Hi Nikhil,
At 08:31 AM 7/21/01 +0530, you wrote:
Also I think Windows is affordable for most users ( OEM stuff ) .So I think the argument that Windows costs a fortune is not true. In Linux too we have commercial distributions ( Suse,Corel, Red Hat Deluxe Workstation,etc..) whose costs are comparable to that of Windows 95 or 98 .
You are comparing the cost of a commercial distro of GNU/Linux with Windows 95/98. You are missing the point that GNU/Linux is a product comparable (I would personally term it superior) to Windows NT and Windows 2000 Server which cost 10 times the cost of the costliest commercial distros on GNU/Linux, and that too for a 5 user licence, as against an unlimited user licence in case of GNU/Linux. Consider the cost of using Windows 2000 Server with about 500 users, along with all licences, as against a commercial distro of GNU/Linux, and you will see an unacceptably high cost.
And no, the assumption of 500 users is not out of the blue, but something we and many others practically have on our GNU/Linux servers (wudnt dare to impose such a `huge' load on NT anyways). Then again, you can always download or use the CDs accompanying PCQ, etc. and spend nothing at all; which is simply not possible in case of M$.
And this covers just one point in the discussion, ie. price. There are a whole lot of other factors such as performance, resource requirements, freedom et al which I believe have been talked about several times here.
Regards, Ninad