Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Jan 2007 16:56 UTC, submitted by Robert
Novell and Ximian Novell might have signed a patent and interoperability deal with Microsoft Corp but it is not about to give up competing with the software giant and last week released a study that suggests its Linux desktop product is better value than Windows Vista. The company's competitive guide compares SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop with Windows Vista and claims that the Linux product provides 90% of Vista's functionality and 10% of the price.
Thread beginning with comment 204552
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
flanque
Member since:
2005-12-15

That's a bit over the top.

Windows is properly managed and administered across thousands of organisations with greater numbers than that. I've worked simultaneously at two over the past two years where more or less there's relatively little administrative effort and costs compared to other parts of the infrastructure.

With the appropriate processes, controls and support models it's not all that difficult to do. Certainly not worth crushing any part of your anatomy.

Reply Parent Score: 3

archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Yet, studies have shown that it requires less administrators to manage and maintain a the equivalent number of Linux servers compared to Windows...I imagine the same would be true of Linux desktops.

Reply Parent Score: 3

flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

That depends on which study you read and whom it is sponsored or paid by. Blanket statements that either Windows or Linux is more expensive than the other are narrow minded. Additionally, comparisons of just maintenance and management costs do not consider other costs such as training, user resistance, user efficiency, software changes and alike.

There are a great deal more factors to consider. It depends very much on the organisation and its needs.

Edited 2007-01-22 21:54

Reply Parent Score: 1

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Interesting, and those who complain about the perceived 'high cost' are those who never use the tools which Microsoft makes available to lower the cost of deployment and administration.

It would be the equivilant of me installing WIndows using all the tools provided by Microsoft, but manually installaing each copy of Red Hat Linux/Fedora rather than using Kickstart - then coming onto this forum claiming that Linux is more expensive.

What is holding Linux back is applications, applications, applications and applications; until you can get the exact same application on Linux as you can on Windows, companies aren't going to move - no matter how 'virus resistant' your favourite operating system is.

Edited 2007-01-23 00:46

Reply Parent Score: 1