"Rex Ballard" wrote:
> One of the reasons that Linux has found it's way into so
> many servers and desktops was because Linux is usually a
> "petty cash expense" instead of a "capital asset". Often,
> even when the software is purchased from a retailer, it's
> even under the $75 price that mandates a receipt. The PC
> it is installed on, has often already been depreciated to
> $0, or has been declared "obsolete" by Microsoft, even
> though it's only in the second year of it's 5 year
> depreciation cycle. The company can't throw them away,
> because these are still valued capital assets, and they
> have to pay for environmentally safe disposal. It's
> actually cheaper to send the fully functional PCs to
> Africa, Brazil, or China, than it is to turn them over to
> someone who will "shred" them.
>
>> http://www.aegeon.com.au/go/article/reduce-software-licence
>> -costs
IT costs are overhead expenses that cut into corporate profit.
It is not unreasonable to consider that the operating system
should also have a 5 year cycle.
However, I have observed 3 year upgrade cycles, too. Toward the
end of the 5 year cycle, we see that the hardware no longer can
keep up with the software upgrades.
In order to make hardware affordable has tended to decrease the
quality of PC's. In one case about 8 year ago, I saw how Maxtor
hard drives on a Dell big buy were starting to crap out on the
4th year of the cycle. IT department was replacing Maxtors on a
regular basis. That was an additional expense both material and
labor wise.
Hence it may seem that some industry is not keeping up with the
times by stretching their PC upgrade cycles, but it is
necessary. Those costs chip away at the unrecoverable overhead
expenses.
This is where Linux can extend those PC's life and make them
useful again. Not everyone requires the bleeding edge
applications. For those who depart from using proprietary data
bases for Open Source models experience freedom in that they
have additional options that don't require proprietary PC pre-
and post processing software interfaces.
I think we will also see more and more implementation of Linux
NFS versus Microsoft CIFS/SMBS.
As Microsoft servers are being replaced by Linux and Solaris
servers will lend greater opportunity to migrate to a Unix like
corporate environment, with greater security, data integrity and
driven down IT labor costs due to streamlined software
management.
--
HPT
|
|
