MS strategy shift
 

Anybody seen this one yet?
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/biztech...eut/index.html

Andrew

Hehe well it is on the cnn site, so it is true. Is MS finally learning their lesson? Will this be the first blue screen on linux?

Find out on the next, Microsoft blue screen empire.

Sure, Linux only has 15-20% market share, but Linux ain't the only open source server OS, now, is it?Back to that old gem?

Quick! Have somebody copyright these two sites and names

http://www.mslinux.org/

http://www.tuxfiles.org/antihelp/linux-xp.html

What scares me about this is I found a site where somebody was actually working on a distro called LinuxXP

HOW DO THEY FIGURE THAT ONE OUT, OH YEAH, LOOK AT THE BOLD

And sooner or later we're gonna have these, too:

http://www.conectevil.com/
http://www.lesbian.mine.nu/
http://www.deadrat.za.net/

This is a microsoft forum?

Nope, one reason why I moved it out of the Linux - General forum and into the General forum.

so how do they figure that cost to run linux is more over the long run that microsoft?

hmm... hardware more expensive? nope, that's not it.
upgrades cost alot? nope, that ain't it either.
Wears out hardware fast? well, I don't know about that, but I'd say no to that as well
Not portable to multilpe architectures? oh wait, that's Windows..

I'm running out of options here.

Damn I like this one:
How about an insert from New York Times' "Beginner's Guide to Linux" published on December 5, 2002:
And I share Mr.McCarty's point.

One of the things they say is that it'll cost lots of money to retrain people to use Linux... because it is just that hard ::sarcasm::! And one that I'll throw in of my own: If you're running with a Windows system at work, you can employ MCSE/MCSAs to deal with all of your finickey problems (by reinstalling - wonderful isn't it?). If you run with Linux at work, you can employ people who actually know what they're doing, and therefore they cost more to employ... so it is more cost efficient to employ 2 monkeys that know how to install Windows. Of course, that doesn't take into account the cost of the OS in the first place...

Thymox, that perhaps may be true. However, such as Linux is a "new" and a OS that is beginning to take off and become popular, it is also the "new" people studying computer science, and computer related subject that will begin to be trained in Linux..and not necessarily in Windows. So, in countries where their computer industry is very under-developed, but which are beginning to pick up...like for example Mexico and China, they are training all their technicians in Linux, and not in Windows. It is expensive if you have to switch from one to the other one...but if you start from scratch, like these countries, then it must be, that in the Long run, it is way, way, way cheaper than runing Windows. because there is no switching costs, :).

Hey, I wasn't disagreeing. I was playing devil's advocate... stating what I believe Microsoft believes... if that makes sense. Tell you what, I'll put a little ::sarcasm:: in my post to make sure that no-one else might get confused as to my beliefs.

oh no!, I know you weren't disagreeing!, :D, sorry if I made it sound like otherwise!

I was just pointing it out...for that's what the site suggests....not you of course.

LOL, I was watching that DVD yesterday when I made Mplayer run!!, lol, maybe we were watching the movie at the same time, and we didn't even know!, heheh, :)