|
|
To print: Select File and then Print from your browser's menu
-------------------------------------------------------------- This story was printed from ZDNet Australia. --------------------------------------------------------------
|
Interview: Red Hat's new CEO By Stephen Shankland, CNET News.com July 31, 2008 URL: http://www.zdnet.com.au/insight/software/soa/Interview-Red-Hat-s-new-CEO/0,139023769,339290968,00.htm
Red Hat's new chief executive, Jim Whitehurst, has his eyes on the sky. The former Delta Airlines chief operating officer, who took the reins of the most established open-source software company from Matthew Szulik in January, names cloud computing as a top priority.
Jim Whitehurst Loosely speaking, the term refers to computing services available to anyone online rather than custom data centers isolated within corporate confines, but it also dovetails with the general idea of computing services running at massive scale on a more flexible infrastructure. "The clouds will all run Linux," Whitehurst said in an interview. Being Red Hat's CEO is always a balancing act. On the one hand you have the sometimes philosophically fervid open-source software community, volunteers and professionals who collectively produce the software Red Hat packages, tests, tunes, sells, and supports. On the other are the much more pragmatic customers who just want their technology to work. Red Hat must be friends to both camps — neither a parasite sponging off the hard work of others, nor a useless middleman selling what can be downloaded for free. Whitehurst, who long has used Linux himself, discussed these and other subjects shortly before the LinuxWorld Conference and Expo, which begins August 7 in the US.
Q: What's your biggest surprise since starting at Red Hat? If you look at the S&P 500, seven of the top twenty companies are tech, and other than Google, they're not high-growth. But they're just printing money because switching costs are so high. There's this incredible amount of residual goodwill to Red Hat because we're seen as an alternative to that. Oracle announced a 20-something percent price increase just as the economy starts heading south. How can you do that unless you're pretty sure nobody can switch? High switching costs led to infrastructure cost creep. Once you get hooked, you can't get off.
I recognize Red Hat's a prominent alternative to incumbent players, but Red Hat's been around for awhile now, and it's not easy to get off Red Hat. It might be easier to get off RHEL than say, AIX from IBM, but...
But the switching cost is still there.
What if you want to switch to Novell's Suse Linux Enterprise?
What about all these high-growth companies with humongous scale-out infrastructure, like Google or Amazon? Does it concern you that these companies are able to use Linux for free? Today, we have Uli Drepper meeting with a bunch of major customers and invited Intel to talk about power management in chips, to talk about the next generation and what they need and what we need and feedback to Intel. If you're not a Red Hat customer, you're not there. That leadership in where the kernel is going is very important to most customers. It's much more smaller Web sites that decide not to pay.
Do the smaller customers pay when they get bigger?
There's a lot of movement toward building large-scale Web infrastructure. Your product plays more to one server running the database here, one server running the app server there. What do you think about getting higher into the stack for enabling a very large, coordinated, distributed infrastructure?
But what about the management, not just providing 1,000 individual operating systems? If someone wants to move something from inside their firewall to outside, they need to feel confident it will run. If you're running it on Joe Bob's Cloud Linux, does it feel like it's certified? There is clear value to having a consistent Linux that's certified across those platforms. So we built the infrastructure to do that. It doesn't surprise me Amazon went with us. Anybody can run almost anything that runs on the data center on it, on it, it's certified, and they can call and get tech support.
What about management tools, though?
But you can automate it — if I need 18 more instances on the cloud I can turn them on, then turn them back off?
One of the interesting dynamics in the open-source world is the constant back and forth with Microsoft. Sometimes they're disparaging, and sometimes they're embracing. How's the current state of affairs with Redmond right now?
Have you seen any benefits from their interoperability announcements that came out of antitrust actions?
Well, speaking of competition, how about Canonical. They're funding Ubuntu development aggressively. Do you see them in customer bids?
I talk to them every now and again, and certification is more on their to-do list than on their done list. I draw a clear distinction between where we create value and where we extract value. You can't get too enamored with one or the other. The airline industry creates a ton of value, but it's never figured out how to extract any of it for itself. It's great for society, but never captured any money for itself. With our model, we create value by working with the community to develop really good software. We extract value by making open-source consumable by the enterprise. Open source is iterative innovation — thousands of small projects going on out in the community. Iterative innovation is what makes open-source so powerful, and it is a disaster if you're running a data center. Every two years, we set aside the major bits, test them, performance-tune them for the major applications, etc. Making it consumable is where we're able to extract value.
The airline industry is charging for checked bags now. Does this feel like sunny optimism compared to your last job?
One question on extension is on getting subscription revenue beyond the operating system: How's that working, for example with JBoss [Java server software]? This is where we stick to our knitting. Open-source, with our model, works best where certification, support, mission-critical [reliability] matter. That's where middleware matters, because it has similar sets of characteristics [to operating systems]. Virtualization is another one. Those are the areas you'll see us focused on. It's where we can add value and make money.
So will you be sticking with the Red Hat Exchange for your attempt to monetize higher-level software?
So that has evolved into a standard partner certification play, and maybe some cross-selling agreements?
Red Hat has often been an advocate of open-source software, pushing the philosophical envelope, not just the business envelope. You're from the business mold, not the open-source advocacy mold. How do you see Red Hat's role now in leading the charge and waving the flag?
Copyright © 2009 CBS Interactive, a CBS Company. All Rights Reserved. |