Not to be flippant, but isn't it a shame that some consultants would recommend a solution which is of more benefit to themselves than to their customer? As for me, I wasn't comfortable making any sort of Linux recommendation (pro or con) until I actually tried it out, though many asked. So, I've downloaded various distros and tried them out. From my customers' perspective, Linux is _almost_ there as a desktop. Most of my customers are too small to worry about the server side of things (peer-to-peer networks, for the most part), and use their desktops mostly as word processors, internet portals, or gateways to other systems. Some have specialized applications that they would _never_ want to part with, or it would exorbitantly expensive to re-write the app for a Linux environment.
The last part of your post makes perfect sense - the more people "out there" that have experience with Linux, the less expensive it is to train them. The more Linux consultants that are available, the less expensive they become (in general) as resources in the management mix. Result: a lowering of Linux TCO. Tom Hightower Solutions, Inc http://www.simas.com Sean Estabrooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/21/2003 11:11 AM Please respond to redhat-list To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Re: Sweet Success > > While it may well be initially less expensive to install a Linux-based > computer than a Windows-based computer, there are hidden costs associated > with that Linux system which many adherents tend to gloss over (if they > ever mention them at all). Those hidden costs need to be evaluated BEFORE > the computer is installed. In a Windows-centric enterprise where there is > insufficient Linux-knowledgeable resource, it makes little economic sense > to do that. The same holds true in a Linux-centric enterprise; it makes > little economic sense to start installing Windows-based computers if there > is insufficient internal resource to properly manage them (or the > willingness to acquire the necessary resources). > > Tom, In my experience the TCO argument you've articulated is used mostly as FUD by people with a vested interest in the status quo. I've seen vendor after vendor try to keep Linux competition out of larger enterprises with these arguments. I've yet to see _any_ case where a Linux solution had _significant_ extra operational costs. While there is some basis for these well known arguments their applicability is surly diminishing as Linux becomes more mainstream. Regards, Sean -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
