All Things Microsoft > Microsoft as a Company

13 lies on the Microsoft website.

(1/3) > >>

slave:
1.)

"Windows offers a lower overall total cost than UNIX."

http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/migrate/unix/businessvalue.asp

2.)

"While the Linux software is practically free, implementing it is far from free."

http://www.microsoft.com/sbserver/evaluation/compare/linux.asp

3.)

"Open Source does not an ecosystem make"

http://members.microsoft.com/partner/products/windows/WindowsCE/CEWhyWindowsCENETNotEmbLinux.aspx

(What, is Yoda working for Microsoft now?)

4.)

"Linux is not free"

http://members.microsoft.com/partner/products/windows/WindowsCE/CEWhyWindowsCENETNotEmbLinux.aspx

5.)

"Microsoft's approach has paid off for customers in the form of lower total cost of ownership. "

http://members.microsoft.com/partner/products/servers/windows2000server/idc.aspx

6.)

"One cannot delete the Web browser from KDE without losing the ability to manage files on the user's own hard disk."

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/mswitness/2002/madnick/madnick.asp

7.)

"Linux is typically much slower than Microsoft and Microsoft partners to consistently deliver the tools needed to stay current with new hardware requirements and new technologies."

http://www.microsoft.com/sbserver/evaluation/compare/linux.asp

8.)

"Linux offers no reliability framework to enhance system reliability."

(I'm not really sure what that even means.)

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/Embedded/sak/evaluation/compare/advantage.asp

9.)

"Linux is still an immature and fragmented market"

http://members.microsoft.com/partner/products/Servers/SmallBusinessServer/linux.aspx

10.)

"Linux offers no browser that is feature-equivalent to IE 5.5"

http://members.microsoft.com/partner/products/windows/WindowsCE/CEWhyWindowsCENETNotEmbLinux.aspx

11.)

"Networking support in embedded Linux simply is not as comprehensive and feature-rich as that in Windows."

http://members.microsoft.com/partner/products/windows/WindowsCE/CEWhyWindowsCENETNotEmbLinux.aspx

12.)

"Modern Unix is a catastrophe. It's the "Un-Operating System": unreliable, unintuitive, unforgiving, unhelpful, and underpowered. Little is more frustrating than trying to force Unix to do something useful and nontrivial. Modern Unix impedes progress in computer science, wastes billions of dollars, and destroys the common sense of many who seriously use it."

http://research.microsoft.com/~daniel/preface.html

13.)

"Computer science would have progressed much further and faster if all of the time and effort that has been spent maintaining and nurturing Unix had been spent on a sounder operating system."

http://research.microsoft.com/~daniel/preface.html

SAJChurchey:
Damn the propaganda and the stupid computer illiterate consumers that buy into that shit.

avello500:
i wonder if they could be sued for false advertising?

mc0282:
holy shit!!  what a BIG fucking lie .. i wish someone in the media world,  would go on tv and put a windows and linux for a test , i mean real test so alot people could see it how fucking bad is window . just like the ads come on tv about  smoking is bad  from those people called TheTruth.
 

one thing i didn't notice MICRODICK didn't had the balls to say was "LINUX IS VERY STABLE AND DOESN'T HAVE IS OWN LIBARY COMPUTER HOLES LIKE WINDOWS"

[ March 17, 2003: Message edited by: mc0282 ]

cahult:
Well, boys and girls, have you thought of the name Microsoft? That is one helluva lie in itself. It

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page