Microsoft Failure in Online Services - Linux

This is a discussion on Microsoft Failure in Online Services - Linux ; It’s no secret that Microsoft’s online businesses have failed to gain leading market positions. But what is not widely appreciated, perhaps, is that the company’s online initiatives have lately been doing worse than ever. The last year when Microsoft made ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 40

Thread: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

  1. Microsoft Failure in Online Services


    It’s no secret that Microsoft’s online businesses have failed to gain
    leading market positions. But what is not widely appreciated, perhaps,
    is that the company’s online initiatives have lately been doing worse
    than ever.

    The last year when Microsoft made a profit in its online services
    business was the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 2005....In the
    2006 fiscal year, Microsoft’s online services produced a $74 million
    loss after the previous year’s profit of $402 million. Since then, the
    numbers have become uglier, as Microsoft’s online segment has added
    employees and absorbed growing sales and marketing expenses. In the
    2007 fiscal year, the online businesses lost $732 million. In the next
    nine months, through March 31 this year, they recorded a loss of $745
    million, almost double the amount in the period a year earlier...

    The numbers at Google, which is nothing but an online services
    business, have moved in the opposite direction. For rough comparison,
    profits in its 2005 fiscal year, ended on Dec. 31, were $1.5 billion.
    The earnings grew to $3 billion in 2006 and $4.2 billion in 2007.

    According to Hitwise, an Internet research firm, Google’s share of
    searches in the United States has increased to almost 67.9 percent in
    March 2008 from 58.3 percent in March 2006. During the same period,
    Microsoft’s share has dropped to 6.3 percent from 13.1 percent.

    At the company’s annual meeting in 1994 [Ballmer] shouted at top
    volume: “It’s market share — market share! market share! market share!
    — that counts!” He continued: “Because if you have share, you
    basically leave the competitors” — here he grabbed his own throat for
    emphasis — “just gasping for oxygen to live in.”

    His mock asphyxiation of competitors was later stripped out of its
    jokey context by government antitrust lawyers. But the imagery is no
    less apt now than it was then, except that the roles have reversed. As
    Google continues to gather market share and the Single-Era Conjecture
    dictates Microsoft’s eclipse, it is Mr. Ballmer’s own online services
    that now are gasping for oxygen.


    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/te...=1&oref=slogin


  2. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT), nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu
    wrote:

    >
    > It˘s no secret that Microsoft˘s online businesses have failed to gain
    > leading market positions.


    What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  3. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT), nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to gain
    >> leading market positions.

    >
    > What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?
    >
    >


    The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search... Google...
    the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?


    --

    Jerry McBride (jmcbride@mail-on.us)

  4. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:

    >
    > It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to gain
    > leading market positions.



    I had to hesitate!

    Micoshaft has 320 million botnet PCs admistered remotely by their
    botnet WINDUMMY owners and 50 million servers whose IT admins watch
    as their servers are remotely adminstered by yet more WINDUMMY botnet
    owners. From their perspective, I can't understand what micoshaft online
    failure meanzzz!!!

    Even if all the WINDUMMIES retrained into Linux, it will take
    them a decade to become up to speed and change everything to Linux.
    Unless your core competance is Linux, WINDUMMY companies
    will fall by the wayside. I can't understand what micoshaft online failure
    meanzzz and to whom!!!


    > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/te...=1&oref=slogin



  5. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    Verily I say unto thee, that nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu spake thusly:

    >

    [...]
    > In the next nine months, through March 31 this year, they recorded a
    > loss of $745 million, almost double the amount in the period a year
    > earlier...


    Add the 30 Billion USD they just lost trying to assimilate Yahoo!, and
    things look even uglier.

    > At the company’s annual meeting in 1994 [Ballmer] shouted at top
    > volume: “It’s market share — market share! market share! market
    > share! — that counts!” He continued: “Because if you have share, you
    > basically leave the competitors” — here he grabbed his own throat for
    > emphasis — “just gasping for oxygen to live in.”


