On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 00:36 -0500, sean wrote: > On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 00:05:54 -0500 > "Myth User" <pvrmyth@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > There are dozens done by universities and independant large companies which > > clearly show MS as the winner. > > Please give some references for these university studies. Unless of course > you were just inventing them to support your argument. > > Linux has succeeded in the server room in large measure because of its TCO. > I've installed systems where the client saved hundreds of thousands of > dollars on initial licensing costs alone and much more over the life of the > project. Anyone who needs to commission a study to "disprove" the obvious > is selling something. ---- No - don't bother - that is an absurd proposition because the criteria used for the study will determine the outcome so a Total Cost of Ownership study will always be colored by those who decide what is to be considered. No resolution comes from that discussion whatsoever. Linux could very well succeed in the server room in large measure not because of TCO but because there are enough people that don't like Microsoft or don't want to use Windows Server for whatever reason. TCO is not universal and the criteria used to evaluate TCO can not be universal and a hand picked selection of TCO reports is only going to serve those who are doing the picking...it's a pointless discussion. Craig
