quote:
Originally posted by brk3:
how could they make claims like that if they arent somewhat true.
Comments please.
The answer to your final question is quite simple, actually: it's their website, they can say whatever they want on it as long as defamation can't be proved (and let's face it, they have deeper pockets than Torvalds & Co.). My concern is that the reports cited are spinning off half-truths as fact by stating manhours to be equivalent to lost revenue. That's not necessarily so; most Linux admins I know work for the same wages as MSCE-certs, and get ten times as much done in a five-minute period. What the reports are analysing are the INITIAL TCOs, which involve compile time on the Linux side and installations on the Windows side. To that end, there is a certain billable loss in manhours, but the reports - more often than not - fail to cite the increased productivity AFTER the initial setup. The mistake becomes apparent when defined corporate entities attempt to spin initial setup fees as absolute truth.
In summary, it's not so much the content of these reports as
the way Microsoft interprets them. Yet another reason to wish another pie in Billy's face.
EDIT: Fixed 4th-hour dyslexia.[ September 11, 2004: Message edited by: Midnight Candidate/BOB ]
