On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Haworth, Michael A. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Michael_Haworth@pas-technologies.com">Michael_Haworth@pas-technologies.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-size: 15px; "> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">Sometimes I think that the mindset has been formed by corporate drones that ‘if we can’t pay for it (and pay
<b>A LOT</b>!), then it’s not good enough for us.’</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"></span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I don't disagree with you, but keep in mind that you will ALWAYS pay. TANSTAAFL (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch). Remember, even if the software is free there is always a cost. The biggest cost is usually labor, and what Microsoft has always argued (unsuccessfully) has been that its expensive software saves you money on labor.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I certainly understand it when folks are suspicious of "free" solutions, because whoever is pushing a "free" solution is obviously not aware of the true costs. Now, even when it comes to Linux and BSD there is still this labor cost - the advantage that RHEL (and others) provide is the work they've done to reduce this labor and the support they provide when the local admins don't have the expertise to solve a problem. There's also the value of the extensive hardware testing and certification.</div>
<div><br></div><div>However, I do share your frustration when at times management goes with an overly expensive solution because they seemingly feel that more expensive = better.</div><div><br></div><div>Jeffrey.</div><div>
<br></div></div>