Slashdot Mirror


Linux TCO: Less Than Half The Cost of Windows

ggruschow writes "Linux Today reports 'The cost of running Linux is roughly 40% that of Microsoft Windows, and only 14% that of Sun Microsystem's Solaris, according to a new study which examined the actual costs of running various operating systems over three years.'"

6 of 527 comments (clear)

  1. Yea But.. by Pave+Low · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    you also get less than have the features and productivity you'd get from running windows.

    sorta comparing a KIA with a BMW.

    different strokes for different folk, I guess.

    --
    SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
  2. DUH by kenp2002 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Wow there's an objective, non-biased report. Nothing like fair objective reporting on how linux is better from Linux Today. I guess those performance reports on Windows XP from Microsoft.com must be just as unbiased right?

    I get all my data from the Gartner Group. I have my TCOs done in house using Gartner's TCO standards. Linux has NEVER been cheaper. Ever. Due largely in part to one simple factor: SLA (Service Level Agreement). Red Hat won't give me an SLA even close to MS. I will post again after I tear this "Unbiased" TCO part and post the conviently missing facts in detail. I'll be back....

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
  3. Re:first? by madfgurtbn · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The Windows technicians, however, only managed an average of 10 machines each, while Linux or Solaris admins can generally handle several times that.


    That could be a very misleading statement, though. What if Windows is much easier to manage, so it can be admin'd part time by someone who does other productive work? In that case, it is very misleading to say that "Linux or Solaris admins can handle several times that". It just means that smaller deployments work better with Windows because anyone can admin them. The windows admins might be able to admin 100 boxen, but they work in places that only have 10.

    --
    Send lawyers, guns, and money. Dad, get me out of this.
  4. Re:first? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Hey rape victim, which dictionary are you using? My 20 volume OED has no definition for "boxen". Too bad you don't list your homepage so I can hunt you down and skullfuck your mother.

  5. Re:first? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Shut the fuck up you worthless shit. I don't need your homepage to find your momma because she's always coming over here from WAYYYY over there just to get some of my big meat that you and your daddy can't give her. Can you ask her to stop? It was fun the first few years, but now she's getting old. By the way, how can you live with a penis that small? Boxen is a word that has come of age you pee hole, accept it.

  6. buttfucker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    (see subject)