* IBM and Microsoft release research in defense of Linux and Windows, respectively
They say statistics are like a lamppost to a drunk; more for support than enlightenment.
And with that, IBM and Microsoft both recently came out firing with their own vendor-funded research in defense of Linux and Windows, respectively.
At a recent partner conference, Microsoft officials brought up a study the company commissioned with Security Innovation, a testing company, in which Windows 2003 running MS SQL was put up against Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 running MySQL and Oracle 10g databases. The study looked at the number of vulnerabilities found on the two systems over a one-year period, starting February 2004. The study found that the Windows system had 27 vulnerabilities over time, while the Linux system experienced 116. Critics of the study said the severity of vulnerabilities found was not considered, leaving Linux to appear as the weaker technology.
On the TCO front, IBM launched its self-funded research with the Robert Frances Group. In that study, findings showed that Linux was 40% less expensive to run vs. Windows servers, and 54% cheaper to run than Solaris. The research was based on interviews of IT executives from 20 organizations with more than 250 employees, including schools, banks, stores and government agencies. The study also focused on a three-year period of owning and maintaining a server that has to support at least 100,000 operations per second. The study found a slight cost gap in favor of Linux over Windows in terms of hardware (which might seem strange, since both platforms run on Intel-based architectures). It was also found that administrators could manage more Windows servers with fewer staff, which was the most significant factor in the 40% savings claim.
