By Munir Kotadia, 30 January 2004 09:35
NEWS Microsoft will launch a marketing campaign against Linux in the UK on Monday, aiming to convince companies thinking about moving to the open source operating system that Windows is a cheaper option in the long run; but Linux vendors say Microsoft's campaign validates Linux as a serious competitor.
As part of its multi-million dollar Get The Facts' advertising campaign, which was launched in the US earlier this month, Microsoft will direct users to visit a section on its website containing reports that were carried out by independent analysts. However, all the research was either carried out on behalf of, or commissioned by, software giant.
Red Hat spokeswoman Leigh Day said the company uses customer references rather than reports that examine "specific situations" to demonstrate financial savings: "We're not giving too much credence to this ad campaign. Our customers have heard from other references the intrinsic values of open source. This is giving Linux validation as an ideal alternative to proprietary providers," she said.
Jasmin Ul-Haque, director of marketing communications at SuSE Linux, agreed that Microsoft must be worried to be attacking Linux in this way and called for an "impartial" study: "You don't attack something unless you have some sort of concern abut it. We would request more even-handed research," she said.
But Nick McGrath, head of platform strategy at Microsoft UK, said the reports are unbiased and "reflective of market conditions". According to McGrath: "The results of each of the studies we commission can go either way. The analyst reports commissioned by Microsoft have been transparent in the scope of their methodology and assertions."
The advertising campaign is the first from Microsoft to take on Linux directly, analysts say, and it illustrates the company's effort to protect its interests, such as growing revenue from server system sales. Microsoft faces a potential decline in new customers if businesses are lured by Linux's lower-cost licensing fees compared with its own, which are in the hundreds of dollars.
"Microsoft is counting on picking up businesses migrating from Unix [to another operating system] for its next two years of growth in that area, and Linux is somewhat throwing a wrench in that plan," said Rob Helm, director of research at Directions on Microsoft, a research firm that tracks the software giant's business strategy. "This is squarely aimed at companies considering Linux on servers."
SuSE's Ul-Haque said that if customers want to migrate from Unix, Linux is the natural choice because there will be less of a learning curve: "When migrating from Unix to Linux, customers already have the skills in-house," she added.
CNET News.coms Stefanie Olsen contributed to this report
Munir Kotadia writes for ZDNet UK

Comments
There are 7 comments. Join the discussion
1. Peter Drinnan
It is not so much Linux, but rather Apache that is challenging Microsoft in the server market:
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/200312/index.html
This really throws a wrench into the Microsoft server side strategy, which I am guessing is to build trust in their "open" XML schemas. Meanwhile, Microsoft is quietly patenting those schemas around the world:
http://www.technewsworld.com/perl/story/32695.html
If Microsoft was serious about open interoperability, would they not have submitted these XML schemas to the ISO, rather than the patent office? It makes me feel no more confident than when a child molester moves in next door and says "I'm all better now ... trust me!".
2. John Maher
I first met Linux a dozen years ago - via a computer science friend who introduced me to Slackware. I was forced to use Windoze for my work until last summer when I retired. Now I have an iMac running System 10.3.2, Unix with an excellent interface - there is even an Apache server running on my machine. So I suggest that the migration might be better to Macs if users want a smooooth interface.
3. anonymous
Having just installed Windows 2003 server on our system, even after months of planning it has been a total disaster. Too many problems to list. The only thing that has reliably worked is the linux clients and the netware dns -dhcp server!
Windows 2003? Never again !It's the worst yet.
4. anonymous
Mcrosoft would do better to get an independent report from Lord Hutton, surely?
The outcome is less risky.
5. Frank Morirs
From personal experience as IT Manager working for an agricultural company with a shoestring budget, Linux has saved me a fortune. SAMBA share for the file server, Domino as the email server (lower TCO than Exchange) and reliability that has meant I can leave the servers for around 12 months between reboots. I used to be a Microsoft addict but after learning more about Linux I would say "Take a look, you'll be pleasantly surprised!"
6. anonymous
People just don't move from linux to microsoft, only the other way around. MS seems easy to use, but gets complicated when you want to stray from the "path". Linux is slightly more complicated, but infinitely more configurable and once you've learned it, it rocks in a way that windows never did.
7. Steve Berry
It's nothing really to do with individual software components i.e. MS VS.Net / XML Web Services / Apache etc.., it's just back to the old Cathedral and Bazaar issue again and the more serious question of whether you want to live in a business software World/Environment controlled/dominated by MS.
Asia/India predominately says nope.
Why do you think jobs are going offshore/overseas ?
MS can slag off Linux all they want. The more noise they make, the more afraid they are. Ever heard of the Halloween documents ?
BTW Win2k/2k3 Server & Linux/Fedora are fantastic products respectively if you get the right people to work on em'/put the effort in, but that's not really the point nowadays is it ?