Time for Linux bigots to take a back seat

commentary Linux and open source software has always been dogged by a kind of University campus idealism that is brutally incompatible with the harsh realities of the commercial world. Iain Ferguson, News Editor, ZDNet Australia

That idealism unfortunately manifests itself most often in online diatribes against Microsoft, in particular, and proprietary software, in general.

Gartner analyst Brian Prentice said recently the "flaming Linux bigots" who were prone to hyperbole and religious debates to advance their cause actually impeded the growth of Linux and open source software.

"People with strong ideological views are good for the community, [but] at the same time that ideology is prone towards hyperbole and religious debates around things," he told a conference in Sydney. "Those don't help us make sound business decisions."

However, heading into the new year, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the Linux and open source software community can ill-afford the luxury of diluting its message to business and government communities. While significant ground has been made this year in winning broader acceptance, most notably by in securing a level playing field in competing with proprietary software companies for lucrative government procurement deals, Microsoft for one is not taking the situation lying down.

For one, the company's massive revamp of its security position two years ago -- requiring programmers to take training in secure coding -- is starting to pay off, with exploits of problems in Microsoft products coming down. This effort -- combined with the increasing frequency at which problems are being found with Linux and open source code -- is quickly undermining the Linux and open source community's argument that Microsoft software is high risk when compared to alternatives.

Secondly, Redmond is likely to step up its efforts to warn customers that deploying Linux and open source solutions could expose them to litigation over patent royalties arising from the use of shared code. (However, the effectiveness of this argument could be blunted if the so-called Open Invention Network -- a company formed by IBM, Sony, Philips, Novell and Red Hat -- is effective in its intention to buy up Linux patents and offer them royalty-free to Linux developers).

In addition, Microsoft is likely to continue to aggressively protect its market share, leveraging its incumbency and size to ensure it loses as little ground as possible to its smaller rivals. The business cases presented by sellers of Linux and open source software -- both large and small -- are going to have to trump Redmond on value for money and fitness for purpose, as well as overcome the innate conservatism of information and communications technology purchasers. A tall order indeed.

The message is pretty clear when it comes to the growth of Linux and open source software in Australia. The ideologues are going to have to fade into the background and keep their philosophical debates within the confines of the community while the sharp and commercially savvy deal with the hard reality of winning business contracts.

What do you think is the outlook for Linux and open source software in Australia in 2006? Is Microsoft going to build on its dominance or will Linux and open source vendors continue to erode its market share? E-mail us at edit@zdnet.com.au and give us your thoughts.

Iain Ferguson is the News Editor of ZDNet Australia.

Advertisement

Print feature brought to you by Hewlett Packard

Talkback 87 comments

  1. Time for Linux bigots to take a back seat, by Ian Ferguson, 2/5/2005 Anonymous -- 02/12/05

    I would really like Ian’s article to be titled "time for bigots to take a back seat'

    I work in an exclusive MS shop; I attend college in a Linux-rich environment. For me, both camps have there strengths, weaknesses and blind bigots. I spend a lot of time defending Linux at work and Windows at school. Neither need defending, people need to be open-minded and professional in there assessment of the competing products. There really is no clear best solution for every situation.

    I think many of the enlightened changes in MS offerings are good and healthy demonstrations of market forces at work. MS clearly is threatened by the potential for Linux and Open Source to encroach on MS market share. This is evidence that Ian’s view that ‘…value for money and fitness for purpose…” are already at work. This provides us, users of these products and services, with choice; this is what drives improvements and competition.

    Lets accept there are alternate solutions available for us in the market, and celebrate it, it can only mean improvements for us all – let’s shun the bigots on both sides, they are the threat to innovation and improvement.

    1. Find personal trainer Harry -- 28/10/07

      Healthy body give healthy mind, and fitness. Personal trainer at www.findapersonaltrainer.com.au/pages.php

  2. Ian, take a back seat please John Robertson -- 02/12/05

    Ian,

    Zealotry will always exist because idealists will always exist. Linux adoption has been going quite well for a decade without your guidance, and I doubt your opinion matters any more than mine.

    Microsoft is already struggling to maintain market share, and will probably be losing it soon - as the third world comes online.

    Ten years from now Microsoft's OS's will be legacy operating systems for legacy applications.

  3. this article is a buisness tactic Anonymous -- 02/12/05

    I think there is not much truth or merit to this article. It simply serves the purpose of spreading doubt and fear around the open source adoption, to the benefit of propriotory developers. Please realize that this is simply a business tactic adopted by corporations and take it with a grain of salt. Very dissapointed by zdnet.(I understand that it could be interpreted otherwise, but regardless, that is the message it conveys)

  4. Take away the idealism then what is the point? Anonymous -- 02/12/05

    Free Software has worked due to the ideals of those writing the software. It is a mistake to think you can dislodge the idealism and still have the benefit of freely available software. For without this idealism you loose the motivation that lead to all this Free Software. Microsoft is the prime example of software without idealism. What is left of your point to me is you want another Microsoft, not truly Free Software.

  5. Who are the bigots again Iain? Cal McPherson -- 02/12/05

    Far from being incompatible with commerce, the university campus idealism(aka integrity) you deride is a fundamental reason for Linux's success.

    The modus operandi of open source is proving to be the only business model Microsoft, a convicted monopolist, has no control over. It is succeeding where every other proprietry competitor has failed. So much for the harsh realities of the commercial world Iain.

    And I suppose we shouldn't mention Bill Gates and SAP executives recently referring to free software developers as communists.

    Who are the bigots again Iain?

  6. Linux and Microsoft Andy Goss -- 02/12/05

    Microsoft's dominance and will to power will ensure its decline. The situation now is very like the early history of the PC, when IBM seemed to be the greedy big bad guy and Microsoft the plucky little good guy, even if it was not true. In the days of DOS and Windows 3.1 people were happy with Microsoft, they sold a service, a nice easy operating system that ran programs. For me, the reaction began when I had four or five Microsoft programs in the taskbar at once and I could not tell which was which, as the buttons all just said "Microsoft". Having flooded the world with Windows, it was, I suppose, an obvious step to write programs for it using inside information that was denied to competitors, but it was, to anyone who thought about it for a moment, a matter of deep concern. In a sense Microsoft caused the Linux movement by locking up Windows and using it as a marketing tool. A service I will pay for, a sales pitch I will not. When my own 98SE became wobbly I installed Fedora Core 4. It is not perfect, but it is more stable than any Windows version I have used, up to 2000, I have far more control, and a proper, powerful, command line with a good scripting language if I need it. I can't see myself going back to Windows now.

  7. We should all be like MS and ZDNET Mal COntent -- 02/12/05

    We whould throw chairs around and curse, we should call people communists, terrorists, bigots and zealots.

    That's what MS and ZDNET do and we should do the same.

  8. Here's some HARSH REALITY. David F. Skoll -- 02/12/05

    I own a small company with around 10 employees and 20 computers. All the computers run Linux.

    So that means: I saved on 20 copies of Windows (at around $200 each), 10 copies of MS Office (no idea what that costs; probably around $450/computer), and 20 copies of anti-virus software (we don't ened it). We also didn't buy MS Exchange (we use a free IMAP server) and we didn't need to pay for client licenses for Outlook.

    In fact, our annual software budget is zero.

    So yeah, if saving tens of thousands of dollars in a small company is harsh reality, I say bring it on!!!

    1. Moreso with thin clients Robert Pogson -- 03/12/05

      I can keep machines running for ten years with a bit of dusting and I do not need hard drives on most of them with LTSP. The advantages for small and medium sized organisations are huge. Big corporations can use this technology too to maximize the bottom line. When competitors switch to a lower cost option everyone notices. Microsoft has reason to worry. It is not about zealotry. It is about the right way to do business.

    2. what about the hidden costs Max Riethmuller -- 14/12/05

      You say you have a zero software budget? Who installed the systems? If you did yourself, well most small business owners don't have the luxury of that expertise. If your tech people set it up, how much cheaper per machine compared to windows machines? If not cheaper then you haven't saved anything. What about windows software that you can't use that's common as hen's teeth? How many hours do you spend searching for Linux equivalent software instead? What about training? How much longer do staff spend learning systems when they already know Microsoft and Office quite well? What about compatibility with hardware? Or the fact that many small business software vendors don't provide linux versions of their software.

      Or what if you get sued as is mooted in the article? If Open Inventions buy these patents, will the developer of your linux version be providing you with upgrades?

      I'm not saying you won't save money, and maybe your own business is particularly suited to a linux environment. But many small businesses would simply have no option but to use microsoft for reasons as stated above, and when linux advocates who can't see beyond their own noses convert them to linux they suddenly find that they can't do many things that were easy with Microsoft. For example what business that doesn't have it's own IT team, is going to want to make sure every hardware purchase will be able to be supported by linux, when with a Microsoft environment they can just by products off the shelf? This and other practical reasons are why businesses tend to stick with Microsoft.

    3. No saving??? Anonymous -- 15/12/05

      >>You say you have a zero software budget? Who installed the systems? If you did yourself, well most small business owners don't have the luxury of that expertise. If your tech people set it up, how much cheaper per machine compared to windows machines? If not cheaper then you haven't saved anything.<<

      Actually you have because you're only paying for the setup instead of the setup and the software. If the setup cost is equal for both the Linux option is cheaper (maybe not free of cost but on 10 or 20 computers that could be a big deal for a small business).

    4. Linux isn't that hard Andrew Donnellan -- 15/12/05

      I'm guessing you haven't tried installing a modern GNU/Linux distribution. Even the traditionally 'hard' ones like Debian are becoming very easy to install. In most installers, if you don't know the answer to a question, you can just leave it blank.

      Sure, in a large enterprise there will be costs in setup, but in a small business where you don't need complex systems, you can get an ISO off the net, burn it to a CD, put it in and install. Repeat on all computers. Spend some time setting things up (an hour or two), and you're done.

    5. OEM Guys John -- 17/12/05

      You don't have to pay to load up your Windows Machines nor pay retail proces. You buy Windows and Office as OEM releases which are very cheap by comparison and are preloaded. You just saved that bucket on money on not hiring the guy with a pony tail and sandles to load and support your linux machines forever

    6. You actually don't know what you are talking about do you? Rex Alfie Lee -- 21/12/05

      Most people cannot do what you just said. Most computer users have never installed Microsoft or any other software ever. Configuration of the operating system isn't that easy, including Microsoft. For someone who does know & there are many who think they do, maybe yourself, but really have little idea of what they are doing.

