[Am-info] Fwd: Customer Focus: Comparing Windows with Linux and UNIX

[Gene Gaines]

Dave Zapple,

Thanks.  Good contribution (below), and good to hear from you.

Gene
gene.gaines@gainesgroup.com

On Thursday, October 28, 2004, 2:05:04 AM, Dave wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>   Thought this e-mail from Steve Ballmer might bring things back in
> line. If anyone would like my opinions on the politics, I am more
> then happy to address the issues. I was a 1st Special Op's, AC-130H
> gunship Crew Chief from 79'-83' and will not be voting for the
> current administration. John Kerry  may have his faults but, I can
> not and will not support this administration.




>>Reply-To: "Steve Ballmer"
>><10_5445_Li8z4NI020b6ENBEDzAIog@ceo.microsoft.com>
>>From: "Steve Ballmer" <steveballmer@ceo.microsoft.com>
>>To: <zappled@odrge.odr.georgetown.edu>
>>Subject: Customer Focus: Comparing Windows with Linux and UNIX
>>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:22:22 -0700
>>Thread-Index: AcS8e8/KqqsFv/zjSCCEmckQMvFDtA==
>>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Oct 2004 23:22:22.0793 (UTC) 
>>FILETIME=[CFE24B90:01C4BC7B]
>>
>>In the thousands of meetings that Microsoft employees have with
>>customers around the world every day, many of the same questions
>>consistently surface: Does an open source platform really provide a
>>long-term cost advantage compared with Windows? Which platform
>>offers the most secure computing environment? Given the growing
>>concern among customers about intellectual property indemnification,
>>what's the best way to minimize risk? In moving from an expensive
>>UNIX platform, what's the best alternative in terms of migration?
>>
>>Customers want factual information to help them make the best 
>>decisions about these issues. About a year ago, a senior Microsoft
>>team led by General Manager Martin Taylor was created to figure out
>>how we could do a better job helping customers evaluate our products
>>against alternatives such as Linux/open source and proprietary UNIX.
>>This team has worked with a number of top analyst firms that have
>>generated independent, third-party reports on cost of acquisition,
>>total cost of ownership, security and indemnification. Some of the
>>studies were commissioned by Microsoft, while others were initiated
>>and funded by the analysts. In each case, the research methodology,
>>findings and conclusions were the sole domain of the analyst firms.
>>This was essential: we wanted truly independent, factual information.
>>
>>At the same time, our worldwide sales organization is going even
>>deeper with customers to understand their needs and create a 
>>feedback loop with our product development teams that enables us to
>>deliver integrated solutions that support real-world customer 
>>scenarios, and comprehensively address issues such as manageability,
>>ease of use and reliability.
>>
>>I'm writing to you and other business decision makers and IT 
>>professionals today to share some of the data around these key
>>issues - and to provide examples of customers who opted to go with
>>the Windows platform rather than Linux or UNIX, and how that's
>>playing out for them in the real world. Much more information on
>>this is at www.microsoft.com/getthefacts.
>>
>>This email is one in an occasional series of emails from Microsoft
>>executives about technology and public-policy issues important to
>>computer users, our industry, and anyone who cares about the future
>>of high technology. If you would like to receive these emails in the
>>future, please go to 
>>http://register.microsoft.com/subscription/subscribeMe.asp?lcid=1033&id=155
>>to subscribe.
>>
>>TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP AND ACQUISITION COSTS
>>
>>In the past few years, you haven't been able to open a computing
>>magazine or visit a technology Web site without running into an
>>article about Linux and open source. Not surprising: who doesn't
>>like the idea of a "free" operating system that just about anyone
>>can tinker with?
>>
>>But as the Yankee Group commented in an independent, non-sponsored
>>global study of 1,000 IT administrators and executives, Linux, UNIX
>>and Windows TCO Comparison, things aren't always as they seem: "All
>>of the major Linux vendors and distributors (including 
>>Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Novell [SUSE and Ximian] and Red Hat) have
>>begun charging hefty premiums for must-have items such as technical
>>service and support, product warranties and licensing 
>>indemnification."
>>
>>Yankee's study concluded that, in large enterprises, a significant
>>Linux deployment or total switch from Windows to Linux would be
>>three to four times more expensive - and take three times as long to
>>deploy - as an upgrade from one version of Windows to a newer 
>>release. And nine out of 10 enterprise customers said that such a
>>change wouldn't provide any tangible business gains.
>>
>>Yankee also noted that, for larger organizations with complex 
