Can switching from Windows to Linux really mean a drop in total cost of ownership for IT? Microsoft has organized road shows and advertising campaigns to convince CIOs it's simply not the case, while some independent organizations haven't been shy in proclaiming quite the opposite.
CIOs with TCO on the brain might start to wonder if Linux cost savings are the techie equivalent of the Loch Ness monster--often talked about, hard to find.
Dale Vile, service director at analyst house Quocirca, says evaluating any potential change of OS, whether desktop or server, should be done within a key framework.
"You need a sense of what you're trying to achieve and your starting point," he said. "Those people that have the most success [with a migration to Linux] have adopted it on a project basis, rather than a wholesale switch... Any migration has to be treated like a project, you have to plan it like a project and apply project discipline."
Taking advice, independent or otherwise, can also help to make up the mind of the CIO. Richard Steel, director of ICT at the London borough of Newham, which recently considered switching to open source but decided to stick with Microsoft software, took advice from both sides of the OS divide to help in his decision.
"We appointed Net Projects to make recommendations. They are an extremely pro-open source organization. We appointed them deliberately so there would be a challenge in the process," he said. Microsoft and Capgemini also presented an alternative case for sticking with the Redmond software behemoth.
One of the key points for a CIO on the verge of an IT environment review and consequent analysis of the relative TCO merits of Windows versus Linux is to actually do an analysis. Yankee Group's study into Windows and Linux TCO found that although more than 50 per cent of those surveyed said they had conducted such an analysis, only 25 percent could answer key questions pertaining to it.
Even for those hardcore Windows shops, upgrade time can be a good time to run an eye over the competition and do a TCO analysis. After all, migration is often one of the main financial burdens of shifting OS, whether from Windows to Linux or from an older version of Windows to a more recent one. Brian Green, director of business solutions and marketing at Novell, says: "People with legacy versions [of Windows server software] are increasingly talking to us."
Among the key elements to consider in such an analysis, according to Quocirca's Vile, are the comparative costs of running the systems, operational overheads and necessary skill sets.
Vile advised against becoming fixated on licensing costs. "It's relatively minor in the great scheme of things," he said. However, even a relatively small issue deserves proper consideration and is thought to be important enough to be pushing managers to change their OS.
Security, of course, is one of the big bugbears of the Windows and Linux communities, with an ever increasing number of reports claiming to prove decisively one case or the other. For the security snow-blinded CIO, there are a number of security issues to mull over--after all, downtime or lack thereof makes a significant contribution to TCO. IT directors should keep in mind the relative severity and likelihood of attacks, how patching is managed and downtime costs should an attack actually hit.
When it comes to security, the merits of either proprietary or open source can be argued 'til the cows come home. Linux has many eyes to check for flaws, says one side, but many hands to exploit what they find, says the other--and so on. It's worth bearing in mind that there are generally ways to sidestep security problems in both types of OS.
Downtime costs on Windows servers, according to a report from the Yankee Group, are thousands of dollars more expensive per hour than similar failures on servers running Linux. This, the report said, is due to the business-critical nature of information stored on Windows systems. A storage rethink could help trim such costs down. Nick McGrath, head of platform strategy at Microsoft, says: "Downtime will always be expensive." Equally, one of the oft-quoted problems with Linux security--lack of documentation--is likely to be a temporary hump and could well drop off in proportion with the number of big name vendors getting involved and the number of big name users taking it up. Analyst house IDC predicts that revenue from Linux servers will grow at an average of 22 per cent until 2008, compared to the three per cent increase the rest of the server market will experience.
Applications are another point for the would-be Linux convert to chew on. For those working in fields where custom apps are the rule rather than the exception, Linux instantly becomes more attractive as the app barrier is removed, while those using an installed base of ready-made Microsoft-compatible applications may take a different view. Michael Silver, research VP at analyst house Gartner, said those considering a change of operating system should take the cost of application migration into account.
"Application migration is the biggest cost--you need a critical mass of relatively few apps" to get the best return. The number of applications a company has is often underestimated, Silver added, and recommends a firm can get a rough idea of the apps it uses by dividing the number of users by 10.
A final issue to consider is the ease with which CIOs can find staff to administer whichever OS you choose. Linux's recent corporate flowering has not seen the growth of skills keeping pace in the marketplace. In silicon.com's Skills Survey earlier this year, around 16 per cent of respondents said Linux skills were in short supply at their company, while 12 per cent lacked Windows experts.
Novell's Green said you get what you pay for when shopping for techies.
"Professional talent requires a certain cost, regardless of platform," he said. "In terms of the number of people investing [in Linux engineers], especially in the ISV community, there's enormous growth... People with proven Linux skills are in short supply but they're growing."
While staff costs might add to Linux TCO, indemnification--protection against legal comeback from the ongoing IP battle over Linux's heritage--is unlikely to be a worry for most businesses. SMEs are unlikely to be affected by any litigation, while larger corporations can get bundled indemnification from some of the larger Linux vendors.
While an operating systems review may or may not end in changes to an organization's IT infrastructure, there can be additional benefits to conducting one.
Newham Borough Council's Steel, for example, found the review process raised the profile of IT funding within the organization and allow a re-examination of it. "All funding had been from capital rather than planned investment," he said.
For the larger organization considering an OS overhaul, the threat of a deserter in the ranks could prove helpful when Microsoft license fees are up for renegotiation. The Office of Government Commerce says it's slated to save £100m in part because of tough negotiations with Redmond and the willingness to consider open source.
Laura DiDio, an analyst at the Yankee Group, said flirting with Linux can prove a powerful bargaining chip in talks with Redmond. "I have customers who tell me: 'you know what my Linux strategy is? I use it to throw rocks at Microsoft'. And you know what? It works."
