Question: switching from a computer running on Windows to one running on Linux could slash computer-generated e-waste levels by 50 per cent. True or false?
And the answer is (cue long drawn-out tension building drumroll): TRUE!
Yes, a UK government study in late 2004 reported that there were substantial green benefits to running a Linux open source operating system (OS) on computers instead of the ubiquitous Windows OS, owned by Microsoft. The main problem with Windows users was that they had to change their computer twice as many times as Linux users, as successive Windows OS upgrades demanded more hard drive space and faster processing speeds. On average, the study concluded, Windows effectively created twice as much computer-generated e-waste as Linux.
The report, titled Office of Government Commerce: Open Source Software Trials in Government - Final Report said that:
"There are also potential Green Agenda benefits, through reducing the energy and resources consumed in manufacturing replacement equipment, and reducing landfill requirements and costs arising from disposal of redundant equipment.
"Industry observers quote a typical hardware refresh period for Microsoft Windows systems as 3-4 years; a major UK manufacturing organisation quotes its hardware refresh period for Linux systems as 6-8 years."
Overall the report concluded that:
"Open Source software is a viable and credible alternative to proprietary software for infrastructure implementations, and for meeting the requirements of the majority of desktop users."
Something to bear in mind next time Microsoft tries to bully you into upgrading to yet another 'latest version' of its OS, I reckon.
(Thanks to EcoGeek for the story.)
