On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:24:30 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> ,----[ Linux migration saves money ]
> | Britannia Building Society's migration from Windows to Linux provided
> | the following benefits: Reduced physical footprint and system
> | management costs, better data integrity, easier backup routines,
> | fast disaster recovery, great scalability, and low costs.
> `----
>
> http://www.ameinfo.com/84028.html
Speaking of saving money...
We're currently looking at deploying a server-based solution which comes
as an annual-feed commercial product. Depending on the level of support
we want, we're looking at between about $130 and about $750 per server per
year.
Since we have reasonably clueful in-house IT staff, we're looking at the
mid-range offering for one server, the low-end for the rest. So, on the
six or so servers we're looking at running this on in the end, that means
one at about $300 and five at about $130, for a total cost of some $950.
Mind you, that's for several thousand users. So, for the price of
basically a single Windows server license, not including the actual server
software, not including the access licenses, not including tech support
costs, we're getting six servers, thousands of users _and_ tech support.
If we went to the mid-range support offering on all six, that'd be about
$1800, or about the cost of two Windows server licenses, again, not
including the actual server software, client access licenses, or tech
support.
So let's see. For $1800, we get _six_ functional servers, usable by
thousands of users, with support, if we use Linux. Or we get two copies
of Win2K3 Server, 20 licenses, and basically nothing for software - and no
support. This leaves us a tech support bill and a licensing bill to pay
still, and then we get to pay it all over again, twice more, to get the
other four servers online.
Yeah, Windows is looking _really_ appealing.
|
|
