Skip to main content
Between the Devil & The Deep Blue Sea

Since I wrote about Microsoft losing the city of Munich to the Penguin, a combined bid from SuSe and IBM to introduce Linux on civil-servant’s desktops, I’ve been tracking the progress of the many stories that suggest Microsoft’s days are numbered.

Robin Bloor is touching up his Windows obituary and IDC Research are predicting that Europe will, in the next four years, be knee-deep in penguins, 162,000 servers and many more desktops, expected to reach half a million servers by 2007.

This growth is of course being encouraged by the willingness of the large vendors, IBM, Hewlett Packard and others to offer Linux to boost their lucrative service revenues as much as their hardware sales and it is not always as a rival to Windows. In many cases, Linux is pecking away at UNIX, which is arguably more vulnerable than Windows in a straight fight over ‘Total Cost of Ownership’. However, it is becoming increasingly obvious that Linux is both maturing out of the ‘X’ space and is losing its geeky image, the feature that once made it unattractive in the corporate space as a potential replacement for Windows.

But you’ve heard this all before and I still don’t see real evidence, in the UK at least, in business or government, there exist what I would describe as significant enthusiasm for Linux adoption, in a way that implies that Microsoft has its back against the wall, yet.

This may change but Microsoft is defending itself with a new argument. The company has always had to defend the proprietary nature of its software business. When you buy Microsoft software, you buy the equivalent of a car with the bonnet welded firmly shut. The engine or in this case, the source code, is Microsoft’s secret and until very recently, it was not prepared to share it with anyone.

Linux has changed all this. Firstly, Microsoft has lifted the bonnet and provided a degree of access to its code by suitably qualified parties, mainly governments but not BBC’s ‘Top Gear’. Secondly, Microsoft appears to be arguing that ‘proprietary’ is not a dirty word and that from a business perspective; it has advantages, simply because ownership implies both control and responsibility in equal measures. Open Source implies ownership by committee, where responsibility is ambivalent, diluted and distributed, much like the workings of local government.

Such an argument is bound to encourage strong feeling from the Open Source community, who firmly believe that the GPL process they support ultimately leads to better cheaper and more flexible software. But does it? Can the evidence really stand-up to detailed analysis or is the Open Source movement representative of a new kind of fundamentalism sweeping an industry searching for an alternative to Windows?

Let me leave you with two questions. When a business invests thousand or even millions in a computer software strategy, is it better to have the future of its software under the control of a single, accountable vendor or instead, is it preferable to have the future direction of its code determined by distributed consensus? Is this anarchy or is it common sense, the devil or the deep blue sea. Which is which?


Popular posts from this blog

Mainframe to Mobile

Not one of us has a clue what the world will look like in five years’ time, yet we are all preparing for that future – As  computing power has become embedded in everything from our cars and our telephones to our financial markets, technological complexity has eclipsed our ability to comprehend it’s bigger picture impact on the shape of tomorrow.

Our intuition has been formed by a set of experiences and ideas about how things worked during a time when changes were incremental and somewhat predictable. In March 1953. there were only 53 kilobytes of high-speed RAM on the entire planet.

Today, more than 80 per cent of the value of FTSE 500* firms is ‘now dark matter’: the intangible secret recipe of success; the physical stuff companies own and their wages bill accounts for less than 20 per cent: a reversal of the pattern that once prevailed in the 1970s. Very soon, Everything at scale in this world will be managed by algorithms and data and there’s a need for effective platforms for ma…
The Mandate of Heaven

eGov Monitor Version

“Parliament”, said my distinguished friend “has always leaked like a sieve”.

I’m researching the thorny issue of ‘Confidence in Public Sector Computing’ and we were discussing the dangers presented by the Internet. In his opinion, information security is an oxymoron, which has no place being discussed in a Parliament built upon the uninterrupted flow of information of every kind, from the politically sensitive to the most salacious and mundane.

With the threat of war hanging over us, I asked if MPs should be more aware of the risks that surround this new communications medium? More importantly, shouldn’t the same policies and precautions that any business might use to protect itself and its staff, be available to MPs?

What concerns me is that my well-respected friend mostly considers security in terms of guns, gates and guards. He now uses the Internet almost as much as he uses the telephone and the Fax machine and yet the growing collective t…

Civilisational Data Mining

It’s a new expression I haven’t heard before. ‘Civilisational data mining.’

Let me start by putting it in some context. Every character, you or I have typed into the Google search engine or Facebook over the last decade, means something, to someone or perhaps ‘something,’ if it’s an algorithm.

In May 2014, journalists revealed that the United States National Security Agency, the NSA, was recording and archiving every single cell-phone conversation that took place in the Bahamas. In the process they managed to transform a significant proportion of a society’s day to day interactions into unstructured data; valuable information which can of course be analysed, correlated and transformed for whatever purpose the intelligence agency deems fit.

And today, I read that a GOP-hired data company in the United States has ‘leaked’ personal information, preferences and voting intentions on… wait for it… 198 million US citizens.

Within another decade or so, the cost of sequencing the human genome …