Laura DiDio Making Sense

Normally I have little or no confidence in what Laura Didio writes concerning Microsoft versus Linux – she has proved to have a “I cant see that” attitude towards persistent problems with Windows, notably in the arenas of reliability, security and security administration.

But in a recent piece summmarizing a Yankee Group Yet Again study of Linux versus Windows she makes a telling point about the various TCO arguments being made on Linux versus Windows. Over 500 parties were interviewed about Linux versus Windows and over 50% insisted they did thorough TCO analysis of their projects and investments. But then when they were asked specific questions about TCO within their organization, well lets pick this up in Lauras own words:

The most startling revelation coming out of the report was the fact that more than 50 percent of the respondents said they had performed a thorough TCO analysis. But when asked to calculate their specific Linux and Windows capital expenditure and maintenance costs, 75 percent, on average, could not answer explicit questions about their own environments.

Businesses lack basic, crucial TCO information, such as the cost of a Linux or Windows server upgrade and what they are spending on network management, third-party applications, tools, utilities, ongoing maintenance, security, systems downtime, calls to the help desk and hardware and software breaks and fixes.

The absence of such crucial financial information makes it difficult for corporations to make informed purchasing decisions and heightens risks when choosing technologies that are ill-suited to their business needs.

I am amazed but I have to say – Amen.

(c)JBSurveyer 2005