Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Red Hat, Inc. (RHAT) Message Board

  • michsteve09 michsteve09 Mar 15, 2002 8:52 PM Flag

    MSFT vs Linux

    For all the MSFT lovers who keep saying that Linux is communism and open source is evil and stealing from MSFT are hypocrits. Microsoft has stolen their whole lives. They started with Apple and continued since. Bill Gates had the vision to see that if he could control the software side then he could set the price and be rich can you say monopoly. Have to give it to him he has been a good thief. Now on to Linux, what will Linux do to the future. Linux is MSFT's biggest scare because it is free or very cheap. Software should be cheap the hardware should cost more than software. Your CD player costs more than music doesn't it? Our lives will be better with MSFT gone then we will have innovation again. I don't think they will dissapear completely but just like IBM used to rule the world MSFT's monopoly must go. It's MSFT's turn what comes around go's around.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I took a look at which Internet servers have the greatest percentage of up-time. ( http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html )
      While the was only 1 Linux server in the top 50 (16th) there was only 1 MS IIS-based server (50th). And that was NOT being run on NT but BSD.

      Free RULES the most dependable server sites - almost all are being served up by Apache!

      What does this have to do with Linux?
      Not a whole lot I suppose but when people are looking for dependable servers they are NOT going Microsoft - they are finding better, more reliable (and free) alternatives. And when conversation turns to better, more reliable (and free) alternatives to Microsoft the Linux name has got to come to mind.

      • 1 Reply to townsend_phelps
      • ---------------------
        I took a look at which Internet servers have the greatest percentage of up-time. ( http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html )
        While the was only 1 Linux server in the top 50 (16th) there was only 1 MS IIS-based server (50th). And that was NOT being run on NT but BSD.
        ---------------------

        You should really look at what they are actually measuring, which is shown on this page:

        http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/accuracy.html

        Especially look at how they define "uptime", and how this is biased against websites that use server farms. There is also some information on why Linux, and some other operating systems, will never report uptime greater than 497 days. Perhaps most important is that about half the operating systems don't report uptime at all, including every version of Windows except 2000.

        In short, this page doesn't tell us much about anything.

        Besides, "uptime" of this magnitude is meaningless. Most companies will pick a very low traffic time to upgrade the server OSes, which almost always requires at least a reboot. Periodically upgrading the OS is a good business decision. If your server has been running 1226 days since an upgrade, your server is probably two or three versions out of date. So having a "record uptime" is not necessarily a good thing.