"IBM’s endorsement of Linux has added credibility and an illusion of support and accountability," Ballmer said.
OK, so its caught up to windows which has had that illusion of support and accountability since circa 1990.
Linux’s weakness, however, was the lack of a central body investing in its development in areas such as engineering, manageability, compatibility and security, Ballmer said.
Ok, this is the whole one man’s trash thing. Open Source advocates would argue that this is linux’s biggest STRENGTH. Plus key subsystems- like the linux kernel – have a central body overseeing development.
First, the Windows Server 2003 generation of products offers stronger performance and value than Linux in most IT scenarios.
The biggest value that it can provide are the lower initial costs associated with staying on the Microsoft upgrade cycle compared to the cost of migrating systems and people to linux. So, if you’re a Microsoft shop you’ll stay one because its still cheaper to do so. Same goes if you are a Linux shop.