Microsofts Linux Myths

I thought that those of you who know Unix/Linux might appreciate this.
http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/nt...LinuxMyths.asp

-mk

I think that both Bill and you should see this: http://www.jokewallpaper.com/html/210.htm

All I have to say to this artical is "Hail Microsoft" with out Microsoft I would be lost. I need Microsft to make my life complete!

Cough, Cough, Did I just say that? Microsoft is SCARED of open source and what it will bring to the world. I will give Bill his dues, but not today.

It looks to me that Microsoft is Scared of Linux and Open Source.

Who know if Linux will ever kill off Microsofts hold on the Server or Desktop market. I dont know if that could happen, and I dont even know if I want that to happen. The only thing I have ever wanted was a Choice. A choice to run Microsoft OS or some other OS.

As long as the Open Source community keeps getting backing from the Bigger fish, ie: IBM, Compaq, Dell, and HP, then we have will be able to offer a choice to Server and Desktop Market.

When the breakup of Microsoft comes, (and if it comes) what will that hold for Linux and Open Source. These are exciting times ahead of us. I am happy I am here to watch and be involved.

These are my thoughts. Thanks for letting me spew them for a bit.

Have a great day.

Wayne

I know I shouldn't post jokes like the one of Titanic98 in this forum, but to what Microsoft says about Linux I can't answer in another way.
I don't think that Microsoft is scared of Linux, but I agree that they don't want to give it a place cause they'd lose the monopoly. But with Microsoft's split, well, weird things may happen.
I also have to say that the way Microsoft talks about Linux is insulting. It is also true that I haven't tried Titanic NT, but they said that Titanic98 would be fast and stable and it isn't. They said that the 2nd edition would never crash, I've experienced up to 4 crashes in a single day.
I DON'T BELIEVE ANY OF THE THINGS I SAW IN THE LINUX MITHS PAGE. I've tested Linux and it is not difficult and "non user firendly".
I also have to make clear that they are not myths, they are facts.

http://www.mslinux.org/

take a look at this url... https://discussions.virtualdr.com/

------------------
Compguy Pete
The Benevolent Moderator
Compguys Techweb Technical Support Portal

Hmmm...

Hmmmm ... is right .... Someones getting a little too carried away.

I think the Microsoft article raises some valid issues, but I think the perspective of the question is off. Here is my two-cents:

Microsoft Products were created to fulfill specific necessities Linux was not founded on. Perhaps we could point out four necessities for Windows: Serve a purpose, be easy to use, be stable, and make a profit. As we can see, trying to fit the first three together requires making some sacrifices in each category. The final necessity, to turn a profit, is probably the most salient. Therefore, we can say Windows was born to fulfill the needs of business in the quickest, easies manner possible and turn a profit.

I don't think Linux was born under these same principles. I maybe wrong, but it seems Linux T. began the creation of linux strictly for the "thrill" of creating an OS. Looking at the early development of linux you see an ever growing group of people contributing to a project not for profit or necessity to boost corporations, but for the sake of creating something unique. As the os snowballed and people began to see the potentials of Linux, thus arrived the desire to fit linux into corporate models. This is a more recent development and we can see that the points brought about by the article, even though valid, will quickly become outdated. Everything the article pointed out is under development. And when it arrives, it will be good, damn good.

I guess what my opinion is, is that Windows is developed under strict guidelines to turn a profit, where as Linux is created by people who enjoy practicing their craft. (I will admit, some of this "crafting" is turning towards making a profit now, but even if you take that away, linux will still carry on.) Which has more staying power? Which will win out in the end? I would put my money on the more "crafted" of the two.

In what regard, Johngeeaswell?

MS is correct in most of it's points, although a bit skewed, But then again, 5 or 6 years ago, the same thing could have been said about MS by any of the major Unix players. Considering the path Linux took to get to where it's at today, I think the open source development community has done a credible job in making Linux a major OS contender.

At one point, WinNT was supposed to spell the end of Unix. That didn't happen. So why not pick on their little brother, Linux. Funny thing about little brothers, though, they eventually do grow up. They sometimes even surpass their older siblings. -mk

Microsoft has been too self-serving far too long. What has microsoft to hide? And why should they continue profiteering the way they do? They act as though they reinvented the computer. And the ego to boot! (No pun intended.)

-Ps. I am currently at the woes of my ethernet card. : )

Just recently, Linux beat out winNT/2k on webservers by 2% . And it can only get better.............

I was refering to that other Web page .... If you watch it load ..... It's getting it's icons and everything from Microsofts site .....

I can't help it ... I get this protective feeling sometimes about things I value ... ...

I guess I just don't want to see anyone get too carried away and give the Linux community a bad name ........

.......... Maybe I read more into things than are there ....... but..........

...G...

Well, since this is from the MS site, I would assume that the "icons and everything" would be coming from the MS site.

"I guess I just don't want to see anyone get too carried away and give the Linux community a bad name ........"

Now who would be getting too carried away, and giving Linux a bad name. Me? This is MS's view of Linux, not mine. I thought it was rather silly, that they, of all people, should be comparing themselves to Linux, using the arguments that they used. And I also assumed that people who know and use Linux would see through their hype and find it rather amusing. I guess I was wrong. Sorry to have ruffled you feathers, John. -mk

It's not the name what matters... Look, I've talked to some friends about this mslinux stuff, and they all opine the same: They are scared that for any reason Microsoft obligates us to use mslinux, just the way we've been before obligated to use Titanic95.
Personally, I don't think that a distro may be incompatible with others, but... I'm also scared. https://discussions.virtualdr.com/

I know that page looks convincing at a glance, but you're not trying to tell me you believe it's real ....... are you ???

Compguy Pete's

mslinux link

.................


...G...