According to an independant study Linux costs 30% less overall than Microsoft's Windows Operating System in the business market.

The study, by Research and Markets, claims to provide a more detailed total cost of ownership calculation than previous efforts.

The study points towards savings potentials up to 30% depending on the application, including commonly used office applications.

The report also suggests that licence and operating costs savings turned open source into a genuine alternative.
But wait, didn't Microsoft release a study saying Windows costs much more? (I think I might have even seem it on this site, hell, I think I'm looking at the ad right now :\)

The study flies in the fact of an earlier pro-Microsoft study by IDC which is much touted by the spinsters in the Lair of the Vole in Redmond, which claimed that Linux was more expensive than Windows.
Well, it seems Linux got some more good news today, when AT&T annonced that it was looking at alturnatives to the Windows Operating System for their desktop machines. While it is not for sure yet they will change, it would be a big boost for Linux in my eyes, if they switched to that.

As http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...lines-business reports,

A decision by AT&T to abandon Windows would be Microsoft's biggest loss to the 13-year-old Linux system.

A surge in viruses and efforts to cut costs have driven customers to look for alternatives to Windows, which dominates the $10-billion market for PC operating systems.
What does all this mean for Linux? How do you feel about these news articles? Personally, I am glad, and I hope AT&T does switch, it would mean a big boost for Linux. It should be interesting to see how this all plays out.

microburn