On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 10:21 +0000, Dave Howorth wrote:

Hans van der Merwe wrote:

...

Thx, but the practical problem is this... we have two competent Windows centric IT people... one IT manager who overdosed on the MS-Coolaid.... we have an AD, 70 XPs (full house, Office etc), MS-Portal, MS-Exchange, MS-SQL, BackupExec, MS-IIS, FullSiteLicense(TM). To move just one of these over to something else will require another Linux IT person (we cant afford), IT manager wont let IT staff go on Linux course because we don't have Linux servers (catch-22).

I'll admit, this is actually an valid issue.

Now I want persuade management (who knows nothing about IT and assumes its always expensive) that we can move over some of these services to cheaper alternatives.

How are you actually going to make cost savings in this situation? If you can show that replacing some component will save the business substantial money, FUD will evaporate. If you can't, there's no hope :(

Yes but something like - "But, TCO is much lower with current Widows arch than Linux, see these reports" (classic FUD) is difficult to counter - I need company expenditure reports and such to be able to make a point - and TCO is difficult to compare. My actual problem is that the IT manager is not an idiot - he is just a die hard capitalist - with some really good business points. The MS momentum is really hard to argue against, but I would like to at least try. E-Mail disclaimer: http://www.sunspace.co.za/emaildisclaimer.htm -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

John Andersen wrote:

On Tuesday 27 February 2007, Hans van der Merwe wrote:

...

Yes but something like - "But, TCO is much lower with current Widows arch than Linux, see these reports" (classic FUD) is difficult to counter -

Any manager that believe a single word from a Gartner report is one you don't want to work for. Run away like your hair is on fire.

Then your problem will be: It's the majority of managers that do believe. And running away all the time doesn't bring much in the end. You know the value of Gartner reports, don't you? Gartner's research is mostly made by asking "deciders" in big companies what they think about technology and market trends. This is not technology research, but market research. Anybody who takes them for technology research is in for a surprise -- but as market research reports they are great. I.e., their reports tell what the majority of managers and people with budget approval rights think about the state and future of technological trends; where they are more probable to invest. Most managers that are new in a filed orient themselves towards the opinion of their peers (not too different from the behavior of techies, if you think about it). This introduces a fortifying feedback loop, thus Gartner reports are often good predictions for investment trends. And this is very valuable information, about what one can expect from one's managers (or one's customers in my case, as we do consulting). For me, being the CEO of a consulting company, Gartner reports are mandatory reading. They give insight in the trends that my customers' managers are probably want to follow, and where I can either try to use that information for acquisition of new projects or try to prep them up with appropriate contradictionary information if I think that Gartner's recommendations would be bad for my customers' situation and IT strategy. Joachim -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Joachim Schrod Email: jschrod@acm.org Roedermark, Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org