[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[no subject]



See y'all Saturday I hopez!

-- CHS

-----Forwarded Message-----

&gt; From: Steve Ballmer [<a  rel="nofollow" href="mailto:steveballmer";>mailto:steveballmer</a> at ceo.microsoft.com] 
&gt; Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:04 PM
&gt; Subject: Customer Focus: Comparing Windows with Linux and UNIX
&gt; 
&gt; In the thousands of meetings that Microsoft employees have with
&gt; customers around the world every day, many of the same questions
&gt; consistently surface: Does an open source platform really provide a
&gt; long-term cost advantage compared with Windows? Which platform offers
&gt; the most secure computing environment? Given the growing concern among
&gt; customers about intellectual property indemnification, what's the best
&gt; way to minimize risk? In moving from an expensive UNIX platform, what's
&gt; the best alternative in terms of migration?
&gt; 
&gt; Customers want factual information to help them make the best decisions
&gt; about these issues. About a year ago, a senior Microsoft team led by
&gt; General Manager Martin Taylor was created to figure out how we could do
&gt; a better job helping customers evaluate our products against
&gt; alternatives such as Linux/open source and proprietary UNIX. This team
&gt; has worked with a number of top analyst firms that have generated
&gt; independent, third-party reports on cost of acquisition, total cost of
&gt; ownership, security and indemnification. Some of the studies were
&gt; commissioned by Microsoft, while others were initiated and funded by the
&gt; analysts. In each case, the research methodology, findings and
&gt; conclusions were the sole domain of the analyst firms. This was
&gt; essential: we wanted truly independent, factual information.
&gt; 
&gt; At the same time, our worldwide sales organization is going even deeper
&gt; with customers to understand their needs and create a feedback loop with
&gt; our product development teams that enables us to deliver integrated
&gt; solutions that support real-world customer scenarios, and
&gt; comprehensively address issues such as manageability, ease of use and
&gt; reliability.
&gt; 
&gt; I'm writing to you as a subscriber to executive emails from Microsoft,
&gt; and to other business decision makers and IT professionals, to share
&gt; some of the data around these key issues - and to provide examples of
&gt; customers who opted to go with the Windows platform rather than Linux or
&gt; UNIX, and how that's playing out for them in the real world. Much more
&gt; information on this is at www.microsoft.com/getthefacts.
&gt; 
&gt; TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP AND ACQUISITION COSTS
&gt; 
&gt; In the past few years, you haven't been able to open a computing
&gt; magazine or visit a technology Web site without running into an article
&gt; about Linux and open source. Not surprising: who doesn't like the idea
&gt; of a &quot;free&quot; operating system that just about anyone can tinker with?
&gt; 
&gt; But as the Yankee Group commented in an independent, non-sponsored
&gt; global study of 1,000 IT administrators and executives, Linux, UNIX and
&gt; Windows TCO Comparison, things aren't always as they seem: &quot;All of the
&gt; major Linux vendors and distributors (including Hewlett-Packard, IBM,
&gt; Novell [SUSE and Ximian] and Red Hat) have begun charging hefty premiums
&gt; for must-have items such as technical service and support, product
&gt; warranties and licensing indemnification.&quot;
&gt; 
&gt; Yankee's study concluded that, in large enterprises, a significant Linux
&gt; deployment or total switch from Windows to Linux would be three to four
&gt; times more expensive - and take three times as long to deploy - as an
&gt; upgrade from one version of Windows to a newer release. And nine out of
&gt; 10 enterprise customers said that such a change wouldn't provide any
&gt; tangible business gains.
&gt; 
&gt; Yankee also noted that, for larger organizations with complex computer
&gt; networks, it's important to look beyond Linux's initial low investment
&gt; cost and consider all of the TCO and ROI factors. 
&gt; 
&gt; This is exactly what one of our large enterprise customers, Equifax, did
&gt; recently. Equifax, a $1.2 billion U.S.-based enterprise with 4,600
&gt; employees in 13 countries, needed more computing power than its
&gt; mainframe systems could deliver for rapidly searching the company's vast
&gt; marketing database. They spent several months conducting an internal
&gt; analysis, which proved that, compared with Linux, Windows would realize
&gt; a 14% cost savings and shorten their time to market by six months.
&gt; (Equifax Case Study -
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy";>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy</a>
&gt; .aspx?CaseStudyID=15528)
&gt; 
&gt; Another comprehensive, non-sponsored study by Forrester, entitled The
&gt; Costs and Risks of Open Source, drew a similar conclusion: &quot;The allure
&gt; of free software is accelerating the deployment of open source
&gt; platforms, but open source is not free and may actually increase
&gt; financial and business risks.&quot;
&gt; 
&gt; In early 2004, Forrester conducted in-depth discussions with 14
&gt; companies that had been running Linux platforms for longer than one year
&gt; to see what the costs really were. Several key themes emerged:
&gt; 
&gt; - Few companies know what they're really spending. Only five of the 14
&gt; kept detailed metrics - and each of those five found Linux more
&gt; expensive (5% to 20%) than their current Microsoft environments.
