Yankee Group Report: Windows beats Linux
I'll let you read the details for yourself, but a soon to be released report from The Yankee Group says:
See also Yankee Group North American Linux Windows TCO Survey from my friends at IAPS.
I'm very surprised by reliability/performance and certainly security!
No Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) basis for a massive switch to Linux doesn't surprise me. Linux, in my own opinion, is not ready for most desktops.
Certainly not my parent's or sister's for example!
- 88% of companies report Windows Server 2003 is equal or better than Linux in reliability and performance.
- Security of Linux and Windows servers about the same.
- No TCO basis for a massive switch from Windows to Linux.
See also Yankee Group North American Linux Windows TCO Survey from my friends at IAPS.
I'm very surprised by reliability/performance and certainly security!
No Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) basis for a massive switch to Linux doesn't surprise me. Linux, in my own opinion, is not ready for most desktops.
Certainly not my parent's or sister's for example!
posted by Ted Demopoulos at 12:12 AM
Comments on "Yankee Group Report: Windows beats Linux"
-
Rich said ... (Tuesday, April 05, 2005 7:29:00 PM) :
-
Charlie said ... (Wednesday, April 06, 2005 6:12:00 PM) :
-
Rich said ... (Wednesday, April 06, 2005 9:27:00 PM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (Wednesday, May 31, 2006 5:49:00 PM) :
post a commentTed, I'm not overly surprised by the security finding. Out of the box Linux installs can be insecure just as out of the box Windows installs. I would even guess that a non-firewalled install of either OS would likely be 0wn3d in a matter of minutes if hooked to the net.
Certainly it's going to be a subjective measurement - is it more secure out of the box, in a standard configuration, as a desktop or a server? What constitutes security - a fully patched server, or one that doesn't offer services such as Samba/sharing or login services/AD?
Windows can be locked down tighter than a drum, if desired, but it just takes as much knowledge as you might need for a Linux box (albeit in a different manner).
Both are going to have their inherent weaknesses, and you really should know what you're doing to lock it down properly.
Hogwash. The TCO thing seals it. Linux is a lot cheaper. It costs nothing, and it never goes down -- period.
Security? Windows servers can be made that way with a lot of work. Linux servers can be made insecure with a lot of work.
As for the desktop -- my grandmother is now Linux-only. For the average user who just wants to surf the web, word process, check their e-mail and play solitaire, Linux is way better. Just ask my grandmother who is pleased as punch with the Linux box she's been running 24-7 for the past three months.
They can put out these reports all they want, but the proof is in the pudding -- Linux blows MS out of the water.
That explains why IPP is installed by default on every RedHat Linux I've installed so far..because I need it, and it's secure...
TCO? Right - I can explain how to get WiFi running on a Windows laptop over the phone....but it took me 2 hours to get it running on my own Linux box sitting in front of me (slightly older kernel and card - newer kernels have better support).
Just because YOUR situation means you have a secure box that never crashes....doesn't mean everyone else does.
I still have unanswered Samba problems which I tracked down to bugs in the product, and haven't been fixed (check my old Usenet posts BEGGING for help from Samba gurus - and getting none)...I got fed up with it and kept my Windows box for my music share. Your grandma may be happy browsing the 'net, but not everyone's needs are so simple.
Anyone who uses RedHat as their example of Linux truely knows nothing about it.
Using samba as your example of a Linux service in action shows how much of a windows nub you are.
The only reason it took you 2 hours to get wifi working on your box is because you had to learn how to use "cd" and "ls" first.
Binary distros like RedHat, SuSe, Debian are not the ideal server solutions like most nub's idolize them as. Instead try somthing like Gentoo, Slackware, or Scratch where everything is compiled from src and you build your own kernel.
Windows can not even compeat in the same weight class as Linux in the server OS arena as Windows is for Jr-High intermediate level and Linux is Pro Heavy Weight.