That depends (Score 1)

That depends on how much software you purchase and for what purpose. I had this same conversation at work not to long ago. I suggested Linux as a way out from under Microsoft's licensing. While there were a number of reasons (cost of retraining, "there'll be no one to blame...", "that's non-standard..." etc.), one issue caught me without an answer.

We were discussing how Linux has just about everything we wanted from the Corporate Standard sense. You could lock the systems down tight for the average user, you could give developers a developer-oriented operating system, Open Office offered a good-enough Word/Excel/Powerpoint replacement, even e-mail wasn't an issue.

Our issue was group calendaring and MS Exchange. You see, while Ximian has some great stuff, it doesn't interface with the release of Exchange we're using. The question was asked, "What if we upgraded to Exchange 2000?" The answer was that we hadn't finished depreciating our current licenses for Exchange.

That last bit has also surfaced as a reason to use pay-to-play software in general. You depreciate the license cost over time like you would office furniture or new computers.

I haven't crunched the numbers, so I don't know which way is cheaper. Do you save so much in taxes by depreciating licenses as an asset? Or is it cheaper to avoid the license cost up front? It seems to me that you'll end up paying someone knowledgeable about the system regardless of whether it's open source or not. Can you really save so much on taxes that it's worth paying recurring licese fees and making yourself vulnerable to vendor-lock?

Personally, I now run Linux as the main OS on my home machine. I became more and more disgusted with Microsoft's policies. I also became more and more concerned about having to keep buying Outlook to read my e-mail archives, or being forced to use Microsoft products to gain access to my own writing. I haven't gone MS free (I'm down to a few boots a day), mostly because of my computer gaming habit. I'm working on it though. (BTW: I bought a duel-boot (pun intended) machine from Los Alamos Computers --great machine.)

I agree with your point about retraining, sort of a weening from MS (ughh can't get horrid image out of mind...). However, I think that the shift is happening off the charts. You see, because you can download it for free, computer geeks like me will try it out. Because /. and other "geek-chic" gathering places take a decidedly pro-Linux slant, people wanting to be "savvy" and "in-the-know" will talk about Linux. And because its good and free (very rich word, that) more people will use it. Linux is not a tide that ebbs, it is the small stream that becomes victorious over the rock bed. Sorry for all the philosophical nonsense, but Linux will find its way into your office and mine the same way Windows machines edged out VAX terminals. Linux offers something better.

As Microsoft becomes more and more the a media giant they want to be (Disney-esque, even), more and more people will see their software for what it is... Mickey Mouse. (Don't forget, they've got Donald Duck heading up corporate strategy.)