Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 16:48 UTC, submitted by Flatline
Microsoft executives pondered whether to remove the company's name from a 2002 report done by research firm IDC that touted Windows total cost of ownership over Linux, according to e-mail messages entered into evidence in an Iowa antitrust case. The report, which IDC released in December 2002 and was plugged by Microsoft in its then-new "Get the Facts" publicity campaign against Linux, compared total cost of ownership of Windows 2000 and Linux server software. The IDC study, which was identified as Microsoft sponsored when it debuted, claimed that Windows 2000 offered a lower TCO in four of five enterprise scenarios. Before its release, however, company executives worried that adding Microsoft's moniker would only fuel the fire from Linux partisans.
Thread beginning with comment 209195
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
The *ISSUE* is that there are people who *FUEL* demand for these lies - people demanding 'reports' rather than doing some leg work for themselves.
Microsoft *KNOW* this and take advantge of it; influence a few 'reputable' (word used in the most liberal of terms) consultancy companies, have some lazy organisations who can't be buggered going and doing a little work, and voila, hook, line and sinker.
Maybe you should show me why it isn't the fault of organisations who demand these reports; you know the basics of economics, where there is demand, there will be supply, and Microsoft know how the whole thing moves - if they didn't demand it, Microsoft would lose their channel of influence, Microsoft would have to actually offer deals, deep discount, and shock horror, compete on grounds of merit.
Red Hat have already demonstrate these studies don't make a lick of difference, they're grabbing customers left, right and centre, their subscriber base is growing, high profile customers are coming on board.
Microsoft know that once ISV's start moving their applications to Linux, their monopoly to the desktop would end in and instant - and right now, they're going hell for leather to bash Linux in terms of 'its not ready' and 'there are no standards' but it'll simply take time for the ISV's and realise, "thats a load of crap" and port their application, finding that the so-called doomsday 'lack of standards' is nothing more than that.
Edited 2007-02-05 03:56