Editing Microsoft (section)

===Marketing===
[[File:Windows 8 Launch Event in Akihabara, Tokyo.jpg|thumb|[[Windows 8]] Launch Event in [[Akihabara]], [[Tokyo]], on October 25, 2012]]
In 2004, Microsoft commissioned research firms to do independent studies comparing the [[total cost of ownership]] (TCO) of [[Windows Server 2003]] to [[Linux]]; the firms concluded that companies found Windows easier to administrate than Linux, thus those using Windows would administrate faster resulting in lower costs for their company (i.e. lower TCO).<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/business/158237_msftresearch27.html |title=Studies on Linux help their patron: Microsoft |last=Bishop |first=Todd |work=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |date=January 27, 2004 |access-date=July 16, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101205010533/http://www.seattlepi.com/business/158237_msftresearch27.html |archive-date=December 5, 2010 |url-status=live}}</ref> This spurred a wave of related studies; a study by the [[Yankee Group]] concluded that upgrading from one version of Windows Server to another costs a fraction of the [[switching barriers|switching costs]] from Windows Server to Linux, although companies surveyed noted the increased security and reliability of Linux servers and concern about being locked into using Microsoft products.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/yankee_independently_pits_windows_tco_vs_linux_tco.html |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130104134612/http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/yankee_independently_pits_windows_tco_vs_linux_tco.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=January 4, 2013 |title=Yankee Independently Pits Windows TCO vs. Linux TCO |last=Foley |first=Mary Jo |work=eWeek |date=March 24, 2004 |access-date=July 14, 2010}}</ref> Another study, released by the [[Open Source Development Labs]], claimed that the Microsoft studies were "simply outdated and one-sided" and their survey concluded that the TCO of Linux was lower due to Linux administrators managing more servers on average and other reasons.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2150210/linux-fans-hit-back-microsoft |title=Linux fans hit back at Microsoft TCO claims |last=Jaques |first=Robert |work=vnunet.com |date=February 13, 2006 |access-date=August 18, 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080724013740/http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2150210/linux-fans-hit-back-microsoft |archive-date=July 24, 2008 }}</ref>

As part of the "Get the Facts" campaign, Microsoft highlighted the [[.NET Framework]] trading platform that it had developed in partnership with [[Accenture]] for the [[London Stock Exchange]], claiming that it provided "[[High availability|five nines]]" reliability. After suffering extended downtime and unreliability<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/4676369/Seven-hour-LSE-blackout-caused-by-double-glitch.html |newspaper=[[The Daily Telegraph|The Telegraph]] |title=Seven-hour LSE blackout caused by double glitch |first=Rowena |last=Mason |date=September 10, 2008 |location=London |access-date=April 3, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171225225348/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/4676369/Seven-hour-LSE-blackout-caused-by-double-glitch.html |archive-date=December 25, 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |work=[[BBC News Online]] |publisher=BBC |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8380607.stm |title=London Stock Exchange trading hit by technical glitch |date=November 26, 2009 |access-date=September 30, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130726144134/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8380607.stm |archive-date=July 26, 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> the London Stock Exchange announced in 2009 that it was planning to drop its Microsoft solution and switch to a Linux-based one in 2010.<ref>{{Cite web |publisher=ITWire |url=http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/the-linux-distillery/28359-london-stock-exchange-gets-the-facts-and-dumps-windows-for-linux |title=London Stock Exchange gets the facts and dumps Windows for Linux |first=David M. |last=Williams |date=October 8, 2009 |access-date=September 30, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110716005714/http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/the-linux-distillery/28359-london-stock-exchange-gets-the-facts-and-dumps-windows-for-linux |archive-date=July 16, 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |publisher=[[Slashdot]] |url=http://linux.slashdot.org/story/09/10/06/1742203/London-Stock-Exchange-Rejects-NET-For-Open-Source |title=London Stock Exchange Rejects .NET For Open Source |date=October 6, 2009 |access-date=September 30, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110811012038/http://linux.slashdot.org/story/09/10/06/1742203/London-Stock-Exchange-Rejects-NET-For-Open-Source |archive-date=August 11, 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref>

In 2012, Microsoft hired a political pollster named Mark Penn, whom ''The New York Times'' called "famous for bulldozing" his political opponents<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/technology/microsoft-battles-google-by-hiring-political-brawler-mark-penn.html?_r=0 |work=The New York Times |first1=Nick |last1=Wingfield |title=Microsoft Battles Google by Hiring Political Brawler Mark Penn |date=December 14, 2012 |access-date=February 19, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170312135416/http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/technology/microsoft-battles-google-by-hiring-political-brawler-mark-penn.html?_r=0 |archive-date=March 12, 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> as Executive Vice-president, Advertising and Strategy. Penn created a series of negative advertisements targeting one of Microsoft's chief competitors, [[Google]]. The advertisements, called "[[Scroogled]]", attempted to make the case that Google is "screwing" consumers with search results rigged to favor Google's paid advertisers, that [[Gmail]] violates the privacy of its users to place ad results related to the content of their emails and shopping results, which favor Google products. Tech publications like [[TechCrunch]] were highly critical of the advertising campaign,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://techcrunch.com/2013/02/10/scroogled-why-so-negative-microsoft/ |title=Scroogled: Why So Negative, Microsoft? |work=TechCrunch |date=February 10, 2013 |access-date=April 18, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140317120624/http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/10/scroogled-why-so-negative-microsoft/ |archive-date=March 17, 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> while Google employees embraced it.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/11/21/googlers-love-microsofts-scroogled-gear-mug-and-shirts-sell-out/ |title=Googlers Love Microsoft's 'Scroogled' Gear. Mug and Shirts Sell Out. |first=Kashmir |last=Hill |date=November 21, 2013 |work=Forbes |access-date=September 5, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729205754/https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/11/21/googlers-love-microsofts-scroogled-gear-mug-and-shirts-sell-out/ |archive-date=July 29, 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>