On Thu, 7 Feb 2002 Bob Tanner wrote: > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011030/tc/tech_intel_napster_dc_2.html I'm unable to access the above link -- "Document Not Found". > "In any case, using Linux is not much cheaper than Windows 2000. Although Linux > as an operating system is free, the real costs are related to the computers, and > support and maintenance, he said." > > I might be blinded by by religion and this group my not have the ability to let > the religion go, but can anyone look outside the box on this and comment? > > My perspective is Linux is much cheaper then Windows. Even if you pay for a > distro you are starting out ahead. Add the virus resistence, stability, > reliability, and security out of the box. Linux should be have a better TOC then > Win2k. I think there are many situations where Windows is cheaper, at least in the short run. For many businesses with an established Windows infrastructure, it would be difficult to justify the potential costs and risks associated with the rollout of a replacement system (training costs, potential bugs, etc). In addition, most businesses using Windows have a heavy dependence on application software that runs only that platform (Microsoft Office, anyone?). Such businesses are likely to have also developed custom, in-house applications that require Windows. This makes it very difficult to completely eliminate their reliance on Windows -- even if linux offers an exceptional value proposition, there will be one or more "must have" applications that force them back to using Windows. As I see it, the web levels the playing field to some degree, as does samba and even Java, making it possible to cost-justify the use of non-windows systems (anything but Microsoft? [0]) on server machines in the corporate data center. Indeed, linux has helped revitalize IBM's mainframe sales [1]. In addition, linux has proven highly effective in clustering systems [2] [3] [4] and is also useful for embedded devices such as TiVO [5] and network attached storage [6]. Linux has definitely become a player in the enterprise IT scene [7]. Maybe some day Wine [8] [9] will realize its promise and help liberate the desktop (where Windows is already entrenched [10]) from its seemingly perpetual enthrallment to Microsoft. I'm not holding my breath, though. Could be a good time to start helping with Wine development ... blah blah blah Joel 0.<http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2808135,00.html> 1.<http://www-916.ibm.com/press/prnews.nsf/jan/75738294A42413B185256AD10058E3E9> 2.<http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-275155.html> 3.<http://zdnet.com.com/2100-11-826047.html> 4.<http://www.internetweek.com/lead/lead060100.htm> 5.<http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=5160> 6.<http://www.itworld.com/Comp/3804/IWD010417hnvalinux/> 7.<http://www.nwfusion.com/archive/2001/124359_08-27-2001.html?nw> 8.<http://winehq.org/> 9.<http://codeweavers.com/technology/wine/> 10.<http://www.12code.net/LinuxWorld2002/linuxexpo2002.htm>