Is Microsoft/Yahoo about Windows' server platform failure?

#1 guruparan on 15 Feb 2008 - 11:37

Windows Server is powerful to handle those kind of "BIG" transactions...this article is really a BS

(i am not into a flame war though...both linux & windows are powerful)..my company uses Windows server for its retail commercial website which is the major page for the very huge customer base)

(5 replies) #2 mrmckeb on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:17

FFS. You guys should send Daniel Fleshbourne a warning for trying to start a flame war. This article is stupid, bias and has no real credibility. It says "Windows is nad for web hosting because most of the biggest companies don't use it".

#2.1 tiagosilva29 on 15 Feb 2008 - 13:46

To warn Daniel, the administrator?

#2.2 +GreyWolfSC on 15 Feb 2008 - 14:31

(mrmckeb said @ #2)

FFS. You guys should send Daniel Fleshbourne a warning for trying to start a flame war. This article is stupid, bias and has no real credibility. It says "Windows is nad for web hosting because most of the biggest companies don't use it".

99% of his articles are crap, the other 1% are irrelevant.

#2.3 CdCViRus on 16 Feb 2008 - 03:30

(tiagosilva29 said @ #2.1)

To warn Daniel, the administrator?

why, is he above the law? Or being an admin suddenly allows him to bash one and all?

#2.4 RAID 0 on 16 Feb 2008 - 22:50

(tiagosilva29 said @ #2.1)

To warn Daniel, the administrator?

Welcome to the "Do as I say, not as I do" mentality of mods/admins.

#2.5 whocares78 on 17 Feb 2008 - 09:30

one of the biggest loads of BS i have ever read..i get the unprofesional bit, but this news is just crap

maybe they shoudl change the moto to 'where unproffesional journalism is just that and worse'

(9 replies) #3 bobbba on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:22

"Its software platform has been a disaster supporting its search engine, email and other free services."

because there are so many problems with Hotmail, Microsoft.com, MSN etc.

You only need to look at the market share of MS web servers to realise that they've got nothing to worry about.

While credit for the original article might not go to you, spreading fud like this as news arguably does...

Last edited by bobbba on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:29

#3.1 markjensen on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:33

Actually, when Microsoft took over Hotmail and switched it to Windows-based, they ran into many issues and some shortcomings with Windows.
http://www.securityoffice.net/mssecrets/hotmail.html

The Reg (of course) picked it up and summarized a few points here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/11/21/ms_paper_touts_unix/ if you don't want to read the whole source report.

#3.2 bobbba on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:37

(markjensen said @ #3.1)

Actually, when Microsoft took over Hotmail and switched it to Windows-based, they ran into many issues and some shortcomings with Windows.
http://www.securityoffice.net/mssecrets/hotmail.html

The Reg (of course) picked it up and summarized a few points here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/11/21/ms_paper_touts_unix/ if you don't want to read the whole source report.

LOL, how relevent is that today given that it was 6+ years a go...

#3.3 ricknl on 15 Feb 2008 - 13:06

Microsoft acquired Hotmail in 1997. Back then there was not even Windows 2000 (which was released in 1999) but Windows NT.

#3.4 markjensen on 15 Feb 2008 - 14:30

(bobbba said @ #3.2)

LOL, how relevent is that today given that it was 6+ years a go...

I was merely responding to your post regarding the quoted "Its software platform has been a disaster supporting its search engine, email and other free services.". Surely you can look up and see where you made that the topic at hand, no?

I was pointing out that there had been problems (in meeting-speak, "challenges" ) with getting their software to perform matching tasks that were previously handled by a unix derivative.

Just as Windows has improved over the time period since, so has the competition.

#3.5 +GreyWolfSC on 15 Feb 2008 - 14:33

(markjensen said @ #3.1)

Actually, when Microsoft took over Hotmail and switched it to Windows-based, they ran into many issues and some shortcomings with Windows.
http://www.securityoffice.net/mssecrets/hotmail.html

The Reg (of course) picked it up and summarized a few points here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/11/21/ms_paper_touts_unix/ if you don't want to read the whole source report.

The Reg is crap. That's why Daniel gets slammed every time he references the site.

#3.6 CaKeY on 15 Feb 2008 - 21:43

(GreyWolfSC said @ #3.5)

The Reg is crap. That's why Daniel gets slammed every time he references the site.

Then read the original report Einstein.

