Support from big guns
Moreover, technology buyers said Linux is getting better in quality and range, largely because of help from Microsoft's rivals. "Once folks like IBM and Sun started providing support for Linux, (they) made Linux better by plugging some holes and providing better support," Mahajan said.
That, coincidentally, is exactly how Microsoft got its foot in the door with Windows back in the 1980s. "Microsoft used the divide-and-conquer marketing tactic. They didn't go to IT managers--they went to business departments. And suddenly, the IS manager looked around and said, 'Man, we're running a lot of Microsoft stuff.' So I think that's going to happen with Linux," Cherry said.
Nevertheless, despite the significant challenge posed by Linux and open source, Microsoft hardly has its back against the wall. Linux may have become a bona fide competitor in the server market, but Microsoft still rules on the desktop.
Industry veterans, including many Microsoft customers, note that it is extremely difficult--and expensive--to unseat the incumbent technology in large companies. One of the largest costs is retraining users.
"It would be very hard to convince the mainstream user in Utah state government that Linux is the right desktop choice for them. Most of the reason for that is not functionality--it's training," said Windley, who supports 22,000 desktops throughout Utah.
As a CIO contemplating making such a huge change, he noted, "you have to be willing to fall on your sword, because you very well may expire doing it."
In addition, those companies that did agree to Microsoft's new licensing program have paid to use the company's products for up to three years in advance, making it unlikely that they will switch to a competitor.
But the mere existence of Linux will most likely benefit Microsoft's customers in the long term. In fact, many longtime analysts said that, with the slump in the technology business and the weakening of some key rivals, Microsoft needs Linux.
"The funny thing about this Linux thing is it might just end up being the perfect kind of threat for Microsoft," said Rob Horwitz, another analyst with Directions on Microsoft. "It's something that ain't gonna kill Microsoft, but it is something that will help it focus on who the enemy is and what they have to do."
Key to that battle plan is making its products more secure and reliable, customers say, as well as changing licensing policies to be less complicated. Otherwise, Microsoft will find itself the victim of a time-honored trend in the computing business: obsolescence.
"Linux is the end game in 'good enough' computing," Illuminata's Eunice said. "It's great stuff, it comes at little or no cost, and it's good enough to do the job. Just as Windows gave Unix makers fits in years past--and the Unix makers gave minicomputer guys fits, and minicomputer guys gave the mainframe makers fits--open source is giving Microsoft and Windows fits."
No Freedom here.
Microsoft is not offering any code as Open Source. Not even close.
What Microsoft has discovered is that it cannot defeat Open Source as a concept or a practice, so it is trying desperately to co-opt the language and terminology of Open Source, and twist it to its own needs.
Here's how Open Source is different to what Microsoft's offers:
- Open source provides the right to re-use, extend and re-distribute. Microsoft does not.
- Open source allows for independent review, and comment of all system and application software, without the need to sign onerous NDAs. Microsoft does not.
- Open source means the allocation of rights and freedoms to users. Microsoft provides nothing here. Read the EULA and the contracts for their bogus 'shared source' programme. The only rights they affirm are their own, not yours. All your rights, often even your rights to comment on defficiencies in the software, or to use the software with other components, are voided.
- Further, by releasing your code modifications in an open source licence such as the GPL (the most popular open source licence) you guarantee that your code cannot be on co-opted, and that it will always be available for others to view, learn from, share and use. With Microsoft, all your hard work will only eventually benefit Micrsooft. You want access to your contribution in the next version of their software? Well, keep paying.
Microsoft will succumb to the un-stoppable rise of Open Source. There's no doubt here.
Much like IBM had to change its monopolistic and heavy handed ways after decades of industry dominance, so too will Microsoft. And the hope is, that much like IBM, one day Microsoft will become a fer better vendor, and a an asset to the IY industry, rather than what it is now.