Micro$oft: Winning Against Linux The Smart Way

[Mark Richards]

John Chambers wrote:
> editor to make changes, and any editor will do.  A  config  file  can
> easily  contain commented-out examples of all the possibilities, with
> accompanying comments.  You can easily jump around in a text file  by
> scanning  for  keywords  or by marking lines for later reuse, This is
> usually much easier than  remembering  how  to  navigate  a  maze  of
> windows with no coherent organization.
> 
Perhaps preaching to the choir, but I especially appreciate the fact 
that, in MS Windows, a mangling of the "registry" can render the entire 
OS dead.  Mangling, say, net.eth0 will potentially bring down the 
network connection, but you'll still have an OS to work and fix with.

I note that commercial (or for that matter open source/free) tools for 
fixing Linux system files are virtually non-existent, whereas the market 
for third-party (costly) tools to fix various windows issues including 
corruptions, protection from corruptions, protection from a program 
writing stuff that you don't want it to write, etc. are quite prevalent.

I note that I can pull the plug on any Linux box here (I run four, two 
as servers and two as workstations) and doing so will not render them 
boatanchors on power-up.  UPS's are still protecting them, but these are 
more needed on the windows machine I also use to avoid having to spend a 
day or more "repairing" which I've done more than once, thanks very much.

Speaks for itself.

Is there something missing in the understanding of the "market segments" 
categorized by Microsoft that could be filled in by Linux proponents? 
Communicating that "Linux won't die", or "you can't break it without 
really trying" require technical substantiation, which loses part of the 
audience rather quickly.


/m

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.