    Yes that's Ballmer alright ... gangster mentality.

    > His mock asphyxiation of competitors was later stripped out of its
    > jokey context by government antitrust lawyers. But the imagery is no
    > less apt now than it was then, except that the roles have reversed.
    > As Google continues to gather market share and the Single-Era
    > Conjecture dictates Microsoft’s eclipse, it is Mr. Ballmer’s own
    > online services that now are gasping for oxygen.
    >
    > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/te...=1&oref=slogin


    Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Or in a more modern
    context, ain't payback a bitch?

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    21:38:33 up 149 days, 18:14, 6 users, load average: 0.49, 0.28, 0.19

  6. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    Moshe Goldfarb (flatfish) in real life Gary Stewart

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

    --
    ! Don Zeigler

  7. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    On May 18, 1:05 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    > > On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT), ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu
    > > wrote:

    >
    > >>
    > >> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to gain
    > >> leading market positions.

    >
    > > What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?

    >
    > The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search... Google...
    > the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?


    Yep. They run a reported million Linux servers. Hard to see how they
    can do it, though. According to DFS, Linux breaks down every 2
    minutes.


  8. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:
    > Jerry McBride wrote:
    >> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>> nessuno wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online
    >>>> businesses have failed to gain leading market positions.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?


    What does whinging about Roy Schestowitz's posts have to do with
    Linux Advocacy?

    >> The whole article is about how google is killing msft in
    >> search... Google... the LINUX giant... You do remember
    >> google? Right?

    >
    > Yep. They run a reported million Linux servers. Hard to see
    > how they can do it, though. According to DFS, Linux breaks
    > down every 2 minutes.


    According to Hadron, Debian stable is so unreliable that one must
    resort to using Debian unstable to acquire stability.

    I see a pattern. They are so used to seeing their beloved
    Windows crash, that they don't know how to handle the stability.
    The only way to fix things is to borque it.

    --
    HPT

  9. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    Jerry McBride wrote:
    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT), nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to
    >>> gain leading market positions.

    >>
    >> What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?
    >>
    >>

    >
    > The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search...
    > Google... the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?


    Google is no more a Linux company than you are a Linux developer and
    contributor.




  10. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:
    > On May 18, 1:05 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
    >> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>> On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT),
    >>> ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:

    >>
    >>>>
    >>>> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to
    >>>> gain leading market positions.

    >>
    >>> What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?

    >>
    >> The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search...
    >> Google... the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?

    >
    > Yep. They run a reported million Linux servers. Hard to see how they
    > can do it, though. According to DFS, Linux breaks down every 2
    > minutes.


    If it will boot up in the first place:

    =================================================
    Linux freezes before the install:
    http://forums.fedoraforum.org/forum/...Fedora+freezes

    Linux freezes during the install:
    http://forums.fedoraforum.org/forum/...Fedora+freezes

    Linux freezes after the install:
    http://forums.fedoraforum.org/forum/...Fedora+freezes

    =================================================
    Then you might get 2 minutes of uptime:

    "Before it would crash within 2 minutes of powering on the computer"
    #39 at http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=412125&page=4


    "this morning in five boot attempts approx up time without freezing about 2
    minutes"
    #103 at http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=412125&page=11


    "Its crashing like hell on me. My mouse freezes and I cant even move
    anything. I have to do a hardware restart."
    "Sometimes it crashes like in 2 minutes, sometimes 10 minutes, max that I
    had it without a single crash on me was 50 minutes."

    #426 at http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=412125&page=43
    =================================================
    Sometimes you can even get 5-10 minutes of uptime with the crapware:

    "I always get a kernel-panic after 5-10 minutes. It crashes often when I was
    opening tabs in iceweasel or have more than 4-5 applications started.
    I tried severeal bott-options e.g. nosmp and more, but that does not change
    the situation.

    Also tried to install kernel with spt-get, smxi and also installed the .24
    kernel from sid...