#3.7 dvb2000 on 16 Feb 2008 - 00:24

(markjensen said @ #3.1)

Actually, when Microsoft took over Hotmail and switched it to Windows-based, they ran into many issues and some shortcomings with Windows.
http://www.securityoffice.net/mssecrets/hotmail.html

Great article - Although it actually proves that Windows OS has a far greater depth of features and usability. The shortomings all seem to stem from from Unix sysadmins who were taken out of the picture for the actual conversion.

Love the following quotes from the article:

It was clear from the responses that some people from the UNIX side of the house cannot distinguish our different systems that are marketed under the Windows brand; there was an inbuilt assumption that Windows 2000 shares the features and faults of Windows 95.

When deployment came near, the Operations staff had to learn the new tools and paradigms. Their existence proved enough; the main interest of Operations staff is, after all, to run and administer the system, and once they found that there were tools, whether custom-built or standard, that did the job well enough, they were able to take control and gain a sense of ownership. Some standard one-day courses were also given to the staff, to prepare them for handling system debugging, hotfix application and so on. By this time, the staff had become convinced that Windows is, after all, a real operating system with surprising richness.

#3.8 toadeater on 16 Feb 2008 - 06:33

(ricknl said @ #3.3)

Microsoft acquired Hotmail in 1997. Back then there was not even Windows 2000 (which was released in 1999) but Windows NT.

Wait until they try using Windows Server 2008.

#3.9 whocares78 on 17 Feb 2008 - 09:34

(toadeater said @ #3.

(ricknl said @ #3.3)

Microsoft acquired Hotmail in 1997. Back then there was not even Windows 2000 (which was released in 1999) but Windows NT.

Wait until they try using Windows Server 2008.

some of the biggest hosting companies in the world are already using 2008 server..

#4 Eros on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:24

LOL. Look at the source of this article 'Linux-Watch'. So what you can expect from them ? praising Microsoft & its product ?

#5 bobbba on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:33

Source: Linux Watch

Last edited by bobbba on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:43

#6 xml on 15 Feb 2008 - 12:33

What is this? Are the news posters for neowin being recruited at slashdot?!

(1 reply) #7 hjf288 on 15 Feb 2008 - 14:06

I use both Windows and Linux but I'm calling BS on this article...

Windows powers some of the largest Far eastern MMORPGs, they are all built for MS SQL/Windows... more or less.

#7.1 tiagosilva29 on 15 Feb 2008 - 14:36

Monoculture: {Read1, Read2}

(2 replies) #8 Hosser on 15 Feb 2008 - 14:16

Er, what?

eBay.com runs on IIS 5.0 (Windows 2000 Server)

:/

#8.1 Frazell Thomas on 15 Feb 2008 - 14:32

Yeap... The proof is in the pudding

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?ur...://www.ebay.com

Another unintelligent MS bashing article :|

Why can't people just realize its whatever the needs are specifically to each problem that determines what OS is better...

Hell today MS runs all of its own stuff on Windows Server and .NET... They have some of the most popular applications on the web from Windows Update on down...

#8.2 prince_niceguy on 15 Feb 2008 - 22:29

some interesting findings from the same site

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/stats/topsites

top ten sites use solaris, linux/apache combo...

first site to use windows/IIS combinations comes at number 13 and guess which one is that microsoft.com :-)...

while www.ebay.com might be using windows/iis combo, my.ebay.com, search.ebay.com use windows/apache combo... interesting to me... why to use apache if IIS is already there???

#9 C_Guy on 15 Feb 2008 - 15:33

Ha ha ha ha... Yeah that's it. Yahoo didn't decline the offer because they are greedy, noooo it's because of Microsoft's server OS.

Nice laugh to start off a Friday

#10 neufuse on 15 Feb 2008 - 15:44

I'm sorry but what? If Windows Server can run the NASDAQ exchange just fine (win server and sql server 2005) with over 2 billion exchanges a day, why the heck couldnt it do more then that? heck it's used in way larger projects also... this article is pure BS

#11 Intelman on 15 Feb 2008 - 18:37

I believe Charles on C9 said that google uses asp.net for osmething, I just don't remember what that was. gmail, writely...something..

www.newegg.com uses Windows, we all love them

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=www.newegg.com

#12 myonlyclone on 15 Feb 2008 - 18:49

#13 waxman830 on 15 Feb 2008 - 19:07

Snore!!!!!!!!

#14 mrJef on 15 Feb 2008 - 19:53

I did a quick look at some "popular" website which would have a large amount of traffic, or at least be popular in peoples minds. I checked to see how many were running IIS, and created a list.

