Re: End of "All-In-One" Microsoft OS

Tim talks of TCO for an "enterprise", but my whole issue is software
used by an individual designer or small group, where by default, most
people have to do all their own software & OS maintenance.

I simply don't know what Linux might be, but I can tell you that
maintenance and training costs between Mac and Windows is not in
question, as even the Windows admin/tech trouble shooter guy next to me
admits he owes his ENTIRE income to the excessive maintenance required
of Windows systems.

If I lock down Win XP w/o network and Internet connections, I can get
it up to Mac OSX's level of up-time. But an OS like Win XP shouldn't
be restricted like that to keep it up and running.

Tim noted the closed vs open systems, but end users rarely care, and I
don't care what is open source and what is not. All they want is
things to be easy to use and stay up and running without all the fuss
and time.

I couldn't care which OS is "faster" as they are all fast enough for my
work.

It is VERY POSITIVE, that I can now run Win XP & Mac OSX & Linux on my
same Mac Book Pro, though I don't have an application which requires I
run Linux, so I don't.

For me to use Windows 100%, Microsoft is going to have to make a
massive improvement in ease of use and reliability on ALL levels.
Otherwise, if it continues with the inefficiencies, I'll stay with SWks
2006 or 2007 running on XP Pro on my Mac till hell freezes over (read
retirement).

Bo



Tim Markoski wrote:

The issue is TCO ( Total Cost of Ownership)
It's an absolute fact that the TCO for Linux system administration in an enterprise
is substantially higher than Windows. The initial implementation is
cheaper but the maintenance is a killer.

All the Mac zealots heap praise on Apple and Macs in particular in spite
of the fact that
it is the epitome of a proprietary, CLOSED system and has been since day
one. Apple Corp. treats 3rd party developers like the spawn of their
red-headed step children.

Benchmark tests show that WindowsXp outperforms OSX on the same hardware.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: McDonalds coffee - better than Starbucks!
    ... it's Microsoft that uses TCO against Linux! ... And yet in every TCO study I know of the Mac has beaten Windows. ... Replacing a dsyfunctional Windows machine costs 45 percent more than ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Hi
    ... My Dad upgraded his Mac OS and after doing so half his ... The kerbing the car metaphor doesn't apply to Windows unless you've got ... Can't say I use that that often so can't give much help Tim. ... and the latter is also the case with most 'decent' suppliers. ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: Hi
    ... Windows is crap at doing what's said on the tin. ... My Dad upgraded his Mac OS and after doing so half his ... Can't say I use that that often so can't give much help Tim. ... and the latter is also the case with most 'decent' suppliers. ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: How To Make Money Removing Viruses And Spyware - Using Totally Free Software.
    ... I have a friend whose Mac was the same. ... you have to drill down into display settings or drill down into IE ... I've got Windows coming out of my... ... You must've bought a Mac mini for a reason, Tim! ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: Apple code writers no better than Microsoft?
    ... >>Windows over Macs, not individuals if you wish to back that up. ... JM> the overwhelming number of businesses reject the Mac. ... JR> group refuses to even look at any TCO comparisons. ... stack of bibles to MIS that it was only for graphics design. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)