I keep finding stories on the web about how to roll out “7” and save money. Let’s see
- Chuck a perfectly working system = -$150 (the hardware is worth something and the licence is as good as it was on day 1)
- Buying new hardware to get a slower performance = -$500 (looks like a bad choice to me…)
- Paying for another licence just to have what you got from the old one = -$100 (or more if you buy licence for Office or get “Ultimate” etc.)
- and still fighting malware and re-re-reboots = -$500 ( Who knows how much this costs? There’s no end in sight.)
That looks like -$1250 and you get nothing for the expenditure… How is that cost-effective? Any possible benefit is just a wash, about the same as the last system that you are chucking while still viable. One could go to Debian GNU/Linux and be free of most of these costs. Really. If you can get all your machines to boot PXE, you can slap GNU/Linux onto hard drives in 20 minutes or so and you are done. One re-boot and the system is working, free of malware and not slowing down until there is a hardware or network failure. If the machines are really old, you will be better off using LTSP, a package in many distros these days, to boot them and users run applications and sessions on a powerful new machine that can please dozens at once.
I don’t see how “cost-effective” can be used in the same sentence as that other OS.