You can see the list here:
Large Web Sites running on Microsoft IIS

I'll add more as I find them of course

Funny how Ebay is on the list

#15 xsliver on 15 Feb 2008 - 20:20

I work at eBay and we use windows.... this is 100% FUD.

#16 dvb2000 on 15 Feb 2008 - 22:26

Total nonsense (and also sent to you by a "linux watch" reader!

.

If anything it would be more to do with the almost total failure of their MSN portal/search engine to capture any significant tgraffic - even thought they force all their hotmail customers there when they log off!

I'm surprised they would consider buying one flawed model (yahoo) when it is pretty similar to the own flawed model. They need to realise we are not interested in news/sport/ads etc when we want to find some info.

Google has had it right all along, and have become so succesful because of it.

(2 replies) #17 prince_niceguy on 15 Feb 2008 - 22:40

some interesting findings from the same site

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/stats/topsites

top ten sites use solaris, linux/apache combo...

first site to use windows/IIS combinations comes at number 13 and guess which one is that microsoft.com :-)...

while www.ebay.com might be using windows/iis combo, my.ebay.com, search.ebay.com use windows/apache combo... interesting to me... why to use apache if IIS is already there???

#17.1 dvb2000 on 15 Feb 2008 - 23:28

(prince_niceguy said @ #17)

some interesting findings from the same site

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/stats/topsites

top ten sites use solaris, linux/apache combo...

If you are going to spread FUD and quote sources which tell a different story, you and your posts will ignored!

From your supplied link above

the 7 of the top 10 sites are all google.

the actual identified operating system is:

5 = unknown
3 =linux
1 = freebsd
1 = solaris

And as most security people will tell you, the OS/web server "identifiers" are often spoofed anyway!

#17.2 neufuse on 16 Feb 2008 - 01:18

(prince_niceguy said @ #17)

some interesting findings from the same site

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/stats/topsites

top ten sites use solaris, linux/apache combo...

first site to use windows/IIS combinations comes at number 13 and guess which one is that microsoft.com :-)...

while www.ebay.com might be using windows/iis combo, my.ebay.com, search.ebay.com use windows/apache combo... interesting to me... why to use apache if IIS is already there???

You can not go by netcraft... remember lots of places use Caching sites which run on linux... heck MS ran a cach site on linux because its caching partner used linux! that started a firestorm of "MS USES LINUX!!!!!!!!" comments... which had NOTHING to do with MS..

#18 mrJef on 15 Feb 2008 - 23:27

Prince,

Uhm...most of the top 10 are just localized versions of Google, which I don't think counts since it's expected they would be the same platform

Use the ComScore Ranking list if you want to rank them by aggregate property.

#19 amb7247 on 16 Feb 2008 - 00:52

I think it's pretty interesting how the kernel in windows vista will be updated via SP1 to match the kernel in windows server 2008.

#20 neufuse on 16 Feb 2008 - 01:13

The fact the guy said eBay doesn't run on windows proves the point the guy has NO idea what he is talking about ... eBay runs on IIS servers which is umm Windows Server? it has an Oracle backend or at least it use to... but that is just database... Oracle and SQL Server perform exactly the same anymore

Edit: nope take that back they use Oracle AND MS SQL Server! just foudn an article about eBay's setup

#21 Drestin on 16 Feb 2008 - 04:09

The server with the #1 longest uptime in all of netcraft history is ... a windows 2003 server. The #3 longest uptime is running windows 2000 (yes, 2000).

The most reliable hosting services include two using windows 2003 and one using Windows 2000

36% of active sites run on Windows servers

Some of the largest and busiest sites on the 'net run on Windows servers (some of these are behind spoofed server headers and/or unix-based load balancers so that their true OS can't be determined readily).

NASDAQ, Microsoft, eBay, Dell, HP, hotmail, usatoday, myspace - all run on Windows servers.

This article is such BS - it just demonstrates once again that linvocates can only lie in order to try to cover for living in their mom's basements and smelling bad.

#22 James812 on 16 Feb 2008 - 22:26

Stupid article full of bs. Wasted 60 seconds of my life. Thank you.

#23 +rm20010 on 17 Feb 2008 - 20:04

The original article doesn't mention who from Linux Watch wrote this, but I'd bet it's the same guy who called Vista crap for requiring a discrete GPU for Linux.

#24 DeMo_BR on 18 Feb 2008 - 03:12

Yeah stupid article.
FYI.. Bradesco (the largest private bank in Brazil) runs on Windows.

Neowin.net