From: Adam Flinton 

Thees Peereboom wrote:
> Geo,
>
> Yes, it does. Linux is not necesarily cheaper than a Windows solution,
> initially. The fun starts when you can add users without paying
> additional licenses, add new systems without additional licenses,
> replace your current systems without buying new systems, etc.
>

Also frankly to a large degree what retraining...we were moving to a web
based set of apps (JSP/Servlets running off a DB2 backend & the
IMAP/Postfix/web based scheduler). To a large degree the users prefered
this as the already knew how to use IE. Did they know or even care what the
back end was running? Nope it was "using" IE & that's all
they cared about.


The owner loved it as he could hook in from where ever he was & slice
& dice the stats e.g. how much sold, who'd sold the most, who was
lagging in their sales targets, how deliveries were doing etc.etc.

i.e. (to him) real business benefits.

An up to date example of this would be the salesforce.com thingy. Does the
user know or care what the servers OS'es are, the db'es are, the http
servers are?


Adam

> - Thees Peereboom
>
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2003 06:09:47 -0400, Geo.  wrote:
>
>> "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
>> news:3ee44d2a{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>>> the change over simply because of this. The solution required them to
>>> spend a couple of hours moving their appointments over to the new system
>>> but they prefered to spend many hours complaining etc instead.
>>
>>
>> do you consider a couple of hours of each employee's time to be part
>> of the
>> cost of upgrading? Retraining time as well? That can very quickly add
>> up and
>> offset the price difference between products.
>>
>> Geo.
>>
>>
>>
>
>

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