Linux vs. Microsoft TCO Comparison

More documents

Recommendations

Info

We are constantly surveying NT/2000 administrators to determine whichutilities are most in demand, and we then release best-of-breedsolutions, leveraging the Internet as our primary marketing medium.Our client list contains over 90% of the Fortune 1000."Such information must be kept in mind when reading through this report.Soreon/Research & Markets TCO ComparisonThis is perhaps the first major independent study contrasting Linux against Microsoftsoftware. The upshot is that Linux was shown to have a lower TCO by upto 30%. Whatmakes this study of particular importance was that data was collected from interviewsconducted with 50 different enterprises. This translates into a real-world demonstration,rather than just another model.Published by Soreon/Research and Markets the report 9(titled “Saving Cash: AComparison of Open Source and Proprietary Software”) presents a detailed TCOcalculation of Linux and open source software and Microsoft software. It offers casehistories, studies into licensing costs, wage and training costs, etc.Out of the list presented, this study is perhaps the most clearly and openly independent.The firm which produced the report expressly establishes its methodology and offers itsresults.Interestingly out of all the various TCO studies presented here to provide a contrast to oursas a separate data point, this independent research closely matches our own results, thusproviding some corroborative value.9 http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reportinfo.asp?cat_id=0&report_id=227601All text material Copyright © 2002, 2004 Cybersource® Pty. Ltd. (http://www.cybersource.com.au/).All trademarks are the property of their respective trademark holders. Document Build: 291 Page 12 of 44
A Look at Migration CostsOne of the most common questions we were asked when the first version of this TCOstudy was published, concerned the costs of migration from Windows to Linux and opensource. Many readers were using the Microsoft Windows platform and associatedapplications and had followed our TCO model to reach a conclusion that adopting Linuxwould indeed result in lower ongoing TCO. What they sought were answers to questionson the ease and cost of migration to Linux.Whilst the focus of this TCO report is not to calculate the costs of migrating fromMicrosoft Windows to the Linux platform, we have undertaken initial research into thissubject, which we will touch upon briefly here. We will also prepare a morecomprehensive analysis to be published as a separate Windows to Linux Migration Costreport in the coming months.Migrating to Open Source 90% Less than Upgrading MicrosoftTo tide us over until that more comprehensive analysis is undertaken, we have found arecently released independent study by the Dutch government. In that report 10 , theresearchers found that migrating to an open source desktop productivity platform was 90%less expensive than migrating to the new version of the Microsoft productivity platform.This included accounting for all the costs of migration, such as re-training, re-developmentof macros and add-on applications, any conversion costs for existing documents etc.As this is only a single data point, it would be impossible to rely on the results as atemplate for all Microsoft-to-open source migrations. However, it is independent research,undertaken by a public sector organisation which has no vested interest in eitherMicrosoft's nor Linux's position in this matter. This research was also based on a largescale migration, involving over 2000 desktops. Certainly within the realm oforganisational size we are considering in this TCO,There is another important point to consider when modelling your organisation's cost ofupgrading to a newer version of Microsoft products versus the cost of migrating to Linuxand open source. Most organisations will likely factor in the costs associated with a singleupgrade-versus-migration cycle. By this we mean an organisation calculating the cost ofupgrading to the next version of the Microsoft product versus migrating to Linux, ratherthan including the subsequent upgrades as well.Many of the costs of upgrading to newer versions of Microsoft platforms (licences,software assurance etc.) have to be borne again and again. Most of the costs of migratingto Linux are borne once, during the initial migration. Any subsequent upgrades for thatLinux platform occur with no licence costs nor software assurance costs. Therefore, toprovide a more realistic appraisal and model of this scenario, you should include two or10 http://europa.eu.int/ida/en/document/3434/469All text material Copyright © 2002, 2004 Cybersource® Pty. Ltd. (http://www.cybersource.com.au/).All trademarks are the property of their respective trademark holders. Document Build: 291 Page 13 of 44
Page 1 and 2: Linux vs. WindowsTotal Cost of Owne
Page 3 and 4: Table of ContentsDisclaimer........
Page 5 and 6: oth the altered state of the IT ind
Page 7 and 8: IntroductionIn early 2002, Cybersou
Page 9 and 10: A Note on MethodologyWhen the first
Page 11: Kusnetzky) in a interview published
Page 15 and 16: Total Cost of OwnershipHardware, Pl
Page 17 and 18: Applications, SalariesOffice Produc
Page 19 and 20: Internet ConnectivityService Charge
Page 21 and 22: Windows Platform SolutionFor our Wi
Page 23 and 24: Linux Platform Standard SolutionFor
Page 25 and 26: Product Price (USD) Comments16 CPU
Page 27 and 28: MicrosoftWindowsLinux(Standard)Linu
Page 29 and 30: Software Licence CostsThe following
Page 31 and 32: Linux Enterprise Solution Software
Page 33 and 34: 245 x Generic WorkstationsIBM Think
Page 35 and 36: Salaries and Services CostsNetwork
Page 37 and 38: Appendix 1Pricing Research MethodSo
Page 39 and 40: Appendix 2Software Pricing Resource
Page 41 and 42: Appendix 3Hardware and Services Pri
Page 43 and 44: under.Linux, according to IDC (http

Linux vs. Microsoft TCO Comparison

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?