Wed, Feb 15 2006 19:28
Anti Spin Cycle please?
When a washer is squeezing out the excess water, it runs a spin cycle. There are some days I want an anti-spin cycle when it comes to marketing and white papers and what not to squeeze out the fluff and get down to the facts.
My sister was talking about some software that was being demo'd to them...and it looked wonderful... it could do everything absolutely perfectly....there's only one catch. Only the company demo'ing the software could afford all the modular parts that made the software do exactly what was being showcased. No normal firm, especially these days, could afford all the parts that would make it all work.
There are times like today I get tired of the spin cycle. Today I saw a Linux white paper that compares the TCO prices of Linux to Windows and in their comparison chart calls ISA 2004 a "web server" and includes it in the pricing comparisons. Uh, nice guys, but ISA 2004 is a firewall and doesn't compare at all to an Apache/Jboss server. Apache/Jboss normally goes 'behind' a firewall, which is what ISA Server 2004 Enterprise is. Then on the SBS Faq site , today I noticed it said this in their faq about what's in SBS 2003 R2:
"SBS 2003 R2 will only include one Windows Server 2003 R2 component and that component is Windows SharePoint Services Service Pack 2. "
Microsoft, come on, give me a break. I get Windows Sharepoint Services Service Pack 2 on Microsoft Update for heavens sake. When I can get it on a Sp1 box, and already have it there, call me wacko, but I don't consider that it's something special that's included from the Windows Server 2003 R2 parts. Furthermore on this Windows 2003 R2 comparison page, it says that Windows 2003 sp1 gets it too. You know why Linux is going to win the hearts, minds and pocketbooks of businesses? Because we, John Q. Public are losing trust in you. Truly, we are. You are slowing eroding the trust. And quite frankly stuff like this plays right into that.
Want to have proof that the paranoia isn't just relegated to the Tinfoil folks? This very statement was on a listserve the other day in regards to trusting Microsoft Defender Beta 2....
"If we relegate watching and protecting for malware, trojans, adware, spyware and the like to Microsoft, who will be watching them?"
Last summer I was in Chicago for Tech conference and the gentlemen giving the keynote (admittedly using a Mac to give his presentations) said that Microsoft was on the real verge of losing trust by it's customers.
Am I the only one that is getting tired of the spin that I see going on? I mean there are marketing books on 'how to tell a story'. Why can't facts sell? Why don't companies see that facts can be just as powerful as fluff?
You know what John Q. Public really wants (or at least I think so anyway). They really don't want to have to think about security, they really don't want to think about technology working at all. They want a TV set or a toaster level of technology. They don't want to be dependent on a family friend to get their printer working over a two weekend timeframe or be dependent on their 10 year old to take care of their computers. But they still want to download that music and what not.
So will a Linux distro or Microsoft be the maker of that TV set or toaster of the future? The maker of that technology that just works?
I really don't know.
Right now I'm not sure John Q. Public can trust either one. Right now the Maytag spin cycle is working overtime in both camps.
Filed under: Rants