__/ [Linønut] on Wednesday 12 October 2005 12:53 \__
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Bob Hauck belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:11:35 -0700, John Bailo <jabailo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> For example, just yesterday, I was thinking: suppose I convinced my
>>> business to stop using Outlook/Exchange and to just go with a simple
>>> pop/sendmail Linux server.
>>> What would be lost?
>> Your IT person would be bored because they would no longer have to fix
>> corrupted Exchange databases.
> Linux -- the Maytag of OS's
And then we have Windows - the Mayday in O/S.
Linønut makes a good point. Linux makes IT staff redundant (...ask how come
I work 9 hours a day only to receive 3 calls at most...).
With servers that retain uptime of months if not years, all that the staff
ever needs to do is dust off the machine at the corner of the room. Windows
reliability is a myth, which is strengthened by vigorous advertising
campaigns and the fact that it's costly (the "more expensive must be
Little does the prospective customer know that the IT staff that are
employer to maintain Windows servers will be thrice as costly. See IBM's
recent TCO study. I think I can give you a reference to an article that
states exactly what you sought. The TCO study makes an excellent document
to pass on to an IT manager for persuasion to migrate.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Disk quota exceeded; sig discontinued"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
1:25pm up 48 days 1:39, 3 users, load average: 0.64, 0.48, 0.37
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms