You are not logged in.

#2 2004-07-28 15:05:32

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

pfft ... any system can be more expensive, slower, faster, etc if the people that use it are not knowledgeable or their study's intent is to prove one system has advantages over the the other.

i see examples all the time of this and not just limited to computers. try going to the cgccomics.com forum some time and see their "case studies" that try to prove their comptition is incompetent.

people try all the time to see ghosts where there are none. read a good book instead.


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#3 2004-07-28 15:24:36

Dusty
Schwag Merchant
From: Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
Registered: 2004-01-18
Posts: 5,986
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Given my lack of knowledge of Windows, it would cost me a lot more in terms of time to set up and use a Windows system than a Linux one...

Given my Dad's lack of knowledge of computers, he saves more time using KDE than WinXP because KDE doesn't crash as often and KDE always behaves the same way... Windows seems to change itself and stuff...

Dusty

Offline

#4 2004-07-28 15:34:36

xerxes2
Member
From: Malmoe, Sweden
Registered: 2004-04-23
Posts: 1,249
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

the OSS development model is a threat to the real society. big_smile


arch + gentoo + initng + python = enlisy

Offline

#5 2004-07-28 15:40:16

dp
Member
From: Zürich, Switzerland
Registered: 2003-05-27
Posts: 3,363
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

sarah31 wrote:

pfft ... any system can be more expensive, slower, faster, etc if the people that use it are not knowledgeable or their study's intent is to prove one system has advantages over the the other.

i see examples all the time of this and not just limited to computers. try going to the cgccomics.com forum some time and see their "case studies" that try to prove their comptition is incompetent.

people try all the time to see ghosts where there are none.

i don't know for sure and believe you this - what i wondered is, that often people do things out of lazyness to learn a better way to do it more efficasely; and studies in this sector (computing) are either sponsored by someone wanting to have a proof of sometihng and pays for creating one or studies that are very surfacely (oberflächlich)

sarah31 wrote:

read a good book instead.

i do so frequently e.g. "the emperor of scent" im' reading now is excellent book :-)


The impossible missions are the only ones which succeed.

Offline

#6 2004-07-28 15:51:06

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

basically what i was trying to say is use whatever OS, computer architecture, lawn mower, etc you are most comfortable with. Unless it kills you screw the studies ..... unless they are a independent third party study with no relation to either side (pretty rare).


i use OS X and linux at home and I actually prefer OS X. At work i use windows because there is really no choice as it is the only system that we can use our office instrumentation on. there are good and bad point about all of them and i really couldn't care less what the "experts" say.


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#7 2004-07-28 18:19:19

dp
Member
From: Zürich, Switzerland
Registered: 2003-05-27
Posts: 3,363
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

sarah31 wrote:

basically what i was trying to say is use whatever OS, computer architecture, lawn mower, etc you are most comfortable with. Unless it kills you screw the studies ..... unless they are a independent third party study with no relation to either side (pretty rare).

wow, really good spoken! you would be able to write a good book aobut computing in general

... and you are really rigth: i was not able to find a  study, that is 100% neutrally analytical on the subject :-(


The impossible missions are the only ones which succeed.

Offline

#8 2004-07-28 19:17:45

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

I don't think that Windows is cheaper. See:

purchasing:
Linux-Server: 0 $
Windows-Server: 2500 $

administration:
Linux-Server: 3500 $/m
Windows-Server: 3500 $/m

administrator-training:
Linux-Server: 1500 $
Windows-Server: 1500 $

additional software:
Linux-Server: 0 $ (most)
Windows-Server: more than 100 $;

You see today a Linux administrtor is as cheap as a Windows administror. And the pricing for administrator-training is the same for both in common. Most GPL based Software for Linux is free so there are almost no additional costs. And I don't think Windows is on the same Performance and Security level as Linux. And Linux runs better on server hardware like alpha processors or on diskless servers. Moreover Linux is better optimized for clustering.

Offline

#9 2004-07-28 19:58:53

Dusty
Schwag Merchant
From: Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
Registered: 2004-01-18
Posts: 5,986
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

I suspect a Linux capable administrator is worth more than a Windows one because:

a) There are fewer of them
b) They have to have more intimate knowledge of the system

the good news is that if you hire somebody like this, they know what they're doing, and that is a huge cost saving. wink

Dusty

Offline

#10 2004-07-28 21:01:02

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Dusty wrote:

the good news is that if you hire somebody like this, they know what they're doing, and that is a huge cost saving. wink

I couldn't say that better.

