Telstra Used Linux To Get Microsoft Discounts

awful writes "Last year Slashdot ran a story about Australia's largest telco moving to Linux desktops. Turns out it was all a way to get some tasty discounts from Microsoft. The Australian is reporting that Telstra just signed a four-year deal with MS for $AU15-20 million, for 40,000 users. No figures yet on how much of a discount Telstra got, but MS might want to rethink handing back all its cash to investors if this is how they're going to do business from now on ..."

Comments

Not much

[Anonymous Coward]

Assuming $400 for each user, that's $16 million, which isn't much of a savings, if any.

Re:Not much

[lateralus_1024]

Yes but they're throwing in a special edition MS Office clippy icon that resembles this man.

Go Back Three Spaces

[SYFer]

One small setback for Linux; one giant leap down the slippery slope for MS.

If this sort of thing isn't direct evidence of the sure eventual demise of the Business Model as Bill Knows It, then I don't know what is.

"Thank you for calling Microsoft Corporate Sales--in order to direct your call, please enter 1 on your touchtone phone if you are oblivious to Linux. Enter 2 if you have priced a Linux solution for your enterprise. Enter 3 if you have considered a Linux operating system..."

Re:Go Back Three Spaces

[chachob]

"...and press 4 if you are actually using linux in hopes of getting a discount."

seriously though, this is quite the dilemma for microsoft. on one hand, more companies might consider this method, and microsoft wins because of a larger userbase for its products. on the other, it has its investors whining because of these business methods that are losing profits. it'll be interesting to see how microsoft plays this to keep its investors happy while keeping linux pinned down (somewhat).

Re:Go Back Three Spaces

[ExtremeGoatse!]

Really, this is not news. Companies have been doing this for the last year and a half, ever since Microsoft announced that they would give substantial discounts to any Linux user who converts to MS. They have nobody to blame but themselves, surely they anticipated this. Users are just being smart and playing the software licensing game, which has always been traditionally in favor of the software companies.

Re:Go Back Three Spaces

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm, this is Slashdot. It should be spelled "loosing."

Posting AC b/c I don't want to Karma whore

Re:Go Back Three Spaces

[Anonymous Coward]

SYFer : "If this sort of thing isn't direct evidence of the sure eventual demise of the Business Model as Bill Knows It, then I don't know what is"

That's about the millionth time I have heard that chant from yje open source crazies.
When will you open source fanatics come down to reality and face cold hard facts for even one minute, and stop living in cloud cuckoo land?
So Microsoft has started off on its "eventual denise" huh?
LOL!
Let me see...Let's look at the Linux fiction versus the cold hard FACTS of reality now, shall we?
Microsoft's latest results for quarter ending June 30th 2004.
"Microsoft reported profits rose 82% in its fiscal fourth quarter and the company raised its revenue forecast for the current year on Thursday....
The world's largest software company reported net income of $2.69 billion, or 25 cents per share, for its fourth quarter ended June 30, compared with earnings of $1.48 billion, or 14 cents per share, during the fourth quarter of 2003..
Revenue increased 15% to $9.29 billion, versus $8.07 billion a year ago, helped by higher license sales of Windows and Office as customers upgraded their PCs, and stronger sales to businesses of more expensive "enterprise" editions of the company's products"


This is by far the best results in the last quarter of any major software company, and these stelar were achieved in spite of the the American-hating Nazis at Munich!
'Nuff said!!

Re:Go Back Three Spaces

[RevDobbs]

it'll be interesting to see how microsoft plays this to keep its investors happy while keeping linux pinned down (somewhat).

1. Get companies to sign 4 years licencing deals.
2. One year into the agreement, introduce the latest and greatest Office/Productivity package to those companies at no further cost.
3. Patent the default file formats for those software packages.
4. Three years later, raise the licencing price 200% and ask "whacha gonna do now, huh?"

Re:Go Back Three Spaces

[ta bu shi da yu]

I wonder if this could be counted as monopolistic. Oh, wait. Been there, done that.

They're paying $500 per user.

[fname]

Unless my math is wrong, they're paying about $500/user. $125/year. But since most companies will not upgrade the OS or applications more often than every 4 years, they basically are paying $500 to Microsoft for each user. That's a ton of money-- maybe it's all worth it, but I guess this is what people are talking about when they mention the "Microsoft Tax."

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[Anonymous Coward]

$125/year is about right for a corp, hardly a discount -- this isn't just Windows, but MS Office, Exchange CALs, etc. Probably a drop in the bucket compared to what they pay Oracle, IBM, SAP, etc for the backend stuff.

Also, a 4 year upgrade cycle is pretty normal nowdays, especially since Windows and MS Office are basically stable and feature-complete enough for most people.

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[challahc]

$500 AUD =~ $351 USD
$125 AUD =~ $87 USD

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent down he's claiming that microsoft doesn't cost a ton of money!

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[Servo]

Usually with these per-seat licensing deals, all the apps are thrown in with it. So each user gets OS, Office, and Exchange all paid for at that price. Which in MS terms, is a very good deal.

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[Zak3056]

Unless my math is wrong, they're paying about $500/user. $125/year. But since most companies will not upgrade the OS or applications more often than every 4 years, they basically are paying $500 to Microsoft for each user. That's a ton of money-- maybe it's all worth it, but I guess this is what people are talking about when they mention the "Microsoft Tax."

Given that it's Australian dollars, and that it likely includes all the goodies (Exchange, SQL Server, etc) along with actual support, I'd say this is a hell of a good deal.

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[SEWilco]

Mod parent down he's claiming that microsoft doesn't cost a ton of money!

That depends upon the weight of Australian Dollars and whether it is a metric ton.

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[tonyr60]

"this isn't just Windows, but MS Office, Exchange CALs,"

Maybe windows and office, but likely not exchange. Telstra has bought Sun's Java Enterprise stack (unlike the Java Desktop System which they only talked about).

So it looks like Microsoft on the desktop, but Sun on the servers.

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[lazybeam]

Microsoft is getting 180 tonnes of dollars from Telstra, if they were to pay exclusively in one dollar coins. :) Thats 4.5 kg per user.

Reference: http://www.ramint.gov.au/making_coins/coin_designs .cfm. One dollar coins are 9.00 grams each.

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA.

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[Anonymous Coward]

According to http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,103250 85%255E15306,00.html it's more like $50M for 40K users or A$1250 per user. Is that a discount?

Re:They're paying $500 per user.

[Keith McClary]

Thats 4.5 kg per user.

What's that in Pounds?

Ahh... competition

[oldosadmin]

Sounds like capitalism at work :)

I love linux, but, go Telstra :) Way to use the free market to your advantage.

Re:Ahh... competition

[kingbyu]

A lot of people tend to forget that Linux is good for people who use Windows because it forces Microsoft to be competitive in the market. Not only does it force Microsoft to continue to compete with their technology offerings, but also to compete with their prices. Even if Telstra didn't switch to Linux, its still a Linux victory because of the position it puts Microsoft in.

Its just too bad Linus won't be getting any thank you cards saying "Thanks Linus for making Microsoft better just to compete with your Linux." (Although they should send him cards like that).

Re:Ahh... competition

[Anonymous Coward]

What like the thank you cards you send Bill Gates for helping Linux be a better solution because of it's competition with MS.

Re:Ahh... competition

[Rotten168]

In reality all Linux is doing is putting the commercial Unices out of business... I mean Microsoft's pricing keeps getting more and more outrageous and Linux is *free* for Godsakes.

Re:Ahh... competition

[Uncle Jimmy]

I love linux, but, go Telstra :) Way to use the free market to your advantage.

Wow. You obviously aren't from Australia.

Re:Ahh... competition

[Anonymous Coward]

Telstra should watch out. It can be a bad idea to fuck with a company with whom you are putting a lot of trust into. In the car repair bussiness I would give a lot lower quilty of service to those who tried to bring my price down by saying they would use one of the competetors otherwise. I gave them the competetors level of service. MicroSoft could even realy screw with you. If really needed tech support they could totally f you up.

Re:Ahh... competition

[useosx]

That the world operates under a free market is a myth my friend.

Think: US taxpayers pay for the military budget. Military helps invent things for the tech industry (like the Internet). Tech industry uses this free R&D to profit. That is the government subsidizing businesses. Not strict free market.

Think: Import/export tariffs.

Think: The recent article on Slashdot describing public subsidies of football stadiums.

Re:Ahh... competition

[devilspgd]

So you overcharge, then when you get called on it you provide shitty service?

Re:Ahh... competition

[Anonymous Coward]

Capitalism my ass.

Capitalism is premised on commercial competition. Linux sprouted not from commercial endeavors.

What you have here is not plain capitalism, but capitalism tweaked by hobbyists.

Re:Ahh... competition

[KarmaMB84]

I suppose you also don't provide a warranty on your work. Otherwise you'd try to fix it right the first time. I wish there was a +1 Unethical Dirt Bag option.

Re:Ahh... competition

[ratamacue]

Free market? Are you claiming that Telstra acquired their market dominance purely through voluntary association? (The core principle of free market economics is voluntary association.)

Re:Ahh... competition

[Anonymous Coward]

Then the next time your customers go to your competitor. Giving crappy service is more likely to hurt your business than giving discounts!

Way to do business

[usefool]

Maybe, just maybe, this is how Microsoft intends to do business in the future?

This kind of first-MS-then-Linux-finally-MS stunts by any company is going to give free publicity to Microsoft, and more and more companies will be attracted to buying MS products because they thought they're getting a discount now.

And frankly speaking, $375 per user is still better than $0 per user, and lose face to Linux.

Re:Way to do business

[Fished]

And frankly speaking, $375 per user is still better than $0 per user, and lose face to Linux.

