Linux More Expensive To Maintain Than Windows? According to an article I found at ZDNET.COM a study commissioned by Microsoft and released by IDC has (surprise, surprise) concluded that Linux has such high additional network support personnel costs that its more expensive to maintain than Windows. Now, why was I not expecting a Microsoft commissioned study to say otherwise.... ?? I must be in the wrong business. Instead of messing around with a Windows 2000 domain and trying to keep all of the users happy, I should be running a server room full of Linux boxes somewhere and getting paid all of this extra $$$ that this study seems to propose that I would be getting. All of this attack on Linux and the open source movement smacks me more of something motivated more by fear, than anything else. Why this constant stream of studies that seem to proclaim without a doubt that "Linux is rubbish"?? Why not more emphysis on Microsoft's own products and the strength of closed source? Microsoft, not so mighty that they are beyond fear, fear open source methinks, and fear Linux. They fear what it might turn into.... something that numbskulls can use just like Windows. That day might be comming soon. "[A]...document posted on the Open Source Initiative Web site said open source software had reached "commercial quality" and that such free software "poses a direct, short-term revenue and platform threat to Microsoft, particularly in the server space." More here at ZDNET.COM here.