3 ms·
That it is cheaper at scale. Say you pay 1M EUR to Microsoft for their suite, 10k users. You get an asset manager and a IAM (AD), database, web server, OS, us
by BrandoElFollito 7y ago
That it is cheaper at scale.
Say you pay 1M EUR to Microsoft for their suite, 10k users.
You get an asset manager and a IAM (AD), database, web server, OS, user desktop, word, excel,...
All of this integrated.
On the other hand you have all the pieces separately, maintained or not, and they do not talk to each other.
You saved 1M EUR, which will give you a team of 5 or 7 people who are supposed to maintain and integrate these pieces (the part of work MS does, not the administration you need anyway on top).
It may work or not, but this is far from a given.
If I had to start the IT of a company today I would go for full SaaS for services, Win10 on desktop, and O365.
(just in case and to avoid misconceptions: I like my Win10 desktop much more than a Linux one (tried to switch multiple times in 20 years), run all my home services on Linux and develop open source)
- karmakaze 7y agoOpensource does make things cheaper at scale. Some of those SaaS services run software that is or based on opensource. This is especially true when you have multiple SaaS companies providing services based on the same opensource software. Even closed source software benefits from using libraries with permissive licenses. The part that's not cheap is running software yourself, regardless of whether it's open or closed source.