Hmmm... It is the same person who wrote this article a while ago and a few members of this group including me responded directly to him. http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/DocView.asp?did=747399&fid=980
His article is definitely not technical and is not taken from a technical perspective. All I saw was number crunching and personal statements that sounds so biased and one sided. What exactly is his knowledge about those things? And to draw from what he said "Leave Philosophy to Philosophers" if the technology world is driven by economists alone and not by people who said that "there is another way!" we would have not progress. Last time an economist tried to run things by crunching the numbers was Robert S. McNamara and his policy lead to a disaster during and after the Vietnam War. "Leave Philosophy to Philosophers" and leave technology evolution to those who envision it and work to make it happen. I don't think we need to get excited each time a biased scholar with no real world experience wants to make a name for himself. Etay ----------------------------------------------- "Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore..." -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aaron Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:47 AM To: Orna Agmon Cc: Linux-IL Subject: Re: Article on YNet Thanks for the translation, A few notes. 1. I infact agree with Dr Saur on a few points. Linux software is infact the same as commercial software and competes against it. Good software is good software and bad software is bad software. Part of what makes Linux good is a Unix way of doing things which Windows software will never have by definition. 2. Even if Windoze is indeed cheaper (He definitely didn't prove it) I would still choose the Unix way of doing things. 3. Windows is not a good OS for Servers and I am sure his numbers are wrong. But still 49% (2001 is a bit old new) means that the more servers run a non-windows os. Man that 49% has to be wrong, who in their right mind would run a Windows server for mission critical applications? 4. Plain math says that a linux distro cost less than windows. 5. I wonder if this guy work for a certain Washington State company? Aaron > > >Illusions that are sold to you about Linux >----------------------------------------- > >By Dr. Robert m. Saur >The appearance of Linux and other open source programs as serious >candidates in the market of computation is an important phenomena. The >challenge they pose to MS and other software manufacturers will lead to >greater competition, which will yield utilities and improvements to any >consumer, business or private. > >Still, the process of the entrance of Linux and other open source programs >to the market is accompanied by strong dissonances, which only harm. Linux >vendors have recently been trying to present an utopian picture, as if >their merchandise is technologically perfect, and a sort of turn point in >the human history in general and in the software market in private. > >It is an illusion. Open source programs are commercial programs in every >aspect. They are characterized by a different commercial model, but like >any software they have technical faults and merits. For competition to >evolve, things must be presented as they are, and consumers must be >allowed to choose based on real data and information. > >The year of Linux >------------------ > >Thus, for example, Mr Horev, manager of Oracle Israel, calls the year 2003 >(in an article recently published in Yedioth Aharonot): "For the first >time since the entrance of Linux to the market over a decade ago, the system >can be viewed as a cheaper and better alternative for Windows", he says. >Mr Horev relates Linux's recent success to the commercial maturity this >system has achieved, and to the fact that governmental systems all around >the world have adopted it. > >The enthusiasm of Mr Horev from Linux is >certainly understandable. >Oracle, which made a large bet on the future of Linux (along >with other software companies), has a clear interest in the matter as the >vendor. But enthusiasm from Linux is one thing, and statistical proofs >about the success of Linux is a totally different thing. > >As a matter of fact, after examining the data, the pink picture looks >totally different. for example, let us examine the part of Linux in the >global servers market. According to the research company IDC, on 1995 >Linux's share was about 0%. By 2000 it jumped to 28%. But what has >happened since then? Linux's share stayed more or less the same, and even >dropped a bit. > >On the other hand, Windows's share in the global market of servers grew >steadily in the said period: from 18% on 1995 to 49% on 2001. From the >data it appears that Windows system does not lose height significantly. It >seems that Linux entered the market at the expense of UNIX, much more than >at the expense of Windows. > >Is Linux a lot Cheaper? >--------------------- >And what about the cost of Linux when compared to Windows? Is it not true >that Linux is cheaper by far? Surprisingly enough, it is not necessarily >so. the most reliable comparative cost review done so far (IDC's 2002 >review) found out that the total cost of ownership of Windows is 11%-22% >lower than Linux systems, according to the type of task, and only in one >type Linux is 6% cheaper. > >Is the adoption of Linux by governments indeed so frequent, and does this >signify technological superiority in any way? attempts to prefer open >source as a rule by means of legislation have faced strong resistance and >failed all over the world.In Israel, a law initiative on the subject by >Kneset Member Nehama Ronen was overruled on this background. The state of >Massachusetts has gone back on its intention to switch all the information >systems to open source several days ago. > >It must be kept in mind, that governmental authorities are not always good >at choosing the best companies in a competitional market, and they >sometimes drag after passing fashions. The clerks of the ministry of >finance, who have recently lead a public war against MS and for open >source, have decided in the end to buy MS programs for full prince and >continue to use them in the next years in all government ministries. > >Leave Philosophy to Philosophers >-------------------------------- > >It appears that a militant rhetoric speaking is not a substitute to a thorough >examination of technological efficiency, which brought to the decision in >this case as well. And finally, one cannot stand being amused by the >philosophic spirit which accompanies the marketing efforts of Linux and >other open source programs today, which are described as the incarnation >of the freedom and democracy. > >The vendors, such as IBM, Oracle and Sun, have not reached cycles of tens >of billions of dollars from selling licenses of freedom and democracy, but >from selling software licenses. Even when they supposedly sell cheap >Linux, they sell for a very high price completing products and expensive >computation services. so to the managers of the vending companies it shall >be said: Leave the philosophy to the philosophers, and you go out to the >market and sell programs in a simple, to the point, language. Good Luck. > >------ >The author is an economics lecturer in the Hebrew Uni in Jerusalem, the >the president of the Jerusalem institute for market research. > >--------------------- > > > ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
