Re: Sure, of course
"How large is the largest network you ever managed? How many servers (win and *nix), and what versions? How many users and applications? I'm sure most of those asserting you can migrate from OS A to OS B in a few days, never managed more than a few servers with some simplle, standard configurations, with a few standard apps and users - and never handled issues like special hardware support, fault tolerance, high availability, tiered storage, backups and so on... nor ever cared about security, really."
Trying to get passed your condescending tone - you might think it strange, but you are actually reinforcing some of my points. That is exactly what I meant by "broad sweeping statements". Trevor often makes these all-or-nothing statements - which are true, for a specific network size, industry, situation etc. But are also inaccurate for other industries, network sizes, software applications etc. But he more often than not "forgets" to qualify his statements. Of course there are plenty of scenarios where even migrating a file server from Windows to Linux can be *nearly* impossible, but he either neglects to mention that it only applies to specific situations - or the general tone of the article implies this is the case for most scenarios. There will be plenty of people and companies for whom migrating from WS2003 to Linux (or something else, if you wish) is a perfectly feasible choice. But I don't see that given any real credence in the article. Hence it is rather hard to take seriously his assertions that he is unbiased when it comes to Microsoft stuff.
The IT industry is not only made up of sysadmins managing thousands of nodes and working on the big cool stuff. The rest of us also read The Reg you know - so qualifying a bit more carefully your statements won't make you sound like you have your head permanently in the clouds (yes, you can take that both ways).