Offline

#11 2004-07-29 18:45:07

mr_ed
Member
From: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Registered: 2004-04-13
Posts: 72

Re: windows cheaper than linux

You're forgetting that on average, running Linux servers requires fewer admins.
So you end up paying X Linux admins more and still save money over paying for X*5 Windows admins.

Offline

#12 2004-07-29 19:00:06

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

mr_ed wrote:

You're forgetting that on average, running Linux servers requires fewer admins.
So you end up paying X Linux admins more and still save money over paying for X*5 Windows admins.

Yes but I can't understand why companies with 30 or more people are still using NT 4.  People have to think about security too. Just image a Hacker has access to a database with thousands of costumer informations. So I can't understand why companies which are using windows do no system upgrades. Just why they think they don't need an admin? I think data security has a higher priority as economies.

Fox

Offline

#13 2004-07-29 19:03:44

Dusty
Schwag Merchant
From: Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
Registered: 2004-01-18
Posts: 5,986
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

I wouldn't say 5 times as many, but it's a very good point.

Oh, what about the cost of lawsuits? If you make a mistake and accidentally (or on purpose!) install one more copy of MS Windows than you are licenced to use, you have lawyers on you. There is no upper limit on how many Linux workstations you can install.

Dusty

Offline

#14 2004-07-29 19:34:23

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Dusty wrote:

I wouldn't say 5 times as many, but it's a very good point.

Oh, what about the cost of lawsuits? If you make a mistake and accidentally (or on purpose!) install one more copy of MS Windows than you are licenced to use, you have lawyers on you. There is no upper limit on how many Linux workstations you can install.

Dusty

2 years ago Microsoft Germany send Letters to thousands of companys (most had more than 50 worker). In this letters Microsoft advised the companys to buy licenses for microsoft products with are not legaly install (e.g 1 license for 2 computers). Otherwise Microsoft has the law tho sue the compnays. Exchanging specialists find out that Microsoft has realized more than 5 Million Dollar extra Profit in that quarter. Microsoft advanced Business products are so expensive and if you need a license for each computer yuo have software costs of more  than 15000 $ Dollar for just a few software packages. For Example Arch Linux big_smile, Debian or Slackware are free and you can install it on all computers in our company without buying any license. Propaganda campaigns like "Get the facts" are just stupid stuff. If I read something like this I just can laught about Bill and his market monopoly.

Fox

Offline

#15 2004-07-30 07:56:47

tmadhavan
Member
From: Wales :D
Registered: 2004-03-26
Posts: 441

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Yeh, it is kinda amusing.

I enjoyed an article about that Get The Facts campaign, when it came to Britain. Someone in the crowd asked

"What about free software, like linux"

The MS guy replied

"Don't ask me about free software. It's not free"

LOL. Get The Facts apparently only compares distros like RedHat and SuSe (which you pay for) to Windows.

Also, MS can order an audit at any time, where you have to show every piece of authentication for every machine/install. Fair enough maybe, but for instance in my old school, no way would they have been able to get all the details in time.

It's balls, really.

Rock on Arch big_smile

Offline

#16 2004-07-30 11:54:07

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

tmadhavan wrote:

Yeh, it is kinda amusing.

I enjoyed an article about that Get The Facts campaign, when it came to Britain. Someone in the crowd asked

"What about free software, like linux"

The MS guy replied

"Don't ask me about free software. It's not free"

LOL. Get The Facts apparently only compares distros like RedHat and SuSe (which you pay for) to Windows.

Also, MS can order an audit at any time, where you have to show every piece of authentication for every machine/install. Fair enough maybe, but for instance in my old school, no way would they have been able to get all the details in time.

It's balls, really.

Rock on Arch big_smile

Yes Get the Facts is realy absurd. They just talk about pricing. Thay should think about security. If there a bug in Linux programms the bug the problem is solved in a few days. If there is a bug in windows programms the bug the problem is solved in a few months. And distributions like SuSE or Redhat you can't call "free". Their not free in pricing and the source of their own programms like Yast is not free.