>>computer networks, it's important to look beyond Linux's initial low
>>investment cost and consider all of the TCO and ROI factors.
>>
>>This is exactly what one of our large enterprise customers, Equifax,
>>did recently. Equifax, a $1.2 billion U.S.-based enterprise with
>>4,600 employees in 13 countries, needed more computing power than
>>its mainframe systems could deliver for rapidly searching the 
>>company's vast marketing database. They spent several months 
>>conducting an internal analysis, which proved that, compared with
>>Linux, Windows would realize a 14% cost savings and shorten their
>>time to market by six months. (Equifax Case Study - 
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy.aspx?CaseStudyID=15528)
>>
>>Another comprehensive, non-sponsored study by Forrester, entitled
>>The Costs and Risks of Open Source, drew a similar conclusion: "The
>>allure of free software is accelerating the deployment of open
>>source platforms, but open source is not free and may actually
>>increase financial and business risks."
>>
>>In early 2004, Forrester conducted in-depth discussions with 14
>>companies that had been running Linux platforms for longer than one
>>year to see what the costs really were. Several key themes emerged:
>>
>>- Few companies know what they're really spending. Only five of the
>>14 kept detailed metrics - and each of those five found Linux more
>>expensive (5% to 20%) than their current Microsoft environments.
>>
>>- Preparation and planning activities took 5% to 25% longer for
>>Linux than Windows.
>>
>>- Training for IT employees was significantly higher for Linux than
>>for Windows - on average, 15% more expensive. The reasons: training
>>materials were less readily available, and customers spent more on
>>training to compensate for the lack of internal knowledge about
>>Linux.
>>
>>- All 14 companies said it was difficult finding qualified Linux
>>personnel in the marketplace to support their Linux projects. When
>>they did find third-party help, they had less leverage negotiating
>>hourly rates than with Windows consulting resources.
>>
>>One of our mid-market customers, Computer Builders Warehouse (CBW),
>>came to a similar conclusion. CBW builds computers to order for
>>education, government, and corporate customers. Several years ago,
>>it deployed Red Hat and Mandrake versions of Linux to support its
>>corporate, retail and e-commerce applications. Challenged with high
>>costs, CBW subsequently migrated to Microsoft Windows Server System,
>>and reduced its total cost of ownership by 25 percent. It also
>>consolidated its server population by 50 percent, reduced 
>>maintenance time by 50 percent, and boosted developer productivity
>>by 200 percent. These benefits - totaling $650,000 in savings - are
>>dwarfed by the millions of dollars in new revenue that CBW expects
>>as a result of bringing a key security and monitoring product to
>>market more than two years faster than it could have done using
>>Linux. (CBW Case Study - 
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy.aspx?CaseStudyID=15131)
>>
>>SECURITY
>>
>>About three years ago, we made software security a top priority, and
>>since then we've invested heavily in a multi-pronged effort to
>>improve software quality and development processes, and to reduce
>>risks for customers through education and guidance, industry 
>>collaboration and enforcement. I think it's fair to say that no
>>other software platform has invested as much in security R&D, 
>>process improvements and customer education as we have at Microsoft.
>>
>>Still, Linux has often been touted as a more secure platform. In
>>part, this is because of the "many eyeballs" maxim of open source
>>software that claims a correlation between the number of developers
>>looking at code and the number of bugs found and resolved. While
>>this has some validity, it is not necessarily the best way to 
>>develop secure software. We believe in the effectiveness of a 
>>structured software engineering process that includes a deep focus
>>on quality, technology advances, and vigorous testing to make 
>>software more secure.
>>
>>A number of third-party reports have questioned how safe the Linux
>>platform really is. For example, a recent independent study by
>>Forrester, Is Linux More Secure than Windows?, highlighted that the
>>four major Linux distributions have a higher incidence and severity
>>of vulnerabilities, and are slower than Microsoft to provide 
>>security updates.
>>
>>According to Forrester, Microsoft had the lowest elapsed time 
>>between disclosure of a vulnerability and the release of a fix. They
>>found that Microsoft addressed all of the 128 publicly disclosed
>>security flaws in Windows over the 12-month period studied, and that
>>its security updates predated major outbreaks by an average of 305
>>days.
>>
>>Other independent sources of data show similar conclusions. 
>>According to statistics posted on the security Web site Secunia
