COM M. Silver

Transcription

1 M. Silver Research Note 19 June 2003 Commentary Linux Desktop Migration Cost Model Migration from on the desktop will be an expensive proposition. Users that employ a limited number of applications may be the best choices for a move, because of lower migration costs. Enterprises cannot consider a move to Linux on the desktop unless they fully understand their migration costs. The migration costs should be compared with the ongoing savings the enterprise expects from the move to understand the payback period for the migration investment. A comparison of Windows and Linux client total cost of ownership (TCO) is presented in "Linux Desktop TCO: An Overview," "Linux Desktop TCO: Hardware and Software Details" and "Linux Desktop TCO: Labor Details." As with all of our cost research, the important part of our migration research is our framework, not the numbers themselves. The numbers are our estimates for what a 2,500-user enterprise might spend, given certain assumptions. Actual results will depend on the number of applications the enterprise needs to test, purchase or rewrite to run on Linux, the cost of labor, and many other factors. Enterprises should also consider other costs and benefits that may not be included in our model. We have built two migration cost profiles: one looking at the cost to migrate structured-task workers, and the other to examine the cost to migrate knowledge workers. Structured-task workers are typically a link in a workflow or process and perform the same tasks repetitively. The process workers are driven in their daily jobs by a set process, rather than ad hoc projects. Knowledge workers gather, add value to and communicate information in a decision support process. These resources are driven by projects and ad hoc needs toward flexible tasks. These workers make their own decisions on what to work on and how to accomplish the task. Structured-task workers may use fewer applications than knowledge workers or may use applications differently from knowledge workers. The assumptions made in this model reflect a relatively low-end structured-task-worker population of 2,500 using only three packaged applications each (out of a total of 30) and a total of 30 custom-developed applications. Although we do not discuss them specifically in this research, data entry workers are the most structured and generally use the fewest applications, mostly to enter data and not to analyze it. Our assumptions about the environments are provided in Table 1. For structured-task workers, our model assumes that the enterprise has Windows 32-bit (Win32) applications for 30 percent of their applications, and for knowledge workers for 50 percent of their applications. Enterprises should replace our assumptions with their own. For enterprises with more Win32 applications, migration costs will be much Gartner 2003 Gartner, Inc. and/or its Affiliates. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of this publication in any form without prior written permission is forbidden. The information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Gartner disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of such information. Gartner shall have no liability for errors, omissions or inadequacies in the information contained herein or for interpretations thereof. The reader assumes sole responsibility for the selection of these materials to achieve its intended results. The opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice.

2 higher and return on investment will be harder to achieve. Enterprises with fewer Win32 applications and more generic-browser-based and Java applications will likely have lower migration costs, because these applications may require some minor adjustments, but won't have to be rewritten. In this example, we do not differentiate between different versions of Windows. The model is divided into several sections: enterprise fixed costs, group fixed costs, individual variable costs, and hardware and software costs. Table 1 Assumptions for Windows-to-Linux Migration Cost Model (Structured-Task Users) V a r i a b l e s Number of Users Total Number of Custom-Developed Desktop Applications Number of Custom Applications Requiring Minor Upgrades Number of Custom Applications Requiring Major Upgrades Average Number of Packaged Applications per Desktop Percentage of Packaged Applications That Will Be Upgraded Under Windows 2000 Professional (W2P) Percentage of Packaged Applications That Can't Be Upgraded and Must Be Replaced Total Number of Packaged Apps. in the Enterprise Varieties of Hardware to Test Percentage of Users Requiring New PCs Percentage of Users Requiring Upgraded Hardware Number of Departments or Groups 2, % 30% % 0% 15 (Knowledge V a r i a b l e s Number of Users Total Number of Custom-Developed Desktop Applications Number of Custom Applications Requiring Minor Upgrades Number of Custom Applications Requiring Major Upgrades Average Number of Packaged Applications Per Desktop Percentage of Packaged Applications That Will Be Upgraded Under W2P Percentage of Packaged Applications That Can't Be Upgraded and Must Be Replaced Total Number of Packaged Apps. in the Enterprise Varieties of Hardware to Test Percentage of Users Requiring New PCs Percentage of Users Requiring Upgraded Hardware Number of Departments or Groups 2, StarOffice 20% 50% % 0% 15 Enterprise Costs: The first section is for enterprise fixed costs (see Table 2). They are not really fixed, but they are less variable than some of the costs in the other sections that vary directly based on the number of users in the enterprise. The first step in the process must be to identify all the applications to which the target population will need access. The applications should be grouped based on type Win32, browser or Java. 19 June