    Couldn't find any reasons why my system always gets panic, hmm."

    http://sidux.com/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-...t-freezes.html

    =================================================
    If you're really lucky, it won't crash when you plug in a USB device

    "I am trying to connect my usb card reader to my system, however everytime I
    connect it it seems to freeze Linux. When connecting it and rebooting -
    linux will not load up."
    http://www.pclinuxos.com/index.php?o...&topic=25127.0

    =================================================
    If you get past all that, it may or may not suddenly quit working:

    cola "advocate" ml2mst: "I've been working with SUSE since 1998, but for
    some mysterious
    reason, it simply stopped working a couple of months ago."
    http://groups.google.com/group/comp....78b83a1137b1f5


    kernel developers just quit working: "Then I quit forever."
    http://apcmag.com/interview_with_con...he_desktop.htm


    Samba just quits working: "Then some of this suddenly stopped working."
    http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-49548.html


    Samba just quits working: "My computer just stopped sharing its folder
    (which had worked perfectly) one day"
    http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-49548.html


    keyboard just quits working: "While entering data in Krecipes package
    keyboard quit inputing characters"
    http://forums.cnet.com/5208-6617_102...sageID=2615582


    keyboard just quits working: "..the keyboard would work for awhile and then
    just quit."
    http://www.linuxquestions.org/linux/..._this_notebook


    yum just quits working: "this has worked for about four months and today it
    has stopped working."
    http://forums.fedoraforum.org/archiv.../t-119325.html


    network just quits working: "I noticed some times my network will just quit
    working and won't reconnect even if i plug it into a cable nothing works and
    I have to reboot."
    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...ux/+bug/152456


    wireless just quits working: "Wireless connection just quits working.
    Windows will connect just fine."
    http://forums.suselinuxsupport.de/lo...hp/t33604.html


    DNS just quits working: "...DNS has just quit working."
    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=243482


    printing just quits working: "...printnig would just quit working for all
    apps..."
    http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/deb...underbird.html


    audio player just quits working: "... the Audio Player program just quit
    working one day and hasn't worked since."
    http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=14453


    PCMCIA card just quits working: "...one day, the connection simply quit
    working."..."The card works fine in win98se, and I have no problems
    connecting to our router, which is a USR8054."
    http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=26032


    graphics just quit working: "When the WU restarted the graphics window did
    not come back."
    http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/forum_thread.php?id=468


    sound just quits working: "I was watching a movie in movie player and the
    right sound channel cut out. Then about 10 seconds later, the left cut out.
    I rebooted and still no sound. My sound is turned up all the way too. I'm
    not sure what I will do. Reinstall something I guess."
    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=342041


    Linuxconf just quits working: "Does Linuxconf actually work? When I use it,
    it tends to mess up my config files (at least for Apache) and always tell me
    some process is taking too long. Sometimes it seems to just quit on me."
    http://rasterweb.net/raster/computers/linux.html



    Entire distro just quits working: "My Mandriva2006 just quit working !"
    http://dunedin.lug.net.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=42838


    =================================================
    Linux just works!

    Mark S. Bilk: "The vast majority of Linux users _never_ experience such
    problems."





  11. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services


    wrote in message
    news:1e6bb9fd-be69-4f79-ae6f-ef14b48e5cac@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    > On May 18, 1:05 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
    >> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> > On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT), ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu
    >> > wrote:

    >>
    >> >>
    >> >> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to gain
    >> >> leading market positions.

    >>
    >> > What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?

    >>
    >> The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search...
    >> Google...
    >> the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?

    >
    > Yep. They run a reported million Linux servers. Hard to see how they
    > can do it, though. According to DFS, Linux breaks down every 2
    > minutes.
    >


    A million linux servers... why do they need so many?

    According to the advocates here they could probably run the same software
    on a old 486 box with 64-megs of RAM that they found in a dumpster.

    If linux is so fast, powerful and efficient it's rather sad that Google
    needs to run a million servers just to stay functional.




    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  12. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    Ezekiel wrote:

    >
    > wrote in message
    > news:1e6bb9fd-be69-4f79-ae6f-ef14b48e5cac@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >> On May 18, 1:05 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>> > On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT), ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu
    >>> > wrote:
    >>>
    >>> >>
    >>> >> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to gain
    >>> >> leading market positions.
    >>>
    >>> > What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?
    >>>
    >>> The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search...
    >>> Google...
    >>> the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?

    >>
    >> Yep. They run a reported million Linux servers. Hard to see how they
    >> can do it, though. According to DFS, Linux breaks down every 2
    >> minutes.
    >>

    >
    > A million linux servers... why do they need so many?
    >
    > According to the advocates here they could probably run the same software
    > on a old 486 box with 64-megs of RAM that they found in a dumpster.
    >
    > If linux is so fast, powerful and efficient it's rather sad that Google
    > needs to run a million servers just to stay functional.
    >


    Google... the largest, most successful search engine on the planet, thanks
    to Linux. You would never be able to do that with windows... even on 2
    million servers...


    --

    Jerry McBride (jmcbride@mail-on.us)

  13. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services


    "Jerry McBride" wrote in message
    news:l438g5xftj.ln2@supertux.my.domain...
    > Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> wrote in message
    >> news:1e6bb9fd-be69-4f79-ae6f-ef14b48e5cac@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >>> On May 18, 1:05 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>>> > On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT),
    >>>> > ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu
    >>>> > wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> >>
    >>>> >> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to
    >>>> >> gain
    >>>> >> leading market positions.
    >>>>
    >>>> > What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?
    >>>>
    >>>> The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search...
    >>>> Google...
    >>>> the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?
    >>>
    >>> Yep. They run a reported million Linux servers. Hard to see how they
    >>> can do it, though. According to DFS, Linux breaks down every 2
    >>> minutes.
    >>>

    >>
    >> A million linux servers... why do they need so many?
    >>
    >> According to the advocates here they could probably run the same
    >> software
    >> on a old 486 box with 64-megs of RAM that they found in a dumpster.
    >>
    >> If linux is so fast, powerful and efficient it's rather sad that Google
    >> needs to run a million servers just to stay functional.



    For starters the wikipedia link that Linonut provided says that Google runs
    about 450,000 servers and not a million. So you may have been off by a
    little. No problem, it's common for advocates to take something... double
    it... then add a little more before coming up with a value. (I realize you
    were just estimating # of servers but I couldn't help myself.)



    > Google... the largest, most successful search engine
    > on the planet, thanks to Linux.


    So you think that it's "Linux" that made Google successful? It had nothing
    to do with their search algorithm or anything like that. You /actually
    believe/ that it is "Linux" that made Google a success? Do tell me the
    reason(s) why it would be impossible to run Google's proprietary software
    on something like Solaris or BSD.



    > You would never be able to do that with windows...
    > even on 2 million servers...


    Why not? Again, based on your knowledge and experience with computers is
    this what you "actually" believe? Or is this just a COLA advocate 'post
    some anti-MS nonsense' and run away?

    Because I do work with computers. Every day I login and have full 'sudo'
    access to a variety of machines and OS's including Windows, Linux and every
    other major OS platform out there. And I actually run comparable-class
    enterprise software on all of these machines similar to what Google would
    run. I use all of the major databases (Oracle, DB2, MySQL, etc) and when
    you break it all down, Google's software is basically a very large
    propreitary database. Google has more volume of data but I've accessed db's
    that are several hundred terabytes in size so I do know how various OS's
    and RDBMS's perform on various platforms.

    *So answer me this... * it is your actual belief that out in the real
    world, a customer running something like Oracle or MySQL or Apache would
    get over 2X the performance with linux than with Windows Server? Based on
    "everything you know" about computers, is this what you actually believe?

    And if you're going to claim that it is a "fact" then provide some links to
    respectable tests that compare linux to Windows server. There's plenty of
    tests out there and the good ones (not a anonymous blog entry from
    'tuxfan87'), the good comprehensive tests show exactly what I see every day
    at work.


