Linked by David Adams on Sun 11th Jul 2010 19:43 UTC
Microsoft U.K. government staff suggested replacing Microsoft Corp. operating systems on computers with free alternatives in response to a call for ideas for Prime Minister David Cameron's cost-cutting drive.
Permalink for comment 433183
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Until they need support
by nt_jerkface on Mon 12th Jul 2010 01:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Until they need support"
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26


Excuse my sarcasm but nothing irritates the crap out of me more than people who make the logic fail that you did - and the price for large enterprise customers is very low when compared to what Microsoft provides.


On-site Linux support costs more and that is a factor that needs to be taken into account.


Cost isn't the only consideration though, the lack of vendor lock in also adds savings that cannot be calculated via the usual accounting methods - as the old adage goes, accountants can tell you the cost of something but not the value.


Switching to Linux doesn't come with a lock-in? What about dependence on Oracle for OpenOffice? There is also a lock-in to a smaller business software library.

I think a case can be made for installing OO on XP boxes instead of upgrading an older version of Office but completely switching to Linux is likely to incur costs rather than savings.

Reply Parent Score: 1