Recent study shows the TCo of linux is cheaper then windows....

stabile007 · 12-13-2004, 09:35 AM

TCO is Total Cost of Ownership is 36% cheaper then windows. I know people here have said its cheaper but for reference here is an actual study.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Breaki...?oneclick=true

You need to register so i posted the article here.

TCO study: Linux wins again
By Sam Varghese
December 13, 2004 - 12:12PM

Page Tools
Email to a friend Printer format Related
German study claims Linux lowers TCO
An updated Linux vs Windows TCO study has found that a 250-seat company can end up saving 36 percent if it were to equip its users with the open source operating system and applications that run on it.

The study, by Melbourne-based open source firm Cybersource, found that even use of a commercial Linux distribution such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux, would result in 27 percent lower costs.

The study was first issued in April 2002. "We have now updated this report to accommodate the changes in both platforms. We have also extended the model to increase its relevance and accuracy," said Con Zymaris, chief executive officer of Cybersource.

The study covers the average requirements over a period of three years. Zymaris said the timeframe was chosen because the costs of upgrading had to be borne repeatedly in the case of Windows.

He said given the fact that the company deals in open source products, four aspects had been factored in to tip the scales towards Microsoft:

The model was not modified to to reflect research by the Robert Frances Group which showed that Linux needed 82 percent fewer staff resources.
The costs of malware - viruses, spyware, worms, keyloggers, adware - were not taken into account. Zymaris said every research point found had suggested that this cost was essentially and predominantly a Windows platform cost, resulting in billions lost by business every year.
Costs which arose when systems need to be pre-emptively rebooted or crashed, resulting in unscheduled downtime, were not taken into account. "All our research indicates that Linux rarely if ever suffers such problems and open source platforms on the whole are extremely robust," Zymaris said.
"Finally, because Microsoft has claimed that introducing Linux into an environment will lead to increased reliance on external consultants, we have tripled the amount budgeted for such requirements on the Linux models," he said.

"The costing models include expenses such as workstations, servers, networking, IT staff, consultancy fees, internet service charges, file, mail and print servers, e-commerce servers, SQL and network infrastructure servers, internet and intranet servers, line-of-business software, desktop productivity applications, external training, printers as well as miscellaneous systems costs," Zymaris said.

zajelo3 · 12-13-2004, 11:50 AM

Good to see the truth come out. In all fairness though, I wonder who financed the study?

stabile007 · 12-13-2004, 12:10 PM

"by Melbourne-based open source firm Cybersource" which does make me be a bit leary of the results but even so I felt it was worth posting. The question is when will an independent company do a study.

zajelo3 · 12-13-2004, 01:28 PM

I did some research, and it does indeed look like that company funded it's own study. With the study that said "Windows is cheaper than Linux" it was found that Microsoft funded the study.

SciYro · 12-13-2004, 02:02 PM

it might be linux funded by a open source company, but doesnt the article say it tryed to tip the scales towards windows.... and linux still came out on top