Linux fails at the OS Corrall. So What?

1999-07-01

Recent benchmarks have shown Linux running less quickly than Windows NT. This may seem significant, but it is not. Linux is open source, developed lovingly by the doves of the IT world. It is a product, it might be argued, and it does pose significant competition to comparable products such as Windows NT. It does not, however, behave as a product. It does not stand up to cost-benefit analysis, because it does not have a financial cost. Different models must be applied.

Die-hards of the Linux community would say that the reason Linux is successful is because of the huge numbers of idealistic hackers who are prepared to make something beautiful. They’re wrong. Linux is moving mainstream because the vendors see it as an opportunity to make money. In any business, there are some things that are given away for free and others which are paid for. With the technological advances that are currently being made, new business models have been invented which take advantage of this. But it was ever thus. The huge advantage of Linux to vendors, is that it is already free – vendors can give away something for nothing, but at minimal cost to themselves.

Interestingly, it was Microsoft that demonstrated how powerful the “give-it-away” model could work, with its free distribution of Internet Explorer giving it the lion’s share of the browser market from a standing start. Explorer is still free, and will probably remain so – a small, calculated cost by the Microsoft camp. Did anyone run performance benchmarks comparing Microsoft and Netscape? Yes. Did anyone care about the results? No. Businsses were more interested in protecting their existing investment, getting something for nothing or trying to avoid lock-in.

The mistake we can make with open source, is to think that one day it will have to be paid for. Some things are for free because they oil the wheels. Service in a retailer, local newspapers, meals on aeroplanes are free at source with their real costs being factored into other goods or services. Open source is an enabler, as it encourages the broad acceptance of technology, with all the money-generating spin-off opportunities that it may cause. And this is why open source will remain.

(First published 1 July 1999)