When you're hired to prove an untruth, success depends on confusing the reader and this report does that in spades - a beautiful example of the consulting art.
Showing results 1 to 16 of 16
While Linux may be cheaper up front, but over time, Windows and Linux offer roughly the same total-cost-of-ownership to customers deploying large numbers of PCs in schools in emerging markets according to a new Microsoft-funded study.
It may well cost more to migrate to Linux than you're likely to ever save in system TCO, according to the analyst firm
Analysis: Here's waht CIOs should investigate to determine whether switching to Linux from Windows will bring about cost savings for the business.
Julie Hanna Farris of Scalix says there's less downtime, less risk and less TCO with e-mail on Linux. Is this too good to be true?
An analyst firm claims that Windows offers equal or better TCO than Linux, but open source companies say the survey has ignored some of the advantages of Linux
Linux provider Cybersource has updated its two-year-old study comparing the total cost of ownership of Microsoft's products against open-source solutions
Linux provider Cybersource has updated its two year old study comparing the total cost of ownership (TCO) when using Microsoft's products against open source solutions -- only to find that Linux is still cheaper.The study comes after a wave of similar "independent" studies that have been commissioned by Microsoft or its partners and indicate that proprietary software is cheaper than open source solutions.
In a 2,600-word e-mail sent to Microsoft customers and partners on Wednesday, Microsoft's Steve Ballmer drove home the key themes of Microsoft's "Get The Facts" campaign. Bill Gates' second in command claimed that Windows was a better choice than Linux in terms of security, total cost of ownership (TCO) and protection against legal action over patent violations.
Dan Farber: Ultimately, Windows will deliver greater security and better TCO than Linux, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told IT execs at last week's Gartner Symposium/ITxpo. While his pitch didn't sway many skeptics, Ballmer at least put the Microsoft-Linux issue in perspective.
Speaking at the O'Reilly Open Source Convention, Peter Schay, executive vice president of The Advisory Council, made the case for Linux versus Windows in simplified terms: avoidance of vendor lock-in at all costs, even if on paper or whiteboard TCO a Microsoft deployment is less costly than Linux.
It seems like everywhere you look, there's an article about Linux and its place in the enterprise. Does it really have a lower TCO than Windows?
Under the guise of reducing total cost of ownership (TCO) in a tough economic environment, technical staffs are recommending replacement of Windows with Linux on their servers. This is based on the flawed assumption that because Linux is "free" it will re
George Ou: "If you don't have any real Linux or OSS experts, paying for Linux support contracts from companies like Red Hat will sky rocket your TCO. If you need support from Microsoft, you call them up for $250 of all-you-can-eat support until the proble
Linux administrators are better qualified than Windows admins--and they can manage 10 times the load. Grant Gross says Oliver Rist got it wrong--Linux has the TCO edge over Windows.
TechRepublic's David Southgate describes one manufacturer's experience deploying Linux in 12 brand new manufacturing plants, to help lower the company's TCO.