Enthusiasm for Linux is still growing among IT vendors, but what is behind the industry support for this 'free' operating system?
Companies such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard and Compaq all used the recent LinuxWorld show as a public platform to declare their devotion to the Linux operating system. Indeed, IBM has created a publicity coup by simply making available a native implementation of the system to run on its S/390 mainframes.
In addition, many major firms have announced their participation in the Gnome Foundation, an open-source group that has been established to steer the development of the Gnome desktop user interface for Linux.
Support revenues
But IT managers should ask why major commercial suppliers are showing loyalty to something that is essentially free. How will they make money from it?
Part of the answer lies not in the price of the software but in the revenues from support and implementation. The operating system that does not require support has yet to be invented. So there will always be a good source of revenue for any company with the right technical skills and experience of the customers' problems and requirements. This is where the real strength of IBM and HP lie in relation to Linux.
There is also a suggestion that support for Linux is being used to threaten Microsoft, especially as it tries hard to push Windows 2000 and its DNA network architecture into IT departments. While this may be true, is its unlikely to be the primary motive Windows 2000 and DNA are likely to take a year or so to settle down enough to interest the majority of enterprise users.
For example, one important component of Windows 2000 is Active Directory, but reports from analyst firm Gartner say that there are design flaws that affect performance and stability when working on networks with over 300 sites.
It is estimated that it will be another year before these problems are resolved, because they are caused by fundamental design problems rather than bugs in the code, according to Gartner.
If Linux could cause serious damage to Microsoft, it is likely that Sun Microsystems the most vehement of Microsoft's opponents would be in the vanguard of supporters. But instead, the company pays little more than lip service to the system, despite the announcement last week that it will purchase Linux server appliance maker Cobalt Networks and its semi-open-source licences.
It is arguable that Sun itself is a more important target for the likes of IBM, HP and Compaq than Microsoft. Sun is now seen by many market researchers as the dominant supplier of servers and systems to the enterprise market, especially for Internet-related activities.
Linux and its applications are extremely popular in many smaller and mid-range Internet environments, but at the top, it is Sun that still shines.
The availability of Linux, well supported on more powerful enterprise-scale systems such as IBM's S/390, might just be the tool these companies need to undermine Sun's position.
Sun, like all the others, is now more interested in selling as much of the total system package to customers as possible. This is because the Internet and e-business are forcing changes on customers that make the specific choices of many components in a system far less important than they were.
Perhaps the most obvious component downgraded in importance is the operating system. With complete IT systems now becoming mere components of a larger integrated business platform (IBP), the choice of operating system is far less important than it was, especially when it comes to determining the architecture and implementation of the complete IBP. There, it is arguable that even the traditional big systems suppliers such as IBM and HP are inadequately resourced for the task.
Consultancy role
It is probable that the larger consultancies will play an increasing role in the development and implementation of IBPs for enterprises. But even they will have to add to their resources. Consultancies such as Cap Gemini Ernst & Young have launched services that are moving in the direction of the integrated services package that will be needed to develop IBPs.
Cap Gemini's DareStep service, for example, sets out to combine the creative elements of Web site design with an underpinning of enterprise network infrastructure and at least some knowledge of the how-and-why of running large-scale business operations.
The objective is to provide an environment in which the flair and enthusiasms of the creative element essential to exploit the sales and marketing potential of the Net are fully integrated into the fundamentals of business processes. In future, enterprise IT managers need to look less at whether the operating system is Unix, Linux or anything else despite the hype. Now it is the combination of the creative, technical and business skills that will shape the future development of IBPs. As a result, it seems likely that the next stage will be mergers and takeovers across the creative/technology/business skills boundaries, including apparently strange bed- fellows such as stuffy accountancy-derived consultants buying up ill-disciplined flair-laden Web site designers. ENDS
