Look how journalists do logic math:
Novell has issued a joint press release with Microsoft, in which HSBC, a customer of joint technology from the two companies, claims that Windows has a lower total cost of ownership than Linux.
This comes from:
In the release, Matthew O’Neill, group head of distributed systems for HSBC Global IT operations, states that the bank’s existing Linux environment is more expensive to maintain than its Windows environment. “Some will be surprised to learn that our Windows environment has a lower total cost of ownership than our current Linux environment.”
So he concludes:
Although it is unclear at this time which Linux distributions the bank is using, the fact Novell is associated with a statement that claims Linux has a higher total cost of ownership than Windows will surprise and anger many in the open-source community.
So, because HSBC has a complex and more expensive Linux environment, you can conclude the TCO of Linux is higher than Windows.
This is the most funny simplification of life I have heard since the joke of measuring a cow’s volume:
A mathematician, an engineer and a physicist sat around a table discussing the best way to measure the volume of a cow. The mathematician suggested the use of geometry and symettry relationships of the cow, but his idea was rejected for being too time-consuming. The engineer suggested placing the cow in a pool of water and measuring the change in the height of the water, but this idea was considered impractical. “It’s easy,” said the physicist. “We’ll make an assumption that the cow is a small sphere, calculate the volume, and then blow it up to the actual size.”
HSBC hasn’t claimed Linux has a higher total cost of ownership than Windows. They claimed THEIR environment has. That includes lot of variables are not mentioned.
“will surprise and anger many in the open-source community”.
Come on. The reasons why Linux is better are far away from stupid and simplistic TCO calculations.