Linked by Ryan (aka Aurex) on Thu 10th Jun 2004 19:55 UTC
Ever since Microsoft started publicly outing Linux with their "Get the Facts" campaign, I have seen numerous articles and studies about the TCO (total cost of ownership) of both products in a head to head manner. However, I have yet to see one article discuss the TCO for home users and small businesses. I have thought long and crunched many numbers to devise a conclusion to this years old debate and I think the results are obvious... Windows is way more expensive than Linux.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
[quote]
But that built on junk is not good enough for ME and I do developement on the same computer as I email and surf, so windows is VERY expensive for ME. And there are LOTS of people out there that have hobbies or that like to do different stuff with there computer besides email and surf, windows is VERY expensive for THEM.
[/quote]
I agree with you. For MY purposes Linux (Libranet 2.8.1) is cheaper to run FOR ME, because the tools I use are free and would cost a BUNDLE for my windows box, which I only use for gaming.
HOWEVER, I was just trying to point out, that what is cheaper for YOU and I, may not be for others. Your basic user, needing a machine to e-mail family, write small papers for school/work/whatever can GET BY using a $500 machine with Win XP home preinstalled with Microsoft works (or OpenOffice.org), and using the default Windows tools for certain jobs (ie. burning audio cd's, unzipping files etc.).
I use Linux, but that doesn't mean I will always rant that it is the best/cheapest for everyone.