Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 02:25:18PM -0500, Rich Braun wrote: > At my job, I'm shocked at the Total Cost of Ownership calculations for the > Linux systems here. They cost us about 3 times as much as Microsoft! Why is > that--because the QA departments at application vendors only have the > resources to validate their offerings against one or two vendors. Can you say what you are running? For example, I would typically consider that a desktop Linux box will have no support contracts associated with the software. A mail server will have zilch. A web server -- zilch. Ticket tracker -- zilch. Backup system -- zilch. All of these have overhead costs which translate into X percentage of a sysadmin's time -- but that's typically very low, across a year. Database server -- very expensive if it's Oracle, but that's the same price they charge a Microsoft or Sun customer. > If we buy > an application and a maintenance contract that's only valid on Red Hat > Enterprise Linux, we're locked into Red Hat. Sounds nasty. The closest I've come to that is buying Oracle, which demands one of N supported OS revisions. > On the flip side is the contribution question. I and my team are building > non-proprietary tools on top of open source tools. We could publish them as > our contribution to the open source community. But we face two very real > costs if we do so: (1) QA verification--taking stuff that's too tightly tied > into our systems and testing it on generic/vanilla configurations that will > work for everyone else; and (2) customer support--answering emails about the > stuff we developed. The latter is what I ran into when I wrote an open-source > file server package back in the 1990s: the email got burdensome. Erm. Both of those are costs that you don't have to bear. You publish your code on SourceForge or what-have-you, and then you can leave it alone, or not. If you want to use it to promote your company's reputation, you write a FAQ and hand-hold the first few external developers. If it's wildly successful, you've won kudos points. And if it fades into obscurity, well, you still have the right to do whatever you please with it except for contributions from external sources. -dsr- -- http://tao.merseine.nu/~dsr/eula.html is hereby incorporated by reference. You can't defend freedom by getting rid of it.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |