We too are constantly facing these questions of Microsoft versus open source alternatives with our clients. In response, I find that most members of the open source advocacy community I meet are still repeating arguments which we all used four years ago, like stuck records. Thought I'd try to share what I find:
1. Unlike four years ago, the Microsoft server OSs today are
much more stable. To talk of memory leaks and instability
in WinXP today in the same terms we used to use for NT 4.0
a few years ago is probably inaccurate. I am getting report
after report of new XP and Win2K servers in steady daily
use showing uptimes of more than ONE YEAR. This would be
par for the course for any stable Unix version, let alone
Microsoft.2. On the other hand, the threat to customers from Microsoft
in terms of lock-in has INCREASED, not DECREASED. Very few
of the Linux users and advocates I encouter, including my
own colleagues in our office, seem to be aware of the new
lock-in mechanisms and schemes which are either ready or
will certainly be released in a short while... these are
not vapourware. These measures will make it even more difficult
(in money terms) for Microsoft customers to mix-and-match
proprietary and open-source components.I suggest strongly that you take some time out and read the (long) editorial note here:
<http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit029.html>
I couldn't abbreviate or summarise it properly if I wanted to... it'd be a difficult job. Therefore, please read it (it's very well written and readable, BTW) and pick up details from it for buttressing your arguments.
If your customer has the patience to look at some of the new measures being released from Microsoft, and has some sense to know what's good for him, this report will scare the shit out of him. It almost scared the shit out of me.
Microsoft, in my opinion, is showing new levels of desperation, in
a do-or-die bid for monopoly domination. If I were Microsoft's
chief strategist, and did an objective analysis of Microsoft's
strengths and weaknesses, I might have embarked on a path very
similar to what they are doing, as a purely business decision.
In other words, the strategy they seem to be following is probably
not the "right thing to do" if you start with a green-fields fresh
start, but it may be the best business decision for Microsoft today. By "best", obviously, I mean "best for Microsoft." This article brings
out some of this desperation. It may hurt the unwary corporate
customer severely. After all, in business, many deals are such that the
customer and the supplier are on opposite sides of the table... rarely
do we find that ideal "win-win for all" deal.
Try to see if you can capture some of this threat in your report to your customer.
Shuvam
_______________________________________________ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
