A study conducted by Analyst Yankee Group, where the Group queried 509 companies, found Windows and Linux are equal, cost-wise, when it comes to maintaining servers equipped with either environment.
The Yankee Group study asked a number of questions concerning server environments and the software used to power them. These include security issues, downtime costs, server recovery time, as well as queries about ROI.
According to ComputerWeekly.com:
The study found that deployment costs, the cost of downtime and the time associated with internal and external security attacks were the key factors for businesses when considering their systems.
On security, Yankee found that users rated Linux and Windows Servers as almost equal. Yankee said Microsoft is “continuing to make significant progress in mending its security and patch management issues”.
Survey respondents said that Windows servers recover 30% faster from security attacks than Linux servers.
But the survey respondents also indicated that the hourly cost of Windows downtime was three- to- four-times higher than that of Linux server downtime. This was mainly because there is currently more crucial corporate data stored on Windows servers, said Yankee.
However, much like the study conducted by Security Innovation, are people going to take this data as it is presented? Or is there an ulterior motive behind Yankee’s study? When Security Innovation released their findings, many were quick to point out the study was commissioned by Microsoft and that Security Innovation used Microsoft’s server software to power their website.
In light of this, the question remains: Will Yankee’s findings be any easier to accept?
Chris Richardson is a search engine writer and editor for Murdok. Visit Murdok for the latest search news.