>>(http://secunia.com/product/2535#statistics_month), Red Hat 
>>Enterprise Linux 3 has averaged 7.4 security advisories per month,
>>compared with 1.7 advisories for Windows Server 2003.
>>
>>And as Yankee Group noted in its Linux, UNIX and Windows TCO 
>>Comparison study, "Linux-specific worms and viruses are every bit as
>>pernicious as their UNIX and Windows counterparts - and in many
>>cases they are much more stealthy."
>>
>>This was a deciding factor in farmaCity's selection of Windows over
>>Linux. Headquartered in Buenos Aires, farmaCity is a rapidly growing
>>Argentinian drugstore chain with 50 outlets and 1,200 employees.
>>Although farmaCity's growth in recent years was a testament to its
>>success, the company's aging technology infrastructure had become a
>>hindrance to further expansion. After careful analysis, farmaCity
>>concluded that Windows would reduce network administration by 30
>>percent compared with Linux, and would also simplify identity and
>>desktop management. But the core reason for selecting Microsoft was
>>the increase in network security, complemented by the ability to
>>reduce patch-deployment time by 50 percent while cutting unsolicited
>>e-mail by half. (farmaCity Case Study - 
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy.aspx?CaseStudyID=15269)
>>
>>INDEMNIFICATION
>>
>>Increasingly, we're hearing from customers that another factor in
>>their consideration of computing platforms is indemnification. In
>>2003, we looked at our volume licensing contracts to see what we
>>could do to increase customer satisfaction, and a top issue we heard
>>about was patent indemnification, which then was capped at the
>>amount the customer had paid for the software. So later that year,
>>we lifted that cap for our volume licensing customers, who are most
>>likely to be the target of an intellectual property lawsuit.
>>
>>Today, when a volume licensing customer - a business or organization
>>ranging from as few as five computers to many thousands - licenses a
>>Microsoft product, we provide uncapped protection for legal costs
>>associated with a patent, copyright, trademark or trade secret claim
>>alleging infringement by a Microsoft product. We do this because we
>>are proud to stand behind our products, and because we understand
>>that being on the wrong end of a software patent lawsuit could cost
>>a customer millions of dollars, and massively disrupt their business.
>>
>>No vendor today stands behind Linux with full IP indemnification. In
>>fact, it is rare for open source software to provide customers with
>>any indemnification at all. We think Microsoft's indemnification
>>already is one of the best offered by the leading players in the
>>industry for volume licensing customers, and we're looking at ways
>>to expand it to an even broader set of our customers. It's 
>>definitely something businesses want to think about as they're
>>building or expanding their IT infrastructure.
>>
>>It was certainly a factor for Regal Entertainment Group, the largest
>>movie theatre chain in the world. In 2001, they moved to Red Hat
>>Linux. After evaluating Linux in their business for several months,
>>however, they migrated to the Microsoft platform - not only because
>>of lower TCO, stronger support and services, and greater reliability
>>and manageability, but because they were more fully indemnified on
>>IP. J.E. Henry, CIO of Regal Entertainment, told me that "reduced
>>risk was a decision factor in selecting Windows over Linux. We
>>needed to minimize our exposure to the distraction of potential IP
>>infringement claims, and we had a big enough open source presence to
>>be concerned. With the way that Microsoft stands behind its 
>>products, it's one less thing that I have to worry about."
>>
>>UNIX MIGRATION
>>
>>One of the hot topics among enterprise IT and business decision
>>makers today is the costs and benefits of migrating enterprise
>>resource planning systems (ERP) from costly, proprietary UNIX 
>>environments to Windows or other platforms. ERP integrates various
>>company functions such as human resources, inventories and 
>>financials, and links a company to its vendors and customers.
>>
>>An independent, qualitative survey of organizations that recently
>>completed a migration of their SAP or PeopleSoft ERP system from a
>>UNIX environment to the Microsoft Windows Server platform found a
>>more than 20% reduction in the number of servers required compared
>>with UNIX. The survey, by META Group, found that in one large 
>>telecommunications company, consolidation on Windows allowed a
>>greater than 50 percent reduction in the number of required servers.
>>
>>The survey also found a more than 50 percent improvement in areas
>>such as reliability, accessibility and scalability; significant
>>savings in cost management, IT staffing, performance monitoring and
>>vendor management; and measurable savings in technical support and
>>training. More than half of business function decision makers also
>>saw significant improvements in areas such as consistency, accuracy,
