My, how time flies. Things sure have come a long way since I started writing on open source issues for ZDNet a hundred columns ago.
At that time, one of the prime goals of my corner of ZDNet was what they called FUD busting." There was no end of misinformation floating around about Linux, much of it generated by fear and intended to confuse and confound people wondering what all this open source hoopla was about.
In the two years since, the complaints about Linux have gone from:
- "It's just a toy" to
- "So it's not a toy, but it can't run reliably" to
- "So it's reliable, but there are no apps" to
- "So it's got apps, but nobody's using it in a corporate setting" to
- "So people are using in a corporate setting, but Oracle's not supporting it" to
- "So Oracle supports it, but there's no commercial help-desk support" to
- "So there's commercial support, but where are the hardware vendors" to
- "So IBM's putting a billion bucks into Linux, but there's no enterprise support" to
- "So there's now enterprise support, let me think of something else..."
Generally, most FUD has failed to stick. Genuine deficiencies, such as real SMP and ease of use, have been or are being addressed, with development and bug acknowledgments in full public view. Flaws are more often seen as challenges rather than setbacks. I myself talked about the post-FUD era back in August 1999, in which Linux-bashers, finding FUD no longer an effective tactic, resorted to name-calling and half-truths.
We can only hope that MicroSoft diligently and aggressively attacks every flaw in Linux, either real or perceived. The real flaws will be fixed -- part of the strength of the Open Source community is the ability to recognize a valid criticism regardless of the source -- and the chimerae will be dispelled. A good, hard anti-Linux campaign from Redmond will firmly establish that an Open Source code base is more responsive to the needs of its users than a closed-source code base.