__/ [ Ian Hilliard ] on Monday 05 June 2006 12:44 \__
> William Poaster wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 04:03:08 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> CRN Interview: Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote
>>> | Ballmer: All I said anywhere is quality, quality, quality, quality,
>>> | quality. The betas are just out: Quality, quality. I get an e-mail from
>>> | a customer who's says 'I'm worried about the following problem with the
>>> | beta.' That's what betas are about. I say: 'don't worry. Quality,
>>> | quality. We're just workgin on quality.'
>>> |
>>> | We will ship quality, security, quality. The features set is all there.
>>> | Now it's all about performance, quality, quality. If I get e-mail
>>> | 'Should I worry about what you're going to ship if you're forced to
>>> | ship on blah blah blah?', I say 'quality." That's essentially all I
>>> | said in Asia.
>>> |
>>> | ( http://www.ntk.net/media/developers.mpg )
>>> |
>>> | [...]
>>> |
>>> | Ballmer: Oh. The question is about Linux. Let's talk about it. Four
>>> | years ago people wrote that we'd be wiped out by Linux. Four years
>>> | later how're they doing?
>>> |
>>> | CRN: They're doing well on the server side.
>>> |
>>> | Ballmer: No they're not. They're not gaining share.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> F*ing liar! Is he legally allowed to do that?!?!?
>>>
>>>
>
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarchives.jhtml?articleId=188701423
>>
>> No big surprise though, is it. IIRC he once compared Windoze 2003 with a
>> RedHat (RedHat 6, a distro from 1998 FFS!), to show how "good" W2003 was.
>>
>> <quote>
>> The first 150 days of Windows 2003 we had four critical vulnerabilities.
>> The first 150 days of Red Hat 6, go check the number, just go check the
>> number. It's five to ten times higher than what we are showing.
>> <unquote>
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/steve/2003/10-21gartner.mspx
>>
>> So he compared something from 2003 with something from 1998. I wonder how
>> he would have gone on comparing RedHat 6 with Win98/Win98SE.....
>>
>
> Balmer likes to twist the facts to suit his point of view. The simple fact
> is that Microsoft generally do no announce a critical flaw until they are
> forced to. In general, the critical flaws are announced at around the same
> time or after many boxes have already been exploited.
>
> On the other hand, RedHat like many other Linux provide patches for
> possible exploits. These, for the most part, are produced well before any
> actual exploit exists.
>
> The real question is how many boxes were exploited within the first six
> months of deliver when compared with the number of boxes in use. I have not
> found these figures, but it would be a fair guess that Microsoft would look
> far worse under this more valid comparison.
The comparisons are of course all very selective. The dee-pocketed PR
department can spend money on hiding the unflattering comparisons and put
emphasis on some organic figures.
I am having a little argument about this in Digg (it's at the top of the
front page at the moment), so here is a citation (one among many) that
shatters Ballmer's argument. There is no other point-of-view to it. He
mentioned market share, not revenue (which is adverse to the Linux sales
model).
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-6041804.html
,----[ Quote ]
| "And in another first, fast-growing Linux took third place, bumping
| machines with IBM's mainframe operating system, z/OS. Linux server sales
| grew from $4.3 billion in 2004 to $5.3 billion in 2005
`----
Linux is the fastest growing platform (as clarified in many subsequent
analyses), in terms of market share. The only loser here is UNIX, as
expected. I think Ballmer confuses UNIX and Linux.
I wonder how the investor feel, having been fed with disinformation by the
CEO.
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Digits 772-777 of Pi are 999999
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
1:00pm up 38 days 18:33, 11 users, load average: 2.70, 2.32, 1.99
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
