It's a perspective thing. I guess that Intel would figure that the hardware is the big expense. For a better assessment of the "total cost of ownership" see: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0%2C4586%2C5098989%2C00.html "Online retailer Amazon.com shaved millions of dollars from its technology costs last quarter by switching to the Linux operating system, a disclosure that could provide some guidance for other companies seeking to cut expenses in a stagnant economy. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the e-commerce giant said it was able to cut technology expenses by about 25 percent, from $71 million to $54 million. " Could not have said it better myself. Mark Browne ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Tanner" <tanner at real-time.com> To: <tclug-list at mn-linux.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 10:21 PM Subject: [TCLUG] Linux and Win2K TOC the same? http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011030/tc/tech_intel_napster_dc_2.html "In any case, using Linux is not much cheaper than Windows 2000. Although Linux as an operating system is free, the real costs are related to the computers, and support and maintenance, he said." I might be blinded by by religion and this group my not have the ability to let the religion go, but can anyone look outside the box on this and comment? My perspective is Linux is much cheaper then Windows. Even if you pay for a distro you are starting out ahead. Add the virus resistence, stability, reliability, and security out of the box. Linux should be have a better TOC then Win2k. -- Bob Tanner <tanner at real-time.com> | Phone : (952)943-8700 http://www.mn-linux.org, Minnesota, Linux | Fax : (952)943-8500 Key fingerprint = 6C E9 51 4F D5 3E 4C 66 62 A9 10 E5 35 85 39 D9 _______________________________________________ Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list