. wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch
<erikf@visi.com> wrote:
>
>> "Roy Culley"
<tgdcuro1@gd2.swissptt.ch> wrote in message
news:10t02a.hc7.ln@127.0.0.1...
>>
>>
>>
<https://www.latimes.com/business/la-000003463jan14.story?coll=la-headlines-business-manual>
>>
>>
>
>> It's an interesting example of how a little knowledge is
dangerous.
>>
>>
>
>> The guy confuses basic topics, like calling Code Red a virus
>>
>>
A common mistake made by more than one journalist. Probably
the only ones who really would care are real security
specialists. Code Red was WORSE than a virus, since there was
no action required by the recipient to receive it.
>> and confusing UPnP with PnP (though named similarly are
entirely
>> different things).
This is a more significant difference. When you understand the
nature of UPnP it's even more of a concern than PnP. It has
even more legal implications (contempt of court, ...). Add to
that the increased security risks, and it really is amazing
that anyone runs XP.
>> It looks like he just collected a bunch of quotes together
>> and added some glue (which he gets quite wrong in places).
Sounds like dozens of "pro Microsoft" presentations and
proposals, usually involving millions of dollars, made over the
objections of the Architect, Network Manager, Security Manager,
DBAs, Systems Administrators, and Production support teams.
Usually done when the project involves a high performance
server and a Manager who has been getting too many free dinners
from the Microsoft Rep wants to use Windows instead of UNIX
(Solaris, AIX, HP_UX, or Linux).
>> He also repeats the lie that Apache
>> has twice Microsofts market share, it doesn't.
It depends on what you are measuring. Microsoft likes to
measure servers, since it takes several more servers to produce
a single high availability site, than it takes with UNIX or
Linux. They also like to compare dollar volumes, since
Microsoft servers cost about 10 times their Linux counterparts,
and about 5 times more "per site" than their UNIX counterparts.
From:
http://www.netcraft.com/survey/
> You're right. Its more:
> Dec. 2001:
> Apache: 8588323 63.34%
> Microsoft: 3609428 26.62%
These are the numbers of total active servers across all
domains. By active servers, this excludes sites which are
primarily "for sale" signs put up by speculators who have
purchased millions of .biz and .tv sites in hopes of making a
killing in the market by registering a site name that matches a
corporate trademark such as k-mart. This by the way has been a
big boom market for Microsoft which has increased it's share of
Vanity sites to nearly 31% (at the time that the snapshot was
taken).
Lately, Netcraft has been having problems getting full counts,
for example one month didn't even include Germany (which has a
very high percentage of Linux and Apache servers).
Of course, netcraft is hard to ignore as a survey, because it
samples over 36 million web sites/domains, and nearly 16
million active sites/domains.
Ironically, Netcraft actually undercounts the Apache servers,
since many corporate sites use IIS or Netscape/Iplanet for
their Home pages and "closing the sale" Merchent machines, but
they use Apache as the workhorse for things like the
catalogues, Gifs, and static pages.
Many Apache servers are also front-ends to Websphere or
WebLogic servers as well, and are still counted as Apache
servers. Apache servers are also undercounted because many of
the "Other" servers, such as Stronghold are based on Apache,
but are branded and contain proprietary extensions or plug-ins.
> -----.