3 Table 2 Enterprise Fixed Costs (Structured-Task Users) (Knowledge Enterprise Fixed Costs Project Plan Audit Needs/Hardware/Software Cost Assessment Best Worst Best Worst Hourly Rate Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost $ $ 5, $ 5, $ 1, , $ 1, , , , ,300 1,110 77,700 Application Testing Tier 2 and Tier 3 Training Tier 3 Training (Five People) , , , ,000 Tier 3 Tuition 7,000 14,000 7,000 14,000 Tier 2 Training (20 People) ,000 1,280 64, ,000 1,280 64,000 Tier 2 Tuition 18,000 24,000 18,000 24,000 Application Development and Selection: See Table 3 Systems Integration/Build Image/Prototype ,000 1,200 84,000 2, ,000 4, ,000 Document System , , , ,400 Help Desk Training Develop Help Desk Class , , , ,000 Help Desk Staff Training (10/15 People) , , , ,960 Trainer , ,200 Hardware Acquisition Software Acquisition , , , ,000 Ongoing Project Management 70 1,040 72,800 2, ,600 2, ,600 3, ,400 Total Enterprise Fixed Costs $ 202,610 $ 436,610 $ 410,180 $ 787,420 Win32 applications do not run directly under Linux and do not have to be tested on Linux. There are several options the enterprise can consider for them. 1. Run them under Wine Wine is a technology that enables running Windows applications on top of Linux. Vendors, including CodeWeavers, have tried to include Wine in their product, and SuSE includes CodeWeavers code in its desktop Linux distribution. However, Wine is far from perfect; CodeWeavers only supports a limited number of applications, and Gartner only recommends Wine as a bandage for light use not as a cornerstone for a Linux strategy. 2. Run them using Citrix and Windows Terminal Services The cost of this alternative includes licenses for Microsoft TS Client Access Licenses, Citrix software, and big Windows servers to host the applications. Licensing costs compared to bringing in new versions of Windows when new PCs are purchased will probably not be significantly lower. 3. Replace the applications with versions written for native Linux, that run in a browser, or with Java. Applications written for browser front ends must be tested to ensure there are no features that are Internet Explorer (IE)-specific. Java applications must also be tested. We have budgeted one day per application for testing in our nominal best-case model, and three person days per application in our nominal worst-case model. 19 June

4 We have included training for five advanced technicians/architects, 20 dispatched support technicians and 10 to 15 help desk technicians. Enterprises should develop training programs for their IT professionals and replace our assumptions with their own. Application Development and Replacement: The largest component of migration costs will be for application development, including the cost of rewriting or replacing every Windows-based client-side application in the enterprise's portfolio (see Table 3). As a "rule of thumb" for large enterprises, the number of applications enterprises often have equals approximately 10 percent of their user base, many or most of which will have to be replaced with Linux or browser-based applications. These migration costs can obviously be significant, perhaps running into millions of dollars. Enterprises or users with fewer applications to move will be better candidates for Linux on the desktop. Application Development Minor Custom Application Upgrade Major Custom Application Upgrade Evaluate and Select Packaged Applications Application Development and Selection (Total) Application Development and Selection (per User) Table 3 Application Replacement Costs (Structured-Task (Knowledge Users) Best Worst Best Worst Hourly Rate Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost $2, $22, $5, $44, ,400 $1,008,000 57,600 $4,032,000 28,800 $2,016, ,200 $8,064, $50,400 6,480 $453,600 6,000 $420,000 54,000 $3,780,000 $1,061,200 $4,508,000 $2,441,600 $11,888,800 $424 $1,803 $977 $4,756 An application written for a browser front end will be relatively easy to modify to run under Linux if it has no IE-specific features. Browser applications written using Microsoft development tools such as FrontPage and VisualStudio may include more IE-specific code and, thus, may be more problematic. Enterprises considering Linux must ensure that the browser-based applications they are considering now and in the future have no such dependencies. Applications written in Visual Basic will likely be total rewrites to run under Linux. Generally, applications written in Java should be easiest and ones written in C and C++ will be next-easiest to modify to run under Linux. Application development costs (and selection costs to replace independent software vendor applications) will vary tremendously, depending on the size, function and other characteristics of the application. We have serious reservations about trying to include generic numbers in this model. Therefore, we have excluded these cost estimates from the main model and include them separately. Since these costs are liable to be so high, enterprises need to consider them carefully when they create their budgets. For evaluating the selection of replacement packaged applications, we have allocated two person weeks per application in our optimistic case and 18 person weeks per application in our worst-case estimate. However, this too will depend on what type of application must be replaced and may be considerably longer for large, critical, complex applications. Minor application upgrades are for browser and Java applications. We've budgeted 20 hours in the best case and 160 hours per application in worst case. These numbers are some of the most tentative in the model because the size and the complexity of the applications will drive them. Enterprises need to examine their applications to size the effort required. 19 June

5 If we assume that 15 applications require rewrites and that rewrite takes six person months (which may be optimistic), we get a cost of more than $1 million, or more than $400 per user in our model. If we assume that each application requires 24 person months to rewrite, we get a cost of more than $4 million for 15 applications; more than $1,600 on a per-user basis. These costs can easily be greater than or equal to all the other costs in the model. Enterprises need to carefully examine their application development costs. Enterprises with significant numbers of applications to rewrite probably will not be able to cost-justify their migrations if the ability to move to Linux on the desktop is the only reason they are rewriting them. Group Fixed Costs: Most enterprises divide a migration project into manageable chunks based on business unit or physical location. Each chunk is examined separately to understand broad application, printing and scheduling issues. In our model, the group costs are a bit of an artificial construct, but because most enterprises break their migrations into groups, we wanted to reflect that in the model (see Table 4). Group Fixed Costs Rollout Planning Assessment Scheduling Communications Setup Training Class Trainer's Time Post-implementation Support Cost per Group/Business Unit Total Group Fixed Costs Table 4 Group Costs (Structured- Task Users) Best Worst (Knowledge Best Worst Hourly Rate Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost $50 8 $ $2, $ $4,000 $50 4 $200 8 $400 4 $200 8 $400 $70 4 $ $1,120 4 $ $1,120 $50 8 $ $1,200 8 $ $1,200 $50 75 $3, $5, $7, $8,750 $36 67 $2, $4, $4, $9,600 $7,430 $14,770 $13,563 $25,070 $111,450 $221,550 $203,450 $376,050 A best practice is to have on-site support available the day after a migration. We include the cost of this support in this section. We assume that 20 people will be migrated each day in the structured-task-user model's nominal best case and 10 people per day in the nominal worst case. For the knowledge worker, we assume that 10 people will be migrated each day, and we assume that on-site support will be available for one day in our best case and two days in our worst-case example. Individual Variable Costs: These costs vary directly with the number of users being migrated. We include the cost of backing up data, installing a new operating system (OS) and applications, and restoring the users' data. The base model assumes that most functions are done manually, and using imaging tools or scripts can help reduce these costs. We assume that only existing PCs will be used, but enterprises that are bringing new PCs should change that assumption. For PCs that would be replaced as part of a hardware refresh cycle, enterprises may choose not to count a portion of the cost against the Linux migration, because there is some amount of labor that would need to be done regardless of whether a new OS were being deployed. In this section (see Table 5), we also try to estimate how many additional help desk calls will be made because of the migration after the on-site support ends. Some of these calls may be questions about the new OS, networking or the new applications. In our model, we assume that 5 percent of users will incur a 30-minute call, 10 percent a 12-minute call and 15 percent a five-minute call, and 70 percent will not incur any migration-related calls for structured-task workers in the nominal best case. In our worst-case 19 June

6 example, we assume that 10 percent of users will incur a 30-minute call, 15 percent a 15-minute call and 15 percent a five-minute call. For knowledge workers, we assume a best case with 20 percent/30 minutes, 25 percent/15 minutes and 25 percent/five minutes and a worst case with 10 percent/one hour, 20 percent/30 minutes, 25 percent/15 minutes and 25 percent a five-minute call. Individual Variable Costs Backup and Installation Prep. Installation New PC Image Install Hardware Upgrade Existing PC and Re-image Re-image Existing PC (No Upgrade) Role-Based Application Install Restore and Test User Training Self-Support/Informal Training/Downtime Post-implementation Support (Help Desk Incr.) Travel Costs Total Individual Variable Costs Table 5 Individual Variable Costs (Structured- Task Users) Best Worst (Knowledge Worst Best Hourly Rate Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost $ $45, $90, $90, $180,000 $ $0 4.0 $0 1.0 $0 4.0 $0 $50 $ $135, $450, $135, $450,000 $ $90, $405, $90, $405,000 $ $90, $180, $180, $360,000 $ $125, $500, $125, $500,000 $ $280, $406, $560, $700,000 $ $140, $840, $420, $1,400,000 $ $5, $9, $16, $25,500???? $905,000 $2,871,000 $1,600,000 $3,995,000 Hardware and Software Cost: We estimate $30 to $70 per user for Linux licenses and used $50 in the migration model (see Table 6). We also budget $100 per user for each application upgrade and $200 per user for each packaged application that must be replaced. These are rough estimates, and enterprises should replace our numbers with their estimates, including evaluating open-source replacements. We also included $35 per user for knowledge workers for StarOffice licenses. Enterprises using this model in conjunction with our TCO model should be aware that this cost is included in both models and should delete it from one. There is also a small amount in the TCO model for deployment that should be eliminated. Hardware and Software Costs New PC Hardware PC Hardware Upgrade Linux/Windows License New and Upgraded Packaged Applications StarOffice Hardware and Software Total Hardware and Software per User Table 6 Hardware and Software Costs (Structured- Task Users) Best Worst (Knowledge Best Worst Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost 1,450 $0 $0 1,700 $0 $0 150 $0 $0 150 $0 $0 50 $125,000 $125, $125,000 $125, $472,500 $472, $5,400,000 $5,400, $87,500 $87,500 $597,500 $597,500 $5,612,500 $5,612,500 $239 $239 $2,245 $2,245 Results: Our model shows that a migration to Linux on the desktop might cost $727 to $1,651 per structured-task worker, plus the cost of application selection and development (see Table 7). Using our assumptions, this brings the cost to $1,151 to $3,454 per user. For knowledge workers, the model shows 19 June

7 $3,130 to $4,308 plus applications, which brings the cost to $4,107 to $9,064 per user given our assumptions. Application development costs compose nearly half of the cost (and, in some cases, more than half). Again, these are the most variable, hard-to-predict costs in this generic model, and we strongly encourage enterprises to explore their own application development costs. Cost per User Table 7 Total Migration Cost Project Total for 2,500 Users (Not Incl. Application Development) (Structured-Task Users) (Knowledge Best Worst Best Worst Cost Cost Cost Cost $1,816,560 $4,126,660 $7,826,130 $10,770,970 $727 $1,651 $3,130 $4,308 Costs Including Application Development and Selection Costs/User Including Application Development and Selection $2,877,760 $8,634,660 $10,217,730 $22,609,770 $1,151 $3,454 $4,107 $9,064 Table 8 provides the cost breakdown by category. We see that direct-cost categories range from $559 to $1,152 per structured-task worker and $2,738 to $3,468 per knowledge worker, including replacement of packaged applications, but not including application development costs (which are all direct IS labor). In addition, we expect lost productivity because of the user learning curve of $168 to $840. Enterprises should decide how they want to handle this noncash cost of migration. Table 8 Cost Breakdown (Excluding Application Development) Cost Summary Excluding Application Development (Average per User) (Structured-Task Users) (Knowledge Hardware Software and Tuition Total Hardware and Software Best Worst Best Worst $0 $0 $0 $0 $249 $254 $2,255 $2,260 $249 $254 $2,255 $2,260 Direct Labor End-User Operations Total Labor $310 $898 $483 $1,208 $168 $498 $392 $840 $478 $1,396 $875 $2,048 Direct Costs (Hardware, Software, IS Labor) Indirect Costs (End-User Operations) $559 $1,152 $2,738 $3,468 $168 $498 $392 $840 Total per User $727 $1,651 $3,130 $4,308 Table 9 shows the cost breakdown, including application development. 19 June

8 Table 9 Cost Breakdown (Including Application Development) Cost Summary Including Application Development (Average per User) (Structured-Task Users) (Knowledge Hardware Software and Tuition Total Hardware and Software Best Worst Best Worst $0 $0 $0 $0 $249 $254 $2,255 $2,260 $249 $254 $2,255 $2,260 Direct Labor End-User Operations Total Labor $734 $2,701 $1,460 $5,964 $168 $498 $392 $840 $902 $3,200 $1,852 $6,804 Direct Costs (Hardware, Software, IS Labor) Indirect Costs (End-User Operations) $983 $2,955 $3,715 $8,224 $168 $498 $392 $840 Total per User $1,151 $3,454 $4,107 $9,064 Bottom Line: Users who require a narrower range of applications, such as data entry workers and some structured-task workers, will have far-lower migration costs to get from. Therefore, for these users, the hurdle to find return on investment will be much lower than for knowledge workers. Enterprises should calculate their migration costs and their expected total cost of ownership savings to decide whether there is any financial incentive for them to move to Linux on the desktop, given their migration costs. 19 June