How “more expensive” became “cheaper” when Microsoft spoke to Newham

Splendid stuff – no, great journalism – by John Lettice over at The Register with
‘Independent’ report used MS-sourced data to trash open-source software
. He got hold of a report quoted – but not released – by Microsoft which it alleged showed that Newham council would save more by upgrading to WindowsXP and buying lots more licences than using its old hardware and getting OpenOffice, Mozilla, etc.

Capgemini, it appears, simply took some numbers Microsoft fed it and said they were right. Er, guys, that’s not how we think of independent consultancy.

By comparison the consultants netproject, looking at the choice, said: “Once all the differences are taken into account we believe that the high cost of the licence fees for the new Microsoft Products more than outweighs the additional costs involved in the migration to open-source software.”

So how does it work out cheaper for Newham? By being a case study for the local sector, Microsoft gives it cheaper licences. Somehow it reminds me of the double-glazing salesmen offering to cut hundreds off the already-inflated price if you let them put an ugly billboard to their work outside your house.

1 Comment

  1. The only way to be certain when Microsoft is lying is?

    If they are communicating anything, they are lying. Their first choice is to lie, their second choice is to lie more and their third choice is always to lie even more. Even when truth serves them best, they lie. It’s a culture of deceit that is so pervasive that, if lying isn’t possible, they have no protocol for responding.

Comments are closed.