&gt; 
&gt; - Preparation and planning activities took 5% to 25% longer for Linux
&gt; than Windows. 
&gt; 
&gt; - Training for IT employees was significantly higher for Linux than for
&gt; Windows - on average, 15% more expensive. The reasons: training
&gt; materials were less readily available, and customers spent more on
&gt; training to compensate for the lack of internal knowledge about Linux.
&gt; 
&gt; - All 14 companies said it was difficult finding qualified Linux
&gt; personnel in the marketplace to support their Linux projects. When they
&gt; did find third-party help, they had less leverage negotiating hourly
&gt; rates than with Windows consulting resources.
&gt; 
&gt; One of our mid-market customers, Computer Builders Warehouse (CBW), came
&gt; to a similar conclusion. CBW builds computers to order for education,
&gt; government, and corporate customers. Several years ago, it deployed Red
&gt; Hat and Mandrake versions of Linux to support its corporate, retail and
&gt; e-commerce applications. Challenged with high costs, CBW subsequently
&gt; migrated to Microsoft Windows Server System, and reduced its total cost
&gt; of ownership by 25 percent. It also consolidated its server population
&gt; by 50 percent, reduced maintenance time by 50 percent, and boosted
&gt; developer productivity by 200 percent. These benefits - totaling
&gt; $650,000 in savings - are dwarfed by the millions of dollars in new
&gt; revenue that CBW expects as a result of bringing a key security and
&gt; monitoring product to market more than two years faster than it could
&gt; have done using Linux. (CBW Case Study -
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy";>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy</a>
&gt; .aspx?CaseStudyID=15131)
&gt; 
&gt; SECURITY
&gt; 
&gt; About three years ago, we made software security a top priority, and
&gt; since then we've invested heavily in a multi-pronged effort to improve
&gt; software quality and development processes, and to reduce risks for
&gt; customers through education and guidance, industry collaboration and
&gt; enforcement. I think it's fair to say that no other software platform
&gt; has invested as much in security R&amp;D, process improvements and customer
&gt; education as we have at Microsoft.
&gt; 
&gt; Still, Linux has often been touted as a more secure platform. In part,
&gt; this is because of the &quot;many eyeballs&quot; maxim of open source software
&gt; that claims a correlation between the number of developers looking at
&gt; code and the number of bugs found and resolved. While this has some
&gt; validity, it is not necessarily the best way to develop secure software.
&gt; We believe in the effectiveness of a structured software engineering
&gt; process that includes a deep focus on quality, technology advances, and
&gt; vigorous testing to make software more secure.
&gt; 
&gt; A number of third-party reports have questioned how safe the Linux
&gt; platform really is. For example, a recent independent study by
&gt; Forrester, Is Linux More Secure than Windows?, highlighted that the four
&gt; major Linux distributions have a higher incidence and severity of
&gt; vulnerabilities, and are slower than Microsoft to provide security
&gt; updates.
&gt; 
&gt; According to Forrester, Microsoft had the lowest elapsed time between
&gt; disclosure of a vulnerability and the release of a fix. They found that
&gt; Microsoft addressed all of the 128 publicly disclosed security flaws in
&gt; Windows over the 12-month period studied, and that its security updates
&gt; predated major outbreaks by an average of 305 days. 
&gt; 
&gt; Other independent sources of data show similar conclusions. According to
&gt; statistics posted on the security Web site Secunia
&gt; (<a  rel="nofollow" href="http://secunia.com/product/2535#statistics_month";>http://secunia.com/product/2535#statistics_month</a>), Red Hat Enterprise
&gt; Linux 3 has averaged 7.4 security advisories per month, compared with
&gt; 1.7 advisories for Windows Server 2003.
&gt; 
&gt; And as Yankee Group noted in its Linux, UNIX and Windows TCO Comparison
&gt; study, &quot;Linux-specific worms and viruses are every bit as pernicious as
&gt; their UNIX and Windows counterparts - and in many cases they are much
&gt; more stealthy.&quot;
&gt; 
&gt; This was a deciding factor in farmaCity's selection of Windows over
&gt; Linux. Headquartered in Buenos Aires, farmaCity is a rapidly growing
&gt; Argentinian drugstore chain with 50 outlets and 1,200 employees.
