“The worst part about this is that the MCSEs involved are right: Linux can never be as good a Windows 2003 server as is Windows 2003. Linux isn’t a cheaper form of Windows; direct substitution without change in thinking fails initially from a technology perspective and fails in the longer term from a cost perspective”, says Paul Murphy.
What Does Linux Cost?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
The author of the article could have just as easily claimed to be insane in the first sentence… and went on about his business.
He fails to consider everyones situation is different, you can’t just switch gears because you want to, and the world isn’t flat
His view of MCSE’s fails to consider MANY of them also happen to be CCNA’s, CCNE’s, and RHCP’s for that matter. The theory every MCSE on the planet is a clueless bastard, just doesn’t hold water.
Firstly, I wouldnt hire a MCSE based on the fact they have a MCSE. They do not know what they are doing and cause more harm than grief. Why put a person who answered a couple multiple choice questions in charge of a business’ it?
Secondly, who is this guy? I’ve never seen him on any security lists or anywhere else.
Thirdly, going forward companies choose linux, because they cant afford spending $20k on licencing, then 10k on implementation. They would rather spend $10k on implementation and get it right over the course of a month than $20k on 2 weeks of grief implementing a win2k3 solution.
The author is correct that a half-hearted attempt by undereducated IT people to convert completely to Linux carries enormous risk. An organization’s first year of Linux has a good chance of costing more than one years’ worth of Microsoft licenses even if the conversion is successful.
Microsoft has the benefit of a lot of inertia going up against Linux. This is probably their biggest strategic asset at the moment.
Nothing new.
Linux code is free but implementing it costs. Companies large enough to have an admin probably benefits from Linux. Or at least they don’t lose; they pay salaries instead of support fees, making them less vulnerable to vendor whims and more able to correct things quickly.
Smaller companies that want to buy support should probably use Windows because it is easier to get support.
True, its hard to teach old dogs new tricks. Old companies thay only have a one eyed, MSCE oriented view of computing will pay a price. But new companies without that kind of legacy knowledge and thinking would benefit greatly from Linux adaptation.
And as the article says it is not the lesser licensing fees that will save the most of the money. One problem with the windows oriented way of computing is that it makes the PC on the employee desktop a personal tool. Most of the employees will refer to it as my PC. Accepting them calling it “my PC” indirectly gives them power to do things that are not directly work related, e.g. installing new screen savers, desktop themes etc.
They will also too a much higher degree try to fix things themselves if something goes wrong instead of calling the IT department for help. At first this might seam to be a good thing, but it is not. In reality it creates hidden costs of IT management in the form of lost productivity. And if the costs are hidden you have less control over them.
If you go to a super market employee registring your purchases with a laser reader connected to the point of sale terminal rarely see that terminal as his PC even though it technically often are quite similar to what you find in any office. You don’t see them tampering with screen savers, surfing the net or even playing games. Instead they do their job and they do so because the PC doesn’t allow them to do anything else, and they accept that as a fact of life. Why should it be any different in normal offices.
It is just a thing needed to get the work done. I see little reason why the attitude of office workers should be allowed to be any different.
In Linux it is much easier to set up user environments that only do what’s needed to get the work done. E.g. one big button for starting e-mail, one big button for starting the wordprocessor, … and of course no lokal hard drive to fill with mp3s.
>The theory every MCSE on the planet is a clueless bastard, just doesn’t hold water.
true, but from my experience, the majority of them aren’t the guys that should be running servers, but the guys running around fixing neighborhood computers. I only know 3 MSCEs, but only of them is bright enough to do anything even remotely interesting on windows, let alone figure out how to run a linux server as anything more than a home page via apache.
“The author is correct that a half-hearted attempt by undereducated IT people to convert completely to Linux carries enormous risk.”
This would be true with ANYTHING in business.
“An organization’s first year of Linux has a good chance of costing more than one years’ worth of Microsoft licenses even if the conversion is successful.”
A very misleading statement IMHO. Change ALWAYS cost. However, I can show where in many of the conversions that we have done, our customers have recooped the cost plus, in the first year. How? They had Windows 98 and 95 on the desktop and would have had to make major hardware upgrades also. We have put in LTSP networks by ugrading only one box (the server) AND saved the cost of the licenses on top of that.
