Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Feb 2006 18:03 UTC, submitted by sharonpr
Linux "In various older studies, Microsoft and some analysts claimed Linux has a higher total cost of ownership than Windows. They attributed the difference mainly to higher system management costs, and concluded that the higher TCO outweighed the much lower license and acquisition costs for Linux. However, in a new study of over 200 Linux enterprises, Enterprise Management Associates found that this perception is no longer accurate. Sophisticated management tools now allow Linux management to be fast, effective, and inexpensive. With far lower acquisition costs, Linux is now a cost-effective alternative to Windows. EMA analyzed the cost factors cited in previous studies and found the following results." Please note that this study was sponsered by OSDL, so take out your salt while reading this.
Permalink for comment 95240
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Another study into TCO. Who is this for really for ,anyway? Organisations are so different and TCO is dependant on so many factors , is measured differently by different groups and is so difficult to accurately measure that the figures don't have much 'realism' value to them. You have to ask yourself the question what for ?

The main factor that drives TCO is the <italics> person in charge of the implementation </italics>. He/She is the one who raises the TCO up or down due to the correct /incorrect usage of the technology being employed.

It's stupid to make decisions based on TCO studies or extol the wonderful virtues of a particular product ,it's also stupid to try and use these metrics to make objective comparisons of different systems. Every situation is different, and a brain inside the IT officer is the only and I repeat the only objective factor useful for such comparisons ....

Reply Score: 1