Cape Town, 10 Sep 2003
Linux has had success in the server market in reducing costs, but in most cases enterprises should not expect to reduce costs by migrating from Windows desktop platforms to Linux, says Gartner.
"Many servers are dedicated to running a single application; in many cases, it has been relatively easy for enterprises to replace specific servers, such as a Web server, and implement Linux," says David Smith, VP and Gartner fellow.
Smith says the environment for Linux on the desktop is significantly different. Knowledge workers use PCs to run diverse combinations of applications. "For those users, migration costs will be very high because all Windows applications must be replaced or rewritten."
Gartner analysts say migrating PC desktops to Linux makes sense only in a very narrow, limited range of situations. The Linux migration should be considered only if there are relatively few applications and those applications are fixed- or low-function, such as data entry, call centre or bank teller/platform automation. In those cases, the cost of migration may be low enough to justify the move to Linux.
Before any migration plan is implemented, it is imperative that enterprises gain a full understanding of the total cost of ownership (TCO), says Gartner. The analysts say enterprises must look beyond the initial costs and realise the full spectrum of costs that can evolve.
"Understanding the current TCO and the expected Linux TCO can help an enterprise determine the estimated migration savings," says Michael Silver, VP and research director at Gartner.
Silver says that when calculating such costs, it is important to realise that the cost of the PC and client operating system represents only a small part of the overall TCO - generally 20% to 30% - and that other costs such as labour, training and external services must be considered.
Another consideration when determining whether to migrate to Linux is comparing the costs and savings of a move to Linux with those to upgrade to a newer version of Windows. The difference in TCO between Windows and Linux depends on which version of Windows is being considered.
"The TCO of Windows 95 is relatively high and increasing because support from Microsoft has been eliminated and support from independent software vendors and other third-parties continues to wane," says Silver.
"Therefore, enterprises running Windows 95 will likely see more benefits by a move to Linux than will enterprises using Windows 2000 or Windows XP. Windows 2000 and Windows XP include more modern technology than Window 95 and are generally more stable and incur lower costs."
Gartner analysts say enterprises running Windows 95 should estimate the costs and benefits of a project to upgrade its current environment to Windows XP and a project to move to Linux. Then compare the return on investment of the two alternatives before choosing a platform.
Share