On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 09:34 +0800, Anand Vaidya wrote: > Hi > > > > I again heard the claim that a certain Enterprise Linux is way too > expensive compared to WS2003 and hence a certain company moved from EL > back to W2003 (dont ask me names) > > > > So my question is this: Superficially EL does seem to be more > expensive (eg: roughly S$10000 x3 for RHEL 3year) vs one time W2003 > (say S$1400). But many people do not consider the hidden costs of a > windows server - >
The only price i see here that is expensive is Linux sysadmins' salary :) Cheers Jett > > > - antivirus + perf degradation > - CALs > - per call support charges > - more sysadmins are needed > - Anything extra costs money (eg: decent backups, network > installations, OS imaging) > - How does discounts affect the costs? > - Guest VM count > - W2003 comes with absolutely no other app, EL comes with OOffice, Dev > env, databases, complete web stack etc etc > - Does MS directly offer 24x7 , at what price? How much is the cost of > a per server license when volumes are considered? > > > > A google search turns up vendor marketing fluff (esp. MS) which I do > not trust. > > > > So, my question is this: Have you been in a situation where you can > choose either , and did a thorough comparison? Any insights to share? > Or have you seen a non-partisan comparison anywhere? > > > > Regards > Anand > > _______________________________________________ > Slugnet mailing list > [email protected] > http://wiki.lugs.org.sg/LugsMailingListFaq > http://www.lugs.org.sg/mailman/listinfo/slugnet _______________________________________________ Slugnet mailing list [email protected] http://wiki.lugs.org.sg/LugsMailingListFaq http://www.lugs.org.sg/mailman/listinfo/slugnet
