Linux 40 percent cheaper than Windows, exclaims IBM

Techworld ^ | 9/1/05 | Matthew Broersma

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Linux's total cost of operation (TCO) is typically 40 percent lower than Windows, according to an IBM-sponsored report from the Robert Frances Group (RFG), publicised by IBM this week.

The report [pdf] comes after two years of Microsoft-sponsored research heralding the benefits of Windows over Linux, although IBM denied it is a direct response.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Get the facts part 2?

However, it's clear that linux is cheaper. Factor in the weekly security updates which aren't nearly as required for linux.(labor costs) Factor in that you don't need to upgrade your hardware in order to upgrade your software.(linux typically makes your hardware more efficient)

And overall linux(just like a mac) isn't nearly as fragile. It's weird when something "just breaks".

[MikefromOhio]

I start the bidding at 25 posts before Golden DoDo shows up.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

tech ping

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

golden dodo?

[MikefromOhio]

hehe don't worry, you will see I am sure....

There is a Windows bot that sometimes shows up on Linux threads.

[varyouga]

I like to rag on Microsoft as much as the next guy but Windows XP Pro is a very solid product.

I've had the same windows install for about 3 years. I just do the updates. I have no blue screens or crashes. This is much better than good ole 98, where I had to do a clean install every few months.

[null and void]

Just killing Internet Exploiter would make any system safer!

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

rofl..... a windows bot.

I understand.

[flashbunny]

I prefer "tin turkey"

Usually he and bush2000 show up one after the other.

It's my hope that it's just one person with a second troll account. I'd be sad to discover there were actually two freepers that dense.

[Psycho_Bunny]

The Robert Frances study simplifies things by examining a single application layer found in most enterprises - application servers - and compares installations on Linux using x86 hardware,

Pretty disingenuous title, once you read the internals way down in the middle of the article.

[JamesP81]

As with anything, you will get a lower TCO out of it if you know how to use it. Linux, by its very nature, requires people who are knowledgeable in computers and programming to use it. Windows, OTOH, is designed to be useable by people who can't really use computers.

There are things I like about both. Install Winex or Cedega on Linux and your windows games actually run faster. OTOH, I find that WinXP, despite my early doubts about it, has turned out to be one of Microsoft's better pieces of software engineering. We have decided in the IT dept here not to use Linux because we have a lot of sensitive data, and we are concerned about using security software that the source code is publicly available for. We would write our own, but we're currently embroiled in two other software development projects and we just don't have the time right now.

[js1138]

I've had the same windows install for about 3 years. I just do the updates. I have no blue screens or crashes. This is much better than good ole 98, where I had to do a clean install every few months.

Shhhhh! There are no Windows versions after 98.

[frogjerk]

Just killing Internet Exploiter would make any system safer

Indeed!

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Golden Eagle.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

I used to think the same thing.

But I'll be honest. I'm tainted. Now I just turn my computer on, use it, and turn it off. Rinse and repeat.

It's the way computing was meant to be.(Like I said earlier, similar to a mac)

Updates are a necessary evil don't get me wrong. But to have to do them on a weekly and even sometimes daily basis is just too much to ask for not enough in return.

And to top it all off people typically pay for this headache. I cured my headache for free.(minus the cost of blank CDRs)

[sittnick]

I like Linux just fine, but this is nothing for anyone to get "religion" over. Linux is NOT "communist", Windows is not taking over your bank account (yet), and the total cost of operation depends ENTIRELY on the size and type of operation you are running.

We NEED both platforms. I used to add Macintosh, but I see them as becoming less relevant, especially if their new Intel OS uses the amount of extreme security measures that it is rumored to use.

[null and void]

Ayeyup. I use Firefox at work and Camino at home.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

^^^^^^^^^^^Linux, by its very nature, requires people who are knowledgeable in computers and programming to use it.^^^^^^^^^^^

Heh, my grandma and mom would disagree with you.

^^^^^^^^^^Install Winex or Cedega on Linux and your windows games actually run faster.^^^^^^^^^^^^

On that same note the system requirements for native versions of Doom3(on the respective platforms) is lower for linux than mac/windows.

^^^^^^^^^I find that WinXP, despite my early doubts about it, has turned out to be one of Microsoft's better pieces of software engineering.^^^^^^^^^^^

I agree. The NT based system is great. What I most often tell people who have a specific use on windows is make a linux box your internet machine while windows for everything else. Most pre-concieved notions about linux are demolished once it's tried.

^^^^^^^^and we are concerned about using security software that the source code is publicly available for.^^^^^^^^^^^^

That's a very fair argument. If I had a business I might consider the same thing.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

^^^^^^^^^^I like Linux just fine, but this is nothing for anyone to get "religion" over.^^^^^^^^^^^^

Agreed. Linux is a better product, nothing more.

^^^^^^^^^^Linux is NOT "communist"^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Again, agreed. I've often viewed linux as more capitalist than windows is. Competition, individual rights, self empowerment. Even of the "it's free" argument, nobody forces OSS users to give theirs away, they give it away on their own free will. None of the above describes communism.

^^^^^^^^^^^^We NEED both platforms.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Agreed. And like it or not, we need the mac too. Gotta have someone to poke fun at right? :-P

[evolved_rage]

IBM is wrong. M$ told me so!!!