I thought it was pretty fishy how they gave out very few details about the exact tests.
I will admit that Linux has some major pitfalls, but so does M$
I don't want to start a flame war or anything, just sharing my observations as both a Windows and Linux Admin.
Here is my humble opinion: (and food for thought)
M$ pitfalls:
-expense (Have you seen those license costs? ouch!). Then commercial products are almost the only add-in to many M$ servers (Backup, Anti-virus, Anti-spam, etc). (Last I checked, an email server like the one I manage using contribs.org would be over $40,000 in M$ and other proprietary software!)
-security (as related to virus/spyware propogation, but linux has security exploits too.) I think that I can assert that linux is more secure out of the box.
-Ethical issues, with many recent anti-trust and "tying" law suits (in the US, EU,etc.), many are wary of the ethics of the company, and its licensing policies that are now on the per user NOT per machine basis. (Example 300 machines, 3,000 users, you need to buy 3,000 M$ office licenses! big ouch!)
Linux pitfalls:
-Project competition, occasional infighting, and lack of standardization. In some cases there are half a dozen projects that do the same thing, would it not be more productive to concentrate resources and make one project more feature-rich?
I find it humurous when someone asks a question about fixing a specific problem with a program, and the first reply reads "Dude/Dudette, switch to program X instead, its way better". I am sure program X is wonderful, But I am dead in the water until I can fix program Y let alone learn how to use program X.
-Sometimes poor documentation/support- Linux has a pretty steep learning curve, I have found that some projects are downright hostile. This is not a good combination. SME certainly doesn't fall under this category
14 Replies
2634 Views