MS cheaper than Linux....

[Seth]

Well, you have to admit the Redmonders are persistant.
Here is an article about their latest endeavor.

Comments ?

[Faust]

They've been banging on about this crap for years now, I think that those of us who know better (including a lot of big businesses.) have just ignored them.

[Seth]

With earnings approaching, what, a billion dollars a  month, I guess they can certainly afford all the skewered reports.

[jasonlane]

What a whole load of crap!

[Pissed_Macman]

I AM OUTRAGED THAT YOU WOULD LUMP ALL REDMONDERS INTO ONE CATEGORY!!! AS A FORMER "REDMONDER" AND FRIEND OF MANY REDMONDERS I AM INSULTED AND DISGUSTED BY YOUR BLATANT ATTACKS ON ALL PEOPLE FROM REDMOND!!!

[Refalm]

You said it Macman, the Linux distribution Lycoris is also from Redmond, and they are pretty cool...

[sime]

Yeh right,

FUD, FUD and more FUD!

Sime

[phrostyboi]

what worries me about this the most is that the people who come up with this kind of bullshit at m/s get paid thousands a year to do it...

thats just disturbing, since when does linux cost you anything, apart from some cd's to burn it onto or buying it on ebay for 10 bucks...

unless they realise that people sell windoze pirated for next to nothing or for free coz it isn't worth jack

oh, what i would give for every game ever made to run on *nix, that would be heaven

[idlepython3]

this stuff makes me sick.  people are morons.  i think windows is not just designed to take over your computer, but to suck your brain into it, forming a bio-kinetic supercomputer for microsoft.  why else would people believe anything microsoft has to say about their product.

[mushrooomprince]

THis is a parody article right ?

[jasonlane]

quote: Forrester cites the combination of  J2EE application servers and Unix databases as being more costly and complex when measured against comparable Microsoft solutions. The Cambridge, Mass.-based market researcher claims that Microsoft .Net development tools reduce the labor costs associated with the development and maintenance of custom applications. Large and mid-size organizations can between 25 percent and 28 percent in terms of development, deployment and maintenance costs by basing their solutions on the Microsoft platform versus an open-source one, the Forrester study says.  

I work with J2EE. This is an out and out LIE. The M$ software for a large enterprise level project would cost possibly $5000 - $50,000++ alone, crumby software at that. J2EE you can do for next to nothing possibly even 100% free. Plus it's much better

Oh but with J2EE you actually have to know what you're doing, trained monkeys can't do the job of a programmer.

[Windows_SuX_@$$]

They Lie too Much.  I bet they can afford to pay people to lie for them also!!

M$ = Crap

[mushrooomprince]

So when do we bust microsoft for false advertisement.

[bananafodder]

*Forrester cites the combination of J2EE application servers and Unix databases as being more costly and complex when measured against comparable Microsoft solutions.*

... yes... for the exchange that you give your soul to Microsoft. Sorry, I sold my soul to the other devil quite a while ago.

[jasonlane]

quote:Originally posted by bananafodder:
*Forrester cites the combination of J2EE application servers and Unix databases as being more costly and complex when measured against comparable Microsoft solutions.*

... yes... for the exchange that you give your soul to Microsoft. Sorry, I sold my soul to the other devil quite a while ago.

What something like Berkeley DB (DB XML) which is arguably one of the best database solutions and say Jetty or Tomcat for the app-server, these are free. Also they ARE 100's times more superior than M$ Truss'd-up-ware.

Again, the main cost here is in expertise.

.NOT and J2EE are not comparable products and Forrester should know better.

Hehe. did you play the fiddle better?

[ September 17, 2003: Message edited by: Zardoz ]