Holding out for a (Linux) hero

commentary Sixty years ago, Alfred Kinsey turned an academic research interest into fuel for a cultural revolution after extensive research revealed what was really going on behind America's closed bedroom doors.

These days, revolution is all about Linux. The word alone has become a catchcry for everything anti-establishment, anti-Bill, anti-licensing fees. If you listen to the hype, it's being used everywhere, in businesses of all sizes, to do everything but make the coffee.

Just because everybody's using Linux, however, doesn't mean everybody's happy for that fact to be known, as I found recently while looking for potential candidates for a series of profiles about companies that had made the switch between Windows and Linux, and vice versa.

Based on the ongoing enthusiasm about Linux, I presumed it would be simple to find companies just busting to tell how they'd ditched their Microsoft server software and moved onto Linux servers. Everybody's doing it, after all, aren't they?

Not exactly. Despite numerous enquiries with Linux integrators, discussions with Linux-heavy vendors including IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Red Hat and Novell, heavy Web research, and perusing the usual channels for potential candidates, I wasn't able to find more than one big company willing to share their experience migrating from Windows to Linux.

That doesn't mean nobody has done it -- only that they weren't happy to talk about what they've done. However, this startling conclusion led me to wonder just why it was so hard to get anybody to come out of the closet. The answer I did get -- from a person who is well acquainted with the reasons behind these things -- was perhaps as surprising as Kinsey's own research: "They may be doing it, but they're scared to talk about it", he said.

Many companies, it appears, are concerned that Linux is still seen as high-risk, and don't want their move away from Windows advertised in case things go pear-shaped. Others see Linux as a competitive weapon and don't want their rivals knowing how they've cut their costs -- or that they've taken a promising yet risky migration path.

The biggest reason, however, was something of a surprise: the reference companies the vendors could offer were all companies that had migrated to Linux not from Windows -- but from Sun Solaris, HP-UX, IBM AIX or any of a dozen other versions of Unix. Yes -- Unix, not Windows.

For these companies, Linux represents just another iteration in the Unix story -- and therefore poses commensurately low risk compared with making a complete jump from Windows. Linux for them is effectively little more than an infrastructure modernisation play -- and not a philosophical statement. Everyone may like to complain about Microsoft, but Windows Server is still an inescapable fact of life for most.

This conclusion is backed by IDC's February server market figures, which showed shipments of Linux servers growing 20.8 percent during the fourth quarter of 2005 compared with a year earlier, to be worth US$5.7 billion for the year. Windows server shipments were lower, at 4.7 percent growth for the quarter and annualised revenues of US$17.7 billion -- nudging out Unix systems, which shrank 5.9 percent for the quarter and notched up US$17.5 billion in revenues for 2005, from first place for the first time ever.

Pull back the covers, so to speak, and -- just as Kinsey found -- the truth seems far removed from accepted beliefs. These figures suggest that Linux's gains are actually coming at the expense of Unix -- and not Microsoft, as the histrionic Linux faithful seem to assume. Perhaps, we must consider, Microsoft has far less reason to be perturbed by Linux than everyone thinks.

We want to know what's going on behind your closed doors. Have you moved from Windows to Linux? Happy to tell us your dirty little secret? Drop us a line at edit@zdnet.com.au and let us know. We'd love to count you in.

Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!

Talkback 12 comments

  1. What a load of rubish Anonymous -- 24/03/06

    1. Please name the contacts. Because I for one want to verify such an article myself.

    2. Have you spoken to companies like CISCO and Sony? What have they told you in respect to this?

    3. Who was the person in Red Hat that you speak about?

    4. Why did you chose to list only the companies that base their work on Unix systems then chose to migrate to Linux? Is it because you wanted to backup your discussion blindly? Why don't you list the larger and more influential companies that decided to migrate from Windows to Linux (Successfully, happily and openly)? Why don’t you include Government in your list? Also have you heard of HP-UX? No wait... obviously you haven't otherwise you wouldn’t have mentioned HP!

    WHAT A TOTALY MISLEADING ARTICLE!

    SHOW US THE PROOF! NAME THE NAMES!

    I cannot believe you guys would post such a poor quality article.

    1. you're rubbish sam neill -- 24/03/06

      scared aren't ya? mate, spend time on your contracts instead of attacking the writer. you know you need to do more lobbying.

    2. Retracting comment Anonymous -- 24/03/06

      I read it again with greater scrutiny and realised I had misread the article. I apologise.

      I thought the article writer was trying to imply that Linux was not secure and that he was trying to go further by claiming this poor opinion was the reason why companies are scared of it. But I was wrong about what the article states. So I take it back.

      From my impression (of what I thought it said) I felt the article was blindly misleading (needlessly). I would react the same way when ever I find something grossly misleading wether it is for MS or Linux. Period. In this case it is a misunderstanding. So I retract my comment.

  2. Holding out for a (Linux) hero Anonymous -- 25/03/06

    One reason there aren't many companies migrating from Windows to Linux is simply current skill sets vs. cost of re-hire/re-tooling/re-training. I work for a largish (around 5000 employees) company in the U.S., and it's a "Windows shop". However, I was given the latitude to migrate a large portion of one division to Linux, which I did mostly myself with the help of one of my direct reports. After about two years of solid performance I went to our CIO to discuss our HW and SW savings among other things. She immediately agreed that Linux was a much better solution and she was impressed with our savings and systems reliability (which leads to intangibles like current personnel having more time to work on business-centric projects instead of propping up the underpinnings all day) but she was fearful of trying to start a company-wide migration involving such a critical component with virtually all of her staff only trained on Microsoft products.