Indeed. This is especially true since Microsoft's marginal cost on each of these licenses is more or less $0. They could sell license certificates for $5 apiece and still be better off than not making the sale (excepting possible market effects if they sell stuff too cheap too often.)

Re:Way to do business

[Firethorn]

Well, there would be a certain amount of support costs. But for any large company, you generally won't be getting the low level calls, as they'll have their own level 1/2 computer support people.

Re:Way to do business

[MBCook]

But there are two problems with that method. The first is that if MS gets used to this and starts calling people's bluffs, then one of two things will happen. They'll buy MS at MS prices, or they'll go Linux at the cheap price. I wonder which. That would be a blow for MS.

The second problem is even if MS doesn't call bluffs (and not all will be bluffs, of course) this will hurt MS's proffit margins. Without those amazing Windows and Office margins, they have less for everything else. That means either making Windows and Office and such better so they are worth that high price (great for consumers), or they have to stop branching out into everything and only do things they proffit at (not neccessarily bad for others).

So no matter what happens, MS could be facing some problems. The fact is MS isn't a total monopoly (like AT&T was, or the post office is for mail), they do have competition. And when you're not a total monopoly, you can lose that position. MS's reserves and such can only let them play bully so long before they start having to really compete on prices, features, and such. It may take years and years, but this is a crack in the damn of the monopoly. Eventually, MS will lose that position and be another business in free-market competition.

Also, "... be attracted to buying MS products because they THOUGHT they're getting a discount now." Huh? Why would anyone look at MS's software because they might get a discount? I would bet in at least 99% of the cases, they would have been looking at MS anyway. I don't think this really changes things for companies seeking MS, if anything they'll seek Linux.

And this is NOT good PR for MS. This is "they almost lost and had to dive to save face and get the account" publicity. That's not what you want. You want "they came in and even though they were more expensive, they blew away the competition" PR. These kind of reports (that MS dropped prices because of the threat of Linux/MacOS/anything) are BAD for MS any way you look at it.

Re:Way to do business

[TeraCo]

Companies of this size generally make around 20-30 calls a year to Microsoft.. tops.

However, most of these are the sort of calls where the business is crumbling, while the best techs in the company all frantically try and recover an exchange server database where every second or third byte has been replaced with 00000000. [Replace with high severity scenario of your choice.]

Re:Way to do business

[tupps]

I beleive that once you get Telstra size you have MS people on site all the time, and they work with not only your current MS implemented solutions but also planning for any future roll outs etc.

If you listen to MS Marketing Speek when they release a major infrastructure product (SQL, NT etc) they always claim heaps of feedback from their top 500 customers. This is how they do it.

Re:Way to do business

[TeraCo]

Not quite, they are available, however Telstra/any other huge IT/IS company would have a dedicated architecture team which would be almost as good as anything MS have.

MS would still only be called out in exceptional circumstances.

The real benefits that you get involve your staff going to MS and getting access to all the secret MS seminars that they don't show everyone else.

Re:Way to do business

[AdamTheBastard]

You know why Telstra only make 20-30 calls to MS a year? It's cos their bloody phones are never working and their internet is always down!

Re:Way to do business

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe support from MS is a seperate cost. I work at a facility that is 99.99% MS with about 5000 seats, we pay yearly for a certain amount support of calls. Maybe we got screwed or got a really good deal on the license. I can tell you that no one where I worked thought about using Linux to leverage a deal, they probably can not even pronounce Linux.

Re:Way to do business

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but those Onsite MS people are generally sales trolls trying to make sure everything is microsoftly correct. They aren't going to get your Exchange server up.

Re:Way to do business

[CaptainZapp]

Maybe, just maybe, this is how Microsoft intends to do business in the future?

Which would mean that they have to adapt to the business model of enterprise software.

See - some other commentor pointed this out excelently - the cost for the software vendor for shipping a "finished" product is essentially nill. So with every seat sold and regardless of the price the vendor makes a profit.

The main job of an account manager (that's a glorified sales man for major accounts of a software vendor) is to figure out the effective budget of the vict^H^H^H^Hcustomer. Because that's exactly the money he will gauge them for and thus price the licenses appropriately.

This is a risky strategy of course, since as the purchaser for MegaCorp I get mightily pissed when I realise that the purchase manager of CompetiCorp got his database seats for 20$ each because that was all they had in the budget, while they charged us 1200$ per seat.

So lesson 1 in the pretty immoral business of software sales is to never ever reveal your budget to a vendor.

Re:Way to do business

[16K Ram Pack]

The more the squeeze is put on Microsoft, the less the share price goes up, and the more chance that shareholders will demand more of that cash pile at Microsoft.

And yes, any story that basically says "large corporation A pushed a Linux threat on Microsoft" is another "Linux isn't a toy" message. And that is still one of the three big challenges along with applications and drivers to Linux acceptance (frankly, building an app that won't work x-platform now seems a bit short sighted).

Re:Way to do business

[Mr_Silver]

But there are two problems with that method. The first is that if MS gets used to this and starts calling people's bluffs, then one of two things will happen. They'll buy MS at MS prices, or they'll go Linux at the cheap price. I wonder which.

Well, if they're trying to use Linux as a means to get cheaper discounts then it would be fairly sensible to suggest that they have absolutely no intention of moving to Linux.

That would be a blow for MS.

Doubtful. If the companies bluff is called then (based on the fact that they didn't have any intention of migrating to something else) they'll bite their lip and pony up the money.

Re:Way to do business

[spitzak]

That means either making Windows and Office and such better so they are worth that high price (great for consumers)

Actually they may have a problem here, as consumers don't want or need improvements, especially to Office. The program is perfectly capable of doing everything almost all users need, and this has been true for almost eight years now. Microsoft's greatest competitor (outweighing Linux by at least an order of magnitude) is old Microsoft installations.

Forced upgrades (ie if you don't upgrade, your computer is going to stop working or stop talking to other computers) is Microsoft's only hope to continue their currrent profit margins. Unfortunately this requires a certain amount of evil intentions, which makes people hate them, and possibly makes it difficult to get some of their engineers (who I suspect sometimes still have a sense of ethics) to implement them.

Re:Way to do business

[KarmaMB84]

And the purchase manager for CompetiCorp would probably be sued into oblivion for violating some term of their contract for letting what they paid get out.

The same thing goes on in real estate when a realtor is selling identical homes. The first guy might pay $600,000 while the last guy out might have paid $800,000 for the exact same unit. Ofc, they can't even reveal what they paid until after they've signed over their soul, and that's if they can even do it then.

"discount" ??

[Quixote]

Even taking the lower figure, Telstra paid A$ 375/license. This is no discount! Since Microsoft has huge profit margins, I'm sure they're making a tidy profit on this.

Wake me up when Microsoft beats Linux on pricing. ;-)

Re:"discount" ??

[Anonymous Coward]

>Wake me up when Microsoft beats Linux on pricing. ;-) Well, they'd have to give me money to get me to use Windows.

Re:"discount" ??

[sirsnork]

It depends what they got. If the got a SQL and Exchange CAL with that then it's not nearly so bad. If they got Office too then it's great

Re:"discount" ??

[asdfghjklqwertyuiop]

This is no discount! Since Microsoft has huge profit margins, I'm sure they're making a tidy profit on this.

Sure, close to 100%. I mean its not like it costs Microsoft all that much money to print up those license papers and make a few CDs.

Re:"discount" ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Even with that, still a tidy profit.

Re:"discount" ??

[tupps]

It used to be that Telstra had a yearly payment to MS and that was the last they thought about licensing, across the whole enterprise. I am not sure if the deal is still the same.

Re:"discount" ??

[Anonymous Coward]

If you really think that Microsoft has 100% margins, then I got two words for you:

re tard

Try taking a business class sometime, idoit

Re:"discount" ??

[Draknor]

No, but it did cost Microsoft money to produce Windows & Office and to hire the lawyers to write up those EULA's.

Sure, the *marginal cost* of selling more licenses is about zero, but the true cost is not, since that factors in all of the fixed costs & R&D.

Just a little economics lesson :)

Re:"discount" ??

[asdfghjklqwertyuiop]

That's what I meant - the marginal costs are zero. They could sell this particular installation at $5 a copy and they would make a profit.

Re:"discount" ??

[photon317]

Technically, any software sold in sufficient volume has a $0 cost, and is all profit, as you're amortizing the development cost over so many copies that it drops to under a penny. And microsoft definitely sells in those kidns of volumes. $375/license is $375 profit. The only issue that cuts into this is Tech Support, which might have been included in the deal, and has real recurring human wage costs.

Timothys biz advice to MS

[mr_z_beeblebrox]

MS might want to rethink handing back all its cash to investors if this is how they're going to do business from now on ...

Microsoft might suck in terms of security. They might suck at guessing what users will want and innovating to it (they guess what users are using and make their own version). But I do not think that they will find value in business suggestions on /. even from an editor. Sorry, just felt compelled to say that.

Why not?

[TheRealStaunch]

I don't see why (apart from the moral issues) more companies don't use this strategy as a way of saving lots of money and scamming big companies out of more profits.

Re:Why not?

[boudie]

Since when have moral issues stood in the way of more profits.

Of Course

[pHatidic]

Naturally it follows since everyone thinks that linux is superior to windows in every possible way, the only possible reason a company could consider two options and then choose microsoft is if they were trying to play microsoft. Which of course also clearly justifies this article going into the linux section.

/sarcasm

Re:Of Course

[polin8]

The issue is that it appears MS is willing to undercut Linux, which they can only do because they have a monopoly pricing system.

Monopolists can lock competition out of a market because of their unaturally high marginal profits. This is why its illegal in the US (in theory).

Re:Of Course

[antiMStroll]

.....everyone thinks that linux is superior to windows in every possible way...."

. Strawman argument or anti-Linux user bigotry? Not a reflection of reality, piecework moderation to the contrary.

Re:Of Course

[Dominatus]

You missed the point. Look at the headline

"Telstra Used Linux To Get Microsoft Discounts"

The grandparent was asking why it was assumed that Telstra was USING linux to get MS discounts, as opposed to Telstra chosing MS because they liked it better. The "everyone...every possible way" was obvious sarcasm as the last word of the post is "/sarcasm"

Re:Of Course

[spitzak]

The assumption is because Microsoft gave them a discount!. Duh.

I don't think "Telstra was using Linux to get a Microsoft discount", which seems to be the prevailing opinion here, in any way means "Linux is good". In fact it implies that Telstra had no intention of using Linux and did not think it would work for them, and successfully fooled Microsoft into believing otherwise.

If Linux was "good" then most people would be saying "Microsoft got scared because their lockin did not work" or something.

The fact is that the prevailing opinion here is decidely anti-Linux. Posters here are a lot more realistic than the trolls think.

Re:Of Course

[Dominatus]

But on the same token, if Linux were good, they never would have gone back to Microsoft. So either way, spinning the story either way makes Linux look good. Even just "using" it implies it's better than giving up on it. I certainly wouldn't say it's anti-Linux, as using something implies niether a good thing or a bad thing.

Re:Of Course

[spitzak]

I guess I'm not explaining this clearly.

Saying "Telstra never intended to use Linux and used it as a ruse to get Microsoft to lower their prices" implies "Telstra never thought there was any chance Linux is better than Microsoft". Get it? It means Linux is bad, or at least that Telstra thinks it's bad!!! Get it now?

Re:Of Course

[HuguesT]

You don't know for sure what Telstra was doing. My own interpretation is that they were negociating in good faith and were considering Linux seriously. Most probably they are already using some kind of Microsoft desktop and they had put a dollar value to the task of switching to Linux, but that it was lower than the deal Microsoft was offering initially. Had Microsoft not lowered their prices, Telstra would have gone ahead with their Linux option. Once Microsoft offer was lower than the cost of switching Telstra just took that option purely on financial ground.

Nowhere in there can you read "Linux is bad".

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not

[Judg3]

I doubt it - this is the way business has always worked, it's only front page news because it's Linux vs MS.
If it was HP vs Cisco or any other 2 vendors which selling competing products it would have been rejected.
Hell, if you're in charge of buying product X for your company and DIDN'T try to lower the price buying shows quotes from companies Y and Z, I'd worry!

um.

[SinaSa]

Somehow I doubt this is the case.

Telstra's IT head wanted to run Linux to cut costs. In a business they figure things out using a cost-benefit ratio. In fact, most human beings do this.

Microsoft simply offered them a deal with better cost-benefit ratio. Telstra aren't going to be downloading ISO's, they would be buying something like SuSE or RedHat. So Microsoft simply discounts prices, and Telstra has cut costs, without needing to move everything across to a new system.

As an Aussie, it's my duty to hate Telstra, but the headline is so very wrong.

Re:um.

[theparanoidcynic]

As an American who had a Telstra phone magically dispense with a $20 phone card for a ten minute call to the states, I'd be inclined to second that hatred. ;)

Still, you're right. It's not like they did anything weird here. Telstra threatens to fire Microsoft, Microsoft lowers their bid. Capitalism.

Re:um.

[elasticwings]

Hey, when you're that close to China, why not pick up your copies of Windows for 5$ each at a neighbor store? Sure, they all come with the same key, but you have all your copies right? Who needs licenses? :P

Re:um.

[entrigant]

So how is it wrong? In an effort to cut costs they fake a plan to switch to linux hoping microsoft will feel threatened enough to lower prices. This still fits in with your provided mindset of "figuring out things using a cost-benefit ratio." It is just a little more underhanded. However, underhanded seems to be the technique of the century thus far.

Re:um.

[Anonymous Coward]

No not capitalism. Telstra never intended to use Linux. They never had a Linux bid. What they did was grind Linux into the ground just to get a better price from Microsoft. In the end Telstra's customers are the ones who get screwed. But who cares, this world is going to hell pretty fast and the sooner we get rid of the idiots who think that capitalism is the be all end all the better.

Re:um.

[YU Nicks NE Way]

Why is it underhanded? It forces Microsoft to show that it's worth the money. (Telstra's prices aren't out of line for a large customer. They're still paying $87(US)/seat-year. That's not to far from what an OEM pays for XP + OXP + W2k3 + E2k3.)

In fact, far from "bad news for M$", this is yet another instance of the problem Linux has been facing. The only major wins Linux has been getting against Microsoft have been political ones like Munich. They haven't won the business case for any large account. (Even IBM is only "thinking" about migrating so far. Hardly a vote of confidence.)

Re:um.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just thought I'd let you know, people are marking this as funny cause Australia is further away from China then the USA.

demise?

[js3]

it only means they won't make as much money. Btw people have been predicting microsoft's demise since OS/2, I guess one more wouldn't hurt

Re:demise?

[SYFer]

Ha! I actually laughed aloud at the OS2 reference--and yeah, I predicted their demise then too and by all rights I should have been correct. I was an early and heavy user (through an employer), but that's another thread.

Having a sort of "dual" price structure though, I think, is a more serious crack in the dike even than making a foolish "vision" call (OS2).

I'm sure that MS will eventually shape-shift to fit a changing marketplace (MSLinux (TM) maybe), but clearly this kind of easy manipulation on the part of customers does not bode well for the status quo.

Read The Artical

[Anonymous Coward]

The amount covers payment for several microsoft products.

From the artical

"The deal will see Windows XP, Office 2003, Exchange 2003 and other collaborative Microsoft software products "

Telstra's commitment to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Before anyone starts bashing Telstra, let me point out that they've got a BIG linux grid running that they do their data processing on.

Re:Telstra's commitment to Linux

[TeraCo]

Um.. very little of their data processing is linux, most of the middleware is solaris, and the big iron runs whatever IBM puts on there.

Re:Telstra's commitment to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

And ~7 years ago, when you purchased a dedicated modem from them, they sent you PPP instructions specifically for Linux. This was before the big rise in Linux, so it was pretty clear that their technical people were Linux users themselves. None of that "we don't support that". They supported standards, and were even friendly about Linux setups.

That was before the big stock sale, when Telstra was an evil government monopoly, instead of an evil market monopoly. They're probably a lot more consumer-hostile now that they're a market monopoly (wouldn't know, disconnected from them 2 years ago).

Well true it's $500 per user...

[atezun]

But this isn't just covering Windows Liscenses, It also mentions they're getting exchange 2003 and office 2003 plus they're probably getting quite a nice support package from MS. A copy of windows and office alone is more than $500 in store in Canada which has relatively the same dollar value as the Australian Dollar right now. Make No mistake, they definately got a discount.

Re:Well true it's $500 per user...

[boudie]

The question is, has anyone actually paid $500 CAD for Office and Windows? Or more importantly, will anyone admit to it, here, in a public forum where they risk the ridicule of others who didn't pay $500 for it. Leaving out the Government, of course.

Re:Well true it's $500 per user...

[Zebbers]

sweet... everyday i rejoice in my system....$0.00 on software.... mmmm

Re:Well true it's $500 per user...

[hawkeyeMI]

I try not to be a grammar/spelling Nazi but you sir have made the error that I am currently on crusade against.

If something is 'definite' or 'definitively true' then one says 'definitely' not 'definately'

/spelling-nazi-mode

Badly Needed?

[lucaschan.com]

I seriously object to the first sentence of that article:

"TELSTRA has secured badly needed cost savings".

Ziggy's not exactly going hungry over there.

Re:Badly Needed?

[weighn]

Monster Telstra eats you.

Re:Badly Needed?

[SlightOverdose]

They only made 3 kazillion dollars last year. Quick! Increase phone line extortion^w rental to $30/month!

Re:Badly Needed?

[Alsee]

The use of the word "secured" in a Microsoft purchase is rather missplaced as well.

-

Currency conversions

[mjtg]

For non-Australians in the audience, note that $1-AU ~= $0.70-US. So the cost estimates are around $10.5M - $14M US, or $265.50-$350 US per seat.

Re:Currency conversions

[Servo]

You got that backwards. If AUD $1 = US $.70, then AUD $10 Million = US $7 Million.

Re:Currency conversions

[Anonymous Coward]

No he didn't. Note the hyphen signifying "to" and not "equals."

Re:Currency conversions

[mjtg]

Nope, you got it backwards. Here's a cut-and-paste from a query I just did on xe.com's currency coverter:

1 AUD = 0.701681 USD

Yes, AUD $10 Million = US $7 Million (or US $7,016,810 to be a bit more precise :-).

BTW, what clown mod'ed me redundant ? Mine was about the 6th comment on this article. Jeez.

How deep a discount?

[danharan]

Does anyone have information on how deep a discount that is?

This is between USD 10.5 and 14 million for 4,000 seats for 4 years, or 656-875/seat/year for "Windows XP, Office 2003, Exchange 2003 and other collaborative Microsoft software products"

I wonder how long it will be until other companies use the same threat... and how long it will take MS shareholders to clue in that their margins are getting squeezed.

Re:How deep a discount?

[cbreaker]

.. or you could look at it as extra money, because it won't really cost MS much to hand the company some CD's. If the company was really serious about moving to Linux, then this is just extra money in MS's pocket that would have been used elsewhere.

Re:How deep a discount?

[tumutbound]

THat's 40,000 seats not 4,000.
Makes a big difference on the cost per seat per year.

Next time Gadget, I'll get you!

[mr i want to go home]

I've no love for Telstra, but it is good that they did at least consider Linux.

What this means is that in 4 years when their indenture to Microsoft is up they will likely consider an Open Source alternative again. If their IT budget is under the same pressure then and their alternatives are using Linux/OSS on existing machines or upgrading all their machines to Longhorn + required hardware, Microsoft may not be celebrating a win.

