On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:04:41 -0400, Simon Templar wrote:
> It matters for places like schools that are on a tight budget. But for a
> company the cost of a Windows license every 5 years (which they buy in
> bulk anyway) is diddly-squat compared to the salary they pay employees.
> They'd save more by switching to cheaper brand of coffee in the kitchen.
I think there are many hidden costs -- for instance, the annoyance of
malware (never mind the tools to remove it). I was about to argue that
given a sufficient number of Linux users there would be plenty of room
for commercial apps to duke it out on a level playing field to the
benefit of all -- but then considered the google office apps.
I can't imagine a situation where commercial application software for
Linux would be competitive and lucrative because either the GPL version
is or would displace the commercial version, or some other model, like
google office running over the web, would change the rules.
However, there's an enormous hidden cost in the lost opportunities from
being stuck with Windows because the applications are written only for
Windows because Windows is what's installed, and being locked into a
specific application.
-Thufir
|
|
