Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Savings were limited" but they decline to say how much. Also "Users complained of compatibility problems" -- all the more reason to switch; a proof of the MS lock in.

I wonder if they write something like "We were only able to save $5K/year/person, but we didn't want to inconvenience our workers for such a paltry sum", what the response would have been. I can assure you it is very far from the $100/year licensing that people mentioned in other threads. If that were the case, no one would switch on one hand, and Microsoft wouldn't be the behemoth that it is today on the other.

It's $100/year/person for their desktop software, + tens to hundreds of thousands for the server software that goes with it (to microsoft), plus a $2000/year/person for lost time due to viruses, spam, and being able to play WoW on their work computer, plus $2000/year/person when you look at the administration cost -- windows shops everywhere I've seen have a much lower admin/user ratio (e.g. 1 in 10 or 1 in 20) compared to unix/linux (1 in 50 or 1 in 100), and even more so when the end users are doing just word processing+spreadsheet work.

Also, what the hell were they doing writing printer drivers? I've been using linux on the desktop since 2005, and didn't have to install a printer driver once.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: