Okay, BSOD = Kernel Panic = Bad Driver or Failing Device
I've seen BSOD very little on NT 5 based systems, unless I install a hacked, or "as close as I can get". Usually old device that has not NT 5 (2k/XP/2k3) drivers. Or there is a problem device, usually overheat, dry joints, or cracked or static damaged circuits.
Easier than what? Seems (reading the report) easier than Win98 with third party network management. They seem to be comparing the network management built in to 2003 against 3rd party tools. Open Source LDAP for example, maybe Novel?
The other Comparison they make is between AD and GPMC in 98... well that's not OSS either, though you can (as the school where I work does) easily dump it and
AD for a third party Registry Tweaker that applies a profile to a machine, and/or user account on connection to the domain and login. Or, as the school I was reading about had done, get in contractors to do the tweaks for you... Though I wouldn't and I don't think our school (so far from the capital) could afford it.
What they clearly aren't comparing it to, is a system with BSD Servers, and Linux Workstations running Wine... for example.
The reason (in my country) that they can't possibly make that comparison
is that Microsoft Office is part of the National Curriculum.
The obvious OSS network setup would implement OOo, K-Office or StarOffice... Heck it would be easier to implement Corel WordPerfect Office in an OSS network than MSO. However it is still not impossible. Office 2003 works under Wine, it's just the installer that doesn't, the solution is to image it's installation on a Windows machine and transfer the installed image to the Linux Desktop.
The reason we can't go OSS, for the desktop either, is because "Microsoft Explorer" is also part of our curriculum training. (And as further evidence of government complacency in this Microsoft Education conspiricy the ECDL
) Though the rate it changes, I don't see the point in teaching it to Secondary School kids.
Anyway, I do know schools (Primary and outside or national borders) which standardise on Mac based systems... These are only partially OSS. OSS OS, Closed UI. I'm not sure how OS X server works, they seem to go for BSD servers, so I presume there must be a reason for that. It may be purely financial though.
Interestingly, if you trained our kids on MSO Mac, they would fail their exams, because the questions expect MSO Windows answers which differ considerably from the way you would do things on the same product released for a different OS.
In our Secondary Education system, there really is no other choice than Microsoft Windows on our Workstations... The only thing we do have some control over, in terms of choice, is the Servers and staff only machine, like teacher laptops. If they implement distribution of Windows Profiles and Security Policies, provide simple File Shares and such, then we can use what we like. Some of our teachers have plucked up the courage to run Ubunto on their laptop.
Therefore, I can only assume that this survey is comparing server technologies in a Windows Network environment... 2003 AD is indeed the ideal solution for Domain Controllers most of the time, but I think some Linux distributions can
handle AD. The question then is, considering in-house support is paid less than the cleaning staff in schools here, can they afford the staff training to manage AD in linux... Again, Schools get free training sessions on using Microsoft Systems from the government. There are many such perks to compensate for the naff wage.
They are right. Microsoft is cheaper than OSS in schools here
. Because of government subsidy. The TCO is quite low anyway, the training will cost with OSS, where the cost is to the Government not the School with Microsoft.
In any event, this is a nonsense survey reinforcing the current tunnel vision Microsoft has encouraged national leaderships to follow. I often think there must be some serious "back handers" going on to enforce this. I may well think that... they couldn't possibly comment.