    She was not willing to spend the money to re-train everyone, nor was she willing to hire new personnel across the board and jettison the Windows people, and she was wary of starting a high-profile, complex project that had the potential to cause a show-stopper or two if someone didn't do their homework correctly. All she could say about the possiblity was, (this is a paraphrase) "I am very interested in keeping a close eye on this technology. I think it would be very good for our company in the long run, but unless something were to happen that would cause Linux to reach critical mass and propel us in that direction I don't think it will happen". There was no further discussion about a gradual migration, because that all pointed back to the personnel and training problem. I've heard the exact same thing from some of my peers in other industries, so I think this is a big part of it.

    Decision makers will probably have to have a dog in the fight if they are willing to bite off the high-profile risk of disrupting the business with a huge infrastructure switch. I don't think anybody who was raised within the Microsoft paradigm is going to see that kind of potential career-limiting risk as worth it. Only when it becomes the "popular" thing to do will these people get on board. And let's face it, "these people" make up the bulk of IT management.

  3. One reason that hasn't been mentioned Anonymous -- 25/03/06

    One more reason why companies are not willing to divulge the fact that they have moved their servers to Linux is because they fear the wrath of Microsoft.

    As they continue to run Windows on the desktop, they need the best deals possible to continue the upgrade circus - and this will not be forthcoming to those who steer away from the Windows Server path.

  4. I have using Linux Esteban -- 26/03/06

    i Been using linux on my desktop, for the past 2 yrs and i most say im happy with. I don't need worry about ad-ware, yes there also no virus problem... but i the most that people have problem is ad-ware. cause of that i need reinstall windows sometime on my family and friends computer. Linux much better suited for desktop then windows. i using FC5 right now all my software i install i trust, and i know where i getting it from, yum. It easy to update, a no more then 5 click and my computer it update, i mean my whole computer, from my chat to web browser. People talk about Linux not ready for Desktop, i say is windows that not. Windows require to much time to admis. Think about it only w/ the anti-virus, if it up-date you got reebot the computer then your able to scan. update then computer you got reebot. go to a web site you got your self adware. People think windows is easy cause they don't do all the thing they need to do. I find a waste of my time, i wanna use the computer not make sure is safe, reading tech news only make sure i didn't miss something, let be real here, Linux problem is that the no AOL AIM i mean the official one w/ web cam support, it the software that people everyday use not there. Yes there is software let you do those thing, I my self use gaim, but people like AIM they want to use aim. other thing when you go to local best buy there no hardware say Linux support. You can say hard to install a driver in Linux, but ask people use window most don't even know what a driver. They only they got pop in the cd and the hardware will work. I hear people buy new printers, only cause they lost the cd, we all know that you can go on the web download it. I can tell you how many times in the middle of winter if winter, only install the driver on the printer (very important paper due next day). I mean people are not dum, only cause you don't how save a file to a floppy don't make you dum. All this people i say are much smart and wiser then me, it only happen that i like computers, they like using it. Windows is not ready for Desktop, is the channel that there to help people that make windows useful, windows is crap, it got more wholes then swiss chess.

  5. we knew this Anonymous -- 26/03/06

    the fact that linux grows more at the expense of traditional UNIX than microsoft is well known, and has been for quite some time. Switches from UNIX just arent celebrated as much because Microsoft's vendor lock-in is much more diabolical.

  6. That sounds like a challenge Bah Humbug -- 26/03/06

    "it's being used everywhere ... to do everything but make the coffee."

    Im sure we could get an embedded processor running linux in there somewhere.

  7. Wasn't too long ago Anonymous -- 26/03/06

    This same type of article would have a number of quotes from well known companies stating that they had no intention of moving from MS Windows. Even MS's own press releases are hazy these days, with MS recently claiming to win "millions and millions" of Netware clients -- with no mention of the client. More importantly, those supposed wins are supposed to be old Netware installations, not Sun, not IBM, not Apple. MS is restructuring, is going to miss the Christmas season with the two products that ARE their income, and is bouncing people around internally.

    All signs of confidence on the part of MS, the same company that all but ignored problems when they felt that it was just a matter of time before they finished of Apple and the *nixes? Personally, it looks like flailing for an answer, especially with a stock price that's been flat for five years, and countries like China increasing their IT infrastructure.

    Oh, and using Linux to make coffee isn't talked about much, because folks were doing that last century. :)

  8. I can understand that Anonymous -- 27/03/06

    I can understand your CEO's views on the subject. She's right in a number of ways.

    I personally think pushing for a lengther migration is best, slowly phasing out your MS systems instead of the all-or-nothing approach I keep reading in the forums. It makes much more sence to do that.

    Think about it, we didn't go from mainframe terminals to desktop PC's overnight. These types of transisions take time, but over time I believe the migration from MS to Linux will happen. Just not as fast as some people would like.

    1. I can understand that.... Anonymous -- 27/03/06

      Was in responce to "Holding out for a (Linux)"

  9. Kinsey was a fraud... Anonymous -- 28/03/06

    It has since become known that he falsified a good part of his research in order to push his social agendas. Google it...can't believe people still parrot the guy as though he did anything worthy.

Add your opinion


Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Renai LeMay Australian Govt funds IT start-ups
    This week Australia's Federal Government announced it had allocated $3.6 million in funding to 57 local research projects so that they could be commercialised, with many of them being web or IT-related start-ups.
  • Array Google should come clean on datacentres
    It's nice that Google says it has put an effort into making its datacentres more energy efficient, but the search giant's pledges won't mean much until it discloses just how many of the beasties it's actually running.
  • Array US shows what OPEL could have been
    Sprint's WiMAX roll-out in Baltimore will prove the Australian government's decision to worm its way out of the Opel WiMAX contract was a short-sighted, and ultimately damaging, political stunt that has benefited nobody.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured