|
|
Posted by Roger on 10/19/05 11:26
el_roachmeister@yahoo.com wrote:
> What is the logic that makes corporations select dot net when
> php/linux/mysql is free and easier to learn?
Corporations do not put all thier eggs in one basket. The fact that
they have used .net, or even "officially adopted it", does not mean
that it is handling the bulk of thier requirements. Be wary of
statements such as "used by 90% of the fortune 500", as in most cases
the same will be true for a lot of competing products.
An IT department of a large corporation that "officially" does not
adopt MS will come under a tremendous amount of pressure from higher
management who are lobbied using dubious TCO reports or even less
ethical methods. It is far simpler to buy a few .Net licences and then
get on with the work with 'whatever'.
By the same token one must be wary about market share. Needless to say
..Net licences by market are far greater than FOSS! One could look at
support contracts but there is an obvious flaw in that as well ;-)
For example, an international company whose per seat MS licences
include SQL server client licences, as this is thier standard database.
All the serious stuff actually runs on a years old IBM setup for which
a site license was paid years ago and has a support contract because
"it is needed for legacy applications". It is still the prime choice
for new applications which require rock solid transaction support etc.
The company also uses MySQL for non transactional databases, indeed the
only 2 servers that actually have MS SQL server on them also have
(unoficially) MySQL/Apache for intranet use, which is what they spend
all thier time servicing as nobody actually uses SQL server.
Moral of the story, if you want to see what corporations are using,
look at netcraft ;-)
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|