Microsoft Final Solution 2000

[Richard Ibbotson]

George

> My research indicates that for small workgroups (a stand-alone
> would be a workgroup of one), Microsoft-based platforms are less
> expensive than Unix (even Linux) based platforms.  The admin labor
> (Windows admins being cheaper than Unix admins) offsets the
> licensing cost and productivity loss during unplanned outages.

Yes .... I think you can argue forever over this kind of thing  ?  I 
know that TCO is an important thing in some places and in business 
circles it mostly dominates decision making processes - as far as I 
am aware.    But ...  our main problem over here is finding a budget 
in the first place. And .. ownership ....  ?  Who wants it ?  The 
software that is.

There is a big argument here for free or low cost Linux software in 
schools which to us makes a lot of sense.  Linux for medical records 
?  There is also a general feeling that TCO of MS products for 
medical records and general office use may actually be something that 
we can't or shouldn't do.  Our own general practitioners are spilt 
down the middle about the use of high cost MS products or low cost 
Linux.  There is also the argument that mixed networks are the kind 
of thing that you should invest in.

Then again... when you get into projects of this scale politics and 
not common sense may be the reason for a particular kind of decision ?
That's over here- that is - things in each State over there are 
different and I'm sure that many people will not understand our 
problems over here.


Thank you



-- 
Richard