Lately there have been reports of Microsoft brand name declining.
I have seen many projects where a Linux solution would have been the best technological and economical alternative. Yet, Linux solutions are not welcome in many organisations. But how can a technical framework that doesn't scale well and constantly creates delays due to technical problems remain unquestioned for so long? It's not that I'm all against Windows, but for example, the 2Gb limit in the GC of .Net on 64 bit platforms should immediately disqualify it from computations of large pieces of data. Think Video. Then we have the NTFS file system not being block journaled as we are used to on Linux. Yet managers just loves .Net . Perhaps this is because of the old saying:
No one got fired for buying IBM stock
Well, for Microsoft, that may change. If you insist of building with technology that aren't well matched to your particular problem, you may get away with it if the company is called Microsoft and has a great reputation. But now that Microsoft brand name is declining you may not get away with that in front of your customers as easy as before.
Add to that that RedHat is rated as the company delivering most value according to CIOs rating.
Comments