Two IBM-sponsored reports published this week have found that Linux is cheaper to deploy and operate than Windows.
One report found Linux was 40 percent cheaper overall than Windows, and 56 percent cheaper than Unix based Solaris. These findings appear to contradict Microsoft's "Get the Facts" campaign, which found Windows to be less expensive than Linux.
One report, called TCO For Application Servers: Comparing Linux With Windows And Solaris, calculated the total cost of ownership (TCO) of an application server, including the cost of acquiring, implementing, and running it.
The report compared Linux and Windows x86 servers and Solaris SPARC servers over three years, and found that while Linux cost $40,149, Windows cost $67,559, and Solaris cost $86,478 (£22,450, £37,776 and £48,355 respectively).
Factors taken into consideration when calculating the figures included not only "raw cost", but also administrator skill set transferability, hardware architecture portability and vendor diversity, according to the report.
The research also found other benefits of deploying Linux apart from total cost of ownership reduction. These include "its flexible licensing model, wide range of supported hardware platforms, the choice of support providers, and fast administrator skill set transfer from other Unix platforms."
The second report sponsored by IBM — Beyond TCO — The Unanticipated Second Stage Benefits Of Linux — claims there are "second stage" benefits to deploying Unix. These include attraction and retention of IT staff.
"Linux is enormously popular among IT staff members, many of whom are at the beginning of their careers, as well as with IT educators in universities and technical institutions worldwide. This has resulted in Linux playing a significant role in the recruitment and retention of IT staff and managers," the report claims.
IBM has given strong backing to Linux in recent years. It committed $1bn investment in the operating system back in 2001, and supports the operating system on its xSeries servers.
The TCO of Linux and Windows is a long-running and often controversial battle. Many analyst groups have published reports into the issue, some of which have cast doubt on the claim that Linux costs less to run.
Back in April, the Yankee Group published a study which found that Windows offered equal or better TCO to Linux. However many people disputed the report's findings.
Microsoft recently met with the Open Source Development Lab to discuss the possibility of working together on TCO research — an opportunity the OSDL appears to have declined.
Talkback
Perhaps Microsoft will volunteer to pay half the cost of this study!? ;->