A ZDNet article covering the opening of the Linux World trade show also has a thorough “state of Linux business” overview. Some highlights: Big firms like HP, IBM, and Microsoft(!) will have a big presence; it seems like Linux willl continue its rapid rise in adoption, though it will still be difficult for firms to make the huge profits that companies like Microsoft have made because Linux resists lock-in; enterprise software vendors like BEA will continue to support Linux; and hardware vendors are embracing it more.Reporting in the mainstream media on Linux is always a bit schizophrenic, and there’s a very clear reason for this. Business journalism places a huge premium on revenue. Many times the market share statistics that we read are based on revenue generated, because those statistics are easy to gather, since every company brags to its investors about how much money they make. Money talks, and traditionally a successful product is a big money maker. Linux, to some extent, defies these conventions. It is successful to some extend precisely because it breaks the mold and enables its users to get out from under the thumb of its vendors. That’s why virtually every article you’ll read in the business media will mention Linux’s dramatic adoption rate only in the same breath with “but nobody’s really making much money off of it.”
It’s ironic that some of the same people who fume that the best way to stimulate the economy is to reduce taxes so firms and individuals will have more money to invest in growth, fail to recognize that Linux’s contribution to the economy is similar. Businesses that save millions of dollars in unnecessary licensing fees by using linux (even if they have to hire a new sysadminor two to do it) are freeing up money that would be locked away in Bill Gates’ pocket and using it to grow their businesses. Instead of this half-sorrowful bewilderment at Linux’s failure to generate massive profit margins for its corporate backers, the business media should recognize that open source software has economy-stimulating potential–just in a more distributed fashion.
That is probably one of the best written and most insightful bits of commentary I’ve seen here in quite a while.
<< Some highlights: Big firms like HP, IBM, and Microsoft(!) will have a big presence >>
you don’t need to fight against an enemie,
if you can integrate them in a way of your interest.
I found it interesting the end bit on how Linux is getting and growing into the new markets that Microsoft want to get into. I think linux should really be imbrased in embedded products and in new service more then tring to take over the dieing desktop market. Its generally a good plan when someone sees a computer they think microsoft but when they see a PDA, a Cell Phone or a DVR. They think more of the product and its features. Linux is good at making itself quite and not broadcasting “Hey I am Linux” to everyone. That way companies can make their products with the features they want to add and sell it with their own name. Its good for the company that they dont have to worry about some larger company controlling what features they can or cant put in. It helps them make their job easier.
Wish I could be there,,
As a hw guy, I’ve worked with a major OEM customer that was embedding Linux in an audio file server, only to find out months later it was changed to WinC or whatever. Of course any company that can be swayed & bought off like that would not likely ship, they didn’t. How many companies can MS buy off, probably only the really large ones that are also Windows resellers.
on Friday, 1/24. If anyone wants to say hello, I’ll be the big guy with the Boston cap and a black shirt on. Don’t ask which one, I have a standard rotation. 😉
-Jason
Did m|crosoft have a linux distribution? :]
or…
Did m|crosoft go “GPL or BSD” their operating system? :]
Yes, yes, I know: m|crosoft is supporting linux, because XP is outdated :]
Verdana, Tahoma etc so alternative desktop would not have to use splashy wall paper to make up the deficiency
“Xft enabled Mozilla” ? this thing is available since win95
I think the fact that the Linux expo has Microsoft at their show demonstrats a large amount of maturity, which will benifit the Linux community greatly.
—
gonad.
P.S. Blade, your and idiot.
Schizophrenia is not the same as multiple personality disorder. The split is between reality and fantasy, although most people with mental illness are less delusional than the average person due to the fact that they are aware they have problems. It is also inconsiderate to use a genetic disorder to compare to software. These are real people. I am a poet but I use understatement if I want to make a point – I don’t talk about things I don’t know anything about.
OMG. Just because MS is there doesn’t mean that it plans to support Linux in any way. Why? The last time they went there, they promoted their solutions for servers and embedded markets.
So don’t expect things like SQL Server or Exchange or BackOffice to be ported there soon. And especially, don’t expect Office to be ported to Linux too. And don’t even think they would release anything under GPL, nor would they even have a Linux distribution.
