Yes, sometimes Linux costs more than Windows

While poorly timed for Novell, I’d agree with this post. Sometimes Linux may indeed cost more than Windows. Putting aside that everything isn’t about cost, look at the parameters involved here:

f you look at the details of the announcement you’ll see that the reason why HSBC had better management costs for Windows was because it had taken a proactive Active Directory-led approach to managing Windows, whereas a variety of Linux systems had been deployed an a largely ad hoc, application-led basis.

Having spoken to Matthew O’Neill, group head of distributed systems for HSBC global IT operations, we published the following:

“’A couple of years ago we commenced the global deployment of Active Directory and in doing that project we managed to demise a range of infrastructure servers,’ he added, noting that the end result was that it cost less to manage Windows servers than it did to manage Linux servers.

One of the reasons for that is that the company had taken an ad hoc approach to Linux deployment. ‘In the early stages of deployment we did tend to set the build to the specific application, rather than look at it as a commoditized server,’ O’Neill said.”

In this context – combined with the abundance of Windows skills compared to Linux – it is fairly obvious that Windows would end up being cheaper to manage per instance than Linux.

Loosely translated, that means a shop with a lot of Windows experience who is utilizing managed deployment is able to more effectively manage Windows than Linux, which they rolled out ad hoc and are new to. That shouldn’t be a real surprise and is obviously not and apples to apples comparison. However, we need to get past this cost issue. The main advantage of Open Source, especially in the Enterprise, is not being gratis.

–jeremy

Follow a journey through the migration process to Open Source

Mercian Labels Ltd is migrating to Open Source. Alone, that’s not huge news – a ton of companies from SMB’s to Enterprises are doing the same. What’s different here is that they are blogging the entire process. This should give us a near real-time look at the trials and tribulations of an SMB Open Source migration as it happens. Should be interested.

–jeremy

Red Hat Launches Open-Source Exchange

The software company is unveiling an online marketplace for Open Source developers—where Red Hat can sell support, and links to its own products. From the article:

Red Hat signaled a strategic shift on Mar. 14 when it announced an initiative called the Red Hat Exchange (rhx), an online marketplace where it will sell products from more than a dozen open-source companies including Mysql, Sugarcrm, and Al Fresco Software. The exchange could make a wide range of software attractive to businesses large and small that have been put off by the challenges of buying from lesser-known suppliers and piecing it all together.

When rhx goes live in the second quarter, Red Hat will guarantee that the other companies’ products work well with its own, and the company will provide tech support for all of them. The marketplace will be much more than just an online product catalog. It’s designed to function as a community where users of open-source software can read reviews, rate the products, and compare notes.

Open-source software is made collaboratively by developers from around the world and is available for anybody to use, free of charge. Red Hat and others sell commercial versions that include extra software, documentation, and support. Says Red Hat chief executive Matthew J. Szulik, “Rhx gives us the opportunity to be the flag bearer for open-source software.”

Partners at launch will include Alfresco, Jaspersoft, MySQL and SugarCRM. The article is light on details, such as what level of support is offered by Red Hat before you go upstream and what kind of revenue share is involved. One thing is clear to me though; this is good for Open Source. It’s the beginning of a bona fide commercial Open Source ecosystem, the likes of which we’ve not yet seen. The importance of an ecosystem is one thing that Microsoft used to really get. It’s one of the things that has made them as strong as they are. But as their stock has slumped in recent years, they’ve begun to canabilize both ISV’s and partners. That makes now a golden opportunity for something like this. The Exchange should launch next quarter and is something I’ll definitely keep an eye on.

–jeremy

Open Source Business Models: A Wall Street Look at a Wild 2006 and the Prospects for Even More Fun in 2007

Stephen Walli points to a presentation from EclipseCon by Brent Williams entitled: “Open Source Business Models: A Wall Street Look at a Wild 2006 and the Prospects for Even More Fun in 2007”.  The presentation is fairly long at 48 slides, but contains some very good information.  You might not agree with all the specific details presented in the slide, but the end result comes together nicely.  His interface standard vs implementation standard explanation using a Lamborghini Murcielago vs. Hyundai Excel drives home the point nicely.  He also covers commoditization issues and the recent Oracle Linux foray, among others items, quite well.  Overall the presentation is definitely worth the read.  I wish I’d have been at EclipseCon to see it myself.

–jeremy

Welcome to the New Blog

I’ve updated my blog to WordPress. It’s been a long time coming, but I finally put aside the time to do it last night. Please let me know ASAP if you notice any problems. I’m still getting some things configured, but so far so good. Using WordPress should give me a lot more flexibility than I had before, and not having my blog on an Open Source platform always bothered me. Once things stabilize, I’ll be adding some additional bells and whistles. One huge problem I’ve run into is that the old permalinks are currently broken. This is very bad. The problem is that Blogware doesn’t export the needed information to migrate this information. I’ve sent them an email to see if they can do it for me manually. In the meantime I have 302’d everything I could. When going to an old article, you’ll get redirected to a list of posts from that day. If Blogware is able to send me the information I want, I’ll update the system to 301 you to the correct post. I really apologize for the breakage and hope it will be cleaned up soon. The feed entry you have should be transparently updated already. The only other issue I see is that the export didn’t respect line breaks in a sane way, so some posts are ugly. I’ll manually clean up at least the posts on the home page. Let me know how things are operating from your end. Thanks ;)