      The other side to your lack of insight is that if you get several reasonable computers & add up the cost of Windows & Office for each box the truth is quite an expensive operation for a small business owner. But with Linux you only need one copy of Linux & the extra software & you can plant that penguin on as many trees as you like giving you a whole aviary or is that a forest without the cost of the OEM as you call it. Each OEM has to be purchased separately bcoz if it isn't & you get caught you might get in a bind that will end up costing you a great deal of time or money.

      One Penguin in the hand is worth all the birds out one Windows.

    7. TCO Anonymous -- 19/12/05

      >> You say you have a zero software budget? Who installed the systems? If you did yourself, well most small business owners don't have the luxury of that expertise. If your tech people set it up, how much cheaper per machine compared to windows machines? If not cheaper then you haven't saved anything. What about windows software that you can't use that's common as hen's teeth? How many hours do you spend searching for Linux equivalent software instead? What about training? How much longer do staff spend learning systems when they already know Microsoft and Office quite well? What about compatibility with hardware? Or the fact that many small business software vendors don't provide linux versions of their software. >>

      These are all valid points if David Skoll had said his Total IT Budget was zero. But he didn't. He said his SOFTWARE budget was zero.

      As for using Windows software that he can't use, even though David didn't indicate any need for such, there are a number of very good options (vmware & WINE to name but two).

    8. You obviously have done little to research your argument. Rex Alfie Lee -- 21/12/05

      As far as using Office is concerned the Office alternates are as easy to use as is Office. Very few people would have any trouble using them, even those who have trouble using the Office products. This is a really simple research item & you should have looked at it before saying anything about it.

      As far as other software resources & working out which ones would do what you need there is anincredible resource out there & it's called the Linux community & the Open-Source community. There is a lot more assistance available for users & guess what; it's free.

      As far as business software is concerned there are limitations but there is also many fine business applications available some for free & some not but when it basically sets itself up for you from scratch with all the settings in place & a simple to use Control Panel to set up the various daemons that you would want to run you'd be silly to not check it out & make the statements you have.

      As far as running server applications there is no comparison. Firstly, the whole set-up is installed & made just about as easy as it could possibly be. Microsux's versions don't come close. They may have the nice visuals but lets face it, if you're running a server of any kind you're not a novice & the intricate ability to change exactly what you want to change using config files leaves proprietary software wounded for all their contempt.

      As far as having someone setting the whole thing up & finding someone with the knowledge, there are people around & these people do it faster & with more surety because they actually know what they is happening within the software. Tell me that is true within the proprietary software. I don't think so.

      I go back to what I said before, "You really didn't research your information at all did you?". Very silly boy!

    9. We must give Linux some time Rami G.D.S -- 19/12/05

      Microsoft is pretty old in I.T world, so many pc users have addiction to it and its related software, for this reason some people find Linux not equalivant to Windows.
      But the big question is : What if Linux produced to People many years before Windows? Maybe this Article turned against windows

  9. You are so right Anonymous -- 02/12/05

    Ian,

    You are so dead on about those Linux bigots. It's becoming pretty obvious to everyone that the vast majority of open source advocates are socialistic and non-ambitious (no desire for personal advancement) to the point that they could even be called lazy. On the other hand, large, proprietary software corporations produce massive amounts of wealth, much or at least some of which is shared with investors.

    It is also widely known that most of the "developers" and programmers who work on open source projects failed to complete college degrees in technology subjects -- in other words, they are dropouts. Contrast this with, say, Microsoft corporation, which employs nothing but the very best and most highly educated in nearly every position. It is probably fair to say that Microsoft's campus has the highest proportion of geniuses of any population in the world.

    A look on the mailing list of any open source project reveals frequent heated disagreements and tugging and pulling in different directions. Most people, used to working in hierachical management environments, would be shocked at the lack of discipline. Clearly, these people lack any respect for authority, unlike those who work for large proprietary software corporations, where clear lines of authority ensure that each employee has is secure in the knowledge of his/her role.

    It's high time that someone stood up to these rude, in-your-face Linux bigots, and I salute you for taking what could be an unpopular position.

    Now, if we could just do something about those uppity aborigines.

    1. Use XML Anonymous -- 02/12/05

      You should use <sarcasm></sarcasm> tags, so that your average zealot doesn't fall pray to this :-)

    2. Contrast this? Anonymous -- 15/12/05

      > Contrast this with, say, Microsoft corporation, which employs nothing but the very best and most highly educated in nearly every position.

      Bill Gates?

    3. What a silly diatribe Brian Carpenter -- 16/12/05

      "It's becoming pretty obvious to everyone that the vast majority of open source advocates are socialistic and non-ambitious (no desire for personal advancement) to the point that they could even be called lazy."

      Socialistic? What do you call Microsoft? This behemoth crushes all who stands in its way and is as anti-capitalist as you can get. There is no such thing as a free market in the software and os sector these days because of MS' dominance. MS is a threat to the free world and most people have not realized the extent of MS' influence. My goodness most governments are dependent upon their technology. A free market is necessary to the health of a society especially in the realm of technology.

      "On the other hand, large, proprietary software corporations produce massive amounts of wealth, much or at least some of which is shared with investors. "

      The issue here is not proprietary software. MS' business philosophy reduces the common people's ability to aquire wealth.