I think the fact that the Linux expo has Microsoft at their show demonstrats a large amount of maturity, which will benifit the Linux community greatly.
by Gonad
They will benefit linux, if they “GPL” their source and give some their ideas and <u>PATENTS</u> they have
“OMG. Just because MS is there doesn’t mean that it plans to support Linux in any way. Why? The last time they went there, they promoted their solutions for servers and embedded markets.
So don’t expect things like SQL Server or Exchange or BackOffice to be ported there soon. And especially, don’t expect Office to be ported to Linux too. And don’t even think they would release anything under GPL, nor would they even have a Linux distribution.”
Exactly. This is why they should be DUMPED now. : ))))
The article laments that the big profit margins MS
has enjoyed will be elusive for Linux companies.Ok,coming from a business publication, this sort of focus is to be expected. Still it a relfexive, superficial analysis.
First off,even MS will find the fat profit margins they enjoyed during the high growth phase of their unfettered Monopoly elusive. Their recent stock split and first ever dividend was an aknowledgement of this some analysts feel.
The more proper question is can Companies make _some_ money selling Linux.
Yes, when it is bundled with services, or comes with the
hardware.
The real Linux Companies are the Companies that use Linux.
Joe’s Drycleaning is just as much, if not more a Linux Comapany than Redhat, if they are using Linux.
Wall Street has to stop being fixated on the bottom lines
of Companies selling Linux and focus on the ones using it.
They will be more competitive than Companies that are still being run ragged, on MS’s perpetual upgrade treadmill. ( the image that comes to mind is a a giant Hamster Treamill with the door welded shut, and liberally covered with razor wire.)
Because for all the recent talk about the Software Industry
driving the new economy , it is still massively dwarfed by
the regular economy.
***Businesses make money using Linux, not selling Linux ***
Why? I doubt LinuxWorld organizers nor Linux fans really really hate direct competition. Plus, I doubt Microsoft plan would really work. People going to LW are finding for Linux solutions, not non-Linux solutions. Showing off Windows CE, Windows Server and Windows XP Embedded really wouldn’t increase Microsoft sale’s by all that much.
Your post still doesn’t rebutt the author’s statement that MS has way way more profit than Linux. You can’t blame it all on Microsoft monopolies; Linux is pretty much free. It is rather hard to make money from it. You can do that from services, hardware bundles, etc., but frankly how big can the profit margin be? Not big at all.
Besides, Wall Street has always judge a company by its bottom line, and will always will. Otherwise they won’t be Wall Street anymore. Do you seriously think the average investor on NYSE cares about how good your community service is? No, all they care is how much they can profit from it and things that affect positively on that profit.
The article isn’t about companies making money (or not) using Linux, it is those selling Linux. And that’s all that matters.
“The article isn’t about companies making money (or not) using Linux, it is those selling Linux. And that’s all that matters.”
Well maybe that is the authors focus in the article. However it misplaced in the question of the continuing success of Linux. That is is the general context of the article.Indeed, it is the general context of almost every article on Linux.
It may be a valid observation that no one will switch
places and make the obscene amounts of money MS made.
So what ?
As long as some companies are able to make some money
there is no problem. except for Media Types who are stuck
in thinking that there has to be a new Microsoft.
Believe me , if Companies in the larger economy who don’t sell Software for a living start to realize significant savings due to deploying Linux, and Schools,Charities,and Governents do the same, then no one is going to care about whether anyone is making money from exclusively selling Linux. This is a bigger to story to Wall Street, to anyone.
There will be modest little margins to be made?
Like the vast majority of business? Welcome to the norm.
The Open Source development model is not as dependent
on Corporate Involvement as the propreitary.
Sure, Corp invlovement faciltates development,but it is
not essential.
And IBM is also helping develop Linux.
Add, HP, SGI, Intel, ……… That is enough Corporate
involvement right there.
And so is Ford if they have even a single tech guy in all
their thousands of employees, who codes on Linux.
We have the whole world to draw from, and Linux is just
getting started.
A good chunk of the Software Industry is about to be super-commoditized.
The world will just have to deal with it.