
Why Microsoft/Novell is good for Linux
Date: Wednesday, December 20 2006 @ 17:34:15 EST Topic: Bull!!
Being aware, as I am, of Microsoft's monopolisation endeavours,
coupled with working in a Linux world inherently mistrustful of the
software giant, it may seem strange that I believe the Microsoft/Novell agreement will be great for Linux. But I do.
Why? Interoperability between Microsoft and Linux has been one the
greatest challenges for software publishers and system integrators in
the Linux world. The Microsoft/Novell agreement will no doubt help to
bridge the gap and make it easier for software buyers to run both
Windows and Linux-based systems. But it is not only integration — vital
though it is — that I believe will propel Linux further into the
mainstream. It is Microsoft's endorsement of Linux, their yielding 'if
we can't beat them, join them' attitude that floods Linux in limelight.
The market's gaze has never been so drawn to Linux and now is our time
to stand and be counted.
The Linux world has always been a very volatile and dynamic one.
Until 2002, in the early years of commercial use, Linux was seen as
anarchic. It was followed by the techno geek with the same enthusiasm
that we saw in the adoption of Unix, before its commercialisation by
each of the hardware vendors.
That all changed with the
release of Enterprise versions of Suse and Red Hat. These
industrial-strength platforms with their hardware and software vendor
certifications, regular updates and extended lifecycles provided a
Linux platform to which many companies felt secure in trusting their
server infrastructure.
So began the mass adoption of
Linux — at least, in the Unix world. Enterprise Linux has made
significant gains as a replacement for ageing Unix systems, but then so
has Microsoft.
For Linux to capitalise on the exposure
afforded by the Microsoft/Novell agreement, we must confront the
confusion surrounding the various distributions, the perceived lack of
support, and to a much lesser extent the SCO/IBM lawsuits and patent
violation disinformation.
Although Red Hat certainly
won the marketing battle, there has been little to differentiate
between the core offerings of theirs and Suse's operating systems.
Partners and hardware manufacturers, however, seem to have alternated
their support unpredictably between the two; in certain cases, dropping
them entirely in favour of one of the lesser distributions such as
Mandriva or even a community-based system such as Debian. If the HPs
and IBMs of the IT world don't know which horse to back, what
confidence can the punter have?
Moreover, few customers
really understood, when they purchased Red Hat or Suse, whether they
were buying a licence, software subscription or support. Oracle's
announcement, that it would provide a locally compiled version of Red
Hat Linux with Oracle support, stripped bare the Linux commercial
proposition so customers understand it. It made clear that what you got
out of the box was an update subscription and operating-system support.
I
don't think that the Oracle proposition is particularly viable at the
moment, or that it will hurt Red Hat or Suse in the long run. It
appears more of a spoiling tactic aimed at reducing the reliance of
Oracle on Red Hat but, irrespective of that, it has lifted the veil on
Enterprise Linux distributions and empowered the user.
Users
now understand what the support from Red Hat and Suse delivers and what
the options are to extend this. They are increasingly aware of the
professional support organisations established to supplement the
operating system support — a network of professional services
organisations akin to those in the Microsoft and Unix worlds.
Ultimately,
Linux is growing up. Linux has built a foundation and extensive
customer base. It has proved that it can be a player in the short term,
and shown that it is a viable replacement for proprietary Unix. The
Microsoft/Novell deal shouldn't be seen as a threat but a chance to
shine.
Source
|
|