>>reporting enhancement and performance.
>>
>>"Windows is now a mainstream option for the vast majority of ERP
>>projects," META Group concluded.
>>
>>A great case study is the Raiffeisen Bank Group, the largest private
>>bank group in Austria with about 2,600 branches. It wanted to reduce
>>costs and provide better customer service by consolidating the
>>number of servers in its branches by 50 percent. Raiffeisen 
>>investigated migrating from UNIX to either Linux or Windows. After
>>evaluating the possible solutions, the company found that Windows
>>Server 2003 would provide the most economical solution along with
>>better performance, while giving bank employees an integrated view
>>of customer information that they needed to improve customer 
>>service. (Raiffeisen Bank Group Case Study - 
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy.aspx?CaseStudyID=15519)
>>
>>One of our mid-market customers had a similar experience. Grand
>>Expeditions is a consortium of luxury travel companies that 
>>significantly reduced its Web development and hosting costs, and
>>improved site reliability and performance, by moving from a 
>>combination of Linux- and UNIX-based servers to Windows Server 2003
>>and the Windows Server System. The new system was up and running in
>>just 60 days, and is saving Grand Expeditions $200,000 a year.
>>(Grand Expeditions Case Study - 
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy.aspx?CaseStudyID=15397)
>>
>>IN CLOSING...
>>
>>There is no question that customers are benefiting today from a
>>healthy, competitive IT industry. Competition requires companies to
>>really focus in on what customers want and need. At the same time,
>>customers have a clearer opportunity than ever before to evaluate
>>choices.
>>
>>For example, BET.com, the Internet portal created by Viacom 
>>subsidiary BET Networks, did an in-depth comparison of Red Hat Linux
>>and Windows Server System. They found that Windows offered 30% lower
>>TCO, was more secure and reliable, and enabled quicker time to
>>market. As BET.com's CTO, Navarrow Wright, said: "When I looked at
>>all the costs - not just the straight price of software - a Windows
>>Server System-based solution made better financial sense than 
>>sticking with our Sun and Oracle environment or switching to Linux.
>>We decided to migrate the whole enterprise from various software
>>vendors to standardize all of our software on Microsoft."
>>
>>By implementing Windows Server 2003, Windows XP Professional, Office
>>Professional Edition 2003, Exchange Server 2003, Content Management
>>Server 2003 and Visual Studio .NET 2003, BET.com conservatively
>>estimated that its workforce will increase productivity by 25-30%,
>>while saving significantly in licensing and redevelopment costs.
>>
>>As organizations increasingly rely on IT to perform mission-critical
>>functions, and with complexity a growing challenge, choosing the
>>right computing platform for the long term can make the difference
>>between profit and loss, and between future success and failure. And
>>it's pretty clear that the facts show that Windows provides a lower
>>total cost of ownership than Linux; the number of security 
>>vulnerabilities is lower on Windows, and Windows responsiveness on
>>security is better than Linux; and Microsoft provides uncapped IP
>>indemnification of their products, while no such comprehensive
>>offering is available for Linux or open source.
>>
>>The vision and benefits of an integrated platform are what 
>>distinguish Microsoft's approach to software. The Windows platform
>>today offers an unmatched level of value, applications availability,
>>simplicity, security and productivity. For Microsoft, this is truly
>>a cross-company effort that requires the server and client operating
>>systems to seamlessly deliver great usability and manageability
>>features, applications that deliver compelling scenarios, and tools
>>that enable developers and ISVs to easily and quickly build new
>>applications on the platform.
>>
>>It's important that customers have all the information they need
>>when making critical and expensive IT decisions. If the evidence at
>>our www.microsoft.com/getthefacts Web site doesn't sufficiently
>>convey the benefits and value of the Microsoft platform, we want to
>>hear from you so we can work even harder to get that information to
>>you. If you would like to have a more detailed discussion about your
>>company's IT needs, email Martin Taylor at martinta@microsoft.com.
>>
>>Steve Ballmer
>>
>>To contact Microsoft, write to us at One Microsoft Way, Redmond,
>>Wash, 98052. To manage your Microsoft.com subscriptions, please sign
>>in at the Microsoft Profile Center here: 
>>http://g.microsoft.com/mh_mshp/48. To see the Microsoft.com Privacy
>>Statement, please go to
>>http://www.microsoft.com/info/privacy.mspx.

> _______________________________________________
> Am-info mailing list
> Am-info@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info


--