    > --
    >
    > Jerry McBride (jmcbride@mail-on.us



    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  14. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    Jerry McBride wrote:

    >> If linux is so fast, powerful and efficient it's rather sad that Google
    >> needs to run a million servers just to stay functional.

    >
    >Google... the largest, most successful search engine on the planet, thanks
    >to Linux. You would never be able to do that with windows... even on 2
    >million servers...


    *Boggle*

    The most successful company of the new millennium is Linux-powered,
    and that's "sad"?

    "Sad" for Micro$oft, maybe.


  15. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    On Mon, 19 May 2008 07:45:45 -0500, chrisv wrote:

    > Jerry McBride wrote:
    >
    >>> If linux is so fast, powerful and efficient it's rather sad that Google
    >>> needs to run a million servers just to stay functional.

    >>
    >>Google... the largest, most successful search engine on the planet,
    >>thanks to Linux. You would never be able to do that with windows... even
    >>on 2 million servers...

    >
    > *Boggle*
    >
    > The most successful company of the new millennium is Linux-powered, and
    > that's "sad"?
    >
    > "Sad" for Micro$oft, maybe.


    Yes, because the greedy monopoly loses out on 2 million licences. Oh,
    dear. How sad. What a shame.

    --
    Mandriva 2008.1 64-bit.
    This message was sent from a
    computer which is guaranteed
    100% free of the M$ Windoze virus.

  16. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    William Poaster wrote: "Yes, because the greedy monopoly loses out on 2
    million licences."

    chrisv wrote: "...there's two very viable alternatives [to Windows]..."


    If there's an alternative then there's no monopoly, you ridiculous
    freetards.




  17. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    On Mon, 19 May 2008 08:16:57 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > "Jerry McBride" wrote in message
    > news:l438g5xftj.ln2@supertux.my.domain...
    >> Ezekiel wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> wrote in message
    >>> news:1e6bb9fd-be69-4f79-ae6f-ef14b48e5cac@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >>>> On May 18, 1:05 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
    >>>>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>>>> > On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT),
    >>>>> > ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu
    >>>>> > wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> >>
    >>>>> >> It?s no secret that Microsoft?s online businesses have failed to
    >>>>> >> gain
    >>>>> >> leading market positions.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> > What does this have to do with Linux advocacy?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The whole article is about how google is killing msft in search...
    >>>>> Google...
    >>>>> the LINUX giant... You do remember google? Right?
    >>>>
    >>>> Yep. They run a reported million Linux servers. Hard to see how they
    >>>> can do it, though. According to DFS, Linux breaks down every 2
    >>>> minutes.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> A million linux servers... why do they need so many?
    >>>
    >>> According to the advocates here they could probably run the same
    >>> software
    >>> on a old 486 box with 64-megs of RAM that they found in a dumpster.
    >>>
    >>> If linux is so fast, powerful and efficient it's rather sad that Google
    >>> needs to run a million servers just to stay functional.

    >
    >
    > For starters the wikipedia link that Linonut provided says that Google runs
    > about 450,000 servers and not a million. So you may have been off by a
    > little. No problem, it's common for advocates to take something... double
    > it... then add a little more before coming up with a value. (I realize you
    > were just estimating # of servers but I couldn't help myself.)


    Never trust a Linux advocate because they will LIE for LIEnix.


    >
    >
    >> Google... the largest, most successful search engine
    >> on the planet, thanks to Linux.

    >
    > So you think that it's "Linux" that made Google successful? It had nothing
    > to do with their search algorithm or anything like that. You /actually
    > believe/ that it is "Linux" that made Google a success? Do tell me the
    > reason(s) why it would be impossible to run Google's proprietary software
    > on something like Solaris or BSD.


    Is Google going to give back to the Linux community by releasing the source
    code to their search engines etc?




    >
    >
    >> You would never be able to do that with windows...
    >> even on 2 million servers...

