File Under: Rat’s Ass, I could give a

I’ve been out of the loop for a little bit with the tech news, having my nose to the grindstone for the past couple of months, so I was a little alarmed when I saw this news item from ZaReason, “Today was filled with articles such as, ‘Ubuntu Kills Linux, Then Self, Dell Suspected of Foul Play‘ which had a lot of depressing but true points and even more depressing and untrue points.” A little taken aback, I re-read the article and the comments thinking to myself that this person certainly has a dislike for Linux. I then scanned the sidebar for what other articles that had been written and not really surprising it was filled with charmers like these:

  • The More Dell Lies, the More Ubuntu Community Embraces Dell
  • Ubuntu Kills Linux, Then Self, Dell Suspected of Foul Play.
  • Ubuntu’s Death Rattle
  • Typical Linux FUD Campaign towards Microsoft.
  • Ubuntu and Dell, a Mismatch Made in a Place Called Hell [IdeaStorm].
  • Smartest Linux Move Ever? And Why Ubuntu will Fail
  • Microsoft Thanks Ubuntu For Increasing XP and Vista Sales

WTF? Sounds more like someone has a score to settle or is on the payroll.

Curious about the company behind the blog I peek at their homepage which proudly crows, “open-source, non-proprietary solutions for Windows.” Ah, a kernel of truth. They are in the business of selling WAMP tools, “Apache Web-Developer Server Suite for Windows including PHP, MySQL, ASP, JSP, Perl, SSL” which, in my experience makes whatever they have to say pretty worthless. Look if you cannot figure out that Apache and MySQL run like shit on Windows and that you are better off sticking with Microsoft product offerings then you are pretty fucking ignorant. Guess what? Windows Server 2003 family ships with IIS. Why in the hell would you try and bolt on Apache? Sure it is superior in my experience to IIS but it runs like hell on MS products so if you are going to use Apache then use a *nix derivative otherwise stick with the Microsoft product family.  Same goes for the database, if you have the cash to pony up for 2003 then you sure as hell likely have it for a SQL Server license as well.  If not, then why are you screwing around with Microsoft for your back-end services?*

So to the fine folks at ZaReson, no need to get depressed or be saddened. In short, there is nothing to see there or even really worth listening to and for as how well reasoned those arguments seem or sound it really boils down to an individual trying to protect their tiny little market share and for all the “Linux, Windows, MacOS? Who cares. Just give me something that works!” comments it is quite clear what they think the world should use. FUD indeed.

* Note: I spent eight years as a Windows System Administrator and three so far as a Linux Systems Administrator.

2 thoughts on “File Under: Rat’s Ass, I could give a

  1. >Same goes for the database, if you have the cash to pony up for 2003 then you sure as hell likely have it for a SQL Server license as well. If not, then why are you screwing around with Microsoft for your back-end services?*
    >Note: I spent eight years as a Windows System Administrator and three so far as a Linux Systems Administrator.

    Right. I have exactly the same experiences, and also the same thoughts about it. Once you allow M$ into your door, they want to hook you onto it.

    That was ago with a business where I was told what to do. But for my own, I’ll never even consider them with a single thought. For people who don’t follow that line of thinking: they don’t know what they’re missing, when we speak of “Freedom”…

    Wanted to try OpenSolaris lately – but that one wasn’t happy with the small resources I’d give it in my virtual surrounding, so…

  2. Freedom, flexibility, adaptability… These are all the things that I found that the Microsoft product line didn’t offer but what they did very well was convenience. If you needed a system from end-to-end that one moderately skilled admin had to set-up, deploy, and maintain (provided support contracts were signed) then their line of products could be very attractive–that is how my last job ended up as a 100% Microsoft shop. However, as the years go by and budgets shrink, cost cutting measures are implemented and re-implemented that the very same convenience quickly becomes a noose. Replacing Exchange 5.5 with 2007 is no mean feat as it requires that you import into 2003 before moving on and the cost of server cals plus Office cals is enough to derail the the project.

    Personally, I prefer to stick with OSS. Sure sometimes it can be more work at times but the freedom, flexibility, and adaptability more than make up for it.

Comments are closed.