Yankee Group : Windows 2003 Server is a more reliable server operating system than Linux

Good to see that independent research comes up with good results for Windows Server 2003 when it comes to reliability of the platform …

… According to the Yankee Group’s annual server reliability survey, only Unix-based operating systems such as HP-UX and Sun Solaris 10 beat Windows on uptime. Windows 2003 Server, in fact, led the popular Red Hat Enterprise Linux with nearly 20 percent more annual uptime. …

… The Yankee Group made a point of stressing that the survey was not sponsored or supported by any server OS maker….

Source : Techweb.com

Peter de Haas
Peter de Haas

Peter is gedreven door de eindeloze mogelijkheden die technologische vooruitgang biedt. Met een scherp oog voor het herkennen van oplossingen waar anderen slechts problemen zien, is hij een expert in digitale transformaties. Peter zet zich met volle overgave in om individuen, teams en organisaties te begeleiden bij het ontwikkelen van nieuwe vaardigheden en het implementeren van innovatieve oplossingen.

Artikelen: 3817

5 reacties

  1. Oxymoron!
    Have you /ever/ seen and independent study from DiDio [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_DiDio], you might as well ask Balmer or SCO for such an independent study.
    And then the real joke, “The Yankee Group states that Windows 2003 Server led Red Hat Enterprise Linux with nearly 20% more annual up time.”
    come again, 20% MORE uptime? (sounds like whiter than white to me?) but do some calculations with me:
    The article is rather contradictory because after they say Windows has 20% more uptime than Linux they then say:
    On average, individual enterprise Windows, Linux, and Unix servers experienced 3 to 5 failures per server per year in 2005, generating 10 to 19.5 hours of annual downtime for each server.
    So, lets assume (for the sake of argument), worst case figures for Linux – 19.5 hours of downtime a year – lets make it 20 hours for ease of calculation. And best case figures for Windows of no downtime.
    1 year = 365 days = 8760 hours
    So for Linux that’s 8760-20 = 8740 hours of uptime per year.
    Windows is alledgedly 20% better than this, so we get 8740*1.2 = 10488 Hours of uptime. Which is 437 days.
    Well, if you believe the Yankee group you might as well want to work for MSFT.. Ooops, you do! 🙂

  2. @ Bert,
    I welcome your comments and like a good discussion but would you please refrain from swearing on my blog ?
    From the rest of your comment I conclude that you question Yankee Group’s objectivity and the analyst in particular; that’s your good right. I have no reason to assume the information is incorrect.
    As far as the calculation based on your own assumption goes; this is a compliment on one hand (Microsoft Windows Server 2003 has 437 days uptuime a year) 😉
    My conclusion on your calculation is that you make the wrong assumptions. Microsoft has less than 100% uptime a year and Linux 20% less than Windows Servers; at least this is what the clipping from the report states.
    I am very proud to work for Microsoft 🙂

  3. well, i reread my post and i cant find any bad language in it. Unless you think saying Oxymoron is swearing.
    It is not. I was referring to Yankee / independent = an Oxymoron.
    hint: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymoron
    “An oxymoron (plural “oxymora” or “oxymorons”) (noun) is a figure of speech that combines two normally contradictory terms (e.g. “deafening silence”). Oxymoron is a Greek term derived from oxy (“sharp”) and moros (“dull”). Oxymora are a proper subset of the expressions called contradiction in terms. What distinguishes oxymora from other paradoxes and contradictions is that they are used intentionally, for rhetorical effect, and the contradiction is only apparent, as the combination of terms provides a novel expression of some concept.”

  4. and regarding “I have no reason to assume the information is incorrect.” I have. Apart from the infrormation about the yankee group and DiDio (right link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_DiDio ) I actually have lots of experience with data about maintaing Windows and Unix boxes. My current employer has about 2k boxes running for webhosting, half of it Windows, Half of it *nix (mostly Linux). And I /know/ what the difference is in uptime, maintenance cost and availability. I dont have to read some report on that.
    Do you have experience in maintaing huge farms of mixed environment? Now reread “I have no reason to assume the information is incorrect” and think about that…

Reacties zijn gesloten.