From: "Joe Barr" 


Thanks, Adam.  Interesting.  I think we can safely assume that:

a.  Richard Shupak did not write the scenario b.  MS did not fund the study




On Sat, 04 Jan 2003 18:02:47 +0000, Adam Flinton wrote:

> http://www.zdnet.com/filters/printerfriendly/0,6061,2907876-92,00.html
>
> " The RFG study also looked at system support costs. Among the companies
> surveyed, the study found few that were paying for Linux support; instead,
> they used free support online. Obviously, commercial support options would
> add to the Linux TCO equation.
> According to the study, the three-year cost of a 100,000-hit processing
> unit was significantly different among the systems:
>
>   a.. Solaris: $561,520
>   b.. Windows: $190,662
>   c.. Linux: $74,475
> "The Microsoft case has always been 'Linux isn't free,' and they're losing
> sight of something these days," Robinson said. "Nobody's
saying Linux is
> free anymore. Our number here is $74,000 for a three-year deployment. The
> news is that, despite it not being free, it's still considerably cheaper
> and is more flexible with licensing." "
>
> Adam

--

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