[« I'll give them credit for telling the truth] [Interesting sports metaphors department.... »]
08/26/2004: This doesn't surprise me in the least...
A report in The Inquirer states that Microsoft was spanked by the The UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for issuing misleading advertising. If you've been playing the home game, you know that Microsoft has been trying to convince businesses that the total cost of ownership (TCO) for Linux servers is greater than the total cost of ownership for Microsoft windows servers, despite the fact that Linux can be acquired for free (or, if you want some technical support, for a quite reasonable cost) while Windows licenses cost an arm and a leg (at least).
Apparently, when calculating their TCO figures, Microsoft ran Linux on an IBM mainframe, while the Windows installation ran on much cheaper, server class hardware. The ASA concluded (correctly, IMO), that a normal user would miss the fact that Microsoft's TCO calculations included the cost of the hardware, and that a normal user would assume that the cost comparisons merely reflected the cost of the operating systems involved.
Len on 08.26.04 @ 07:42 AM CST
