tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3694669490587041161.post9012127028205838737..comments2023-06-22T03:38:39.855-04:00Comments on William Yang: Microsoft Licensing for Schools Lock-InWilliam Yanghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05581920709461964839noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3694669490587041161.post-21356980242863808792010-01-24T15:02:47.367-05:002010-01-24T15:02:47.367-05:00Yeah, it should, but I suspect you'd have to h...Yeah, it should, but I suspect you'd have to have a really low percentage of computers running Windows then since Office 2007 Standard full version costs $400 and Windows 7 Professional upgrade costs $200, which if you amortize it over six years still comes out to $100/yr/PC, triple what FCPS pays now. Based on those assumptions, the hard cost to FCPS of Microsoft licensing of 30% Windows or 95% Windows is the same. That said, I didn't look too far into some of the other options Microsoft offers, but I doubt they are likely to give educational institution discounts without requiring 100% coverage. And of course it's not an issue if you start from scratch with Linux, it's just that seriously attempting to transition from Microsoft to something else may result in some degree of seemingly wasted dollars. Again, not trying to say people shouldn't try, but I feel like not many people are aware of the lock-in clauses that schools have to deal with.William Yanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05581920709461964839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3694669490587041161.post-18282092287309425862010-01-24T14:45:43.971-05:002010-01-24T14:45:43.971-05:00Okay. I still feel like the decision-making proces...Okay. I still feel like the decision-making process ought to be more along the lines of, "How many computers do we need? How many of those do we want to run Windows? Given those numbers, is it worth it to buy a volume license?" There is pressure against adding more machines than necessary, not against adding non-Windows machines.Josiahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05930099717130641912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3694669490587041161.post-88557635964606182002010-01-24T13:51:41.334-05:002010-01-24T13:51:41.334-05:00I'm not sure it can be considered a 'sunk ...I'm not sure it can be considered a 'sunk cost' though since the systems loaded with Linux have to continue to be counted and paid for on a yearly basis (this isn't a one-time fee). You have to figure in training and support costs as well.William Yanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05581920709461964839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3694669490587041161.post-11668071072052882102010-01-24T13:31:40.908-05:002010-01-24T13:31:40.908-05:00"From a financial perspective, then, it makes..."From a financial perspective, then, it makes the most sense to run Windows on every computer."<br /><br />Um, no it doesn't. If the goal is to get as much Windows for as little money per installation as possible, then yes; but once the volume license has been bought, it is a "sunk cost" and should no longer factor into calculations. Financially speaking, nothing is lost if some Windows installations are replaced with Linux.Josiahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05930099717130641912noreply@blogger.com