      "It is also widely known that most of the "developers" and programmers who work on open source projects failed to complete college degrees in technology subjects -- in other words, they are dropouts."

      Is it widely known? I noticed your lack of documentation proving this assertion. BTW - Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard to start Microsoft.

      "Contrast this with, say, Microsoft corporation, which employs nothing but the very best and most highly educated in nearly every position. It is probably fair to say that Microsoft's campus has the highest proportion of geniuses of any population in the world."

      No I would say Microsoft has the largest percentage of brain-washed slaves in the world. This is why Microsoft is no longer innovative. How can you be in a top down organization who's sole purpose is to create everyone in its image?

      "A look on the mailing list of any open source project reveals frequent heated disagreements and tugging and pulling in different directions."

      Praise God for free speech!! BTW - You see the same thing from the MS tramps on message boards.

      "Most people, used to working in hierachical management environments, would be shocked at the lack of discipline."

      That is because the MS slaves have forgotton what its like to think for yourself.

      You must not have worked for RedHat? I am writing this on a rock solid Ubuntu Linux installtion that is a probably a product of a non-displined environment. Your point?

      "Clearly, these people lack any respect for authority, unlike those who work for large proprietary software corporations, where clear lines of authority ensure that each employee has is secure in the knowledge of his/her role."

      A good socialist-communist could not have said it better. I wonder how America ever made it to its current world position if it just decided to respect England's authority and not challenge it?

      "It's high time that someone stood up to these rude, in-your-face Linux bigots, and I salute you for taking what could be an unpopular position."

      And your somehow different?

    4. Observation Cristian -- 22/12/05

      Now, if we could just do something about you. It's pretty simple. Be wise and keep your mouth shut. You definitely sound like a cretinoid and are too little of a challenge to average people.

    5. Cristian on Anonymous Rex Alfie Lee -- 30/12/05

      Your crushing allegory on Anonymous, Cristian, develops into a potent response for the original author. Perhaps if this had been delivered to the origin priorly, the diatribe submitted in the first place could have been avoided & should have been.

    6. Mmmmm Anonymous -- 27/12/05

      >> A look on the mailing list of any open source project reveals frequent heated disagreements and tugging and pulling in different directions. Most people, used to working in hierachical management environments, would be shocked at the lack of discipline. Clearly, these people lack any respect for authority, unlike those who work for large proprietary software corporations, where clear lines of authority ensure that each employee has is secure in the knowledge of his/her role. <<

      So you are saying that arguments, discussions and (why not) democracy are bad, everyone should be told what to do, think and create?

      Have you heard of open-minded people? Trust me, you should hang out more with some of them.

      Lucky you I tend to try not to pity people.

      Cheers

    7. How pathetic Simon Krogh R. -- 28/12/05

      That's properly the lammest post I ever read. Thank you for trying to be funny, but obevously you failed.
      Why don't you go and burrying your prejudicism and come out of your hole and make some research on the subject.

      There's nothing than FUD in your post.

  10. Take a back seat... Lindsey Rockwell -- 02/12/05

    You seem to be a bit desperate in your comments. Just watch - there's no stopping Linux or any other Open Source Software!

    Many signs tell alredy that MS is loosing market share, what ever lies or FUD they come up with.

  11. Behind the words Anonymous -- 02/12/05

    I don't understand this article. Free Software is not a product but a new way to do business.

    Linux acceptance implies the acceptance of its rules.

    This implies incorporating strange stuff like ethics, respect, altruism... in your bizness plan.

    Behind the words of thse the author calls biggots a clear message that a lot of people dislike (or hate) the rules of the "real and harsh" companies the author praises.

    The author also minimizes or ignores the fight against software patents everywhere in the world and against new ip laws. Together with free software, they are the main preocupations of us biggots and part of a broader fight (or resistance).

    There is another way to do business and if you don't like it or your company don't want to respect the rules, just don't use it.

    get it, Iain?

  12. You've proved his point Anonymous -- 02/12/05

    All the linux bigots that have replied to this article have pretty much proved Ian's point for him.

    Your comments aren't constructive and only serve to tarnish the good image of Linux by using overblown emotive language, stating unproven and unprovable non-facts and spouting illogical nonsense.

    If you could just learn to keep your mouths shut and let the rational Linux supporters do the talking maybe the ideals that you yearn for so much will actually come to pass.

    1. Yeah, spot on Anonymous -- 02/12/05

      > stating unproven and unprovable non-facts and spouting illogical nonsense

      XP Pro----------------
      Microsoft Windows XP Professional with all vendor patches installed and all vendor workarounds applied, is currently affected by one or more Secunia advisories rated Highly critical

      Currently, 27 out of 122 Secunia advisories, are marked as "Unpatched" in the Secunia database.
      ----------------------

      RHEL WS4-----------------
      The Secunia database currently contains 0 Secunia advisories marked as "Unpatched", which affects RedHat Enterprise Linux WS 4.

      Currently, 0 out of 127 Secunia advisories, are marked as "Unpatched" in the Secunia database.
      ----------------------

      Sorry, just more nonsense and unproven facts.

    2. Now that's what I call a good answer! Anonymous -- 03/12/05

      That was pertinent, succint, concise, documented and illuminating.

      That little exchange was a microcosm of the whole Microsoft vs. Linux "debate".

  13. This is typical FUD Richard Steven Hack -- 02/12/05

    This is the sort of thing that people say when they are "offended" by someone else's strong opinion - especially if they don't have anything rational to counter that opinion with.

