Microsoft Windows – the Gates left open

2000-02-18

Microsoft has been quick to backtrack from claims by a certain W. Gates that the company is prepared to open up the Windows source, if it would prevent the break-up of the company. Is this the kind of innovative idea that Uncle Bill wanted to focus on, when he resigned as head of the software giant?

Oh, the underhand nature of journalists. When is off the record off the record? Clearly not just after the videotapes have stopped rolling, as illustrated in last week’s televised interview between Bill Gates and Bloomberg. According to the transcript on Bloomberg’s web site, “After the on-camera portion of the interview was completed, Gates was asked whether the company would be willing to open the Windows source code in order to settle the case, and Gates said “yes.” He then added, smiling, “if that's all it took.” ” Unfair tactic or no, “yes” is a pretty fair indication of what the great innovator was thinking.

We have discussed the potential perils of Microsoft opening up the Windows source, if nothing else for the scrutiny it would cause. Taking a pop at M$ is a common pastime in the IT industry, so just imagine the howls of delight from hackers and hopeful hecklers, as they find potential security flaws, weaknesses or just plain bad code. Like Greta Garbo without makeup, there are maybe some things that just shouldn’t be made public.

The bigger question is whether there is really room for two open source operating systems. I’m not including Solaris in this debate, because whether it is truly open is questionable. The issue lies between Windows and Linux: people want Linux because it is free, stable and perfectly adequate for a large number of uses; they want Windows because it runs all the right applications and because it is what everyone else is using. If Windows is opened, there is nothing to stop (indeed, just TRY to stop them) the open source community from linking the two OS’es. WINE, the Windows emulator, would be dropped like a stone, after all, why emulate Windows calls when you can have the real thing?

Open source Windows is a logical development as it equates to the rising tide of commoditisation in software. Mobile phone users would not expect to pay extra for the software that runs on the phone; rather, there are a certain set of expected facilities that are delivered with any device, and the OS is one of them. Traditionally, we have paid for PC operating systems and (grudgingly) upgrades, but as products like WebPads from Samsung and Diamond illustrate, the line between PCs and other devices is diminishing and so must the pricing models. It is a fact that Linux is being chosen as an embedded operating system for a wide variety of devices, from video recorders to the aforementioned WebPads, because it does not incur software licensing costs. Microsoft knows that it can only really establish itself in the device-driven market if it cuts its licensing fee structure to the bone, or if it drops it altogether.

Microsoft is in a quandary as it grows out from its desktop PC home ground. As it moves upward into the server space, where premiums are currently higher, is risks incurring the wrath of its user base due to the higher licensing costs it is demanding. Downward, the company’s success in the device space is dependent on it making the product much cheaper, or even free. This “Open-Windows” thing may solve these problems, by enabling the company to concentrate more on applications and services, but may also cause some problems of its own. Either way, it is an issue that is unlikely to go away.

(First published 18 February 2000)