Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Can Linux experts charge more than MS experts? Linux seems more technical

  • Subject: Re: Can Linux experts charge more than MS experts? Linux seems more technical
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:30:56 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / ISBE, Manchester University / ITS / Netscape / MCC
  • References: <1157973616.015403.240210@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <pan.2006.09.11.15.05.54.393609@zianet.com> <1157990554.32163.0@proxy00.news.clara.net> <45058e70$0$2112$edfadb0f@dtext02.news.tele.dk>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ Peter Kai Jensen ] on Monday 11 September 2006 17:27 \__

> BearItAll wrote:
> 
>>> I don't think I agree with your assessment "that a higher level of
>>> technical skill is required to manage Linux". In my experience, it's
>>> usually easier - it's just that a lot fewer people have taken that
>>> route, so it's foreign to most IT 'experts'.
>>
>> Yes that's true Ray, but then UNIX was always much easier than people
>> supposed. It was the fact that management believed it to be a highly
>> complex difficult to run system that kept our wages high for many
>> years.
> 
> Well, if they never bothered to actually examine the complexity of the
> task they hire you to do, then why the heck not charge whatever they're
> willing to pay?  It's all supply and demand.
> 
>> When the truth is that it could run for years with only preventative
>> maintenance and muchus bulshitto in the boardroom.
> 
> Having someone on the pay-roll who ensures that the system does indeed
> run for years with only preventative maintenance is actually very much
> more valuable than any *nix admin's going rate.
> 
>> It's the way the world turns.
>>
>> Linux is going through a simmilar thing, best get the cheques cashed
>> before they spot that we don't have busy days.
> 
> Actually, most *nix admins simply get more systems to manage, to
> compensate.  In a report by the Danish Board of Technology about the use
> of OSS in the public sector[1], they mention that Linux admins are
> indeed typically a bit more expensive than Windows admins.  However,
> they also mention that the typical Windows admin can only handle about
> 10 "normalized servers", while a Linux admin can handle 44.
> 
> [1] http://www.tekno.dk/pdf/projekter/p03_opensource_paper_english.pdf

And 10 Linux servers can handle the workload of 44 Windows servers.

^^
More of a pun than a factual statement, but nonetheless, Linux server get far
superior 'bang for the buck' (the "initial cost of purchase" component of
TCO) and perform better (setting aside the number of of sysadmins required).

Best wishes,

Roy

PS - Good paper. Bookmarked.


-- 
Roy S. Schestowitz      | Code built upon another's is less prone to bugs
http://Schestowitz.com  |     GNU/Linux     ¦     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem:    514480k total,   483484k used,    30996k free,     7828k buffers
      http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index