I don't know how the situation is in other countrys but in germany more than 60% (home and server applications) of the Linux computers run with SuSE (because it's geman and computer magazines advertise SuSE). So most People think they have to pay for Linux. And SuSE exploits this and sells home editions from their software which include just gnome and kde and some multimedia programms (wich are all free) and 1 manual for more than 50 $. I think SuSE is the "microsoft" of the branch.

And Redhat goes the right way wuth Fedora. If business likes redhat distributions they can pay or take a distro like debian, slackware or arch linux.

Offline

#17 2004-07-30 15:14:32

Dusty
Schwag Merchant
From: Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
Registered: 2004-01-18
Posts: 5,986
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Fox wrote:

SuSE (because it's geman

So's Knoppix. smile

Dusty

Offline

#18 2004-07-30 16:02:57

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

And in the USA or Canda which distro are the people using there?

Offline

#19 2004-07-30 16:06:36

dp
Member
From: Zürich, Switzerland
Registered: 2003-05-27
Posts: 3,363
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Fox wrote:

And in the USA or Canda which distro are the people using there?

i assume ArchLinux ( www.archlinux.org ) ... i heard only good things about it ;-)


The impossible missions are the only ones which succeed.

Offline

#20 2004-07-30 16:33:56

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

dp wrote:
Fox wrote:

And in the USA or Canda which distro are the people using there?

i assume ArchLinux ( www.archlinux.org ) ... i heard only good things about it ;-)

Archlinux rulez  smile

Offline

#21 2004-07-30 16:44:04

Dusty
Schwag Merchant
From: Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
Registered: 2004-01-18
Posts: 5,986
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

It seems like most linux users in Saskatchewan (i'd estimate about 1000 of them) prefer Fedora. There are a few Mandrake ones and the smarter ones use Debian. The really smart ones use Arch (AFAIK, only one Arch user in Saskatchewan. :-D).

It seems like most people recommend Mandrake to newbies, but prefer Fedora for themselves. :-S

Suse isn't terribly popular here.

This is all amoungst home users though. I believe most ISPs or businesses that use Linux use Red Hat.

Dusty

Offline

#22 2004-07-30 16:51:35

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

I don't know why to use Mandrake but anyway newer uncomercial Distribtuions have no chance to grow in Linux business. :cry:  Companys like SuSE, Mandrake or Redhat should remember that they sell free software and they should publish the source of their installation and configuration tools.

Fox

Offline

#23 2004-07-30 17:36:46

Dusty
Schwag Merchant
From: Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
Registered: 2004-01-18
Posts: 5,986
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Fox wrote:

should remember that they sell free software and they should publish the source of their installation and configuration tools.

Why? People that support open source tend to avoid the distros that don't publish the source to everything. Further, people that know how to program (ie: those that would help out with the configuration tools) don't use configuration tools, they use configuration files. wink

Any company is free to do what they like. Neither the GPL nor any other licence requires you to release every program you ever wrote under that licence just because you happen to use one program that is.

It would be perfectly legal and perfectly ethical for, say, Microsoft to sell open source software, provided they also provided source. For example, TTBOMK, there is nothing saying Gimp for windows can't be packaged with windows XP (except Adobe would have a legal fit....), provided that MS released any changes they made to Gimp for Windows under GPL.

Companies are above ethics (but not above laws). It is up to users to be ethical... as an ethical user, I never steal software, and I don't support companies that don't release their source. However, that doesn't mean those companies are bad or wrong in any way, it just means they don't make any money off of me or people like me.

Dusty

Offline

#24 2004-07-30 17:54:34

Fox
Member
Registered: 2004-07-28
Posts: 124

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Ok that's an aspect. But but the source or at least sme libs will developer incite to write own modules for the config tools. ANd the companys will profit by more configuration tools. And if the users want to use this tools they have to buy the distro. This makes the Distro easier to handle and easy distros make profit we know since Red hat and SuSE.

But I think making profit is not he Linux basic concept.

Fox

Offline

#25 2004-07-31 12:33:01

dp
Member
From: Zürich, Switzerland
Registered: 2003-05-27
Posts: 3,363
Website

Re: windows cheaper than linux

Dusty wrote:

Companies are above ethics

no, they are not! they only think they are - and that's one of the main sources of the trouble


The impossible missions are the only ones which succeed.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB