TCO and etc arguement
freebsd at activeeffects.com
Thu Oct 23 06:45:31 PDT 2003
I've been having an argument like this with a friend for years, mainly
about all open source vs Microsoft. Just the other day, he emailed me to
say he was starting to see my point. Not because of any of the standard
speeches I'd given him, but because of the control MS exerts over an
organization using it's products. Here's his direct quote so you can see
his point. It's a good one that I hadn't thought off. I've added it to
my arsenal, hopefully others will too.
The problem with Microsoft products is the method at which they are sold.
Because Microsoft ends up bundling it's packages together, they end up
wielding too much power over your business. In order for me to install an
Exchange server, I need the new version of Windows 2003 Server, but I
still won't get all the options unless I upgrade Outlook, which of course
can only be bought in the Office suite.
Every product of Microsoft you buy gives your company less freedom to buy
a different product down the road. Making the cost to move off of
Microsoft more expensive with each new purchase and each day it remains
Open Source I don't think ever will die. The popularity is growing
despite little to know marketing. Their profile couldn't be any lower,
yet it's still gaining popularity.
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Vulpes Velox wrote:
> Well recently got talking with a MSCE about the total cost of ownership
> of running something like FreeBSD. Any one have any comments on this or
> any thing that would be useful to bring up?
> My view on this is how could it not be cheaper since for the most part
> it just requires some one that knows how to properly set it up. It can
> be setup toautomatically update it's self. No trouble some licsensing.
> No company hell bent on feature creep. Easy access to source code. Easy
> administation. Easy expansion. UNIX admins are no longer a problem to
More information about the freebsd-advocacy