It seems that when I hear MS people talk about the cost of licenses, they often forget that a hardware up-grade might be needed also. It’s at this point where Linux starts to become an imdeiate cost savings.
“Same old Linux vs Windows cost”
It’s not the same, things have changed a lot.
“Linux code is free but implementing it costs. Companies large enough to have an admin probably benefits from Linux. Or at least they don’t lose; they pay salaries instead of support fees, making them less vulnerable to vendor whims and more able to correct things quickly.
Smaller companies that want to buy support should probably use Windows because it is easier to get support.”
Your argument holds very little water. We have many customers that we have converted to Linux and who don’t have admins on site. ALL of them pay LESS support cost under Linux than they did under Windows.
I work as an ICT Technician for a local school, and I’m a qualified MSCE. While the MSCE helps around the 99.9% Windows based school network (with a single Linux computer), it means bugger all on my home network, which consists of 100% Linux machines.
I hate Windows. The only reason I have an MSCE is because of my work.
MCSE != MS Zealot or clueless.
” only know 3 MSCEs, but only of them is bright enough to do anything even remotely interesting on windows, let alone figure out how to run a linux server as anything more than a home page via apache.”
You are jumping to several conclusions… You could have worked IT for many years and never have had the need to touch a Unix/Linux/Novell system…. There are a TON of IT people in that boat at the moment. That doesn’t mean they suck at networking, it simply says they have a different skill set.
It works the other way too… A lot of Linux/Novell admins get lost in a hurry faced with a heavy Windows enviro..It’s all about what you have been doing the past few years.
No doubt a Linux admin without Active Directory experience will look a really dumb really quick too….
This may sound insensitive, but if a company is going to move to Linux, they should layoff techies who lack linux know-how and hire people who have it. If an IT professional doesn’t have the goods your company needs, it’s not worth employing them.
Besides, the way the economy has been lately, I can guarantee a linux CE would come at price competitive to an MSCE. You’d certainly get more bang for buck.—most of the MSCE’s I’ve dealt with lack any working knowledge of the MS products they’re certified on.
Strikes me that a lot of these “articles” on OS News are written by morons whilst an lot of the comments are written by intelligent people who understand much more about the article content or lack thereof.
Perhaps the world should go back to a less “information”, in search of more quality.
Okay I understand my initial reaction before reading the article was what the hell MS FUD again. Actually he is not too far off. Linux cost is about zero. I have this trouble I walk in pitching Linux servers set against MS and the customer would rather pay 750$ a year for Linux than get the Debian or SuSE version at a tiny fraction of the cost. Really people need to rethink how they plan to do it Red Hat is going to bite us in the rump by its “Enterprise” method. Debian is stable and has a long life schedule (just what enterprise and large companies want but instead they buy Red Hat AS which only last for two years–good grief they are not thinking)
As for the MCSE thing I am one of two people in my tech department who holds a current MCSE. I work on Linux almost exclusively. The other guy has blue screened Windows 2003 twice so far.
Having an MCSE does not make the technician. I have had this proven to me continually sice I started paying attention in about 1997. I have only met 4 MCSEs in that time that I could honestly trust to work on servers-and about 100 I wouldn’t trust to install a base system and service pack it. Also consider that that many of us hold many certs (at las count I held 13-AIS, APS, ASE, CCNA, LCA, LCP, Linux+, LPI I, MCP, MCSA, MCSE, RHCE, Server+) but certs are worthless outside of impressing customers what really matters is the experience and even more important the drive of the engineer. I will take a young engineer who has only done a little if they are interested enough to read book after book and try new things. (I only met 1 MCSE other than myself that did more than just do enough to get by-the value of Linux and FreeBSD Admins excels in this area and the majority of these I met actually do continually expand their skillset rather than settling for being “certified”)
I can’t actually determine just what the guy is trying to say to be honest.
To say that it costs more to move to linux is disingeneous. Change always costs. However the cost to buy, maintain and support linux software is less than windows based equivalents.
