The same is valid for Mainframe solutions

Aug 23, 2007 18:07 GMT  ·  By

Microsoft claims that Linux and UNIX are nothing compared to the Windows operating system in terms of server side solutions. And the perspective offered by the Redmond company reveals not only that Windows Server leaves Linux and UNIX biting the dust, but that not even Mainframe solutions compare to the apex of "reliability, security, total cost of ownership (TCO), interoperability and manageability" that is Microsoft's Windows server operating system. Essentially, Microsoft managed to put up the Windows Server/Compare website designed especially to trash Linux, UNIX and Mainframe server side alternatives to its proprietary operating system, just an extension of the Get the Facts campaign. And some of the conclusions Microsoft reaches when comparing Windows Server with Red Hat Enterprise Linux are surprising. Notice that Microsoft did not even mention Novell's SUSE Linux Enterprise operating system, but did not hesitate to go straight for the kill with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Microsoft's partnership with Novell wouldn't have something to do with that, now would it?

"How can "free" be this expensive? Red Hat's business is based on annual subscriptions for OS support-you pay a subscription for every server, every year. And, if you want 24/7 support, you'll pay more," Microsoft scares potential customers, adding that "Over the first 650 days of product life for Windows Server 2003, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, Windows Server 2003 had 75 percent fewer published vulnerabilities. (...) The reality is that Linux is just the operating system kernel-so IT organizations run commercial distributions, such as Red Hat or SuSE, not just 'Linux'. (...) Open Source is a software development and distribution model, which does not equate to how easily the software interoperates with other software or how open or standardized the interfaces are."

But the comparison terms just get worse and worse when it comes to UNIX. "Many older UNIX systems have become very expensive to maintain and upgrade. While newer UNIX systems are closer to the price / performance of Windows, costs for software and UNIX IT skills drive TCO significantly higher than Windows Server," Microsoft underlined, adding that the benefits of reliability and security erode in time with the aging of the platform welcoming a "lower level of reliability, scalability and security due to hardware limitations and issues with out-of-date software." But the final touch in Microsoft's view is that UNIX is obsolete because "the UNIX paradigm for computing has remained relatively unchanged over the last couple of decades. UNIX applications no longer provide the business value required by today's business climate."

Mainframe is common server platform for mission-critical workloads, still Microsoft opined that customers are simply not getting their money's worth. And the most expensive server platform is also limited in relation to "mainframe management and the lack of standards-based interoperability." And of course that Mainframe solutions are also behind their times. "The mainframe paradigm for computing has remained relatively unchanged over the last several decades. The outdated mainframe approach to computing is no longer relevant for the needs of today's dynamic business climate," Microsoft concluded.