–jeremy

If you can't beat them, fine them II

There's a little debate going back and forth about the topic I posted about here. For my part, I have no issue with most of what the EU has been able to accomplish with respect to Microsoft abusing its monopoly position. In fact, I give them kudos for stepping up and taking a stand where the DOJ failed to. What scares me is the possibility of a Government being able to assign a value to what it perceives as innovation (or lack thereof). Even if they are correct in this particular case, it just seems like a precarious precedent.
–jeremy

Tory Party promises an Open Source Britain, if elected

Matthew Aslett points out that in reality, politicians are leveraging Open Source in their campaigns. This runs contrary to the potential fantasy the Mr. Enderle cooked up. From the article:

Conservative shadow chancellor, George Osborne, has promised “that an incoming Conservative government would create a level playing field for open source software in the UK, in a move which could save taxpayers more than £600 million a year.”

Incredible scenes, as Glyn Moody has noted.

According to a speech made by Osborne at the Royal Society of Arts:

“What it is about is better and more effective government. The problem is that the cultural change has not taken place in government. There isn’t a level playing field for open source software. As it stands, too many companies are frozen out of government IT contracts, stifling competition and driving up costs.

“Taking into account the experience of companies and public sector bodies, it is estimated that the Government could save at least 5% of its annual IT bill if more open source software was used as part of a more effective procurement strategy. That adds up to over £600m a year. The internet age is transforming politics and has the capacity to transform government. Let’s start being open source right now.”

Osborne also announced the appointment of Mark Thompson, of the Judge Business School at Cambridge University, to advise the Party on how to make Britain the open source leader in Europe.

Now, there is no guarantee that the party will win (they haven’t in well over a decade) and the election might not be until as late as 2010, but the fact that Open Source has now made it into political campaigns is an indication of just how mainstream and accepted it is. If you’re still blindly flighting it (which is different than wholesale agreeing with it), you really are fighting a rising tide.

–jeremy

If you can't beat them, fine them (The EU's wrong policy on Microsoft)

While I’ve agreed with many of the decisions the EU has made with respect to Microsoft, I have to admit that I don’t agree with this one. From the article:

Neelie Kroes, antitrust chief for the European Commission, tried again last week to show Microsoft Corp. who’s boss. She declared that the software giant is overcharging other companies for access to technology that, in her opinion, doesn’t represent “significant innovation,” and threatened another massive fine: perhaps €1 billion or more. Ms. Kroes’s new assertion of power to assess innovation and to regulate its pricing should get the attention of businesses everywhere. When government officials feel comfortable second-guessing markets on such decisions, no business is safe and no property right secure.

Things like this should be decided by the market, not by Governments or courts. When a monopoly abuses its power, that’s one thing. In some situations like that, the court is the only one who has enough leverage to remedy things. I don’t think anyone, be they Open Source proponents or proprietary vendors, want courts and judges deciding what is “significant innovation” and what value should be placed on it. We’ll have to see how this plays out.

–jeremy

Is EnterpriseDB an Open Source Company II

A follow up to this post. The debate continues. It's certainly a somewhat complicated issue with nuances that people interpret differently, especially at the edges. I still think coming up with a solid category name may help to alleviate the debate a bit, but alas have not come up with a name I like. While I can see that a company like EnterpriseDB is not what Matt is calling “open source bona fide”, can they really be considered “proprietary bona fide”? Andy Astor suggested “Open Source-Based” but that doesn't put things across in the clear succinct manner that I'd like. Anyone else have an idea? I'd agree that the discussion and issues being discussed here do matter. As I've said before, consumers in the IT space are getting more educated and more demanding (in a good way) by the day. A new dawn is rising. If you are even considering selling into that space, I hope you realize it matters a whole lot. I look forward to discussing some of these issues at the upcoming OSBC, which I'll be attending and LQ is a sponsor of.
–jeremy

Google offers employees true choice on the desktop

Sure, the fact that “when you start work at Google, you get to choose whether you want a Mac, Windows, or Linux computer” shows how fundamentally Google gets some things. That’s not why I find this article interesting though. There are two very good snippets in the article:

“It strikes me that the fact that this level of choice is so unusual is a fundamental reason why Linux is struggling to make an impact on the desktop.”

There are other factors of course (such as application availability) but the fact is that for many businesses, Windows continues to be the desktop operating system of choice simply because it is currently the desktop operating system of choice.

I don’t think this factor is taken into account often enough. Companies are averse to change, even if that change is good for them. The “no one ever got fired for purchasing $COMPANY” mentality is pervasive in upper level technical management at many companies. We don’t just need to create a better product – we need to overcome hurdles like the one above.

“For many uses Windows may well be the best solution, but its difficult to think of another business asset for which managers would not even consider an alternative when it comes to renewal time.
In this regard businesses are doing themselves a disservice. I am not suggesting that Linux is a better option, but I am once again arguing that businesses owe it to themselves to consider the desktop requirements of their users before making a sweeping decision about desktop requirements.”

This drives home a point that I have thought about before but failed to put so succinctly. Why is it that for most assets, there is a considerable evaluation process and procurement procedure, but when it comes to choosing a platform that will run a considerable part of your operational infrastructure you don’t even think twice about deployment options. A disservice indeed. The question becomes, how do you overcome these obstacles. In many areas, we already are. Desktop Linux is not one of them. Yet.

–jeremy