Microsoft is trying to convince enterprises to switch over to Windows 10, claiming they could potentially save up to $404 per employee over a three-year period when they upgrade from an older version of Windows. But don’t just take Microsoft’s word for it – the company backs up its claim with evidence from a recent study by Forrester Research, which was commissioned by its good self.

Forrester interview four Microsoft customers that have already started migrating from Windows 7 to Windows 10, and used the analysis to create a hypothetical composite organization numbering 20,000 employees with 24,000 Windows devices in use. Using that hypothetical organization, Forrester modeled the costs of rolling out Windows 10 and calculated the savings of doing so.

Microsoft’s claims are typical of a company that’s no stranger to using cost-saving pronouncements to try and get customers to upgrade to the latest software. Microsoft did exactly that in 2012, when it claimed that the cost of support for Windows XP was around five times that of Windows 7, as part of a push to get companies to adopt what was then its latest and best OS.

As such, today’s claim can be seen in the same vein, but it might just be enough to tempt some to upgrade. That’s because, according to Forrester, the hypothetical composite company it created would need to spend around $4.3 million to deploy Windows 10 – but note that figure doesn’t include the costs of Windows 10 licenses, as it’s assumed that the hypothetical firm is already on a volume licensing agreement backed by Software Assurance. The figure also doesn’t take into account the cost of new hardware either.

While that sounds expensive, Forrester nonetheless contends that the same imaginary company would save around $12.4 million from deploying Windows 10, with the savings coming from various sources, some a tad contentious. For example, the biggest savings would come thanks to a boost in mobile worker productivity – Forrester says $5.8 million in savings can be had, following its estimates of a 25 percent increase in productivity due to Windows 10. Why? Simply because Windows 10 is faster, and would allow for a thorough re-provisioning of the firm’s mobile devices.

“With Windows 10, the organization is ready to fully leverage virtualization for these employees, to help speed up their ramp-up and close project tasks,” Forrester said in its analysis.

Other areas in which Windows 10 can lead to cost savings include simpler, self-serve application delivery ($1.9 million); faster boot times ($1.8 million); security enhancements ($1.3 million); and third-party licensing ($1.2 million), assuming the pretend company drops its antivirus software and only uses Windows Defender. Still, these claims are rather debatable. Forrester’s claim of $1.9 million in savings due to “streamlined application delivery” is based upon a presumed “much faster application installation” – just 15 minutes for the average worker, compared to an average 150 minute wait for IT to provision a device, as was necessary on Windows 7. Forrester said the difference between the two times was considered totally unproductive, and “billed” to the savings column at an hourly rate of $50. Of course, that means Forrester is simply assuming a worker would just sit and wait for 150 minutes while the application was installed, whereas in reality they would probably begin some other task in the meantime. As such, the $1.9 million in savings claim is highly suspect.

As far as direct savings, the numbers are somewhat less impressive – Forrester said the pretend company would save a rather meager $273,000 due to streamlining of IT management duties on Windows 10.

If Microsoft’s and Forrester’s numbers really do add up, then migrating to Windows 10 from Windows 7 should pay for itself within just 13 months. It’s a big “IF”, however.

Photo Credit: TechStage via Compfight cc