That’s just a simple fact. The problem is getting the people with the appropriate skills. There isn’t much point in throwing Windows familiar people (MSCE or otherwise) at Linux boxes if they don’t already have the Linux skills.
A total nothing article I’m afraid…
Beyond the conceptual garbage.
I am one of those IT people who uses whatever is available to get the job done.
Even if “NitWads” are hedging their bets into the single M$ basket – I chosen to train myself on Linux over the last year. I now use it to support specific learning equipment I am responsible for.
Linux works extremely well! Move forward.
I purged M$ from all my home machines and destroyed the CDs.
* cough *
Talk about a cheap pleasure.
Wonderful what an analysis?. That why i guide my colleagues to use only microsoft product. Use windows in phones, game in business (database, mission critical applications, graphic servers, notably the back office) and not to forget? even in defense. Who care if Microsoft code is stolen or broken? 96% of market is still with Microsoft. Linux is bad for every one and so do open source. Even though its basic version is free the enterprise cost is too high. So guys stick to microsoft and windows(THIS IS SPECIALLY FOR CORPORATE) even if it creates hugh amount of losses afterwards. So Daniel you speak only one word Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft………………..
IT-decisions are not based on logic but are made for very subjective reasons, mostly based on irritations by users and managment on the day-to-day use. Cost is not really a factor that differentiates Linux from Windows (but in that way it gets attention). The mindset of Linux is quite different from the Windows one. I agree with the author: if you treat Linux the same as Windows you won’t benefit that much.
I know peter its not about nos. but more about applying windows to different functionality. Tell me r u going to use Windows for mass datatransfer as it is done for Air traffic control from US to tokyo via singapore. R u going to us Windows in Space mission or Nuclear Plants. R u going to use Windows for database to handle 1 trillion transactions. I am point at though maniacs who think that windows is applicable every were and Windows is the only platform to handle every thing and nothing handle better than windows.
The article seemed pretty good. The comments on here are a little off base or just one track minded. I’d really like to know where you people have been employed to see such MCSEs be total screw ups. My former position was working for an enterprise class company. We had a mixed environment of Unix and Windows. There were a decent number of MCSEs there. Those who were MCSE were really smart and clueful about the systems and network and knew exactly what was going on. If there was a problem the conference call would start and the troubleshooting would begin. So I agree with the other person who said they didn’t think all MCSEs are just dumb.
I disagree with firing anyone who doesn’t have Linux experience if you are going to migrate to it. The concepts between Windows and Linux are the same. Need a list of files? dir in Windows, ls in Linux. Both have services that can be started and stopped. You can edit config files in both. I really don’t see how an MCSE (or any Windows admin for that matter) wouldn’t be able to grasp the concept of Linux and admin the server.
People can (and usually do) put a spin on everything. For example some people would say black is a color. Some would say it’s not a color. Some would say it’s the abesence of color. Some would say it’s the combination of all color. I guess depending on who your talking to and depending on the circumstances they are ALL right or ( or wrong
). Anyway, What I really don’t understand is exactly when MS started giving free technical support. I also don’t understand why, when giving these types of comparisons, the most expensive services/products are used (is it because the more they cost the better they are?). Also can Linux ever be Windows? I hope not. Ever. It can emulate Windows though. It can also perform better and faster. I have used Windows for 20 years with Linux and Windows for the last 10 of those 20. You don’t need to be genius to figure out which is better. I find it strange (to say the least) that MS has driven customers away with their prices of software and support (not to mention security and other stuff) and now try to convince the world that they are cheaper than FREE… I guess that’s where the spin comes in. After all, I need to buy clothes to wear before I can go out into public to buy Linux. I also need a car and gasoline. The CD’s cost money and so does the computer to burn the ISOs. It never stops. There’s no telling how much Linux actually costs. It’s probably thousands of times more expensive than Windows though 
. It just takes a little common sense. Really.
If you go to a super market employee registring your purchases with a laser reader connected to the point of sale terminal rarely see that terminal as his PC even though it technically often are quite similar to what you find in any office. You don’t see them tampering with screen savers, surfing the net or even playing games. Instead they do their job and they do so because the PC doesn’t allow them to do anything else, and they accept that as a fact of life. Why should it be any different in normal offices.
