By Jo Best, 11 June 2004 09:55
NEWS Microsoft has launched its 'Get the Facts' road show – the tech equivalent of a political battle bus – to tour the country and convince the wavering that Redmond is as at least cheap and as secure as its open-source rival.
Nick McGrath, Microsoft's head of platform strategy, described the campaign as "a reality check we're bringing out", aiming to tackle the "myths" surrounding Linux.
One of the myths that's getting Microsoft's goat is the term 'free'. At the London leg of the road show, not one attendee raised their hand when asked if they believed Linux was free – after all, Linux vendors aren't giving their Linux products away for nothing.
Meta Group analyst Philip Dawson said consumers should bear in mind that while Linux itself is free, that's not the whole story. "It's a free component – it's not a free platform, it's not a free service – it's a free component," he said.
But what about the old adage that it's not free as in free lunch but more free as in freedom of speech?
From the talk today, it seems that Microsoft have appreciated the difficulty of persuading the passionate Linux folk. One Microsoft exec described the anti-Microsoft feelings as a "jihad".
It's a term that didn't sit well with other open-sourcers. Novell's technical director, Steve Gaines, said: "There's a huge amount of passion around open sourceÂ… It's far more positive; it's 'let's create alternatives' not 'let's trash something someone else has done'."
The other prong of Microsoft's rebuttal takes on security 'myths'.
Nick Barley, Microsoft's director of business marketing organisation, refuted allegations that MS security was lax, saying the tools are there, but they have to be switched on. "We've spent a lot of time recently trying to educate the marketplace… work with the marketplace to help them understand what to do to protect their PC – it's not necessarily anything that's not on their PC already, it's just not enabled."
When asked the question, 'Why might Linux be more secure than Windows?', in a recent silicon.com poll, the majority of respondents said it was the way the operating system was created.
Forty-one per cent said it might be more secure because of the open-source development model, 32 per cent said because it's not as widely used and is therefore less of a target and 27 per cent said it wasn't more secure, full stop.
While Microsoft does share its code with big corporations and government organisations, it's keen to keep overall control for commercial reasons - "our source code is our only intellectual property," said Barley. Microsoft also says that, as a proprietary company, it may not have an independent community looking out for flaws, but it has staff employed to exactly the same ends.
Novell's Gaines, for one, isn't concerned. "It's good news. [The road show] validates Linux as a platform."
Microsoft's Get the Facts road show will be in Edinburgh on 17 June, Manchester on 29 June and Newport on 7 July.
Comments
There are 21 comments. Join the discussion
1. Dave Howe
Next Week:
USG declares Linux and FreeBSD illegal terrorist organisations and has all non-MS customers on the planet arrested....
:)
2. anonymous
Just recently we've been rolling out XP as a replacement for 98 - it's been a nightmare battling with what can most positively be described as a 'crock of s**t'. NO WAY can it be made secure when the inbuilt security model is so complex as to be unmanagable and contains many hard-coded rules that over-ride the settings imposed by the administrator.
The only explanation for the 'issues' we've come up against is that MS have deliberately done two things : 1) made everything VERY complicated, and 2) made it even more complicated so that it can be 'fixed' by Active Directory.
It's so complicated that no-one can really understand all the security implications of even a simple change, and Active Directory is itself a huge security minefield as it allows wholesale changes to be made across large numbers of clients with little visibility of what, why, who, and when - what you can't see you can't control !
Give me open source any day, it allows me to decide what MY security policy will be and implement it.
3. anonymous
Microsoft may think it's "smart" to try and place itself as software's all american clean cut hero and try to parallel itself with the current political situation. You can certainly see why they might want to suck up to the US authorities.
But terms like "jihad", really makes me uneasy.
Frankly, it's Microsoft who have the "battle bus" mentality and it's Microsoft who are mischievously misinterpreting terms like "free(dom)", in fact it's Microsoft who are trying to make this something like a religious crusade.
Instead of fixing their software.
4. Gary Smith
A jihad in the way of "the GPL is a virus that will destroy our industry"?
I also like the paragraph that basically infers that customers security problems with Microsoft products are their own fault. "We have provided tools..."
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=hypocrite
I use and run Windows software alongside Linux and can see the benefit of both. This sort of mudslinging just belittles Microsofts technical achievements and makes them look like whiners. Try pushing your products strengths and give people the credit that they are intelligent enough to make up their own minds.
5. Smy
I love when the facts MS states are the ones they paid for.
6. Robert Privett
I the main story MS states that it employs people to check and test its code for security flaws, if this is the case then how come there so many security exploiting worms & viruses followed by patches to fix these security tested products. We often hear that MS is the target of this malware because of its position in the market place, could it be because it keeps shouting about how good it is instead of producing a quality tested product. So how about a little less effort in self praise and a little more effort to produce a better product
7. Jeff
"Nick Barley, Microsoft's director of business marketing organisation, refuted allegations that MS security was lax, saying the tools are there, but they have to be switched on... it's not necessarily anything that's not on their PC already, it's just not enabled."
This is the biggest load of MS FUD I have ever seen. If Mr. Barley were telling the truth, why do we constantly need to download large critical patches to keep our computers safe? IMO, MS made products that enabled them to deliver features without the proper security infrastructure because it was faster and cost less money. Now they are reaping what they have sown.
8. Scott Gant
Hmmm. I'm sitting here reading this site, this article on Linux.
I surf the web, do my email and play games just like anyone else does. Yet, I didn't pay anything for it. Yes, it IS free.
Now, there may be some applications that you or your company may need to run that require you to buy. Yes, you have to buy their application. But the OS is free. I pay for no updates to my OS like you have to for Windows. I don't pay for new features or have to buy anti-virus or disk doctors or blah blah blah just to make my OS run like I want it to. Now, how can Microsoft say that using their software is just as cheap when in fact you have to buy their OS to run it. If they upgrade it such as going from ME to XP you have to buy the upgrade. To install it on a new computer you have to buy it. All of these things are free on Linux. Now, hmmmm....spend money on MS or download for free with Linux....hmmmm..which is cheaper? Ok, service and support blah blah blah. I don't need service and support. All the times I've ever had to buy Windows I've never ever called MS nor have I had to get any support. So that's wasted on me and everyone I know really. Hire a service or support company to come in and work and install your computers? OK, you have to pay for them AND the MS software. Hire people to install the Linux equiv and you pay for the people themselves. You save money there. This isn't a jihad that MS says it is. It's cheaper than MS, that's not opinion, it's fact. The computer I'm typing this on I built from scratch and paid less than $500 for it and I saved...let me repeat myself...I SAVED 100 bucks by not having to buy Windows. I SAVED not having to buy Office and installed Open Office instead. How am I saving if I shell out cash for Windows and Office...both of which will continue to cost me money if I keep upgrading them. Where are the savings?
9. anonymous
Hey, I'm in the U$ and work for a state agency. We're replacing any microsoft pieces of sh*t we can with linux. The only jihads we're on are the holy fight against the BSOD, getting owned, and virii.
Another American against Bu$hit.
10. Collin Pasternack
I would like to just say that if Microsoft had such a crack team of employees that looked for security issues, I would have never lost my entire hard drive contents to a virus. Twice. I have never had a virus problem with my Linux box or my Mac.
11. Void Main
Did they pass out any purple refreshments?
12. Not Me
We know that Linux isn't as easy as Windows. Out of the "box", Mandrake would not install something downloaded from the internet, whereas Windows has the neat little unzipper and installer with almost everything you can download. When you can click on a Linux download and it installs itself, I'll use Linux. Until then, it's just a tool for cheap rebel geeks with attitudes. Ask a Windows user how to drive somewhere, and you'll get good directions. Ask a Linux user, and he'll say something like "Get in your car. Drive south. When you get there, lock the door." It gives you the impression that Linux users DON'T WANT more people to join their ranks.
13. anonymous
"Jihad"="bad", "crusade"="good" ?
I think both terms refer to a "holy war", and MS should not trade on anti-Islamic sentiments for its own ends.
14. Rodd Clarkson
There's plenty of studies finding that Linux is no cheaper to use than Windows, (mostly paid for by Microsoft). And there's plenty of studies suggesting that Linux is actually a good deal cheaper to use than Windows.
Strangly absent is any studies suggesting that Windows is a good deal cheaper to use than Linux. Or maybe not that strangely.
Even if you give credence to the studies funded by Microsoft, Linux is still as good as, or better than Windows. That's odds I can live with.
15. anonymous
Jihad? Like in Internet Explorer vs. Netscape Navigator, cf.
<http://www.worldhistory.com/wiki/M/Microsoft-antitrust-case.htm>
The unwashed masses of non-enlighted *nix-users simple underestimate Microsofts experience with things like 'Jihad' or 'competing', i.e. squashing competitors with all (il)legal means available. Believe me, they are right, they know what some of the linux dudes feel...
16. ivan tonchev
hahaha and in the week after next week US military will invade Brasil for the brasilian goverment supports Linux too :)))
Oppa! i think i should be worried myself!!! Uhh! is it FBI agents that are knocking on my door so late?! I'd better reboot to windows! see you! ;)
17. anonymous
Mr. Jo Best, ... you have just misused the term "jihad" ... You simply don't understand the basic requirement of "jihad".
(Ed note. Two salient points here. The first is the article quotes Microsoft's use of the word 'jihad' - so you may want to get semantic with Microsoft over that and not Jo. The second is that 'Mr Jo Best' is actually a Miss Jo Best... Joe would be male, Jo - no 'e' - is female.)
18. Wesley Parish
Firstly, have they ever looked up the word "jihad" in any decent Arabic dictionary or glossary? I have, and it tells me that the root meaning is - paraphrased - "a concentrated and persistent effort to achieve a goal considered worthwhile".
As such it is a compliment. But in this day and age of "soundbites" and "eyecandy", they obviously don't intend to compliment Linux users do they?
Doh! That they don't have a clue is not my problem.
19. Nathan
Games are the only thing I use Windows XP for and only because the games would be slow under a windows emulator such as Wine. For everything else I use SUSE.
20. anonymous
This is a prime example of what Microsoft are _really_ good at. Their software is mediocre with some inspired, genuinely good packages like Office: inspite of the actual company being a gigantic leap in front of the rest of the market (if not owning it), the quality of their product is relatively not in the same position. What MS are good at is marketing- convincing people who are ignorant of the subtleties involved with quality software that MS is the only way to go. They will play upon religious, political, moral and any other heartstrings they can find without shame to sell their products- the use of the term 'jihad' to refer to their competitors is just another instance of this ploy. You taught them well Bill. As Dogbert would say "who needs a good product to sell?"
21. Rudi Leibbrandt
They can take away our O/S, but the cannot take our FREEDOM!!!!!
Hehehe