    >
    > Why not? Again, based on your knowledge and experience with computers is
    > this what you "actually" believe? Or is this just a COLA advocate 'post
    > some anti-MS nonsense' and run away?


    Because these Linux loons might actually be asked for some evidence of
    their claims and they don't like that.


    > Because I do work with computers. Every day I login and have full 'sudo'
    > access to a variety of machines and OS's including Windows, Linux and every
    > other major OS platform out there. And I actually run comparable-class
    > enterprise software on all of these machines similar to what Google would
    > run. I use all of the major databases (Oracle, DB2, MySQL, etc) and when
    > you break it all down, Google's software is basically a very large
    > propreitary database. Google has more volume of data but I've accessed db's
    > that are several hundred terabytes in size so I do know how various OS's
    > and RDBMS's perform on various platforms.
    >
    > *So answer me this... * it is your actual belief that out in the real
    > world, a customer running something like Oracle or MySQL or Apache would
    > get over 2X the performance with linux than with Windows Server? Based on
    > "everything you know" about computers, is this what you actually believe?
    >
    > And if you're going to claim that it is a "fact" then provide some links to
    > respectable tests that compare linux to Windows server. There's plenty of
    > tests out there and the good ones (not a anonymous blog entry from
    > 'tuxfan87'), the good comprehensive tests show exactly what I see every day
    > at work.
    >
    >
    >> --
    >>
    >> Jerry McBride (jmcbride@mail-on.us

    >


    Expect more waffling from the Linux loons.
    It's their only defense.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  18. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    On Mon, 19 May 2008 07:45:45 -0500, chrisv wrote:

    > Jerry McBride wrote:
    >
    >>> If linux is so fast, powerful and efficient it's rather sad that Google
    >>> needs to run a million servers just to stay functional.

    >>
    >>Google... the largest, most successful search engine on the planet, thanks
    >>to Linux. You would never be able to do that with windows... even on 2
    >>million servers...

    >
    > *Boggle*
    >
    > The most successful company of the new millennium is Linux-powered,
    > and that's "sad"?


    Where can I get the source code?

    > "Sad" for Micro$oft, maybe.


    Who cares?


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  19. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > Never trust a Linux advocate because they will LIE for LIEnix.


    HPT says KDE, Gnome, beryl, KNode, Konqueror, Synaptic and OpenOffice are
    all "mainstream applications, all well deployed, well used, reputable" and
    thus my bug complaints are lies.

    Whadda maroon!




    > Is Google going to give back to the Linux community by releasing the
    > source code to their search engines etc?


    Heck no! They develop their own custom Linux kernels and code, and that
    stuff's proprietary.



    > Expect more waffling from the Linux loons.
    > It's their only defense.


    Linux "advocacy" on cola: run, hide, killfile, lie, snip, insult




  20. Re: Microsoft Failure in Online Services

    On Mon, 19 May 2008 11:04:52 -0400, DFS wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >
    >> Never trust a Linux advocate because they will LIE for LIEnix.

    >
    > HPT says KDE, Gnome, beryl, KNode, Konqueror, Synaptic and OpenOffice are
    > all "mainstream applications, all well deployed, well used, reputable" and
    > thus my bug complaints are lies.
    >
    > Whadda maroon!


    HPT must have a very low set of standards.
    This is not unusual in the Linux community.


    >
    >
    >
    >> Is Google going to give back to the Linux community by releasing the
    >> source code to their search engines etc?

    >
    > Heck no! They develop their own custom Linux kernels and code, and that
    > stuff's proprietary.


    So when is Mark Kent and Roy Schestowitz going to put up the "Boycott
    Google" website?


    >
    >
    >> Expect more waffling from the Linux loons.
    >> It's their only defense.

    >
    > Linux "advocacy" on cola: run, hide, killfile, lie, snip, insult


    The truth is like a dagger in the hearts of these Linux loons.
    They just can't handle it.
    They will attempt every trick in the book to spin things their way and the
    more they try, the more foolish they look.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast