Microsoft dominance poses security risk

[aeallison]

Ahh yes back in my younger dayz....

I was confused by the fact that at the top he had me lumped in with you as obsolete, which, like you, I found a little disconcerting but further down he was nice to me and told me that he agrees and my post was "great".

Look at post #31 in this thread, I believe it was I who said your post was great.

I too am a bit befuddled by all of this.... lol <-- OBSOLETE! -->

[Tiger Shark]

AE.... LOL.... I didn't realize he was quoting you there...... Oh well..... Back to my medications....

[aeallison]

With all of this stuff about obsoleteism (is that a word? lol) I completely overlooked stevemilner's last post... I think he brings in another argument viable to this thread. At this point in time we do not have a lot to lose in trying to adopt *nix into our networks, I am considering using IRIX for my DNS servers and Solaris for authentication, my WIN2K Server boxes are secure enough, just not reliable. I have to keep bouncing them or my entire network eventually goes sour and then my phone starts doing its thing. I have to do this at least once a week. I do not think I will ever adopt WIN2K3, I am not going to "pay" again for something that was inadequite the first time I paid for it.

[S1lv3rW3bSurf3r]

"My turn for a one liner here. I have to agree with Tiger Shark on his last post catch. You do bring a very high level of knowledge and intelligent opposition in this thread, and I really have enjoyed reading everyones views. But like Tiger Shark stated most of us here are seat-of-the-pants admins. I have to completely run my network, alone, without manuals or anything. I do not even have a college degree, I barely graduated high school. But I do maintain it to the point that my customers stay happy. Just my two cent. Great post Tiger Shark.

Yeah I know that was more than one line, In retrospect to the other posts in this thread it is. "

My response centres around this post, dear sirs. the comments about maintaining something so that the customer stays happy. maybe i miss interpret comment context. it maybe that my english is bad, tis my 3rd language...... now, i make an effort to learn english so that i can communicate better on forums like these, so if i may metaphorically speaking, say that ,do u mean that u do only enough to get the job done, or does aeallison ever read up on subjects, use e-zines etc to become informed on topics perhaps?! the information i can garner and glean from catch's posts are most informative, and in my case anyways, help give me new understandings and perspectives on subjects surrounding operating systems and networks in general. i too have to deal on a technical level, on many aspects of networking, sometimes i come across very informative and information rich posts here and elsewhere regarding information i need. and trust me, i deal with a 15000 user wan, that real world enough? plus issues that are brought up by catch, do affect me, in my "real world" scenarios. plus isnt steve milner speaking about total cost of ownership, and didnt gartner group and others et al (independant auditing firms), prove that MS is cheaper to own and maintain over a 3 to 5 year period?

please do explain to me if i am misunderstanding what is before me regarding the post as above in quotation marks. this may actually be pointless from my side, if i can understand properly the context in which the statement is made.... please gentlemen, enjoy your day further....and if applicable and appropriate, merry christmas ......

[rapier57]

I think I understand where you are coming from, S1lv3rW3bSurf3r. Yes the Gartner study and Milner all take the position that MS-based networks have a lower cost of ownership over a 3 to 5 year period. We can read the study (if you have the money to pay for the paperwork), or glean what we can from the comments of others and whitepapers available on the net.

Microsoft has a high entry cost. That is a given. That cost is going up. I feel fortunate that I work in public sector education, so my annual costs are less than a comparable corporation. The ongoing cost of ownership (we have been in business for going on four years) is reasonable, I think. But, we have some other factors to consider. We started with sys admins who were familiar with Windows (NT, anyway), and we proceeded to build a Win2K/AD network. The decision to go Windows was made prior to my involvement. We leveraged our WinNT knowledge and experience, and have had to do so without additional professional development training (budget problems). At this point, the ongoing training of current staff to maintain skill levels has not been included in our operational planning.

The question now is, can we continue to leverage our knowledge and experience into Win2K3 and beyond without a lot of expensive professional development training?

Could we have--given sys admins with Linux knowledge and experience and a decision to go with Linux on the servers and desktops--have survived to this point with the same number of staff and with the same level of budgetary support? I'd like to crunch some numbers sometime to see how that plays.

The larger question is, could we have done it with Linux and met the college's stated mission and goals and the needs of the curriculum? If you can't meet the needs of the curriculum (heavily Windows-based applications, networking and programming), and the mission and goals of the college, the cost of ownership is a moot point.

/me just inches ahead of obsolesence.

[S1lv3rW3bSurf3r]

rapier57, in south africa, especially in Cape Town, Linux is a scarcity. Here Microsoft and Novell are King. I dare say it is very difficult, and expensive to get Linux training as there is little to no skill here. Microsoft however has sponsored many educational intitutions here, as far as Bill Gates' visiob of computers from Cape to Cairo are concerned. He has personally contributed to building the Western Cape School's Network in underpriviledged areas. This has enabled previously disadvantaged people, to become empowered, and maybe , to the more sinister (conspiracy minded), microsoft "locked" people. Cape Town is MCSE capital of the world. it costs less than US$150 to get the training and certification. Here Red Hat was started but soon fizzled out as the Hype around it could not be sustained to market growth. There is no big inroads by Linux into South Africa as yet.

Will Linux ever have a coherent and co-ordinated marketing strategy to open up new markets? Lindows has done more harm than good in the governments eyes in south africa, because of its policies toward microsoft, in particular, its strategy of paying for a "hack" of the x-box competition. why should the government or the private sector want to do business with a company like that?! does it mean that if they do not like a company, they could go into a practise like that against a former client for example?

Thank You for the response thus far, it has been appreciated, and thanks for being patient with the language barrier!!!!