GPS wrote:
>1. moving between systems (even POSIX-based) usually results in some
>configuration, build, or runtime problems. Linux is not fully POSIX
>compliant, but it is mostly POSIX compatible.
>2. changing the system architecture from a Windows API to a Linux API is
>often a very involved task. It's not a 1:1 translation.
>3. developers need to be retrained, and thus costs grow.
>4. good unix/linux developers are not generally as plentiful as with other
>commercial systems.
>5. users need to be retrained, if the frontend changes.
>
>There are other factors, but I think I've made my point. The industry votes
>with their feet.
Sure, and most of them are too concerned with the short-term over the
long-term. Most managers are afraid of making "risky" decisions that
might get them fired, even if the potential payoff is huge. Staying
with M$ is the "nobody ever got fired-for" decision.
|
|
