On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 08:24:28AM -0400, Gregory Seidman wrote: >On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 08:14:58PM +0800, John Summerfield wrote: >} "Microsoft has long asked third party analysts for accurate assessments >} of the total cost of ownership of Microsoft Windows deployments, >} especially against the Linux deployments commonly going into all >} segments of the market. However, Immunity, Inc. as a third party >} assessment provider has, until now, not done a thorough analysis, using >} Immunity proprietary data to tell the true story about the costs of Open >} Source... >} >} http://linuxtoday.com/security/2004081302226OPSWNT >} >} Comments? > >Did you read the actual paper? It's mostly a joke, though >well-researched and -supported. That's Total Cost of 0wnership, spelled >with a zero, as in 0\/\/|\|ing the box.
I had loads of fun reading it, as did a few of my colleagues. I have to admit I first dissmissed it due to its title, until I realised they spell ownership with 0 (zero). /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://magnus.therning.org/ Maturity is when you quit blaming other people for your problems -- Craig Burton
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
