Microsoft have launched a new site aimed at informing everyone just how expensive and poorly supported the free and extremely large and constructive community of Red Hat Linux is a complete mess in comparison to Windows Server. It would be very interesting to see the other foot, for we are certain that both sides of the argument would be just as convincing:

RED HAT ENTERPRISE LINUX
WINDOWS SERVER 2008

 

TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP (HUH?)

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.
Reduced downtime and better manageability mean lower TCO

Research consistently shows that the two biggest cost components of TCO are:

  • The staffing costs associated with ongoing management and maintenance—60% of TCO
  • Downtime—15% of TCO


These 2 cost areas represent 75 percent of TCO over a 3-year period.

 

RELIABILITY (NEED WE MENTION VISTA?)

Don’t touch that package

A reliable system isn’t just available to end users, it is easy for administrators to configure and manage as it changes in response to the evolving needs of the business.



In realistic studies where IT administrators are required to install patches, security updates, and make functional changes to IT systems, Linux administrators have used a wide variety of management tools and processes.
Easier configuration and management + predictability =
A more reliable platform


Windows Server was designed to reduce the time it takes to implement and manage solutions by:


  • Standardizing common administration tasks.
  • Providing robust tools for more customized administration.



 

SECURITY (THIS SHOULD BE FUNNY)

Empirical evidence that the ‘everyone can see the code’ approach to software security doesn’t work for Red Hat

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.
A comprehensive approach to security: quality software, proactive security management, and innovative technologies

The Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) was developed by Microsoft to provide a rigorous engineering process for developing secure code. This process includes the development of threat models during software design, the use of static analysis code-scanning tools during implementation, and the conducting of code reviews and security testing during a focused “security push.”

 

CHOICE (HARD TO DENY)

It’s a commercialized world

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’. These commercial distributions are made up of vendor specific versions of open source software.
Microsoft and the Windows ecosystem provides customers with more choice than any other server platform

Windows platform is supported by:

  • Thousands of applications.
  • 750,000 Microsoft partners.
  • More than 450,000 Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) professionals.
  • More than 6 million developers.
  • The largest Independent Software Vendor (ISV) community in the world.

 

MANAGEABILITY (WE KNOW NOTHING)

Manageability is more than an update tool

World-class IT organizations improve efficiency, and save time and money, by standardizing on a comprehensive set of management tools and processes to manage desktops and desktop applications, as well as servers and server applications.
Windows Server and management tools like Microsoft System Center allow you to do more in less time

The Dynamic Systems Initiative (DSI) is the Microsoft technology strategy for products and solutions that help businesses enhance the dynamic capability of their people, processes, and IT infrastructure using technology.

 

INTEROPERABILITY (OPEN SOURCE Vs CODE PLEX)

Open Standards ≠ Open Source

Open Source is a software development and distribution model, which does not equate to how easily the software inter-operates with other software or how open or standardized the interfaces are.
Interoperability by design

Microsoft approaches interoperability by design which strives for greater ‘out of the box’ connectivity for customers and partners.

But once again, if anyone has the Linux version of this comparison table, we would be extremely interested in showing it…?