Linux.com

Feature: Migration

Microsoft and Unisys are way, way out

By on April 04, 2002 (9:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

- By Robin "Roblimo" Miller -
No, it wasn't an April Fool's joke. Microsoft and Unisys really did plan a multi-million dollar ad campaign to tell the world about the evils of Unix and tout the wonders of Unisys servers running Windows. And they really did put up a Web site called We Have the Way Out that immediately became a laughingstock. The site is working again, but it was down for several days after it switched from running on FreeBSD to a Windows server.
The premise of the ad campaign is that Unix is inflexible, mysterious, and takes high-priced specialists to administer, so instead of buying top-end Sun, IBM or Hewlett-Packard servers, you should buy top-end Unisys servers that run Windows.

Windows is so easy to administer that kids in Pakistan can pass MCSE exams. Even adult Americans can become certified Microsoft Systems Administrators in just 14 days. Given this ease of use, it's obvious that sane corporate managers would prefer to run their servers on Windows instead of Unix, right?

Except, of course, for the managers who put up the We Have the Way Out Web site, which ran Apache on BSD when it first went up, a fine bit of irony that didn't escape Slashdot readers' notice. On April 2, the site moved to another server, one running Windows and Microsoft IIS. And that's when the fun began.

The new "Way Out" Windows servers apparently had a whole slew of ports open, and since the site had gotten plenty of publicity, a whole slew of script kiddies dove into them and had a high old time for a few hours -- until the site got taken down. It's back up now, three days later. But it was down from Tuesday through Thursday. This is not exactly a great ad for Windows reliability. But worse, it's a message about unskilled systems administrators that applies to any server, on any operating system.

Being a systems administrator in today's world of hackers and crackers and loonies and spammers and virus-writers and root kits and open relays and Glub knows what else takes skill, knowledge, and vigilance. Those who are truly good at this work study constantly to keep up with the latest exploits and the latest defenses against them. You could argue -- and many of my sysadmin friends do -- that it takes more skill, more knowledge, and more study to deal with servers running Windows than with servers running almost any other operating system. Managers trying to find a "Way Out" of hiring skilled (and therefore pricey) systems administrators by switching from Unix to Windows are doing nothing but painting themselves into a corner: Unless they want to achieve total security the way the people running the Microsoft/Unisys "Way Out" site did -- by disconnecting all servers from the rest of the world -- even the world's cost-savingest IT managers eventually have to pay high-level sysadmin salaries to have a secure systems.

This shoots down most of Microsoft's sales message in the server arena.

Enter Linux

This is also where Linux comes onstage, with three spotlights focused on it and the audience (of cost-conscious IT managers) on their feet, clapping their hands over their heads, and swaying in time with the music.

After the "Way Out" debacle, smart IT managers and CIOs are going to be saying, "Gee, if Microsoft and Unisys put together can't secure a Windows Web server, it's obviously time for us to look for an alternative to Windows, maybe something that doesn't have high license costs -- they're eating us up these days -- and can run on these Intel boxes we already have."

CIO Magazine recently ran a feature titled How to Run a Microsoft-Free Shop. The article is in the form of a 12-step program similar to those used to wean alcoholics from booze and druggies from their favorite highs. This is an excellent primer on corporate Linux advocacy from within.

Another excellent site for advice on moving from Windows to Linux, BSD or proprietary Unix is called We Have the Way In. Some might look at this one as a parody of the Microsoft/Unisys "Way Out" site, but it's a real, useful site that can help you learn about Linux and Unix alternatives to Microsoft's server-level products.

(Okay, maybe We Have the Way In won't teach you anything, but it's a great piece of ammunition for your advocacy arsenal, especially since it is a slick, professional-looking "marketing feel" Web site that upper management will take seriously.)

Will Microsoft and Unisys continue their campaign?

So far, all that Microsoft and Unisys have managed to do with their "Way Out" campaign is make people sneer at them. But I suspect that they will keep the site going and run all the ads they planned -- many millions of dollars worth -- out of sheer pigheadedness. Plus, they might have a (probably correct) belief that although their "Way Out" site has made them into laughingstocks in the leading-edge tech community, most people out there -- including most IT managers -- don't know about their "Way Out" debacle and will be receptive to their "Windows is gooder than Unix, yuh, yuh, yuh" message, and that if they pound that message in often enough via enough different media they are bound to pick up some sales.

Meanwhile, smart IT managers and CIOs -- the ones who read technical documentation instead of marketing brochures -- will keep switching to Linux and other Open Source alternatives, happy that they have found a "Way Out" of proprietary server operating system licensing fees and security problems.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on Microsoft and Unisys are way, way out

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

Miscommunication?

Posted by: RickySilk on April 05, 2002 12:56 AM
Does anyone know how this happened?

