Along the same lines, Microsoft took out a full page add in the March 2 edition of PC Magazine which shows that "Linux was found to be over 10 times more expensive than Windows Server 2003". Both boxes were used to serve files and web pages. Closer examination shows that the Windows server was running "on two 900 MHz Intel Xeon CPU's". The one Linux Image was running on "two z900 mainframe CPU's". I find it strange to use a big IBM mainframe to serve some files and web pages and nothing else. (This was on page 37 of the magazine). You can see more of this baloney at microsoft.com/getthefacts (lies). By the same logic, why would anyone ever by a bulldozer or end loader when a Geo Metro gets you to work just fine for much less money and better gas mileage. Microsoft must be really worried about Linux to publish such junk.
