From: "Geo." 

I thought we were talking about the bullshit TCO study that says unix
admins can handle 1000 machines but a windows admin is limited to 10? MS
didn't fund it and it had nothing to do with initial cost so I'm kinda
confused what you are going on about now.

Geo.

"Joe Barr"  wrote in message
news:3e1882f5$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
> The point I made is valid for TCO.  That point is that it is most often
> nothing more than a marketing trick, a ploy, a deceipt, duplicity by
> designl.
>
> TCO (even if valid in the first instance) for one firm is not the
> same as TCO for another
>
> Microsoft is scum.  Bill Gates is a lying thief.  Richard Shupak doesn't
> have the balls to be a thief, so he is only a liar.  Everyone at MS in
> between the two are scum as well.  If MS funds a TCO study, you can be
> sure that they will like more and better than the competition.  But any
> TCO study funded by one firm is bound to be false as well.  It's not just
> Mcicrosoft that makes it so.
>
> They can lie about startup costs and they can lie about ongoing.  It makes
> no difference to them.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 05 Jan 2003 11:50:52 +0000, Geo. wrote:
>
> > That's initial cost, not admin costs.
> >
> > Geo.
> >
> > "Joe Barr"  wrote in message
> > news:3e18220f$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> >>
> >> How about this one.  It includes a copy of the infamous
"Enterprise
> >> Agreement" as well as invoices proving the City of
Austin now has to
pay
> >> twice for every copy of Windows used on the desktop.
> >>
> >> http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2002/1219.barr.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, 04 Jan 2003 21:41:43 +0000, Egan Orion wrote:
> >>
> >> > Joe,
> >> >
> >> > Back that up in a factually based article:  I'll quote
you and link
> >> > it.
> >> >
> >> > All the best (as Will Z. used to say, before he sold out to
> >> > Microsoft), Egan
> >>
> >>
>
> --
>

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