My guess would be the marketing department and the IS department didn't communicate very well. The exchange probably went something like this.

Marketing: "Hey we need you to get this domain up and let us know where we need to put the files for the site"

IS: "Ok" *put's the domain on trusty apache/bsd server*

#

Re:Miscommunication?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 01:45 AM
nah. they probably hoped people wouldnt notice it was on FreeBSD/Apache. Besides, whose IS dept put the server up? I doubt MS's. Quite possible Unisys, but unlikely. Probably some ad agency.

#

Re:Miscommunication?

Posted by: Amresh Deshpande on April 05, 2002 04:36 AM
More than miscommunicatio it seems to me that probably they realiz'd that using M$ products was as hopeless an idea as the products themselves...

#

Re:Miscommunication?

Posted by: Andrew Lindeman on April 05, 2002 07:10 AM
Maybe so, but the domain is registered to the Unisys corp, but I guess that doesn't mean that they host it....

#

Re:Miscommunication?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 11:35 PM
See this list of machines owned and run by Unisys running Linux, Unix or other below.

#

Interesting Netcraft Results

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 04:48 AM
I've used Unix generically here. Most of those labelled Unix are in fact Linux systems, Stronghold is a hardened Redhat Linux variant and Notes/Domino runs just fine on Linux.

Unix: https://www.rmsg.unisys.com/
Domino/Notes: http://storage.unisys.com
Netscape Enterprise: http://support.unisys.com
Unix: http://usuarios.unisys.com.br
Unix: http://weather.unisys.com
Netscape Enterprise: http://www.adept.unisys.com
Lotus-Domino/Release-4.6.2a: http://www.corp.unisys.com
Unisys e-@ction Web Transaction Server for ClearPath OS 2200/4.3.20 (The way out?): http://www.cpix22.unisys.com
Netscape Enterprise: http://www.napcare.unisys.com
Domino/Notes: http://www.partnerinfo.unisys.com
Stronghold/2.4.1 Apache/1.3.3 C2NetEU/2409 (Unix): http://www.rmsg.unisys.com
Unix: http://www.s-tevent.unisys.com
Unix: http://www.service.unisys.com
Netscape-Enterprise: http://www.support.unisys.com
Unix: http://www.weather.unisys.com
Unix: http://www.wxp.unisys.com

#

Re: Microsoft and Unisys are way, way out

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 04:53 AM
I went to the site when it was running on FreeBSD, and it was quite fast.


I've been back to the site since they've converted over to Windows, and its WAY slow compared to before.


When will M$ learn that their product can't compete in a Enterprise market. Even their Data-Warehousing product can't scale when it comes to a clustering environment.


M$ and Unisys, I give ya 2 points for a failed attempt.

#

Re: Microsoft and Unisys are way, way out

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 06, 2002 06:35 PM
Maybe because everyone and his dog are taking a look there? The fact that I run a *nix doesn't make my ADSL connection faster...

#

LinuxFreak doesn't exactly swoon

Posted by: superbenk on April 05, 2002 07:18 AM
I did look at the "We Have the Way In" site and it looks pretty good until you scroll down to the fine print and see "Copyright LinuxFreak.org". I hate to say it (I do advocate moving to unix/linux), but LinuxFreak does not exactly swoon to corporate management as a name conducive to prestige and strong reputation. When management sees that kind of name, I'm sure they think geeky over-caffinated trouble-maker running around their building at ungodly hours hacking and IMing. I know that's what pops into my head. If this site is going for image and marketability, I'd pick something a little more professional as a footnote to my site.

#

Re:LinuxFreak doesn't exactly swoon

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 08:13 AM
Surely this should be published under the Gnu documentation licence?

#

Re:LinuxFreak doesn't exactly swoon

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 05:53 PM

I'm sure they think geeky over-caffinated trouble-maker running around their building at ungodly hours hacking and IMing.

What? They think head of IT?

;-)

#

Re:LinuxFreak doesn't exactly swoon

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 06, 2002 08:18 AM
Actually the first thing they'd see is "Advocate" and then what else should they think?
It clearly is a Linux advocacy site.
What amazes me is how for so many an offical ad dictated by the CEO is more athoritive than an advocate.

The reality is that they should be equals.
A CEO is the advocate of his company and products every Linux advocate is a salsemen.

Why should the opinions of "LinuxFreak" be any less than the opinions of "Bill Gates"?

Nitpick detrails to death.... and you bleed...

Corprate knows Linux runs the roage..
And they are more likely to laugh with names like "Linux Freak" than see "over-caffinated trouble-maker"s

Sadly those who do see Linux as "over-caffinated trouble-maker"s aren't going to switch to Linux even if it would save them from dying a horrable painful death.

