody around here is "looking through the facts of both sides". They're shooting the messenger. As if that were some kind of cogent argument. Hint: It ain't.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
Considering that you're posting here anonymously, it could be likewise argued that you have no credibility, either.
Oh pulease, when this lady resorts to making smart ass comments about Linux, she ranks her self down at the bottom of the society's barrell, side by side with Rush Limbaugh and Susan Coutler.
If she wishes for her study to have some weight, then make some strong arguments that carry some weight; why can't the opensource model work in a capitalist system? so far Red Hat seems to be pulling in the cash quite nicely; Novells Linux revenues have been growing at 20% - if it were failing, wouldn't it be true that these companies would be bankrupt already?
The whole *point* of an analyst is to be impartial; look through the facts of both sides and produce a document/report showing the arguments on both sides, then summerising it as to either be one way or another, if there is insufficient evidence, then an impartial view of 'there is insufficient evidence to for either side to prove their stance on the matter" is required.
Too bad that there isn't the same level of disclosure that is now required for market analysts; when they come on tv, they must say what their interests in a particular company are.
Oh, and btw, why on earth is a person, with a communications degree, doing analysing an industry that she knows NOTHING about; it would be like me analysing the phamaceuticals industry and having no training, education or background in the industry.
Edited 2006-06-07 08:33