Re: [school-discuss] Cost comparisons for Linux vs. Windows

[William Abernathy <william@inch.com>]

jeff williams wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 August 2002 09:30 am, Cameron Miller wrote:


>>>I'm working on a paper for one of my graduate courses that is
>>>tentatively titled "Free As In Speech: Using Open Source Software In
>>>Education." Depending on how it turns out I plan to submit it for
>>>publication to one of the educational technology journals.
>>
> 
>>Don't just focus on entry cost.  Focus on TCO over time, compare versus
>>the myriad of proprietary software upgrades, and definitely get into the
>>new Microsoft subscription program of forced annual payments and upgrades.
> 
> 
> Consider, too, the cost of upgrading hardware to keep up with the minimum 
> system for running the new proprietary software coming out of Microsoft.  
> Look at the minimum system requirements for Windows 2000 vs. Linux.  I can 
> and do run Linux on a 486, and could, if I had one in stock, run Linux on a 
> 386.  An early Pentium is hard pressed to run Windows 2000.  
> 
> Thus, part of the price of running Windows is the need to replace systems or 
> major components every 3 years or so.  No so with Linux.

You might also cite the tremendous administrative burden of rights management. 
If M$ wants to shake down their Jefferson Parish with a software audit, you'd 
be in the catbird seat to say, "Sorry, we don't use your software. Bye." Nicer 
still would be not having to hire an administrator to manage tracking who has 
what license on which machine, and where the certificates are.

M$ attacks school districts. Copy the Steve Duin article from the Portland 
Oregonian last April. Hold the beast accountable for its behavior.

--W