Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on February 16, 2004 08:02 PM
When faced with the "you get what you pay for" argument, I always compare it with the next upgrade for Windows/Office:
"Assume you have a company running on Windows 2000 Pro and Office 97.
Determine the price for upgrading that to XP-pro + Office 2003, and try to justify spending that money.
IOW who is the vendor where you don't get anything for what you pay for? (in the case of XP: an integrated winzip?)
Even if you think Windows NT is a solid base (and a case can be certainly made both in favour and against that), most companies have already payed for NT two of three times, probably even more for Office.
And Microsoft will make you pay it another time, don't worry.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Get what you pay for. A possible rebutal
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 16, 2004 08:02 PM"Assume you have a company running on Windows 2000 Pro and Office 97.
Determine the price for upgrading that to XP-pro + Office 2003, and try to justify spending that money.
IOW who is the vendor where you don't get anything for what you pay for? (in the case of XP: an integrated winzip?)
Even if you think Windows NT is a solid base (and a case can be certainly made both in favour and against that), most companies have already payed for NT two of three times, probably even more for Office.
And Microsoft will make you pay it another time, don't worry.
#