Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 29th May 2011 21:29 UTC, submitted by teigetje
Microsoft It turns out that a lot of people haven't been paying attention. Over the weekend, a story about how Microsoft is earning more from HTC's Android devices than from its own Windows Phone 7 sales spread all across the web, with surprised reactions everywhere. Anyone who has been paying attention to Microsoft's recent patent trolling regarding Android could've seen this coming.
Thread beginning with comment 475009
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: One of the many reasons ...
by JAlexoid on Mon 30th May 2011 00:09 UTC in reply to "RE: One of the many reasons ..."
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

Windows Server is very good competition for Linux on its own merits

I LOL'ed at that statement. Win2008 is a good product, but nowhere near a competitor to Linux.
Win2008 occupies a segment, the Microsoft product stack segment that is very big. But when it comes to selecting OS as a server, Windows Server is a non contender anywhere where Microsoft stack is not one of the prerequisites. That is an observation from the enterprise and startup company field. Even though MS is pushing for startup mindshare really hard. And that is exactly why Microsoft considers Linux a bigger threat than Apple.

Edited 2011-05-30 00:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 9

ephracis Member since:
2007-09-23

Granted that Win Server isn't well suited for a web-, dns-, ftp-, etc server but when it comes to having a domain with shared resources such as printers and drives, managing user accounts, deploying software and restricting access to certain features in the workstation OS... Well then Active Directory along with stuff such as GPO is actually very efficient.

I have tried to find a good replacement for Active Directory on RedHat but I haven't found anything that is as good. To me the Linux alternatives feels a lot like NDS back in the days.

Then, you are talking about startups and they may not be the kind of businesses that needs to have a domain. But of all the larger places I've been to here in Sweden there's always been Windows Server with Active Directory and Exchange, while Linux and BSD is common on the more "hardcore" type of servers.

Just my experience...

Reply Parent Score: 2

bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

You've made the guy's point, your requirement is an MS stack, an ms server to manage ms clients... For anything else, windows server is a very poor choice. Even if you have a mixed client environment the ms server option is very poor.

And don't forget the security weaknesses of an ms network, attacks like hash spraying and token stealing combined with the flaws of wsus mean that its extremely difficult to keep such a network secure...

Reply Parent Score: 4

turrini Member since:
2006-10-31

Hmm... Here we use CUPS for sharing 627 printers, SAMBA/NFS(plus SSHFS for remote places) for file sharing and OpenLDAP+Kerberos for authentication. We use Cfengine too for managing configurations.

Our company has 3 thousand workstations, 92% runs Linux.

So, M$ not big deal and not really necessary here.

Reply Parent Score: 2

ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

Granted that Win Server isn't well suited for a web-, dns-, ftp-, etc server...

What? You must be still using old 3.1 Windows NT servers. Because you seem not aware of new options like Windows Azure and Windows Azure Appliance.

Reply Parent Score: 2