Re: [ossig] Help: How to Beat Microsoft OLP (Long-ish!)

[cdemarco@xxxxxxxxxxx]

On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 01:28:21AM +0800, Senandung Mendonan wrote:

> In this case, does this mean migrating to OSS would actually be more
> _expensive_ in pure $$$ sense? Especially since we're thinking of

<snip>

> Any ideas on how to counter this?   Or I would  have to rely on some
> sort of  long-term   cost-benefit analysis  (need help    here:  any
> pointers), or the hidden/intangible costs, etc.  as in

Yes, a migration will always be  more expensive up-front than sticking
with what you have.  That's implicit in  the term "migration" - you're
chucking what you've  already  got (and  have  already paid for)   and
getting   something new.   But   the *reason*  for  doing   so is that
presumably the new thing will be better.  So you do have a tricky path
ahead; you've got  to help  the customer  decide whether the  up-front
cost  of replacing his infrastructure  is  worth it  in the long-term.
And that's hard, because you're  trying to quantify *potential* future
liability if he  stays where he is,  and *potential* future savings if
he switches.

Perhaps an easier  tactic (huh - my dad  was trying to explain this to
me last nigh but   I didn't  get it  -  must've  sunk in while   I was
sleeping)  would be to sell    features that are unavailable on   your
customer's  current   platform.   "50%  higher  maintenence  costs for
security  patches with MS" is a  tough statistic  to justify; "MagicOS
lets you transcend time and space!"  is a no-brainer (all other things
being equal, of course, so the converse of this  thrust is that you've
got to counter FUD about whether MagicOS contains MSG or can't be used
by left-handed folks, or whatever).

This  seems  to be  a facet of  human nature,  and  to some degree may
explain why people buy MS products in  such droves - new functionality
is  simply sexier  than an improvement    to what you've already  got.
However, it's clear that optimization is a natural progression towards
excellence - the Japanese took over the car market not with gizmos and
gadgetry but with refinement of quality.  Our dilemma is that while we
have overwhelming   evidence  of OSS'  superiority  to  at  least  MS'
products on the server-side, that  evidence is largely subjective, and
the   disproportionate amount of marketing   power  which MS wields is
well-suited to manipulating public perception of the issues.  

So  if you feel you  have the  ability to  present  the superiority of
Brand X over Brand Y in the long-term, then  by all means go ahead and
try.  But be aware  that MS [probably]  has bigger guns than you have,
and that marketing does not, by  definition, fight fair.  On the other
hand, you can  invoke the gee-whiz factor  and try to sell  capability
which is unique to OSS.

Let us know how you fare, this is an interesting "case study".


-- 
% You are in a maze of twisty passages, all alike.
Christopher DeMarco <cdemarco@fastmail.fm>          
PGP public key ID 0x2E76CF5C @ pgp.mit.edu
+6012 232 2106

PGP signature