Because the users will hate you if they can’t do anything relaxing while working or thinking about work, if you restrict them to much it will backfire on the IT department. Someday someone will bring their AK47 and start killing nitwit helpdesk staff and control freak sysadmins.
And if that doesn’t happen their are lots of other ways to be improductive if that’s nessacary, if they are play with their computers they are at least at the desk near the phone.
No offense to the people that spent alot of money on their MCSE, but its not a degree in computer science its not a degree in electronic engineering, its not a degree in information theory. What a MC anything, a CN anything, or a CC anything is a statement you can configure a manufacturers equipment the way they want it configured. The certifications don’t imply that you can do creative, interesting, or even particularly usefull things with the equipment.
“As proof, they adduce an up-front cost of US$4,000 for Windows 2000 Advanced Server plus $5,000 for SQL Server in contrast to Red Hat Enterprise Linux at $3,200 for one-year premium support plus Oracle at $15,000 or DB2 at $7,500. That comparison is deceitful by both omission and commission, but it does raise an interesting question: What does Linux really cost?
Whats deceitful? I think this is a more than fair comparison from a Corporate buying view. Corporations want solutions not a geek with an aim to setup a “free” linux server running Mysql or Postgres. They want to be able to call support to workout an issue with the system and they are willing to pay for it.
“If you go to a super market employee registring your purchases with a laser reader connected to the point of sale terminal rarely see that terminal as his PC even though it technically often are quite similar to what you find in any office. You don’t see them tampering with screen savers, surfing the net or even playing games. Instead they do their job and they do so because the PC doesn’t allow them to do anything else, and they accept that as a fact of life. Why should it be any different in normal offices.
It is just a thing needed to get the work done. I see little reason why the attitude of office workers should be allowed to be any different.
In Linux it is much easier to set up user environments that only do what’s needed to get the work done. E.g. one big button for starting e-mail, one big button for starting the wordprocessor, … and of course no lokal hard drive to fill with mp3s.
”
Not to go against linux but ive actually seen a desktop locked up in windows so they havent been allowed to add screen savers and do other stuff non work related. Whether its easier might be different but then again if someone knows ms software, im thinking how hard could it be for that person
What Does Linux Cost? Linux costs ZERO !!
If you want to pay a license to have official support, ok, but it is not vital.
Is it need time to put linux solutions on air ? Yes, but windows solutions need time too.
Is it need knowledge to install and configure linux and its applications ? Yes, windows and its applications too.
Windows is not in the human DNA. If you have to take courses and pay for them to be MCSE, why not do the same to be linux certified ? There are many linux couses too.
If you have to learn an pay for it, learn linux and free (as freedom) softwares. In long term you be free from vendor lock-in and costs tend to zero for new installations (because you already know linux and its softwares).
Does a college degree imply that you you can do creative, interesting, or even particularly usefull things with the equipment?
I don’t thinks so. A lot of people who are teaching college students have never even been out of an eductional enviroment. In other words they have never had to apply thier knowledge to real world situations.
Also most of what you are going to learn about system adinistration is going to be completly obsolete within five years. If you don’t keep up by self educating, your are going to be worthless to any business.
Restricting employee use of computers is is a short-sighted and foolish decision. Despite the wishes of some sectors of the business world, workers are not automatons.
My former employer, a MAJOR UK newspaper group, has just banned access to certain websites including Yahoo Mail. Forcing journalists to use internal e-mail is a mistake – it may cut down on non-work related e-mail, but it also gets people’s backs up and has other business consequences. Do I want to discuss something with a whistle-blower on what is effectively tracked e-mail? Do they want to discuss it with me?
As for helpdesk staff – well, the IT people where I now work are helpful and courteous. And not much help to me as sadly, they are inexperienced with Macs. As it’s a newspaper, Mac knowledge is vital. At my last position (with the big newspaper group), the IT staff were totally clueless about Macs and made several attempts to replace the Macs with PCs. This was only avoided because both pre-press and journalistic staff refused to use the PCs as they needlessly increased workload and require significant retraining.
In short – IT people should NEVER be allowed to make decisions on behalf of other staff just because they have technical knowledge. The interference in the workflow is immense.