I think this is the best incentive for people not to add bloat and extraneous features to key OSS components (I'm looking at you Gnome guys and Kevelopers).

Re:Next time Gadget, I'll get you!

[zbaron]

In four years, are they going to be able to dig their data out of Microsofts closed formats to even think about a move to Open software?

The city of Munich said something along the lines of, that the biggest advantage of moving to an Open Standards based infrastructure and not leaving yourself at the mercy of one vendor by being locked into proprietary document and data formats.

Somehow, I do not think Microsoft will be so nice in four years time.

Re:Next time Gadget, I'll get you!

[Anonymous Coward]

In four years, are they going to be able to dig their data out of Microsofts closed formats

Most shops have been using Microsoft's formats for 10 years now and it hasn't killed them. Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow.

The city of Munich said something along the lines of

They also said "We're going to pay IBM out the ass with the taxpayers money because we're a bunch of Linux Zealots that got into politics", before goosestepping into the datacenter. It was an idelogical decision, not a cost one -- there was no TCO put on "proprietary".

Re:Next time Gadget, I'll get you!

[Frogbert]

I've reciently acqured some refurbished Telstra harddisks, naturaly they were unformatted. There wasn't that much interesting information on the disks however I did notice that Telstra apps predominantly appear to be written entirely for MS Access or in Visual Basic. A linux OS would have to overcome these difficulties before it could be implemented.

lot of cheese

[Anonymous Coward]

for a bunch of cds that cost pennies,
or just a piece of paper even that cost a penny.
Those engineers have already been paid for the OS
I would say the whole development has been paid off already.
So its all clear and free money anyway, to MS.
375$ a license is a lot hell upgrades are only 180$
@(insert your electronic store chain here)

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Isn't that how competition is supposed to work?

[walterbyrd]

Give me a better price, or I'll go with the competition. I do that when I'm buying a refridgerator. What's the problem?

Frankly, I think we've grown so accustomed to msft's monopoly, that we've forgoting that competition is supposed to be a normal way to do business.

If msft want's to fight for their business that's fine. I'm just glad that there finally is a something that is real competition to msft's monopoly.

Re:Isn't that how competition is supposed to work?

[OwlWhacker]

Microsoft claims that it's solutions offer a much lower TCO than Linux/Open Source solutions. Why is it, therefore, that Microsoft has to keep discounting its prices in order to beat Linux?

It's not really the fact that Microsoft has lowered prices to win over Linux, it's the fact that Microsoft is saying that it's already less expensive.

Microsoft's actions of price-reduction seem to prove against the 'facts' that it's constantly referencing.

One of the primary difficulties

[Anonymous Coward]

In product pricing is trying to reclaim something called the "consumer surplus". The idea here is that the amount of money that each of your potential customers is willing to pay is different; vaguely speaking, you want to choose the price that balances out being low enough that you retain as many of your customers as possible, while being high enough that you make a lot of money on each unit. Still, there's always going to be that consumer surplus-- the amount of money lost to the fact that a subset of your customers would have been WILLING to pay much more, but because you have to charge them the same amount you charge everyone else you only got the same amount from them you got from everyone else.

This is why you're in very good shape if somehow you can work your way into a sales model where, as happens with an auction, or with car sales, you're somehow able to tailor your price to what exactly each individual customer is willing to pay. You maximize both the number of customers you get, and the amount of money you could get from each one.

This is where Microsoft's doing and it isn't a bad thing for them. Microsoft's prices are ridiculously high, and the market is beginning to realize this, but rather than actually correct for this and charge reasonable prices, they're simply continuing as they have and making special allowances for those customers who might be leaving.

Or, in other words: This shouldn't be seen as a victory for Microsoft's competitors because Microsoft's having to lower their prices for the customers who are threatening to leave. It's a victory for Microsoft, because Microsoft isn't having to lower their prices for everyone else.

Re:One of the primary difficulties

[Anonymous Coward]

You are assuming that this is the only time that this will happen. It hasn't occured to you that other companies might do the same thing?

Re:One of the primary difficulties

[danielsfca2]

if somehow you can work your way into a sales model where, as happens with an auction, or with car sales, you're somehow able to tailor your price to what exactly each individual customer is willing to pay.

This is known in the world of microeconomics as "perfect price discrimination" and is indeed a very good thing. Also in the "Price Discrimination" category are "student discounts," and those "travel discount guides" you see at every [US] fast food place, with coupons for motels at a few dollars below the normal rate. All firms would like to achieve perfect price discrimination, where each individual pays the maximum he's willing to pay for the good or service.

Re:One of the primary difficulties

[Tony-A]

It's a victory for Microsoft, because Microsoft isn't having to lower their prices for everyone else.

I wouldn't be too sure about that. Best delay any high-price committments and see what develops. Otherwise you risk buying it a week before it goes on sale.

Re:One of the primary difficulties

[beakburke]

Price discrimination only comes into play when a company has at least some pricing (monopoly) power. This is because the company faces a demand that is flexible with regards to price (as opposed to a competitive market where you sell at the going market price or lose all of your customers). This only works if Microsoft can keep the stong effects of its monopoly working for them. Basically, MS will have to lower prices for other customers, at least for those customers over whom it has less pricing power due to competition from linux, etc.

Re:One of the primary difficulties

[Kenardy]

"Or, in other words: This shouldn't be seen as a victory for Microsoft's competitors because Microsoft's having to lower their prices for the customers who are threatening to leave. It's a victory for Microsoft, because Microsoft isn't having to lower their prices for everyone else."

Yet.

I just thought I'd supply the word you left off.

Re:One of the primary difficulties

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have a problem paying a bit more if it means I don't have to spend 3 days shopping around for the best price. Even with the advent of online price comparison sites, I'll look at the price, and then check my short list of preferred vendors. As long as my preferred store has the product, in stock, for a price that is within a few percent of where I could get it elsewhere then I'll purchase from my preferred store. Why switch vendors just to get a minor discount when I've had zero issues with my current set of vendors?

OTOH, there is a point where the price differential gets too great in which case I'll look elsewhere for better deals. Or, if I think that the price being offered to me is 'unfair'.

And if you're dealing with a small business, being willing to pay without excessive haggling or making unreasonable demands will result in long-term benefits. Either through improved service if you're known to be a good tipper or a profitable customer, or through occasional price breaks. (A good example is a bar where the bar tender knows you, or a mechanic that gives you above-average service, a diner where the waitress brings you coffee before you ask, or a drop-off laundry service where you sometimes get loads done for free.)

Not all that suprising....

[urbaer]

when you consider it is Telstra who we are talking about. Telstra seems to want to charge whatever it wants, however it can only increase it's charges in line with costs. So jumping on Linux would decrease thier costs and the ACCC would jump all over them.

Maybe I'm just a cynic and my logic is flawed, but it doesn't suprise me that one monopoly should use get into bed with another monopoly.

MS will be using this now

[steveha]

MS will use this in ads, and MS sales folks will mention this. "Telstra looked into Linux, and they saw MS is a better deal."

There will also be some kind of press release, with quotes in it like:

Mr. I. T. Director of Telstra says, "Microsoft's TCO was compelling, yada yada yada."

Probably MS will write the quotes for Telstra.

None of this is shocking or new. This isn't even the first time I have read a story like this on Slashdot, let alone the first time it has ever happened. (Remember when Home Depot announced they would go to Linux for their POS terminals? Remember when they announced they would go to MS?)

steveha

Re:MS will be using this now

[dacarr]

It's funny that they didn't talk about all the companies that went the other way. Like these guys, for a small example.

A few thoughts

[failedlogic]

Seeking a good deal is a smart business move for Telestra. That said, say Telestra bought licences @ $375/user. Some ppl here are saying that any sale evern if it were $5/user would be good. I disagree. MS has a huge install base. They don't have to worry about losing money on lots of users. If MS sold @ $5/user it would be a loss to the company. MS wants to make itself appear to be a premium brand. Selling low to anybody negatively affects their brand. If you're a Ferrari salesperson, even if you're desparate, you don't sell the next car for $5 -- you want the full $500,000 (or whatever). Selling low just to sell just lowers the prestige of the brand and the perceived value.

Re:A few thoughts

[Kenardy]

I have heard a rumor that Longhorn will be renamed "Brand X" before release ... like XP (that's "Brand X, build P"). Most likely, it will be called "MSFT XTC".

Re:A few thoughts

[Anonymous Coward]

MS wants to make itself appear to be a premium brand.

What? Did something change completely around while I was on holiday? Because before that, Microsoft wanted to be the brand used by everyone, even people who hate them. Comparing them to Ferrari is even further out, Ferrari is the car almost noone can afford, not the car you are forced to buy even if you prefer a VW bug. And definitely not the car all your neighbours have at least three models of, which they can't use because they only have one PC.

Re:A few thoughts

[OSgod]

How do you reconcile that view with Oracle? Oracle is the creme of the crop in relational DB's. Oracle is an aggressive marketer.

Oracle starts very expensive -- most expensive of any big relational DB vendor.

If you work with them at a sensitive period (end of a quarter, end of a year, etc.) you will get a large discount. Big customers can get huge discounts -- rumored to have been in some cases 95%. Most times we are talking less than 50% from what I've seen but remember -- with MSFT and Oracle list is only paid by tiny consumers and companies that neeed to have their heads examined.

Re:A few thoughts

[Anonymous Coward]

But Ferrari not have motto: Ferrari in every house, every family and for everyone.

Re:A few thoughts

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you dare compare my Ferrari to Microsoft product!

Sheeesh... where is this world coming to?

Re:A few thoughts

[spitzak]

Are you kidding? Microsoft relies almost 100% on the perception that the OS is "free" and comes with the computer.

