Re: Some Obvious Reasons.....
I've been using Linux myself since about '96. Pretty much abandoned windows entirely in '98. But even I don't believe this post. It has gotten better over the years. My job has been supporting Linux-based(almost exclusively) infrastructures for the past 12 years. I've had Linux as my desktop for 14 years.
No licenses for Linux ? Tell that to Red Hat - the #1 Linux distributor in the world. Licenses are not an issue for most companies, especially if they are priced fairly. Red hat did jack their licensing costs up by as much as 60% when RHEL6 came out, but it's still worth it. License management is there too.
You can argue that Linux has better functionality but I would say it does not. It has different functionality. There are tons of applications that run only on Windows+IIS. Also of course Exchange, MSSQL, tons of enterprise applications that are run inside of things like XenApp or remote desktop.
Linux can outperform windows in some cases, I'd say it's more of a draw here really. Performance is good enough that it doesn't really matter anymore.
I'm still far more comfortable using Linux, I can get around in it easier, all that. I think Linux is a better platform in general (I like the Unix "strings" approach to scripting vs windows "object" based). Linux in general is much more embeddable in enterprise things whether it is storage, networking or other types of appliances. But in most cases you'd never know Linux was powering the system. I think EMC still has storage systems that run on windows(Clariion - unless things have changed in the past many years) that are used by a lot of folks.
I used to have a blind hatred for Microsoft many years ago, but not now. I actually feel sorry for them, they have lost their way. Windows server does seem to be one of their bright spots still. 2012 looks to have a ton of cool innovations (I don't plan to use it either way), in some cases putting it well ahead of linux (file systems for one - btrfs doesn't count it's not stable).
The state of file systems on linux in general (at least the open source ones) is pretty pathetic right now (has been for years). Functionality is little changed from ext2 days other than journalling. I can't even use ext4 on Ubuntu (10.04) on my enterprise servers because of a bug which causes ext4 to hang under load. ext3 works fine though. I spent weeks trying to find resolution but I think I am the only person who has the problem (and I've seen it consistently on dozens of systems).
I've never been fond of the ACLs in windows that is one area of endless frustration for me whenever I have to deal with it. (by the same token SELinux is absolute shit too I disable it everywhere - nothing but headaches). Of the hundreds of boxes I have managed over the years (99% linux) only 3 have been compromised. Two of them were linux, and were installed before I started at the company, both were internet facing that hadn't had updates in ages. In both cases the results of the breach were minor, no damage in either case.
The 3rd system was a FreeBSD box. I didn't manage it directly (this was back in 2000), but my friend did (it was a porn site). He used telnet to administrate the system. I convinced him to switch to SSH. 6 months later he was hacked by an SSH bug.
Gotten off topic. I think Windows server 2012 will be good - with all the new features people may want to wait until SP1 or something, but windows going back to 2003 server at least in my opinion have been good products for their respective markets. My skills are Linux and I will continue to seek employment where Linux is used, but at the same time admit windows is fine too for those skilled in that trade.