Somebody that far gone isn't going to believe anything even if Bill Gates himself publicly proclames "Windows sucks and Linux is the way of the future" something that wouldn't happen unless you brain washed him into thinking his product was "Linux" and the compeditor was "Windows"

#

Re:LinuxFreak doesn't exactly swoon

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 07, 2002 05:23 AM
I agree. It really needs a better name than that. The corporate world does not want to deal with a bunch of idealistic, philosophical, gawky Linux advocates who can't talk about anything else besides Linux.. that's the impression I get when I see the term "Linux Freak."

#

VMS isn't unix

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 09:42 AM
Under the commercial section of that "We Have the Way" in website they list OpenVMS as a UNIX. VMS isn't and has never been a UNIX. They could at least get their facts right.

#

Re:VMS isn't unix

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 11:26 AM
Dave Cutler must be foaming somewhere in the fair city of Redmond, first his RSX-11M was steamrollered by Unix then VMS withers on the vine as Ultrix/Digital Unix invade his castle at DEC, and now Windows NT is heckled at every turn by Linux/BSD and even his employer can't tell his operating systems from Unix !!!!!

#

Re:VMS isn't unix

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 09:48 PM
Windows NT shares a lot of memory management code with VMS.

#

Re:VMS isn't unix

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 09:52 PM
Well, it may not be Unix, but at least its not Windows.

#

Re:VMS isn't unix

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 10:18 PM
What OS was NT based on? Or bought away from if you like?

#

Re:VMS isn't unix

Posted by: Kiwi009 on April 07, 2002 08:01 AM
NT was initally based on code jointly developed by MS and IBM for OS/2. I have heard from some of the early developers of NT that whole sections of code were lifted from OS/2, especially the NTFS file system, which was a hacked version of HPFS386. MS, however, couldn't even hack it good. Witness the fragmentation problems associated with NTFS, that are not prevalent in HPFS. Heh.

#

We Have A Way Out

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2002 08:58 PM
When I was a kid, many, many years ago, there was a name for Microsoft's advertising technique. It was called "The big lie." Popularized by Hitler, the idea, much in use today, in today's advertising, is as Commander Taco said -- say something often enough and people will begin to believe.

#

Re:We Have A Way Out

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 07, 2002 11:06 AM
Reminds me of the fact that Hitler's favorite movie was, in fact, directed by the Jewish (or at least half-Jewish) Fritz Lang...

#

The site is still using non-MS technology

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 06, 2002 04:48 AM
According to The Register, the site is still using Java and MySQL. Like a lot of other high profile Windows Web Servers, it is only using Windows for a front end to non-MS technology (mostly UNIX). The story just keeps getting better...

  http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/53/24714.html

#

Article good base

Posted by: cybersekkin on April 07, 2002 07:38 PM
Okay I am disposed to agree but it doesn't matter the OS what counts are qualified Admins (not Certified) Although my list of certs are up there. I know a ton of certified MCSEs that couldn't secure a cold (its tough enough as they can't even find out what is running on their system) Careful with Linux catching on we are bound to get our share of "certified" Admins that are going to totally screw up Linux rep. MS will never be as secure as Linux or even Unix but don't think being certified means being qualified.

#

Any closed source OS needs pricy admins.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 07, 2002 08:12 PM
Since most people running open source software operating systems tend to run other things with open source as well I would make a statement.

Any questions regarding the OSS can easily be answered by anybody able to read C or pseudo-code.

But to know what truly happens and how Windows _really_ works you have to be very well connected with Microsoft (or whatever vendor/closed software) and they are EXTRA pricey!

So, instead of throwing money at specialized consultants, give a donation to your local university, LUG or open source organisation.

Not only can they often solve your problem, they are way cheaper too.

#

Unisys is anti-UNIX?

Posted by: sysadminJim on April 15, 2002 10:34 AM
OK, I can buy Unisys supporting Microsoft to sell it's high-end servers. They are dynamite servers, but they come with a dynamite price tag too. You pay for what you get. What surprises me is that Unisys would come out and condemn UNIX, and especially to condemn the high-priced tech support for UNIX. Why? Because they are, and always have been one of those companies providing that high-priced support for UNIX servers.

I worked for Unisys for a few years, and they will provide hardware tech support for anyone and everyone willing to pay for it (except Mac...sorry to any Mac users, but Unisys doesn't support them.) They also provide software and O/S support on high-end systems, whether UNIX or Microsoft. To hear they are slamming UNIX so blatantly when they service UNIX systems was a real hoot. It appears that their marketing and advertising folks need to do more research on their own company before they talk.

I guess they learned their lesson about needing high-priced tech support. Maybe they should've invested a bit more in that area.

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.



 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya