Posted on 12/13/2004 11:57:11 AM PST by N3WBI3
TCO study: Linux wins again By Sam Varghese December 13, 2004
German study claims Linux lowers TCO An updated Linux vs Windows TCO study has found that a 250-seat company can end up saving 36 percent if it were to equip its users with the open source operating system and applications that run on it.
The study, by Melbourne-based open source firm Cybersource, found that even use of a commercial Linux distribution such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux, would result in 27 percent lower costs.
The study was first issued in April 2002. "We have now updated this report to accommodate the changes in both platforms. We have also extended the model to increase its relevance and accuracy," said Con Zymaris, chief executive officer of Cybersource.
The study covers the average requirements over a period of three years. Zymaris said the timeframe was chosen because the costs of upgrading had to be borne repeatedly in the case of Windows.
He said given the fact that the company deals in open source products, four aspects had been factored in to tip the scales towards Microsoft:
The model was not modified to to reflect research by the Robert Frances Group which showed that Linux needed 82 percent fewer staff resources. The costs of malware - viruses, spyware, worms, keyloggers, adware - were not taken into account. Zymaris said every research point found had suggested that this cost was essentially and predominantly a Windows platform cost, resulting in billions lost by business every year.
Costs which arose when systems need to be pre-emptively rebooted or crashed, resulting in unscheduled downtime, were not taken into account. "All our research indicates that Linux rarely if ever suffers such problems and open source platforms on the whole are extremely robust," Zymaris said.
"Finally, because Microsoft has claimed that introducing Linux into an environment will lead to increased reliance on external consultants, we have tripled the amount budgeted for such requirements on the Linux models," he said.
Advertisement Advertisement"The costing models include expenses such as workstations, servers, networking, IT staff, consultancy fees, internet service charges, file, mail and print servers, e-commerce servers, SQL and network infrastructure servers, internet and intranet servers, line-of-business software, desktop productivity applications, external training, printers as well as miscellaneous systems costs," Zymaris said.
Ping
Linux TCO Ping
The problem is that most IT/IS students aren't trained with Linux, and instead seek Microsoft certification. If you can hire enough Linux-knowledgable staffers, you're set. But they're a rare commodity.
Yup, study was HOPELESSLY biased in favor of WINDOWS (on purpose), and in spite of that the numbers still said 36% saving by moving to Linux.
Preditction: Here's where the Windows fans rush in again and say Linux is unuseable by mere mortals....
I tried Mandrake Linux. I cannot fathom where they come up with these conclusions. Windows XP is lightyears ahead of Linux!
Wasn't there a recent study that said TCO was less with the microsoft products.....?
The problem is that MS certification is no indication that a candidate can handle the job.
Wow, even heavily weighted the TCO comparison against Windows by removing some of the heaviest Windows costs and upping one of the Linux costs. Linux still came out ahead.
Your conclusions are based on what????
The truth of the matter is that windwos Certification isn't work squat, and any teenager that has used windows for a few months can do as well as the certificate holders.
But the study took this into consideration, and it was STILL cheaper to retrain you windows techie that to keep on running windows.
Whoops. Meant "for Windows"
What version of Linux? Are you talking Desktop or Server?
Betamax was better than VHS!
Apple's operating system was better than Windows!
Direct Democracy is better than Republicanism!
Target is better than Wal-Mart!
Okay, here I am. "vi" is THE text editor from HELL.
;O)
I agree that Windows certification is meaningless. People still go for it and businesses still want it, though.
Naa I cut my UNIX teeth on Solaris and I moved into Linux just fine.
Yup. Paid for by microsoft.
This study was actually performed by a Windows oriented company.
You are right on the money. I'm sure there allot of good IT people with MS certs, but you don't have to be that good to get one. I have a Cisco certification(CCNA) and I was passing MS cert tests without even studying the material. Recently, I was speaking with the owner of a consulting firm and he said a CCNA cert(cisco's lowest) is equivalent to a MSCE cert(microsoft's highest).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.