When I did work for the state we used this method

[isolation]

I was doing some security work for goverment agency in South Carolina and this was the method we used for getting better deals out of Microsoft.

MS Sales rep: "This is the best deal we can give you"
Client: "OK thats fine. Our IT staff is suggesting moving to Linux"
MS Sales rep: picks up a cell and calls the office....."uh-hu"..."linux"..."uh-hu"....hangs up phone. "Ok how about this deal on a Open License package. We can knock another 20% off."

The Microsoft sales team has been ordered to win over Linux at all costs and they mean it.

Why is this big news?

[calldown]

Honestly, doesn't every large store/business do this? Hell, even Best Buy or Future Shop have a 'price matching' scheme where they'll match the price of the competitors product - just to keep your business.

So again, is it just because it's Microsoft? "Oh no, Microsoft had to lower their revenues!" Guess what? Telstra's cost of switching is starting to rise slowly, as they keep with MSFT.

Jeez. "News."

-calldown

Re:Why is this big news?

[Stevyn]

I think this is big news here is because everyone's going to get angry that linux was never considered a serious choice.

Competition, and from two sides

[digitect]

MS might want to rethink handing back all its cash to investors if this is how they're going to do business from now on ...

But isn't this the only option they really have? This is what competition is all about!

Everyone knows Microsoft has been cleaning up because they are a monopoly. (Whether a good or bad monopoly is another subject.) With competition, everything changes. To keep up you have to make an offer to the market with some efficiency, service, feature, innovation or quality that no one else can provide.

But on the desktop, Microsoft is now being pinched from above (Apple) and below (Linux). Granted these competitors are not yet worthy to take the whole pie but I'm sure Redmond is beginning to understand that they are fighting a two front war. And their ability to attack one competitive front only exposes a weakness to the other. The article suggests to me that this reaction is against the bottom: Linux is simply cheaper, Microsoft has to respond with significantly better pricing to make the sale. (Maybe Longhorn is an effort to compete more with Apple by offering a competing design level or media friendly platform?)

Having been around a while, I find this all very facinating because I can see how fast the tables turn in this industry. What they once did to others is now being done unto them. :) The best part is that the market can now feign to either side and Microsoft has to respond. They can negotiate against price point or from design/usability.

During such an innovative time (historically speaking) many disruptions occur. It's nearly impossible to keep any ship afloat for more than a generation. As Microsoft enters its second one, I feel certain we'll see more of this type of behavior as they struggle to keep momentum. Sit back and watch the show!

Re:Ow the Irony

[Reivec]

wow you totally missed the spirit of the comment. /. tends to put MS in a bad light any chance they get (can't say I blame them). The comment was to point out that MS isn't going to get the profit margin they want anymore so maybe they should rethink giving even more of their profit away. Thus the comment was trying to question MS business decisions. NO WHERE in there does the fact that this is a aussie company come into play. It was not intended to make MS look like a victim I assure you.

Barely a dent

[HangingChad]

Cutting prices won't make all that big of a dent in MSFT profits. Okay, so they take a couple billion off the top, they still make something like 12 billion a quarter. And they have no factory to support, no parts to buy...they can afford to cut prices a long, long way.

Besides, with MSFT the nickle and dime treatment never ends. You pay, pay, pay. Not to mention all the other software you have to buy to keep their crap running right.

Personally, I think it was a bad choice. But if you're going to stay with MSFT, then that's the way to deal with them.

MS will still make a profit here

[EmbeddedJanitor]

In most corporate environments, most desktops are kept the same by the corporate IT Gestapo, with first-line support, installation etc done by the jackboots. This means that the effort involved for Microsoft to support those 40k desktops is way lower than, say, 1000 * 1-desktop companies. Therefore the actual cost of good sold to Microsoft is probably no more than 1000 licenses. They can therefore give huge volume discounts without making a loss.

Of course they are willing to burn a lot of cash to maintain market share. MS have yet to have a quarter that comes near to breaking even in their mobile biz. They can afford to wait their time and burn cash in the mobile sector to keep their hands on corporate business.

Not Surprising

[Esion Modnar]

I once pretended that I was considering moving to a different apartment complex to get a discount on my current rent. It was all a bluff, but it worked.

That was just dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Why pay money for a crappy product when you can get a better product for free? I guess the Australian government isn't as smart as they thought they were.

I have been using Linux for two years and my total cost has been $70.00 US (for CD-r's and a modem) and the education I received is worth more than $70.00 US, so, I guess I came out ahead. I can do things on my PII 450Mhz that Microsoft Windows could never do on any machine.

Home Depots rival Lowes did go Linux

[isolation]

On IBM hardware even. I suspect the servers my still be AS/400s.

It's Still Pure Profit

[John Hasler]

> No figures yet on how much of a discount Telstra
> got, but MS might want to rethink handing back
> all its cash to investors if this is how they're
> going to do business from now on ..."

It's not as though they had any manufacturing costs.

Re:It's Still Pure Profit

[chandip]

Actually what M$ pays its software developers to manufacture (write) their products is their manufacturing cost.

Were I a MS investor I'd want the cash *now*, too

[Anonymous Coward]

It's kind of hard to make money in a commodity market when the competition is FREE .

And that's what Linux is: the commoditization of the consumer software market. And in a commodity market, the cost of a single unit is little more than the marginal cost to produce that one unit....

So I'd want all that cash M$ has before they piss it away to someone else.

Re:Timothys biz advice to MS

[Bull999999]

But I do not think that they will find value in business suggestions on /. even from an editor.

What do you mean? There are plenty of good business/financial suggestions on /. Here are some of the gems I found over the years.

"High income = being rich, no matter what."
"You shouldn't invest because you'll have to pay capital gains tax when the value goes up (and is realized)."
"Government should take over the health care becasue they did such a good job with Medicare and Social Security"
"You shouldn't have to put away money for the retirement because Medicare and Social Security is all you need"
"Buying an overpowered computer is a good investment. It's even better if you buy it using a credit card and make only the minimun payments on it."
"If your credit card company raises its rates, bitch on /. instead of calling the company to find out why."
"Businesses shouldn't lay people off no matter what because it's a bad thing."
"For-profit businesses should exist to serve the mankind, not for-profit."
"The due date on the credit card bill is only a suggestion."
"Pay your bills at the last moment because the postal service always delivers and the online payment system never fails."
"The financal experts recommend that you have 3-6 months worth of living expeses as an emergency fund only because those experts get paid alot."
"Don't budget for the emergency fund because it will cut into your cool gadets (and gaming computer) fund. Use the credit cards instead. And if you do use those credit cards, you'll somehow magically budget to pay off the cards AND the interest over time."
"Don't listen to the doctors who says you should eat healty and exercise. They work for the greedy health food stores and gyms (like you shouldn't listen to the economists because they work for the rich)."
"Don't wear seatbelts. The greedy cops work for the insurace companies (less injuries mean less payouts)."
"Put all your investments into the Linux companies because they'll crush MS, UNIX, and Apple. Don't invest in diverse stock funds, such as S&P 500 based index funds, because they are likely to contain shares of MS and owning shares of it will make you evil, no matter how small."
"It's easier to lobby the government to spread the wealth of the people who actually saved millions for their retirement instead of actually saving for yourselves"
"Best thing to do in a recession is to tax the hell out of those evil corporations to stimulate the job market."
"The rich are evil because majority of their wealth are in form of unrealized gains, which is not yet taxed. They should sell all their investment to buy usless things that they don't need in order to pay the fair share of taxes."
"Even though higher income usually means higher taxes, there's a cutoff point where you don't pay any taxes once you reach the 'rich' status"

CAD ~= USD???

[agraupe]

Where do you get that number? 1.35 CAD/USD is hardly similar. It's not yen, but it's not close either.

Re:CAD ~= USD???

[cbiltcliffe]

Sigh....RTFA.

There's nothing in the story about USD. This is Australian dollars we're talking about.

$1 CAD ~= $1.07 AUD

Pretty damned close if you ask me.

Re:CAD ~= USD???

[agraupe]

Ah, so you're right. I knew the article was in AUD, but I guess I got confused by the mention of USD in the above posts.

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not - XOR not not

[rjamestaylor]

Wrong. It is fundamentally different because this time it ISN'T Microsoft in the spoiler's seat. Microsoft has been leveraging a lucky break (PC-DOS with rights to MS-DOS) with being the low-price leader. Now its competition is a no-license-price leader. Tables turned, MS floundering in its new role.

Re:When I did work for the state we used this meth

[Bull999999]

I guess we all know there MS gets it's sales force from!

Used car saleman: This is the best deal we can give you.
Buyer: OK, that's fine, I'm going to look around some more at the other dealerships.
Used car salesman: walks over to the sales manager's "office"....."uh-hu"..."other dealerships"..."uh-hu"....comes back. "Ok how about this "some made up discound bullshit" deal? We can knock another 20% off.

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not

[timeOday]

I doubt it - this is the way business has always worked

But having competition is precisely "the demise of the Business Model as Bill Knows It"!

You don't rake in 80% profit margins year after year by undercutting the other guy, you do it by being the #1 and only.

But if too many of these "linux switches" turn out to be bluffs, MS won't be so generous with the discounts.

This is only one remember

[metalac]

I guess you have to realize that this is only one company doing that if more and more companies started doing that and then recieved huge 50% or more discounts from MS, then for sure MS stock would just plumit since their earnings will be half of what they got now (remember MS makes money on OS and Office, rest of the stuff mostly looses money, maybe MSN isn't, but most other stuff sure is). Eventually this will work in Linux's favor since it's doing exactly what it's needed, weakening MS's position in the market and exposing corporations at least tot he word Linux which hasn't been accepted that much by most companies.

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not - XOR not not

[Anonymous Coward]

Now its competition is a no-license-price leader

Why are all you shitwits assuming that a large corporation is going to roll out a no-cost version of Debian or something? The article very clearly states they were evaluating Sun's Linux Distro which is not 'free'.

