Is Microsoft Really Less Expensive Than Linux? (CIO) [LWN.net]

Is Microsoft Really Less Expensive Than Linux? (CIO)

Posted Sep 11, 2003 22:04 UTC (Thu) by neoprene (guest, #8520)
Parent article: Is Microsoft Really Less Expensive Than Linux? (CIO)

"The savings are impressive. For large corporations, the cost of using Microsoft products for development and deployment plus three years of maintenance was 28 percent less than the cost for J2EE/Linux. And for medium-size companies, the Microsoft route was 25 percent cheaper."

... and not to mention the added benefit you get of being completely dependant on a convicted monopoly in addition to whatever games and licensing scams MS may add in the future.

"Linux is not a product, it is a process" - Ian Murdoc.

The "suits" keep treating Linux and other GPL programs as "products" making their comparisons limp and hobble.

Without a monopoly on desk-top OS, M$ would be just another software vendor.
Linux is likely to become adopted as THE desk-top OS _STANDARD_. Widely accepted Standards are extremely vaulable, like the TCP/IP communications protocol and the English language. Keeping such things proprietary is not only not smart, it is also stupid.

Microsoft better hang on to their $45 billion in cash, thats likely to be the last Judas money they will ever see.

I expect to see even more studies how .NET will save the planet. ( .net is a URL nomenclature, somebody stop M$ from using this and dictionary WORDs for proprietary products)

(Log in to post comments)