As I’ve said before..the biggest problem of the linux community is the linux community. It does take skills and knowledge to set up any kind of networking environment. Those without skills at their place of employment will be shown the door. Those willing and able to keep growing with the field will stay employed. I agree that a BSCIS is rather important for an admin job but BSCS degrees are more programming oriented. Our admin job is quickly becoming like the programming world. Have you looked at programming lately? You need to know 10+ programming languages. The same is true of recent admin jobs. You need MCSE because MS is the market leader. You also need Linux for the boxes that are saving money. You also need Oracle for the big DB’s. On top of all that, most companies (especially in Hawaii) want to pay only $15 an hour or less.
That being said (phew): The true cost of Linux is in salaries, training, and loss of features. The question of Linux in the environment is really this: Is “good enough” okay for our business? If so then, is our Linux guy so skilled that if our linux solution bites the dust, can he recover it quickly? CAN OUR BUSINESS SURVIVE IF OUR LINUX GUY DOESN’T CUT THE CAKE? Is this chance worth the money we save by implementing linux? That’s the questions business ask with every critical app they transfer to linux.
In regards to doing something interesting: Does setting up an environment interest you? Doing the same thing over and over. It sounds like regular work to me. Get you network and environment designed and administer it. Update the IT Company Policy monthly. Wow! So interesting! If you want to do something interesting and always new – become an electrical engineer.
Final comment: I have to giggle at the degree touting fellow. Most college grads I’ve met are the truly clueless folk. Only if they have certed would I ever consider hiring one. Same goes for certed only folk. Get your degree.
This article does not even take into account the cost of viruses on Windows, the cost of Worms on Windows, the cost of crashes on Windows, the cost of training from one version (of Windows or Office) to the other. And I do not simply mean the cost of a MCSE or help desk, but the cost of having non IT staff wait for things to be repaired.
That article is abslutely not exhaustive. Why something as amateur as that was posted ??
Ultimately, the biggest differences between the Windows and Unix/Linux world are not technical ones. They are cultural, and moving from one world to the other is more like moving from one country to another. The things you do are all largely the same, they are just done in different ways with different background philosophies.
.
After reading the blurb, I thought at last something interesting, perhaps with real figures and quotes, but honestly claims like these have to be really backed up with proper stats, otherwise managent won’t really take any notice…The author did mention some important decisions that I am having to face at the moment, and the situation is this, we’ve got Win2k server. People within the company who can click a mouse think they know everything, and so my job is sometimes a bit more frustrating then it should be, I.T support is more about CRM these days, patience. Linux seems interesting purely from a finanacial situation if there is a distribution that I can just set up quite easily I’ll use…the thing is there is a distribution out there, but I can’t see it, This is because of the mountains of garb I have to deal with people asking for this feature or that thing. Which puts my search behind, a few months as I’m busy trying to get things rolling on a M$ platform. Truth is there is no Silver Bullet.
But at least Linux does not charge you per seat, per user connected to the server, and dare I say it we’ve had problems developing applications for Win2K server, purley because of Licence issues, how political is that? This is costly on both money and stress.
If you want to sell anything to your managers, then you need a business plan, a backup contingency plan and most of all a table to prove Linux will save money. The select Licensing scheme is flipping nightmare to manage no wonder our managers are so behind, with technology, they are so busy caught up with the bureaucracy.
Anyway so I’ve started planning for Linux to be a part of our company, and I doubt an article like this could put me off…EVER.
Sorry guys, someone has to say this… it’s me.
Windows is cheaper than Linux is some cases. However, a Mac with MacOS X does all the work, half the time – even with the same applications from both worlds most likly, and cost less than BOTH of them.
There’s my swiss cheese everyone. Painful to some, but every word of it is the absolute truth.
No, it’s more expensive to purchase all new hardware.
People say the retraining is expensive. But having done at least some technical work with Windows; it involves a great deal of retraining also. Everytime they add features they seem to change the way something interfaces. It’s easy to adapt, but if these IT people are as inept as analysts claim then I’m sure they can’t figure out new versions of Windows without retraining.