Re:Timothys biz advice to MS

[Bull999999]

"I will be wealthy in six months, unless VA [Software] or the U.S. economy craters before then. I'll bet on VA; I'm not so sure about the U.S. economy :-)." -- Eric S. Raymond, December 10, 1999.

Most slashdotters think that great computer skills somehow equals great financial skills and that they can learn all about accounting and economics in CS classes (I only learn about computer stuff in my CS classes, so I guess I got ripped off).

The one million dollar coffee cup.

[HotNeedleOfInquiry]

This story reminds me of the one million dollar coffee cup legend.

The legend goes like this: A major company is negotiating with IBM for a new mainframe system. They've called in IBM and gotten a quote. Then they call in Amdahl and get a quote from them and a coffee cup. Next they call IBM back into the office with the Amdahl coffee cup in plain view. Legend has it that the coffee cup gets you an automatic 1 million dollar discount off the original quote.

Re:The one million dollar coffee cup.

[Anonymous Coward]

and where are Amdahl now?

Telstra are scum...

[Goonie]

For the benefit of our American readership, Telstra are Australia's local piece of evil incarnate. They're 51% government owned, so they combine the worst characteristics of rapacious private companies and pig-headed government bureacracy. They price-gouge to an incredible degree on access to the local loop, they deliberately delayed the introduction of DSL services so they could cream more money out of business clients using ISDN (at truly outrageous prices), and deliver shocking service to their customers (ask Bigpond broadband internet customers about the reliability).

Re:Telstra are scum...

[watsondk]

no way, tel$tra has a long way to rise to get to the level of scum .....

to see just how totally fscked internet access is here just look at this

http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,10 273820%5E15318%5E%5Enbv%5E15306,00.html

sure prices have finally started to drop but, as they drop so does the quality, and yes while it may be hard to believe, the "service" can get worse, although not sure how far it can fall

from personal pain, the tel$tra cable service is third rate, and thats on one of the rare good days

so far today its dropped out 14 times, then comes the mail server which I have been unable to talk to for over 2 years

not forgeting the news server which all of a sudden will not even resolve

call the helldesk, to be told "you need to use a supported OS, before we can sort your problem", er hello, I am using a Mac, but no thats not enough seems I have to downgrade OSX to 10.2 before they will talk to me

After 18 years in the IT business (data comms, infrastructure design etc), I should know whats happening, but no, some trained monkey with zero experience and a single digit IQ, tells me they he knows its my problem, even after I proved them wrong every time I have had a problem in the past.

these are the same idiots who told me "I would be able to ping the mail server if I ran outlook", yes really!

and no, I cannot change ISP, all down to my only voice line being pair gained, which rules out ADSL and even a dialup if speeds >28K are wanted. And just guess who owns the local loop, yes tel$tra.

Re:Telstra are scum...

[Artega VH]

Perhaps I should elaborate..

Telstra (formerly Telecom) is THE tele-communications company in australia. It is a government owned monopoly, and doesn't hesitate to screw over the little guy to please the shareholders (like any big public company). On top of that it is bureacratic to the extreme(like anything governmental).

They provide shocking service for both wired telephone - dialup(particularly in regional areas), and for "broadband" - I'm not with Telstra and I still pay 70AU per month for 12gb on cable. Simply because Telstra can price fix the market. The mobile phone market is slightly better, with 3 established companies and a few smaller but growing ones.

Re:Telstra are scum...

[kubrick]

It is a government owned monopoly

51% government owned, 49% publically traded shares.

It has all the bad attributes of a private monopoly, but seems to be as untouchable as the average government department.

Sell the whole lot off, I say, and speed the day when the ACCC or a future equivalent will feel able to smack them down hard.

Re:Telstra are scum...

[zsau]

It's actually quite good. Or at least, what I experienced of it on cable was. A helluvalot better than the crap ADSL I'm putting up with now (AINS).

How Is This a Deal?

[rudy_wayne]

$20 million divided by 40,000 = $500 per user. That's a deal?

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not

[antiMStroll]

You're absolutely right but neglect the important point, it hasn't been a a necessary desktop tactic for Microsoft for a very long time. Since the OS/2 days?

Linux devaluates Microsoft's golden eggs

[Alwin Henseler]

..Since Microsoft has huge profit margins..

I read somewhere that the Windoze family of OS'es, and the Office softwares are THE big money-makers for M$, and other products are just riding along on that capital.

A story like this just shows that from a customer's point of view, Windoze/Office have value (that M$ can cash in on), but having Free/OSS alternatives, lowers that value.

So making Linux a more attractive alternative, lowers the net value of Microsofts golden eggs. How nice...

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not - XOR not not

[Anonymous Coward]

Ya it's 100USD per employee (not even per seat) too. After 18 months of testing the solutions they tried based on Linux and open-source could not compete at 83USD per seat. That says something very different from all the "Linux is zero cost" advocates.

Al--right-ie

[Anonymous Coward]

Good job, Telstra!! Quite right, quite right. Now, everyone, move along . . . there is nothing to see hear, move along . . .

small math

[jdkane]

No figures yet on how much of a discount Telstra got,

Well, 40 000 users and $20 000 000 is 20 000 000 / 40 000 = $500/user over 4 years.

The full office Suite is ~ $599.00 by itself. And I'm sure the deal includes server and developer versions of software too ... maybe even subscriptions to MSDN. On the overview, it sounds like they have really received a sweet deal ... relatively speaking of course :)

Re:small math

[RichMeatyTaste]

Retail doesn't mean anything.

Even without the "Telstra discount" Corporate licenses are much cheaper than retail. One of our clients pays about 200 a seat for Office 2k3 professional AND Windows XP.

Competion

[CDWalton]

The Telecom is doing the same type fo shit my company does with Intel, and that is cry "We aregoing to start a line of AMD servers/desktops to get a better price on chips. I am not allowed to mention the company (I could get fired), but I will say it has four letters begins with a D :), and dude your getting one......

The Truth

[Anonymous Coward]

The stories are bullshit.

The truth of the matter is that Sun (the chosen, and ONLY Linux vendor) couldn't deliver an acceptable alternative platform, and Telstra refused to consider the vendor which could - Novell.

There were two factors which prevented a Linux deployment, collaboration and existing applications. There is no Sun equivalent to a full Exchange/Outlook environment, particularly for calendaring and availability management. Add Live Communication Server to the mix, and Sun's offering looks pathetic.

For applications, Telstra has literally hundreds of applications developed for a Windows platform over generations since Windows 3.1. Some would run under Crossover, with varying degrees of success, but there were key applications which were too dependent on the Windows platform, and integration with other applications, to be ported, and no budget to have them rewritten. In some cases, the source code for applications could not be found, making the job even worse.

At no time did Microsoft "panic" in relation to this project. They came, did their job, then negotiated a price AFTER the platform decision had been made.

Put simply, Microsoft offered a better solution. It worked, it satisfied users, and (taking ALL costs, not just licences, into account) it was the better financial option.

As for the earlier comment about Telstra running all its applications on a massive Linux grid, the poster must be smoking illegal substances. The bulk of Telstra's data processing occurs on IBM Mainframe or Sun Solaris platforms.

Re:The Truth

[LibrePensador]

Well, Sun is pathetic, indeed.

But Novell has groupwise, OpenExchange or they could even deploy egroupware if that is what the customer wants.

I believe that Sun doesn't really want to push Linux and therefore hasn't really learned how to sell it.

Re:The Truth

[Anonymous Coward]

Lock-in claims another victim.

Re:The Truth

[Anonymous Coward]

How are the stories bullshit and your "truth" is not? were you actually working on this?

Why would Telstra consider going back to Novell after being royally screwed by them and in the middle of a Netware-removal process?

Can Novell make the windows applications work better on Linux than Sun? Hardly! they would both use crossover right?

As far as I can see, Sun's desktop supports a feature similar to group policy whilst Suse's or any other Linux Desktop product does not. I fail to see how Sun could not represent linux in as good a light as novell.

Calendaring and availability management works a treat with the sun/iplanet calendar server.. exchange exchange and you'll see.

Its the Microsoft lockin making migration difficult that can be most attributed to the decision in my opinion. But what would I know?

It seems you really know "the truth". Maybe you should read Microsoft's get the facts a little closer.

*laughs*

This is not news and won't change

[tqft]

" In the end Telstra's customers are the ones who get screwed. "

It will be news when Telstra's customers don't get screwed

Re:Ow the Irony

[Anonymous Coward]

The moderators are... I can't wait to get my next batch of mod points... the crack is itching...

Re:Timothys biz advice to MS

[Anonymous Coward]

You are an arrogant condescending low-life prick.

Anarchy forever. Wait till we burn your place down and take all your stuff.

Aaarrgghh - the personal turmoil!

[lendude]

One hated monopolist Aust. co. gouging a hated monopolistic US co., and me an Australian. Must...not...succumb...to...grudging...respect...o f...Hellstra...for...this...delicious act. Must...resist...

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not

[Kenardy]

That's the magic of it all ... it's not a bluff. If Microsoft doesn't actually cough up the serious discounts, the Linux card gets played. Unless staying with Microsoft is significantly less expensive than changing to Linux, Linux gets installed over MSFT. The more security (and other) problems MSFT operating systems and application programming have, the greater the margin they have to beat Linux by.

Even with the discounts, the sales are still profitable (they have to get below ~15% profit before Bill starts looking for the exit) but the days of 'gag a maggot' margins are nearing their end. This leads, necessarily, to the question of how long MSFT stock will remain at its current levels.

And, if MSFT stock options become less attractive, will they be able to retain their programmers for the same cash wages?

A loss of profit margins leads to a loss of stock value which leads to a loss of programmer income which leads to a brain drain. Responding to the brain drain by upping the cash component of the wages narrows the profit margins even further.

This cannot be good for Microsoft.

More power to 'em!

[Ridgelift]

Great! Hopefully other companies will use Linux to leverage Microsoft into deeply discounting their overpriced software.

I don't like monopolies because they lead to unimaginative products with high price tags. Competition clears the stagnant air and fires the imagination of those who seek to build and compete.

Linux will never go away. Nor will Microsoft in all probability. It's an ecosystem that's not pretty, but it gives me lots of cheap hardware that's useless to bloated MScode. I like that. And I'm glad people will use Linux anyway they see fit, even if it's to negotiate a better deal.

Re:What's the problem?

[SimonInOz]

Your spelling, that's the problem.

It may well be a fridge, but it's still a refrigerator.

We could ask them to send 1% of their savings...

[leonbrooks]

...to Linus, as a thank-you for the huge discounts from Microsoft. And encourage them to try for AUD$250 a seat or less next time.

No, *Microsoft* is putting them out of business

[leonbrooks]

Linux just gives them a justifiable destination other than Microsoft.

Time to invent a new word: "linussend", as in "You mean we don't have to shift onto MS-Windows when our hardware becomes obsolete? Hurrah! What a linussend!"

OS2?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why doesn't IBM donate a lot of the parts from OS/2 into Linux, or is it completely different?

Re:OS2?

[Anonymous Coward]

The JFS filesystem has been ported to Linux.

A lot of OS/2 code is (c) Microsoft and governed by various agreements between the companies.

Also, OS/2 is completely technically inferior to Linux, what would they donate? 16-bit device drivers? The only interesting part was the shell, and that could be cloned easily if anyone cared to (while avoiding design flaws like binary INI files).

Finally, I suspect that IBM would rather have everyone forget the thing.

Nice business practice

[digidave]

The problem is that MS still wins because they retain their market share. Their market share is what is causing their customers to threaten them with Linux.

Don't these companies see what they're doing? They finally have some ammo to shoot MS down with and yet they are handing MS their monopoly. Unless Linux makes some serious inroads into the desktop market there will be nothing to negotiate with after this 4-year deal is up. MS can waltz in and say, "well, we gave you a grea deal last time because you were thinking of using Linux, but with Open Source out of the picture we'll double the price". And of course once there is no alternative then there is no choice but to pay. This is what MS has been doing for years, so let's not hand it back to them.

Maybe he _is_ from Oz?

[leonbrooks]

Way to use the free market to your advantage.

They did this. They used it to their advantage by subverting it.

It's taken... how many years for Western Australia's largest ISP to be able to roll out its own DSLAMs into a few core exchanges? Up to that point, the only real in-the-exchange competition here was a few pathetic efforts from giants like Optus, plus literally a handful of exchanges with RequestDSL DSLAMs in them.

Re:Maybe he _is_ from Oz?

[mcbridematt]

I wouldn't call the above statement pathetic. Ever heard of how hard Telstra makes it to put 3rd party DSLAM's in exchanges (remember: Telstra's wholesale DSL network is limited to 1500/236k)?

They literally force you to give them the equipment for free and pay the monthly maintenence charge for it.

Well... not actually down, as such.

[leonbrooks]

It's more likely that their internal billing system screwed up again and disconnected them.

Producer Surplus

[Anonymous Coward]

"Still, there's always going to be that consumer surplus"

It is good people are learning economics, but Microsoft doesn't give a rat's ass about consumer surplus, it is producer surplus they are trying to maximize.

Producer's surplus is below the consumer surplus, and to the bottom left of the equilbrium point. It expresses the same idea as CS: the area is the net benefit to the producer (instead of consumer) from selling the product on the market.

Spot the Australian [no text]

[leonbrooks]

As I said, no text.

They're also as frail as eggs

[leonbrooks]

I've had to deal with a few of them, and they've been that way since the days of CP/M 1.4. They must have had the same crew, or at least team leader, passionfingering their internal and PC software offerings for at least 25 years. Change the version of anything, just about down to changing the colour of the interface, and it dies. Generally silently. The installers also had a bad habit of blindly trashing whatever other DLLs were present.

Magic number

[Anonymous Coward]

This makes me wonder what the magic number is. At what number of seats does Microsoft concede defeat to linux?

This also makes me wonder about the implication of Microsoft selling cheap licenses overseas. Is the dumping practice forbidden for softwares too? Can Australia punish Microsoft for undercutting local linux distros?

Use the Penguin.......

[Anonymous Coward]

....to get into bed with MickeyMou$se

Use the Penguin....

[Anonymous Coward]

..to get into bed with MickeyMou$e

Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, do as we do here in Lithuania- use wireless whenever you can. Of course, Australia is a big country, but you can get a point-to-point wireless connection over 20 kilometers with good antennas if the land is flat and the points are high up. Here the mobile phone companies got quite big and strong and now they can compete with our still de-facto monopoly telco. We have a VERY strong academical network, and they supply internet over all of the country to universities, schools, libraries and etc. They use wireless a lot too.

--Coder

In every other market

[hayden]

They have to get below ~15% profit before Bill starts looking for the exit

For most markets MS try to enter this is true. But it's all built on the cash cow that is Windows and Office. If they start to loose ground there then they're in trouble.

Lack of Purchasing Ethics

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell, if you're in charge of buying product X for your company and DIDN'T try to lower the price buying shows quotes from companies Y and Z, I'd worry!

This comment demonstrates why some admins shouldn't be purchasers. Professional purchasers won't compromise their ethics by releasing a vendors proprietary information (pricing). As a buyer my reputation would suffer if this behavior became common knowledge.

For those who aren't familiar with Supply Ethics visit the Institute of Supply Management's ethics page.

Re:Lack of Purchasing Ethics

[cos(0)]

Ethics? Proprietary information? Since when is pricing of products of a public company private by any means? Doesn't capitalism encourage us to shop around for the best deal, comparing companies and setting them to fight against one another in order to ultimately provide a better deal for the consumer?

I opened your link, and nowhere there does it mention anything about pricing combined with unethicalness or unprofessionalness of revealing it to anyone else.

Re:Lack of Purchasing Ethics

[Anonymous Coward]

Midway down the page:

Examples of information which may be considered confidential or proprietary include:
Pricing
Bid or quotation information

Use the arrow keys or your mouse if that will help, better yet get some training in purchasing.

Re:Lack of Purchasing Ethics

[cos(0)]

OK, I grant you that the page does mention something of the kind.

However, that still doesn't answer the question why it's proprietary. If anything, it makes companies more accountable to us: if a company cannot justify a higher price quoted to one client than to another, then it's a sign of untrustworthiness.

Please explain.

Re:Lack of Purchasing Ethics

[rtb61]

Since there is a cost associated with putting together a price, shopping prices is poor ethics. Shopping prices is what domestic consumers do because they lack the skills to be able to negotiate i.e. they behave like children.

In the long run this kind of amatuer purchasing falls over because good business with ethics will cease pricing for companies with bad purchasing ethics (hence leaving them stuck with inflated prices).

Linux is creating the competition, this piss poor effort by a large corporation with a known lack of ethics using the open source communities efforts purely a bargaining tool is just offensive. If every corporation had the same lack of integrity and foresight Linux would not be growing as it is. Price open source options for Telstra - why waste your time (let them shop off some body elses quote).

Re:Lack of Purchasing Ethics

[Anonymous Coward]

Pricing can be proprietary for many reasons, e.g. margins, customer preference, etc. However the main unethical reason is that you're doing your employer a disservice.

If company X is offering a product for $400 and you advise company Y of the competition's price they may make an offer of $375. This appears to be a twenty five dollar savings and as a purchaser you did it with a minimum effort. Perhaps you might even take the $375 back to X and they shave another ten bucks and on and on. But you've done your employer a disservice. You're looking for the best price, maybe Y could offer the product for $265 but they don't have to, all they have to do is knock off twenty five bucks to beat X. You think you saved your company twenty five bucks but really you cost them $110.

If you want the best price let vendors sharpen their pencils and offer the best price. There is nothing wrong with telling a losing bidder that they were too high or whatever the reason was that they lost the business but specific terms that aren't common knowledge shouldn't be revealed, at least not without their permission. Usually disreputable salesmen won't even follow up to find out why they didn't get the business but better vendors will and next time they'll be better prepared in the meanwhile you don't have to compromise yourself or your employer.

I don't see the problem

[EmagGeek]

So, let me get this straight... The slashdot crowd bitches and moans when MicroSoft acts like a Monopoly, but they also bitch and moan when MicroSoft acts like a competitor?

I don't get it.. what's the problem with getting competitive on price in the face of opposition from a fierce competitor?

Re:I don't see the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing weird about it -- we like bitching and moaning. You do too, as you so aptly demonstrate. Here's my part: How can you be a slashdotter and not realize this, or the fact that the daily Microsoft hate is part of the mindset? What's wrong with you?

Re:When I did work for the state we used this meth

[OSgod]

Actually MSFT is successful because they have aggressive salesmen. Many others aren't because they don't.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Timothys biz advice to MS

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does ANYONE pay any attention to what that windbag says? Eric S. Raymond is a f***ing loser whose 15 minutes of fame is continually extended by the Linux zealots who for some reason like to give him mindshare.

ha ha ha

[twitter]

Microsoft simply offered them a deal with better cost-benefit ratio.

There's a benefit to running Windoze? That's funny right? Let me know what it is. If you can't you can get back to hating Telstra with a new passion because someone was either very stupid or bribed. 40,000 M$ desktops, oh my aching head, what a nightmare.

Re:ha ha ha

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF is "Windoze"??

