«

Hi there,

Fred Dagg wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:14:06 +1000, Chris Wilkinson
> <> exclaimed:
>
>
>>>It is not even slightly balanced, and contains pro-Linux statements
>>>throughout, rather than a balanced analysis and presentation of
>>>results.
>>
>>So, does that make it any different from the 'get the facts' site?
>
>
> Whilst MS's advocacy is obviously pro-MS, it is a heck of a lot more
> objective than this "report". It does more harm than good to "the
> cause".

The MS website by and large is glossed over FUD. It is subjectively
objective...

> The Linux advocacy crowd just lost their moral high ground, throwing
> this sort of crap around.

An independent objective analysis is as rare as hens teeth, but this
one at least provides some interesting metrics. It does contain some
decidedly tilted statements, but I tend to read the numbers, not the
statement made about them...

--
Kind regards,

Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia.
Anyone wishing to email me directly can remove the obvious
spamblocker, and replace it with t p g <dot> c o m <dot> a u