From: "Adam Flinton" 

ROFLMAO.

My point was that most serious production servers (vs SoHo) etc tend to
rely either upon the maker of the machine (IBM, HP, Sun) or a major
outsourcing organization (IBMGS, HP, CapGem, EDS) for support etc. Smaller
comps tend to rely on more local IT services suppliers but again they get
the support call not MS or Redhat. However if your useage of a given
distrib is big enough then you can get direct support from the distrib
people (e.g. RedHat on Wall Street) but that is the same basic thing as
buying an HP or IBM server & looking to IBM & HP to support it (inc
AIX or HP-UX).

EDS, IBMGS et al will hold the relationship with MS or Red Hat that's why you pay em.

That's why IBM/HP support for linux is such a nightmare for MS & why MS
are responding in this manner.

Adam



"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e694186{at}w3.nls.net...
   Can you remind us why you replied to this thread if you have nothing to
add?

Rich

  "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:3e693e89$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  I'm not making any claims. I am stating what I know.

  Re support for a production web server...go ask Yahoo or Amazon what they
  pay. I could tell you about the ones I know such as ocado
  (http://www.ocado.com/) but frankly I'm not going to coz I don't have
their
  permission to do so.

  Adam

  "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e6933f0{at}w3.nls.net...
     You are the one making claims.  Spell out the support level you believe
  is necessary for a production web server and the cost of this support.
  Remember we are discussing the claim that one solution is cheaper than
  another where Red Hat's price for their linux plus stronghold solution
costs
  more than four to six times as much for a one year subscription than
Windows
  Server 2003 Web Edition costs for a perpetual license.

  Rich

    "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
  news:3e692e38{at}w3.nls.net...
    What? EDS/CapGem/IBM GS Support or direct support from the distrib
owner?

    Adam

    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e68c854{at}w3.nls.net...
       OK.  How much does this cost?

    Rich
      "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
    news:3e6854e1{at}w3.nls.net...


      I don't know any major comp (there may be some, I jus don't know them)
    which
      relies directly upon MS for support. EDS yes...CapGemini yes, IBM GS
      yes....direct MS support?

      However I do know a couple which do have a direct channel into the
  distrib
      comp whose distrib they're using (in Europe Suse are especailly good
at
      this).


      Adam


      Rich

        "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
      news:3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net...
        >  Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand waving?

        I just stated my opinion, that's all. I'm not here to list out
    everything
        possible.

        >   It's well known that Linux has less functionality.

        I'm not so sure that can be said any more, but no matter I wasn't
just
        talking overall OS functionality, but what you can do with that
  specific
        version of Windows Server -- with no Cal's, that means no NT
      authentication,
        files serving, or print serving, and I assume no domain
  capabilities --
        that's 4 areas that Windows is strong on and Linux needs to catch
up,
    yet
      I
        can put together a Linux box that does all 5 of these things for a
LOT
      less
        money.

        >If you want to roll your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming
  your
      time
        is worth >nothing.

        There's actually a decent amount of free support out there, and you
    don't
        have to roll your own version, you can use someone's distribution.

        >If you want to use a supported version, like from RedHat, expect to
    spend
        much more for your annual subscription.  They will sell you a
    subscription
        to red hat linux advanced server for $1499 per year.<

        I would *never* pay Red Hat that much, they don't have enough to
offer
        support wise.  I have spent that much on Microsoft products several
    times
        over up to now, but things are a changin.  I might add that
Microsoft
  is
        quite costly for aftermarket support and I don't buy that either.

        >If you want their supported enterprise level web server you are
going
    to
        pay another $395 to $895 annually.  That's more than four to six
times
      more
        expensive than the Windows Server 2003 solution.<

        I got it beat -- I have a server here at home (always learning) that
    cost
      $0
        for the Linux and about $200 for the hardware.  (I also have a Linux
      client
        PC here that I paid $99 for and I'm not going to do that again, at
  least
      not
        this distribution.)

        - Bob Comer



        "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e67d5e4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
           Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand waving?

           It's well known that Linux has less functionality.  If you want
to
    roll
        your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming your time is worth
    nothing.
        If you want to use a supported version, like from RedHat, expect to
    spend
        much more for your annual subscription.  They will sell you a
    subscription
        to red hat linux advanced server for $1499 per year.  If you want
  their
        supported enterprise level web server you are going to pay another
  $395
    to
        $895 annually.  That's more than four to six times more expensive
than
    the
        Windows Server 2003 solution.

        Rich

          "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
        news:3e67b7d1{at}w3.nls.net...
          Less functionality, higher cost. Ease of use is a draw, but it
would
      have
        to be even cheaper just for a web server.

          - Bob Comer


            "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e67b63f{at}w3.nls.net...
               By what criteria and how so?

            Rich

              "Robert Comer" 
wrote in message
        news:3e67ae88$1{at}w3.nls.net...
              That's not good enough to compete with Linux.

              - Bob Comer


              "Geo."  wrote in message
        news:3e67a4e1$1{at}w3.nls.net...
              > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29567.html
              >
              > There will be no price increases (as such) when Microsoft
  ships
      its
        next
              > server OS, Windows Server 2003, on April 24th, but there
will
  be
    a
        new
              > budget-priced version of the product aimed squarely at the
web
        server
              > market. Server 2003 Web Edition comes without client access
        licences, with
              a
              > 2gig limit on memory, 2-way SMP, and is $399.
              >
              >

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4