So here’s one thought. Until the hardware breaks, just stick with what you bought into initially. And if you are just coming into the business, plan things based on your platform.
Also this is far too generic. Is it speaking of high end uses for Win2k3 or is it talking about running a web server. Cause it seems to me that IIS or Oracle is too much to spend on a web server. Also, comparing IIS and Oracle; that’s cheating.
> So here’s one thought. Until the hardware breaks, just stick with what > you bought into initially. And if you are just coming into the business,
> plan things based on your platform
I have to say this makes lot of sense to me.
Oftentimes on OSNews there are well thought out technical answers from technical people to non-technical questions. In my line of work it doesn’t really matter a damn in a cheap PC is less expensive than a Mac, or Linux is a cheapr (or better) server solution. What goes is what was already going, plus any major strategic changes which need to be thought out.
Enlightened businesses (if such thing exist) do not solely base decisons on the upfront bottom line, but also other factors like TCO, availability of skilled relevant workers, workflow, fear and whether or not something in place is already functioning enough.
Example: the newspaper which I work for is a small independent title due for launch in March. Sales staff and some of the journalists are on cheap PCs (bottom line), art, pre-press and some journalists are on Macs (G5 and G4 – decision taken for workflow reasons). Servers are a mix on Win and Linux. Why? Experienced Win and Linux network people.
Horses for courses.
J…
>>The theory every MCSE on the planet is a clueless bastard
nice strawman arg.
first make up an absurd claim that NO ONE has put forth, and knock it over.
not very clever.
anyway, as someone who has direct, first hand experience and knowledge, i can state with perfect conviction that technical centers are cranking out truckloads of MCSEs.
I happened to train a cisco classes as a consultant, and i’ve contracted with many cert-centers. it’s all the same.
there’s a demand by non-technical people to have “good paying technical jobs”…and these tech centers promise them pie-in-the-sky.
it’s not limited to mcse, but cisco, comptia, linux and general hardware/software.
but mcse is one of the most popular, and the population of truly skilled mcses vs paper, imho, is completely lopsided.
while the article was, so-so…i can state, again with conviction, Don Elings character doesn’t know jack squat.
he proffers that “every situation is differnt”
well that’s just perfect. what aspect of life could you NOT apply this particular counterargument in an attempt to discredit someone?
in a word: none
but only someone who has no real cogent counterargument falls back to the tried and true “everybody & everything’s different” defense.
I am an MCSE but am also a HP-UX sysadmin, have been running FreeBSD since 386BSD-0.1 and have used Linux for some trivial stuff. My opinion is that the ease of administration that comes with Windows Active Directory and all that comes with it is well worth the cost. Samba, Unix file permissions, Sendmail, Postgresql, etc just don’t cut it when administering thousands of users on hundreds of servers.
It’s true that MCSE’s are cranked out by the truckload. But you DO have to pass the tests. Let’s say a person just studies the tests and passes. They still have done some labs at these testing centers. They can do most admin tasks even if they do not get the “big picture”. When they realize that MCSE is just the start of their certification madness, then they will either fully commit to becoming a worthy admin or get the heck out. Their first job will usually weed out the folk that aren’t truly serious if the tests don’t.
Why does anyone here care about discussing an article that has no merit?
Here are two real questions…
1. when is the last time you rolled your eyes when Joe Blow said “hey, I’m a MSCE”?
2. don’t we all have something better to read than the latest OS News drab?
Ga-bye
We are bored.
are always right.
You should listen to them more often.
And anyone, like myself, who recommends Linux or uses it is probably a zealot. Don’t listen to us.
Avoiding the rest of this, why does the author automatically think that one _could_ consolidate the Windows 2003 servers from forty units down to sixteen, or perhaps he meant sixteen each, thirty-two.
I use Linux, I use Windows, and I have used them professionally for years, and I don’t see how that applies. I am willing to be remonstrated if someone can prove otherwise, but I know of know rule that says, “Linux requires 60% less hardware than Windows to do the same job.” Or even just 20% (8) less. I am not a database expert by any stretch, but I would think the Windows boxes may handle the load _slightly_ more effieciently, do to Windows’ faster disk I/O implementation.