&gt; Although farmaCity's growth in recent years was a testament to its
&gt; success, the company's aging technology infrastructure had become a
&gt; hindrance to further expansion. After careful analysis, farmaCity
&gt; concluded that Windows would reduce network administration by 30 percent
&gt; compared with Linux, and would also simplify identity and desktop
&gt; management. But the core reason for selecting Microsoft was the increase
&gt; in network security, complemented by the ability to reduce
&gt; patch-deployment time by 50 percent while cutting unsolicited e-mail by
&gt; half. (farmaCity Case Study -
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy";>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy</a>
&gt; .aspx?CaseStudyID=15269)
&gt; 
&gt; INDEMNIFICATION
&gt; 
&gt; Increasingly, we're hearing from customers that another factor in their
&gt; consideration of computing platforms is indemnification. In 2003, we
&gt; looked at our volume licensing contracts to see what we could do to
&gt; increase customer satisfaction, and a top issue we heard about was
&gt; patent indemnification, which then was capped at the amount the customer
&gt; had paid for the software. So later that year, we lifted that cap for
&gt; our volume licensing customers, who are most likely to be the target of
&gt; an intellectual property lawsuit.
&gt; 
&gt; Today, when a volume licensing customer - a business or organization
&gt; ranging from as few as five computers to many thousands - licenses a
&gt; Microsoft product, we provide uncapped protection for legal costs
&gt; associated with a patent, copyright, trademark or trade secret claim
&gt; alleging infringement by a Microsoft product. We do this because we are
&gt; proud to stand behind our products, and because we understand that being
&gt; on the wrong end of a software patent lawsuit could cost a customer
&gt; millions of dollars, and massively disrupt their business.
&gt; 
&gt; No vendor today stands behind Linux with full IP indemnification. In
&gt; fact, it is rare for open source software to provide customers with any
&gt; indemnification at all. We think Microsoft's indemnification already is
&gt; one of the best offered by the leading players in the industry for
&gt; volume licensing customers, and we're looking at ways to expand it to an
&gt; even broader set of our customers. It's definitely something businesses
&gt; want to think about as they're building or expanding their IT
&gt; infrastructure.
&gt; 
&gt; It was certainly a factor for Regal Entertainment Group, the largest
&gt; movie theatre chain in the world. In 2001, they moved to Red Hat Linux.
&gt; After evaluating Linux in their business for several months, however,
&gt; they migrated to the Microsoft platform - not only because of lower TCO,
&gt; stronger support and services, and greater reliability and
&gt; manageability, but because they were more fully indemnified on IP. J.E.
&gt; Henry, CIO of Regal Entertainment, told me that &quot;reduced risk was a
&gt; decision factor in selecting Windows over Linux. We needed to minimize
&gt; our exposure to the distraction of potential IP infringement claims, and
&gt; we had a big enough open source presence to be concerned. With the way
&gt; that Microsoft stands behind its products, it's one less thing that I
&gt; have to worry about.&quot;
&gt; 
&gt; UNIX MIGRATION
&gt; 
&gt; One of the hot topics among enterprise IT and business decision makers
&gt; today is the costs and benefits of migrating enterprise resource
&gt; planning systems (ERP) from costly, proprietary UNIX environments to
&gt; Windows or other platforms. ERP integrates various company functions
&gt; such as human resources, inventories and financials, and links a company
&gt; to its vendors and customers.
&gt; 
&gt; An independent, qualitative survey of organizations that recently
&gt; completed a migration of their SAP or PeopleSoft ERP system from a UNIX
&gt; environment to the Microsoft Windows Server platform found a more than
&gt; 20% reduction in the number of servers required compared with UNIX. The
&gt; survey, by META Group, found that in one large telecommunications
&gt; company, consolidation on Windows allowed a greater than 50 percent
&gt; reduction in the number of required servers.
&gt; 
&gt; The survey also found a more than 50 percent improvement in areas such
&gt; as reliability, accessibility and scalability; significant savings in
&gt; cost management, IT staffing, performance monitoring and vendor
&gt; management; and measurable savings in technical support and training.
&gt; More than half of business function decision makers also saw significant
&gt; improvements in areas such as consistency, accuracy, reporting
&gt; enhancement and performance.
&gt; 
&gt; &quot;Windows is now a mainstream option for the vast majority of ERP
&gt; projects,&quot; META Group concluded.
&gt; 
&gt; A great case study is the Raiffeisen Bank Group, the largest private
&gt; bank group in Austria with about 2,600 branches. It wanted to reduce
&gt; costs and provide better customer service by consolidating the number of
&gt; servers in its branches by 50 percent. Raiffeisen investigated migrating
&gt; from UNIX to either Linux or Windows. After evaluating the possible
&gt; solutions, the company found that Windows Server 2003 would provide the
&gt; most economical solution along with better performance, while giving
&gt; bank employees an integrated view of customer information that they
&gt; needed to improve customer service. (Raiffeisen Bank Group Case Study -
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy";>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy</a>
&gt; .aspx?CaseStudyID=15519)
&gt; 
&gt; One of our mid-market customers had a similar experience. Grand
&gt; Expeditions is a consortium of luxury travel companies that
&gt; significantly reduced its Web development and hosting costs, and
&gt; improved site reliability and performance, by moving from a combination
&gt; of Linux- and UNIX-based servers to Windows Server 2003 and the Windows
&gt; Server System. The new system was up and running in just 60 days, and is
&gt; saving Grand Expeditions $200,000 a year. (Grand Expeditions Case Study
&gt; -
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy";>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/casestudies/CaseStudy</a>
&gt; .aspx?CaseStudyID=15397)
&gt; 
&gt; IN CLOSING...
&gt; 
&gt; There is no question that customers are benefiting today from a healthy,
&gt; competitive IT industry. Competition requires companies to really focus
&gt; in on what customers want and need. At the same time, customers have a
&gt; clearer opportunity than ever before to evaluate choices.
&gt; 
&gt; For example, BET.com, the Internet portal created by Viacom subsidiary
&gt; BET Networks, did an in-depth comparison of Red Hat Linux and Windows
&gt; Server System. They found that Windows offered 30% lower TCO, was more
&gt; secure and reliable, and enabled quicker time to market. As BET.com's
&gt; CTO, Navarrow Wright, said: &quot;When I looked at all the costs - not just
&gt; the straight price of software - a Windows Server System-based solution
&gt; made better financial sense than sticking with our Sun and Oracle
&gt; environment or switching to Linux. We decided to migrate the whole
&gt; enterprise from various software vendors to standardize all of our
&gt; software on Microsoft.&quot;
&gt; 
&gt; By implementing Windows Server 2003, Windows XP Professional, Office
&gt; Professional Edition 2003, Exchange Server 2003, Content Management
&gt; Server 2003 and Visual Studio .NET 2003, BET.com conservatively
&gt; estimated that its workforce will increase productivity by 25-30%, while
&gt; saving significantly in licensing and redevelopment costs.
&gt; 
&gt; As organizations increasingly rely on IT to perform mission-critical
&gt; functions, and with complexity a growing challenge, choosing the right
&gt; computing platform for the long term can make the difference between
&gt; profit and loss, and between future success and failure. And it's pretty
&gt; clear that the facts show that Windows provides a lower total cost of
&gt; ownership than Linux; the number of security vulnerabilities is lower on
&gt; Windows, and Windows responsiveness on security is better than Linux;
&gt; and Microsoft provides uncapped IP indemnification of their products,
&gt; while no such comprehensive offering is available for Linux or open
&gt; source.
&gt; 
&gt; The vision and benefits of an integrated platform are what distinguish
&gt; Microsoft's approach to software. The Windows platform today offers an
&gt; unmatched level of value, applications availability, simplicity,
&gt; security and productivity. For Microsoft, this is truly a cross-company
&gt; effort that requires the server and client operating systems to
&gt; seamlessly deliver great usability and manageability features,
&gt; applications that deliver compelling scenarios, and tools that enable
&gt; developers and ISVs to easily and quickly build new applications on the
&gt; platform.
&gt; 
&gt; It's important that customers have all the information they need when
&gt; making critical and expensive IT decisions. If the evidence at our
&gt; www.microsoft.com/getthefacts Web site doesn't sufficiently convey the
&gt; benefits and value of the Microsoft platform, we want to hear from you
&gt; so we can work even harder to get that information to you. If you would
&gt; like to have a more detailed discussion about your company's IT needs,
&gt; email Martin Taylor at martinta at microsoft.com.
&gt; 
&gt; Steve Ballmer
&gt; 
&gt; To cancel your subscription to future executive emails, please reply to
&gt; this email with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line. To contact us,
&gt; write to us at One Microsoft Way, Redmond, Wash., 98052. To manage your
&gt; Microsoft.com subscriptions, please sign in at the Microsoft Profile
&gt; Center here: . To see the Microsoft.com
&gt; Privacy Statement, please go to
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.microsoft.com/info/privacy.mspx";>http://www.microsoft.com/info/privacy.mspx</a>.
&gt; 


</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="01002" href="msg01002.html">[ale] How the Borg Looks at Us</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> pete.hardie at gmail.com (Pete Hardie)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01007" href="msg01007.html">[ale] How the Borg Looks at Us</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> bob at verysecurelinux.com (Bob Toxen)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00998.html">[ale] Ximian Connector and Active Directory</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg01000.html">[ale] vonage service</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00993.html">[ale] LISA booth volunteers</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg01002.html">[ale] How the Borg Looks at Us</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#00999"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#00999"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>