arl: critique: www.microsoft.com/finland/mscorp/faktaa/

This article is critique for URL: http://www.microsoft.com/finland/mscorp/faktaa/

Microsoft has strong need to prove Linux is no good for real business applications and environments.

Microsoft has very cleverly sponsored and selected suitable environments and targets (like IBM) at their struggle for Windows. Problem is that normal installations have not been notified, like installations to other mark or markless PC machines.

Total costs of solutions are based on "innovative" and selected base, naturally because for example only one (1) virus attack to Windows based environment in real business environment would have devastating turnout, in some cases extra work loss may be calculated man-years.

Basic computer skills are still almoust non-existent.

Learning Microsoft environment and applications still take lots of time.

Changing environment from Microsoft to for example to Linux takes time - and mainly because the same applications are not available (Microsoft double role: Operating system and applications) by Microsoft, and alternative applications are not available because of Microsoft patenting and copyright policies.

"Computer driver's license" type diplomas are not useful and are _more_ like harmful because they tie people to one environment and mentally prevent further learning.

Linux is not IBM - IBM has just lately turned Linux supporter, and not even with its whole product arsenal. In many cases just Microsoft support is available - just try to upgrade your laptop's (Thinkpad) bios using Linux.

Linux is free - all of the source code is freely available this means:

Lot's of application developers: you are not tied by Microsoft support programs.
Security by obscurity is _impossible_: the open source code shows possible security holes, and they get fixed as soon as they are noticed - you do not need to wait service packs, especially you do not need to wait _buggy_ service packs. I personally know many highly appreciated computer specialists which think security by obscurity is a good thing - even computer magazines have printed such articles - security by obscurity is mostly technique for 60's and 70's, when we did not have proper algorithms nor implementations. Security by obscurity opens door to innovative computer cracker - it also prevents fixes by Microsoft, because also Microsoft is obscured..
Most viruses do not work with Linux environment. I have seen a company after virus attack: toilets did not work and were flooded with smelly liquids, doors did not work at all - the "security 1st company" had "open doors policy" - and all this because someone did use environmental management computers for their personal use.

And Microsoft Windows based solutions work - tried to find out more information: selected "Asiakkaidemme kokemuksia" (our customer's stories), and then selected "earth 9 - Ongelmallinen Pingviini jätti yhtiön porttaalitoteutuksen jääkauteen" (earth 9 - problematic penquin left company's portalsolution to ice age) - because it had really interesting topic, and have been doing years Linux or Unix based portal implementations.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/casestudy.asp?CaseStudyID=11364

The somewhat familiar end result with Microsoft environment was:

<html><head><title>Error</title></head><body><head><title>Application Pool Access Denied</title></head>
<body><h1>The specified request cannot be executed from current Application Pool</h1></body></body></html>

In my browser:

The specified request cannot be executed from current Application Pool
(what ever this means...)

Page naturally might work with you - but if I'm buying customer and that would be your product page, I would buy competitor's product.

Infamous last words..

Checked out what this as reference used company really is: "We are a Microsoft .NET solutions provider". Very interesting .. would .NET solutions provider use Linux + Apache? (200608: they use now MS IIS). And if yes, then would they really be customer's first choice?

Here's an image how earth9 WWW page shows up in my browser: www_earth9_com

And here's some validator W3 links to earth9 WWW pages:
home | ssoln.asp | careers.asp | news.asp |
mostly minor errors, but also creative use of tag/attributes (i.e. microsoftian way).

This shows quality (not) - the only problem is earth9 does not have HTML pages, their content might seem to be HTML, but it is not. How can your business or yourself trust this kind of service? How can you trust earth9 does their service for customer releationship quality and quantity management well, when they cannot do much easier tasks as releasing proper WWW pages using HTML? I just wonder...

arl: critique: www.microsoft.com/finland/mscorp/faktaa/	[this] [up] [top]
	[en] [fi]
	[response] [style]