From CarterFamily

Recently I did a My Total Cost of Ownership Study and I got a lot of flack on it's perceived accuracy. Well the key topic in that study was "what it would cost for me personal to convert partly to Microsoft and totally to Microsoft". Any smoke and mirrors perceived from that study are actually irrelevant as I'm showing what I would purchase to replace my infrastructure, not what other business, or how the average user might do it. My point was to show, whether Microsoft or Redhat did the study the numbers can be way off depending on who's using it or who's doing the purchasing. With that in mind I thought I'd do a different type of TCO from the perspectives of the "average user".

The purpose of this study is to show that TCO studies are extremely subjective depending on who it's for and how it's perceived.

Note to advanced users: This is from the average users perspective, ie: like your grand mother, or parents. This is not from the perspective of the academic community like Derek Lawerence's user community, or the business/data centre world like my user community.

From the windows user perspective:

Now I know there are some of you thinking that this chart is way out to lunch. But when talking to people non-techie family, this is what they may have perceived. Also there is the whole question of usefulness. Quite a few windows users I talk to are under the notion that Linux is not a desktop platform. That you need a team of Linux engineers to install it and a host of high paid Linux administrators to keep it running.

From the linux user perspective:

For this chart, keep in mind that the "average" people using Linux today are tech people. So the perspective of the Linux user is going to be entirely different.

Conclusion

In my opinion, if you see a comparison study put out by Redhat or by Microsoft, ignore it! The study is based on generic usage and conditions. You as a "average user" need to look at how you'd actually use it, if choice is your goal. Let's face it, is the "average user" going to be using AutoCad, or Microsoft Office Ultimate Edition, or Windows 2008 Data Centre Edition? My dad and I may use it but we're not "average users".

So facts to think about:

• Fedora and Ubuntu Linux have been making huge leaps and bounds over the last 5 years. Comparing Fedora 1 to Vista even I'd recommend going with Vista. But the new Fedora 11, in my opinion, is just as easy to use as Windows. I also don't say this lightly. I have some users who actually say Linux is easier to use than XP/Vista. I also have users who say they don't see a difference. In my opinion the word easy is almost meaningless these days. If your trained in school from grade 1 on how to use Linux, windows is going to be extremely hard to use. Same goes in reverse. The reality, that I find, is most people use software, not the os. So as long as there is a menu, to click on firefox. They're happy!
• Installation of Fedora and Windows is only as complicated as you want to make it. Sure if your going to grab a full dvd iso of Fedora and compare to a pre-installed windows, then sure Windows is easier to install. But, Fedora and Ubuntu have LiveCD. You just pop it in your computer and reboot. They you can use and try it out, without disturbing your hard drive. If you like it you, click the "install to hard disk" button and it guides you through a series of questions similar to a new or upgrade copy of Windows XP/Vista. ^[12]
• Windows Commercial Software/Games currently holds the market share. If I had to put out some number, purely based on my personal feeling, they would be (not including free software): 10% can be install both on Windows and Linux, 40% of can be install in Linux via tool kits (ie Crossover, Cedega, or Wine) and 50% can only be installed on Windows.
• For most commercial software there are free alternatives. They are going to be different, and may not have all the features your used to. So expect a learning curve. But for simple usage they will suffice quite well. (ie typing a simple Word document is 100% compatible in OpenOffice.org)

Also I don't trust Microsoft, because I've personally seen them send out miss-leading information or plain false information to further their own agenda. So trust no one! Especially that friend who's never used the latest Linux or never used the latest Windows. or even me for that matter. Use what I've said above as a spring board to find your own answers. To quote a phrase, "The truth is out there"!

Footnotes

1. ↑ In my experience, a lot of people I run into believe that programs downloaded from the web are illegal and full of viruses. So this price is a high estimate based on my past experiences to purchase Linux off a shelf, with a book, or have it shipped to you
2. ↑ In my experience, a lot of people I run into believe Windows was free with the purchase of their computer. Even I didn't realize, until recently, that I was actually paying $100 - $250 with the new computer. I also toss the CD's in the garbage when I get it, so I might as well have been lighting the $100 bill on fire
3. ↑ When you purchase that new computer you get support from Future shop or wherever you purchased your computer. So your support costs are actually in the price of the computer. If you wanted support from Microsoft directly it's anywhere from $40 - $70 per issue.
4. ↑ I've never seen an argument that Linux software cost money. The argument, as I perceive it, is always on how good the software is
5. ↑ That new computer you purchased is loaded with MS Office Home Edition or MS Words, so you didn't need to purchase anything. Again, in my opinion, I doubt a percentage of people realized that the two configurations, side by side, the included software price is much higher than the non-included price.
6. ↑ Most distributions have a LiveCD or LiveUSB install. So anyone seriously looking into Linux would download the LiveCD's for their favorites, burn or copy them to CD/USB and try them out. Then if they like it, click the install to hard drive button. So typical Linux users would perceive the only cost would be the price of the CD.
7. ↑ This is assuming the Linux user didn't buy a computer with Windows on it already. If that where the case then the perceived cost would be $0. But for people like me I'd look at purchasing the full copy because I know that the included software is OEM licenced. Which means it's typically illegal to install it anywhere other than the computer it came on. Also, Linux is a server platform so the high end price would be the perceived cost for a server license.
8. ↑ If you seriously looked into Linux you would get your support directly from Fedora or Ubuntu. They may not have phone support but they do have live chat, email, forums, etc. So it would be like getting support from Futureshop. The bottom line is this is the common perception I've run into talking to my users.
9. ↑ Again this is the perceived cost in the Linux community. If I downloaded Fedora, I can get support directly from Fedora creators. So, me as a linux users, would want to look for direct support from Microsoft if using Windows. I still can't find any free live chat, phone or e-mail support. Every time I click on their support it asks for a credit card number and quotes $40-$70. If someone finds the free Microsoft live chat, phone or e-mail support, by all means I'll add it here. (I don't mean the technet or knowledge base support, that's free but it also means your not talking to a live person)
10. ↑ From the Linux users perspective all software in Linux is free. Not entirely true as there is commercial software for Linux, just your not going to find it at Futureshop. Not to mention for the "average user" they'd just use the free software anyways.
11. ↑ To buy Microsoft Office Home edition it would cost around there. However, talking with my father, he said that he tried using the Home edition and it was missing most of the features he needed. So he went back to Linux OpenOffice. So from the Linux user's perspective this cost could go higher and higher. Not to mention the ??? which is a user purchasing endless software types.
12. ↑ For those negative people out there. Remember: a CD/DVD drive is not as fast as your computer's hard drive. So loading programs is only going to be as fast as your CD/DVD drive. So if you want to try it out for speed, try loading it on a USB 2.0 key or eSATA drive to try it.