Re:ha ha ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Moderators: Please note that "twitter" is a known fanatical psycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft bashing. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" or "fanboy" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, twitter is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Knoppix or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check this post out. I mean, this is an article about email disclaimers, right? The parent of the post is complaining about the ads in the linked page and so on, and twitter actually goes off on a rant to blame it on Microsoft and recommend Lynx. WTF?

Here's another. In this post twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own. Or these two. Or this one.

Still not convinced? This is what twitter considers "humour" while going about his daily "M$" routine.

More? Bad spelling in astounding conspiracy theories, more offtopic FUD and uninformed "I'm right, look at me" rants, promptly proven wrong. Worse even, twitter wants to be RMS, apparently (that first one is a winner). I mean,

Re:ha ha ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Moderators: Please note that "twitter" is a known fanatical sycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft bashing. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" or "fanboy" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, twitter is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Knoppix or Mepis or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check this post out. This is an article about email disclaimers. The parent of the post is complaining about the ads in the linked page and so on, and twitter actually goes off on a rant to blame it on Microsoft and recommend Lynx, because "is teh free".

Here's another. In this post twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

Here's that drive-by advocacy and FUD in motion: twitter goes on about some topic and then drops the usual "oh and M$ is teh evil" because "WMP phones home" or some such. Called on his FUD, he then claims that WMP stores every song and movie you've ever played in a file, somewhere. Pressed further, he just sort of slithers out of sight, his FUD-spreading complete. This is not about some Microsoft technology that nobody likes anyway; it's about lying for the sake of lying. Way too many of his posts are exactly like this one.

More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own. Or these two. Or this one. Or this one.

Still not convinced? This is what twitter considers "humour" while going about his daily "M$" routine.

M

Re:ha ha ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Moderators: Please note that "twitter" is a known fanatical psycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft bashing. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" or "fanboy" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, twitter is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Knoppix or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check this post out. I mean, this is an article about email disclaimers, right? The parent of the post is complaining about the ads in the linked page and so on, and twitter actually goes off on a rant to blame it on Microsoft and recommend Lynx. WTF?

Here's another. In this post twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own. Or these two. Or this one.

Still not convinced? This is what twitter considers "humour" while going about his daily "M$" routine.

More? Bad spelling in astounding conspiracy theories, more offtopic FUD and uninformed "I'm right, look at me" rants, promptly proven wrong. Worse even, twitter wants to be RMS, apparently (that first one is a winner). I mean,

Re:ha ha ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Moderators: Please note that "twitter" is a known fanatical psycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft bashing. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" or "fanboy" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, twitter is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Knoppix or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check this post out. I mean, this is an article about email disclaimers, right? The parent of the post is complaining about the ads in the linked page and so on, and twitter actually goes off on a rant to blame it on Microsoft and recommend Lynx. WTF?

Here's another. In this post twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own. Or these two. Or this one.

Still not convinced? This is what twitter considers "humour" while going about his daily "M$" routine.

More? Bad spelling in astounding conspiracy theories, more offtopic FUD and uninformed "I'm right, look at me" rants, promptly proven wrong. Worse even, twitter wants to be RMS, apparently (that first one is a winner). I mean,

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not - XOR not not

[rjamestaylor]

Because some of us "shitwits" have real jobs in real companies and we have negotiated real contracts with Microsoft representatives and resellers. Some times we even decide to go with an alternative to MS in favor of a solution not having ongoing licensing fees. There are other real costs, which is why I singled out licensing fees.

However, you failed to address the reality of Microsoft's switched position of being the high-priced solution versus a low-cost, good enough solution. Not surprising for a coward, though.

Re:Were I a MS investor I'd want the cash *now*, t

[16K Ram Pack]

I and plenty of other people have said it before. There are lots of reasons why the way is down for Microsoft:-

Everything NOT related to the PC has either failed or done badly. They can't seem to grow outside of where they are.

Ownership of PCs has basically maxed out. That growth in the 90s is never going to be repeated.

The PC software does everything people want it to, feature wise. How many users can name the differences between Office 97 and Office XP. Therefore, less upgrades.

Alternative methods of delivering content (eg phones, PDAs) are growing. That's more people having an opportunity to do what they need without an upgrade.

The internet will deliver more functionality to people without software (just a browser). So, less upgrade possibility.

Linux/Open Office software attacking their existing markets.

Microsoft will undoubtedly be able to sell products, but it's going the same way of things like telephone services - software is going to be a commodity and very soon.

Remember also, the MSFT share price has a big P/E ratio. People don't buy them for the dividends, but for the growth, and to give a good return, that's got to keep going at quite a rate. Once that stops, people will want dividends, which may mean investors waking up to the big cash pile.

for THAT kinda money....

[zogger]

... this company coulda rolled their own custom distro, have it do exactly what they want it to do. they could have started with any generic pick of distros and customised, or just a raw kernel and built and added on their own packages, then reproduced the image and shipped them out to their servers and desktops in a controlled orderly manner. That's a significiant sum to have to play with to just hand it over to microsoft for some marginal differences in what they already have.

Sorry, I don't believe their cost studies, I smell a rat and some behind the scenes cash-ola "consultation fees" involved with this decision.

Um...

[Bandit0013]

You realize that since software doesn't really have much of a fabrication cost (media is cheap and most MS software is distributed over the network from a central source anyway) that once microsoft breaks even on a product like Exchange they can sell it for peanuts and they're still making money.

That's one of the luxeries of the software business model.

Re:Um...

[aXis100]

Bullshit.

Software takes significant time (thus money) to maintain, plus you need to improve the product all of the time to stay ahead of competition.

MS: Use MS? Try linux first

[joostje]

So effectively, MS is saying that everyone who buys MS products, should try out Linux first (or pay a penalty if you don't try linux).

Well, that should help you next time you try to convince your boss to try linux.

Someone going to do it ...

[Sonic McTails]

1. Threaten Microsoft by going to Linux 2. Get massive M$ discounts 3. Sell the unopened M$ products at higher prices. 4. Install Linux 5. PROFIT!

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not

[Anonymous Coward]

That's where it gets tricky. Eventually ms will call the bluff but the day they do, gauranteed someone will call it back and just really switch to linux.

I'm for one am finally happy to see ms have some competition. Competition is a wonderful thing for the consumer....

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not

[thoth]

And, if MSFT stock options become less attractive, will they be able to retain their programmers for the same cash wages?
We'll see... MSFT stopped stock options and replaced them with stock grants, last year. And the recent options grants, back to '99 or so, are all underwater. MSFT brought in another company (Goldman Sachs I believe) to offer a buyout plan for underwater options - pennies per option.

It will be business as usual...

[mark-t]

As this is now public knowledge, and MS knows it, MS can safely from this point on, ignore any requests for a competitive discount because a company is using Linux. Almost of the organizations that would try this tactic for gaining a discount would be bluffing (I'd guess more than 95%) and again, MS knows it. The PR hit they'll take for this is minimal, given the prevalence of loyalty that companies have for MS (after all, if they weren't loyal to MS, they probably already would have stopped using their products, right?)

Re:Timothys biz advice to MS

[Bull999999]

You are an arrogant condescending low-life prick.

That's pretty much the norm here. I guess you missed the article where experienced Linux users bash the newbies that doesn't know any better.

Anarchy forever. Wait till we burn your place down and take all your stuff.

But that would require you putting your games down and doing something active for your cause... That'll be quite a change.

Yeah, but....

[Radical Moderate]

...keep in mind that 99% of those users are probably only using Windows and Office. Also, my organization's deal with MS does not include server licenses, and it looks like this one doesn't either. From the article:
"The deal will see Windows XP, Office 2003, Exchange 2003 and other collaborative Microsoft software products deployed..."

Granted Exchange is a server product, but "other collaborative...products" is pretty vague. MS still makes out like a bandit, just a slightly less fabulously wealthy one.

This doesnt come as a surprise..

[ShadowRage]

given telstra's record of how it treats its customers, and the fact it's the monopoly phone system in australia, my friends in australia have given me plenty of horror stories related to telstra and its "Fuck the customer" attitude.

and it isnt a shock they'd use a cheap tactic to get something cheaper.

I get confused with all these newfangled measures

[Medievalist]

I just can't keep track of the difference between a common shitload and an Imperial Arseload anymore.

Why don't you damn Aussies and Brits learn to speak American, like the rest of the world?!

And...

[leonbrooks]

They literally force you to give them the equipment for free and pay the monthly maintenence charge for it.

Not to mention that you carry the entire insurance risk etc. My point exactly. Nevertheless, in terms of "pathetic" someone like Optus ought to be well able to wear it.

Have you ever priced a commercial Optus connection? They can afford to give away DSLAMs.

I've had several commercial customers connect through Optus ADSL into Optus DSLAMs, and the retail data prices are insane. Nearly as bad as Telstra. They even charge full price for data routed between adjacent devices on the same rack.

The reason people are occasionally willing to pay those prices is exemplified by an ADSL link which a customer of mine had through Optus as a backup for their primary ISP (iiNet at the time, never again): it never went down. I mean never. They had it in place for over a year, and once it was installed it never even disconnected, let alone went down long enough to drop traffic.

Re:Go Back Three Spaces - Or not

[4of12]

That's the magic of it all ... it's not a bluff. If Microsoft doesn't actually cough up the serious discounts, the Linux card gets played.

Errr, it's only Not A Bluff if the user is willing to play the game to the end.

That means, especially now that this tactic is receiving publicity, that users will have to show that they are serious about Linux deployment. That means investing some effort into really testing out Linux in their environment.

The only way the Linux card gets played is if the player is willing to play it.

Otherwise, it's like showing up at the box office hoping that saying "Fandango!" will give you an instant discount.

Where are they now?

[urbaer]

Bought out by Fujitsu? Interesting article on how IBM took on Amdahl.

Anyone know if there is a "Where are they now?" website for tech companies?