    The real question has always been: where do I go to register MY complaint when Bill Gates calls open source users "communists", or Ballmer implies - as this article does - that he's going to sue everybody for abrogating lame patents he should never have been awarded anyway?

    In other words, everybody is allowed to have an opinion - as long as they don't express it.

    This is the same thing as calling everybody who opposes the Iraq war a "traitor" or a "friend of terrorists." It's an attempt to seize a moral high ground they don't deserve. It's an attempt to define the issue in a way that allows the definer to win without having to do any actual defense of his opinion.

    The only appropriate response to this tactic is: F U.

  14. Nice Microsoft Ads you have there Anonymous -- 02/12/05

    Its interesting that ZDNet has a nice MS ad hanging down the side here (sometimes) while this article is displayed.

    Also if Microsoft is not struggling then why are they resorting to advertising more and more and attempting to brain wash our kids into thinking there is no alternatives? (The Xbox is a cut down PC and is not a game machine designed for gaming). Microsoft’s attempts at monopolizing media formats will fail (as history repeats itself).

    Now that we have cleared that up I will remind everyone that technology developing giants are now dropping MS all together... I have heard rumors that they have lost major deals to some network component manufacturers. Its interesting since such a "perfect" company is so flaw ridden too. I applaud all the media, network component, electronics giants that are joining forces to bring MS back down to earth!

    Has anyone even bothered to test the legality of some Microsoft software? Do they comply with Australian privacy laws? Or will Australia follow America and lighten its privacy laws in order to make way for the gambling and porn industries? How are all these related? I don’t know, maybe I’m a freak and I see a link here?…. Maybe I’m a “bigot”… so be it!

    Has anyone ever heard of a Network switch or router that runs on a MS based OS? NO! What a laugh that would be!

    If my child told me he wants an Xbox, I’d buy him one only to melt it (with him watching) in a Microwave oven.

    Shame on you ZDNet your reputation has been tarnished. Take it back! Take it back immediately! How dare you spit on me!

  15. Open-Source Software Rex Alfie Lee -- 03/12/05

    Firstly, the idea of Open-Source Software being free has nothing whatsoever to do with the cost being zero. Open-Source means that you can't own the software. You can sell it for whatever you want to ask but if you want to give it away that is your choice. I think some of the newer fanatics may not have realised this as yet but that is the reality of open-source's free software campaign. Rather it is free by way of it doesn't belong to anybody & if you modify it then the source becomes part of the free software. Basically with Linux the software is free but you can sell it for whatever you want to charge.

    Secondly, perhaps your delivery of context is biased because you can't see past the first point but as the Gov'ts of the Asian & European contingencies continue to vacate their reliance on Microsux & your need to believe in proprietary institutions, may destroy your very livelihood. For as things like "Open Document" make themselves standard & organisations dependant on Gov't contracts move to fit into the Gov't requirements organisations that remain stoic will choke.

    Ahh if only I cared.

    1. Correction John Robertson -- 03/12/05

      "Rather it is free by way of it doesn't belong to anybody ..."

      Nothing could be further from the truth. The authors of the software own the copyrights. If they didn't, the GPL would be meaningless.

      Licenses like the GPL obligate distributors of the software to make the source code available to recipients.

      "... & if you modify it then the source becomes part of the free software"

      This is not necessarily true. The GPL, for instance, only obligates you to make the source code (including your modifications) available to those whom which you distribute the software.

    2. Correction Response Rex Alfie Lee -- 30/12/05

      Ah! But I see your point. The point you are making is that no-one can take your software & modify it as they see fit. If it is under the GPL then guess what? They can. What's more, they do. That's what makes it free. Once you've released it you have no control over what happens to it. That doesn't mean that anyone else is going to use the modified code. They may just be content to use the code you released. That is free choice. So, what was your point; your correction?

  16. As an American, I want to thank you. Anonymous -- 03/12/05

    Thank you for sending money to Redmond. Thank you for not advocating Australia to build upon the work of thousands of developers world wide that are making that cheap knock-off crap often grouped under the label "Linux". Australia doesn't need a software industry of its own, since Redmond releases its products in your language by default.

    Thank you for your money. Keep sending it, please, we have a budget deficit here.

    1. Correction... Paul S Adams -- 06/12/05

      Sorry - you don't produce your software in our language by default. We speak Australian English here. We almost exclusively use English spellings (for words ending in 'our' like 'colour'), or accept either US or UK spelling for words like realise / realize.

      In it's default settings, your software doesn't like our spellings, so it is not in our language.

    2. Dear Anonymous Rex Alfie Lee -- 30/12/05

      You don't sign your name so you mean nothing. You are pointless beyond point. Please stop wasting good Oxygen. Stop now you pointless pratt!

  17. Linux Security b quest -- 03/12/05

    Come on there are more than only the whitepapers of Redmond. Why is Linux winning so big on servers, because of the million security flaws? The security lies in the architecture, so even if we assume that sec. holes get fixed at a comparable rate a Linux server is still more secure. Get yourself also the report of the code quality of the Linux-kernel which is way above average compared to closed source development projects. Microsoft has grown better, no question, but there is absolutly no advantage of having user space programs have full system acces (XP Home). There is only one single Linux Distro that lets users surf as root.

  18. Philosophy poorly misunderstood Max Murdock -- 04/12/05

    IMHO mr Ferguson you have understood very LITTLE of FOSS way on thinking and motivations...
    You treat us like a bunch of nerds with poor contact with reality...
    Clearly you're not into it, so keep talking of what you know if you like, cause with us you see you're pretty out of the tracks...

  19. This is just name calling, Scott Moe -- 05/12/05

    And an attempt to change the subject. Open standards are the real issue. Microsoft and it's shills would like to confuse open standards with open source because it is easier to call names and scare people about open source. Open standards are good for users, good for competition, and bad for monopolies. It is easy to see why Microsoft wants to tell you that open standards are about dangerous anti-Microsoft raving crazys who are out to steal their ideas.

  20. Have you heard of BSD? Anonymous -- 05/12/05

    uh, have you heard of Sun Microsystems? they build their company right out of Berkeley with the blessing of the university. they helped pioneer BSD since they could not use Unix when it was copyrighted and wrote their own OS that was open source and became something called "Solaris". do your homework before spouting off such rubbish.

    1. I thought... Anonymous -- 09/12/05

      ... that SUN meant "Stanford University Network"...

  21. Linux and Microsoft Bigots Tony McNamara -- 05/12/05

    I dont recall the CEO of any Linux-related business calling Microsoft a cancer, calling Microsoft communistic, reworking the code so a competitor's program just would not work ... I could go on and on.
    It makes a good headline Ian, but your article has no value. Linux bigots, no more than MS bigots, are not open to persuasion. As with the MS bigots, just ignore the Linux bigots. Unless of course you want to use them as a hammer, casting them as representative of Linux.
    But back to the beginning of my comments, when has any commentatior anywhere deplored comments such as have regularly been made by Steve Ballmer?

  22. Feedback Zoki -- 05/12/05

    *** It is remarkable how your journalist who criticizes open source software is making gratuitous insults about "bigots" and "zealots" that are at least as immature (childish comes to mind too) as the behavior he opposes.

    1/
    "..That idealism unfortunately manifests itself most often in online diatribes against Microsoft, in particular, and proprietary software, in general..."
     
            "idealism"
            "unfortunately"
            "diatribes"

    2/
    "...Gartner analyst Brian Prentice said recently the "flaming Linux bigots" who were prone to hyperbole and religious debates to advance their cause actually impeded the growth of Linux and open source software..."

            "flaming Linux bigots"
            "hyperbole"
            "religious"

    Is this name calling just to hide his lack of arguments? Or is the authors' private wish to provoce a return fire, so that he can turn to his colleagues and audience and say, "See that? Look at all this. I told you these people are zealots"!?

    Meanwhile Microsoft runs ads directly attacking Linux, using studies which were *covertly* directed and funded by... Microsoft. They have a talent for this kind of behavior, thanks to their Windows and MS Office desktop monopolies. I wonder if this is evidence of "flaming bigotry" against Linux on the part of Microsoft, or is it just supposed to help the "the commercial world" "make sound business decisions"?

    "...For one, the company's massive revamp of its security position two years ago -- requiring programmers to take training in secure coding -- is starting to pay off, with exploits of problems in Microsoft products coming down..."

    Obviously it is also Linux fault that Microsoft is "requiring programmers to take training in secure coding". Microsoft exists for over a decade. It is only now they require their developers to take training in secure coding!? How much more do you need to take a sound business decision? Do not even listen to Linux bigots; just read Iain's columns.

    Linux acceptance is on the way. Open Source runs the web, government institutions are switching to Linux, Microsoft is loosing market share and it does not know how to stop the hemorrhage. Microsoft has only its shills and FUD campaigns to oppose Linux.

    Do not believe me. The numbers speak for themselves. There's no need to call people names.

    1. What goes up must come down... Ahmed A. -- 06/12/05

      Monopolies become too big and confident that they become unviable. Monopolisation creates a lack of progression in market technology, which in tern creates a frustration towards the monopoly, which in turn creates new and improved opposing solutions, which in turn causes the monopoly to crash. What goes up must come down!

  23. Linux vs Microsoft Rodney King -- 06/12/05

    "Can't we all just get along?!"

    For the children.

    1. My children! Rex Alfie Lee -- 30/12/05

      I'd like to agree but under the fear of Big Brother (BB) & all the BB establishments stand for I cannot in good faith accept your verbal. Looking across the board at various BBs including George Bush, John Howard, Christians & Microsux I want better for my children. I thank you!

  24. Open Source Sean -- 07/12/05

    Still neither MS nor Linux can stop you from being a little baldy mutant with a squeaky nasal ozzy whine.

    1. Dear Anti-Ozzy Whiner Rex Alfie Lee -- 30/12/05

      Coming from someone who doesn't know how to say the words - million, billion, advertisement etc, I think your point is an anti-point; meaning nothing!

  25. ZDNet Australia - running on open source Apache webserver Shane -- 07/12/05

    Iain, I feel I must warn you that your magazine's website is running on an open source Apache webserver - as shown by this netcraft <a href="http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.zdnet.com.au">site report</a>. <-click here

    Please, bring your business into the brutal realities of the commercial world, and put behind you this so-called open source software - before it drags you down into a cesspool of University campus idealism.

    I wish you all the best in making the most of Microsoft's leveraged encumbancy, and aggressively protected market share. As you have correctly pointed out, there may be threats of litigation, if you allow your business to continue down this wrong path.

    1. Pay Attention A.C. -- 10/12/05

      Iain didn't say Linux or open source software was bad, he said that there are a lot of vitriolic madmen out there whose psychopathic diatribes and rants make people think Linux is crap.

      He's not talking about the software, I think he's talking about YOU.

    2. God know... Anonymous -- 28/12/05

      Linux community is small compared to Microsoft. Now you can calculate how many wackos their must in the Microsoft camp.

    3. Nah nah nah nah nah! Rex Alfie Lee -- 30/12/05

      Got you there you nasty Linux, Open-source Software zealot, with no clothes on!

      I really enjoyed that. I wonder which zealot this is really having a paste at?

  26. Microsoft comes second in versatility for programmers Dwight Walker -- 09/12/05

    Well, people still like Microsoft mainly through habit. I find I can keep my business more stable using Linux. I have built my business on being non-Microsoft which more and more people are looking to flee because of slack reliability, endless downtime and no end in sight to upgrades and hot fixes. Linux supports tons of developer-oriented tools like PHP and MySQL. Try wading through msdn.microsoft.com for even a basic syntax page or sample code and it will take hours. In PHP or similar there are tons of useful tips out there - more code reuse and synergy, less hiding and creating little empires behind closed doors. The only reason I went to XP was because the Maxon Minimax would not support Linux drivers except through Quozl's blog - in other words, the reader had to learn a little basic system admin to get it going. Otherwise I could run Linux on a slower Pentium using Knoppix on the CDROM and USB port to get on the Net using wireless Internet. How many Windows versions can do that? Linux is low cost, good value and very safe for running a small business that moves around frequently with no fixed assets to rely on. Open Source moves with the times. Windows is a legacy system that requires no end of propping up and costing more and more money to maintain. That's my angle anyway. One thing that gets to me as a programmer is how Microsoft divides and conquers one field after another - PC, laptop, mobile, PDA, games machine. Someone has to make it top heavy and see it implode like the Roman Empire when it got too big for itself. I checked out Red Hat's share price and it is growing way better than Sun or Microsoft. Other Linux businesse are not so strong. There is an avenue in there for people tired of rebooting and fighting upgrades. I like how you can change the code yourself and not rely on the developer fixing it. I have run source on older operating systems. Even with all these RHEL and SuSE only versions of IBM and other big iron software, there are ways to hand build software which is unique to open source and gives people a leg up who can't afford to fork out for Bill Gates' system. I am thinking of little software houses in India or back of NSW like mine. We can survive without having to fork out for licences. Sure we have to spend time and effort coaxing them into what we want but there is no overhead or software police coming down to find out what we are up to. Linux is free and we can build a safe business model on it.

  27. The meaning of TurboSquid -- 10/12/05

    I am so tired of so called experts bad mouthing the open source movment on the grounds that it is not economicaly feesable. The entire point of the open source networks are that people will share there code openly without the blind need to proffit directaly off of every little scrap of code they write. Yes there are plenty of user pay linux distro's out there but the core idea is a free, ever changeing, operaiting system that can be accessed and developed by anyone, not just for corperate profit.

  28. Take it personally! A.C. -- 10/12/05

    This is a message to all those "Linux bigots" out there who are responding to Iain as if he rubbished Linux. He didn't. He rubbished YOU. He was talking about you personally, not about the software, not about a business plan, not about Linus Torvalds, but about you. Get it yet?

    Oh and Iain, you ever get the feeling these "Linux bigots" you're talking about don't actually like Linux? They're probably MS employees trying to make Linux look bad...

    1. Nah nah nah nah nah Rex Alfie Lee -- 30/12/05

      That's for all you nasty Linux-loving, Open-Source, Shiíte zealots who have no clothes on!

  29. Yes, & also... it's about control, not TCO like they ............ ricardomardi -- 11/12/05

    ..the MS paid writers like to slant the case. How subtle, but very insidiously, they keep the subject of open source very very tightly entwined with TCO.

    Their biggest fear is that the general public might begin to awaken to the real heart of the open source argument... & that is... OPEN SOURCE gives you the freedom to customise the code according to your company's needs, IT'S ABOUT CCONTROL of THE CODE!!!!

    most migrations to open source are made on the grounds of being free to evolve & customise your software & NOT TO DO WITH TCO!!!

    For M$, it's about NOT GIVING YOU THE CHANCE TO CUSTOMISE IT YOURSELF, otherwise, the BIG FAT $$$ Middle Man has to go on a diet & get lean again. They (Mm$) are too drunk on their marketing success & are now acting like violent domestic Bullies who beat up women & kids , they have lost control of the vehicle & have awoken to find themselves in front of a semi trailer's headlights, too late now. :-)

  30. Yes, & also... it's about control, not TCO like they ............ ricardomardi -- 11/12/05

    ..the MS paid writers like to slant the case. How subtle, but very insidiously, they keep the subject of open source very very tightly entwined with TCO.

    Their biggest fear is that the general public might begin to awaken to the real heart of the open source argument... & that is... OPEN SOURCE gives you the freedom to customise the code according to your company's needs, IT'S ABOUT CCONTROL of THE CODE!!!!

    most migrations to open source are made on the grounds of being free to evolve & customise your software & NOT TO DO WITH TCO!!!

    For M$, it's about NOT GIVING YOU THE CHANCE TO CUSTOMISE IT YOURSELF, otherwise, the BIG FAT $$$ Middle Man has to go on a diet & get lean again. They (Mm$) are too drunk on their marketing success & are now acting like violent domestic Bullies who beat up women & kids , they have lost control of the vehicle & have awoken to find themselves in front of a semi trailer's headlights, too late now. :-)

  31. choice of words Ross Corkrey -- 12/12/05

    I note that some words in Iain's article used when referring to Linux supporters were interesting due to their emotive associations. Words like: idealism, diatribes, hyperbole, religious, bigots, and so on. When referring to proprietary software no such word use occurs. It sounds like an rhetorical trick which attempts to reduce the import of the opposition's arguments by make their proposers' themselves somehow unsound, rather than addressing the argument themselves.

  32. "Linux Bigots" Baruch Ben-David -- 12/12/05

    There are extremists in every group. Open Source software and Linux are no exceptions.
    Most of the spokespeople for Linux are level-headed, rational advocates, not overzealous crusaders.
    Linux is an excellent alternative to Windows. It has problems, of course. All software has problems. We live in an imperfect world. However, overall, Linux has fewer problems than does Windows, especially with regard to security.
    The improvements cited by the author are "vaporware" - they have not yet manifested. Like most of Microsoft's products, it's going to be here "real soon now".
    Don't tell me how great it's going to be. Show me how good it is right now.

    1. XP Anonymous -- 13/12/05

      XP SP2. Try it sometime ;)

    2. SP2 Anonymous -- 13/12/05

      AH SP2 is the wonder software, no wonder half my harddrive got wiped by a malevolent worm the third day after i installed it.

    3. XP SP2 Baruch Ben-David -- 24/12/05

      The fact that I support Linux does not mean that I am unfamiliar with Microsoft products. I have XP SP2. The computers running it regularly get wedged and I have to reboot them. If I try to keep a Windows computer running for more than a full day, I am risking serious problems. Either it will become unresponsive, or it will hang. About the best that can be said for XP SP2 is that it doesn't give the Blue Screen of Death as often.
      My Linux boxes run merrily along for weeks at a time, without hanging or leaking memory. I do all sorts of things on these boxes, including recompiling the Linux kernel itself. Linux is a robust and feature-rich alternative to Microsoft products - not just Windows, but most of the programs that are written for Windows.

  33. SP2... Damon -- 13/12/05

    The problem I have with the worm wiping you out after 3 days is pretty simple... you must not have known what you were doing...

    I use knoppix, red hat dist. or other linux regularly, but am by no means a master of it. When it crashes or something horrible happens, do I go around telling people that linux sucks?

    No.

    Instead I blame myself for not knowing enough about the product, and work on improving that before it happens again.

    Same goes for windows. And if someone craps on about a BSOD in windows again, I will go nuts... windows 2003, and xp variants, I would have to struggle to remember a BSOD.

    1. Re: SP2 Anonymous -- 15/12/05

      But with Linux you can learn exactly how it works, due to the source code being available. There's no way I'd be able to find out why XP blue screens when I enable EAX in Thief III with a slight overclock on my processor, apart from the info on the blue screen which blames a Windows sound driver file.

  34. Missed the Point Anonymous -- 14/12/05

    Iain is bagging the people, not the open source software. Why? Two reasons. One, reading between the lines he is indicating his support of open source software without saying it and two, bagging the people behind the open source software means supporting facts are not required. This article makes for a great Year 7 English example of how not to present an argument.

  35. XP2 Anonymous -- 14/12/05

    Lack of understanding of security and wandering around p0rn sites is no reason to switch to a different operating system.

    Been using XP and Linux for years. One is a s good as the other. XP SP2 hardly crashes. Virii, worms ? The last time I got infected was about 10 years ago. Again common sense prevails here.

    So just because you get virii shows that you have insecure networks, not a bad operating system. Given enough time, doesnt take a brain surgeon to come up with a spectacular virii for Linux systems.

    Looking for bigots, they are the ones ever ready to blow anything and anyone who remotely suggests that their favourite operating system might actually be just that - another operating system.

  36. It's also about Freedom Andrew Donnellan -- 15/12/05

    I have ethical and moral concerns about using proprietary software. Software is/should be scientific knowledge, not something to own and control exclusively.

    M$ only likes to tell people about the 'TCO', not about the fact that they will need to build their systems around the restrictions of Micro$oft software, and that only their software will be able to read their files.

    1. Ethical and Moral Concerns Regarding *ANY* Service Anonymous -- 15/12/05

      I never understood the fact that most people have no ethical and moral concerns about purchasing pretty much anything *EXCEPT* software. Heck people dont demand *p0rn* magazines to be free but expect software to be free! People pay for news and its contents are protected and is exclusive. So are recipes etc...

      I believe what irks people is the success of Microsoft. Hence the use of the $ sign. I see Microsoft as a successful company like McDonalds. McD's foods cause cancer and heart disease, yet I dont see the line at their counter shortening.

      So proprietary software is a fact of life. Live with it. You may not like to pay for it. Others do. Just like we pay for pretty much anything else.

      And if you dont like the Microsofts products, dont use it. But please dont infringe the rights of those who like to buy software.

      I pay for my Big Mac and I pay for my software.