3 ms·
"The comparison with Windows assumes that Windows systems must be on the same technological level; this would, for example, mean that they would have been upgra
by josefresco 13y ago
"The comparison with Windows assumes that Windows systems must be on the same technological level; this would, for example, mean that they would have been upgraded to Windows 7 at the end of 2011"
That's a big assumption, and one that no doubt helps push the price of the MS solution up considerably.
- drzaiusapelord 13y agoRelaly big assumption there. Lots of shops, including government, are only now getting off XP and migrating to 7 or 8.1. There's no case study more massaged by those who want certain outcomes than the Munich linux migration. I also believe they were running NT4 when they started this project, so they're definitely the type of organization that is very behind the tech curve. I don't have a preferred outcome and wish them the best, but there's so much BS and massaging of data here that its all fairly useless to those of us interested in how this really turned out for them. Pardon me if I don't considering slashdot as a reliable and unbiased source regarding TCO of Windows.
- sergiosgc 13y agoThe devil is in the details. Did they account for migration costs between windows and office versions, or just licensing costs? Migrating between windows versions is far from easy (see the XP weaning process for proof). Technology deprecation also happens on a stable platform (VB6, for example).