Why Linux will win and Micro$oft will lose

[der.hans]

Am 10. Nov, 2001 schwätzte George Toft so:

> Short version: Converting to Linux costs much, much more.  An 
> example is presented for a "hypothetical" local company converting 
> their desktop to Linux.  Result is that it will cost over
> $900K - just to avoid a $150K license.

Short version: apples and oranges.

Medium version:

you're comparing maintenance fees vs. converting. Conversions *are* more
expensive. Standard m$ schedule requires conversions every couple of years.
Linux/*NIX doesn't.

Under Linux/*NIX upgrades might be conversions. They might not be. That
generally depends on how much the company wants to change stuff.

Using m$ it's almost always an upgrade, depends on how much m$ wants to
change. Customer doesn't get much say.

So, sure there's a one time hit, but they're gonna get that anyway by
sticking with m$. They key is whether or not they wanna keep taking those
hits when they don't need to.

Also note that only Free Software gives them the ability to choose whether
or not they're gonna take that hit, because it gives them the 4 freedoms
they need to be in charge of their own destiny. That doesn't mean they won't
still have costs, because they most certainly will. It does, however, give
them control of how they'll incur the costs and let them set the timetable.
Most likely it also allows them to greatly reduce the costs, even if they're
paying big blue for support.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  http://home.pages.de/~lufthans/   http://www.DevelopOnline.com/
#  Practice socially consious hedonism. Do whatever you want,
#  as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. - der.hans