Skip to main content

Win the Battle - Lose the War?

Some time has passed since I last re-visited the titanic struggle been the “Open Force” or is that Open Source and the Empire, loosely known as Microsoft. Since then we’ve had a new Star Wars movie and a total cost of ownership argument from Gartner has proved compelling enough for Lord Vader to decide that when it comes to provisioning something as large as a Death Star, Windows offers a pretty decisive advantage

In fact, the Star Wars saga offers a better metaphor for the struggle between Windows and the Open Source (principally Linux) movement than you might think, as this is a story which pits two conflicting ideologies against each other and which looks set to run with multiple episodes and victories for both sides, for many years to come.

“Microsoft,” report Gartner, “will remain the dominant server operating-system provider for midsize businesses through 2010. For midsize businesses,” it continues, “Linux presents many challenges, including not fully understanding the OS’s benefits, resource constraints and the perceived high switching costs to move from Windows.”

In principle at least, neither side looks set to lose in the arms race between the two camps. Microsoft’s grip on the Server market remains too powerful to prise loose in anything more than guerrilla-sized victories for Linux, which in turn offers a growing number of advantages, making such wins larger, more significant and more frequent as time passes.

Strategically, Microsoft, after years of attempting to ignore the threat from the Open Source community, is now looking for the arguments that reinforce both its own paradigm model and customer loyalties that exist in the Enterprise market, while from time to time; it conveniently shoots itself in both feet with it aggressive software licensing policies. This strikes me as bizarre because Microsoft, given its market share advantage, has some control, through its pricing, of Linux market share growth, going forward. After all, in a rabidly costs-conscious Enterprise IT environment, a clear cost of ownership advantage, one way or the other is compelling, which is why Microsoft is hard to stack the argument against Linux, particularly at the mid-level Enterprise level, where it feels it is at its most vulnerable to “Penguin Creep”.

Security remains an inflection point in the struggle between Open Source and Windows. Looking back at columns I’ve written on the subject, one can see that Microsoft has managed to turn what was a shambles into relatively solid argument in favour of using Windows over Linux. While at this point, I can almost hear my inbox filling with outraged emails from the Open Source community, I think we need to accept, that while Windows is subject to a constant catalogue of exploits, Microsoft’s method of delivering security updates, does, in my experience, inspire a level of confidence among businesses that has yet to exist in the Open Source world. I’m not saying that the Windows platform itself is more intrinsically secure but that in a world increasingly swamped by Netcrime business and consumers are possibly more confident in a single source of leadership than an open one.

It’s important to note that since I first started writing about the growth of Open Source in around 1999, both Linux and Windows have both been growing at the expense of Novell, Unix and Sun Solaris but from now on, as Gartner warns, Microsoft, is facing a highly flexible and mature Operating System, which “Through 2010, likely to become increasingly prominent among large enterprises.” As this occurs,” Gartner adds the Linux-focused market and after-market skills base will increase in support of large enterprises, feeding the skills and technology pool to the benefit of midsize businesses as well. As this “Mature ecosystem increases”, it concludes, “the risk of market share loss for Microsoft increases and “Businesses will have a more substantial alternative to Windows than they have had.”

I have to agree with Gartner, it’s the middle ground where Microsoft looks set to be most vulnerable over the next five years because it’s here that Linux offers the kind of evolutionary flexibility which doesn’t quite exist in larger Enterprises, wrapped in a tight know of compliance, security and TCO issues.

In a stark warning to the software giant, Gartner writes “It is
Microsoft’s business to lose, and it must execute diligently against its midsize-business strategy to secure its position”, which rather reminds me of the problem faced by another global superpower today, that of winning mindshare and a series of small wars than the much larger battles its more suited for.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 …

The Nature of Nurture?

Recently, I found myself in a fascinating four-way Twitter exchange, with Professor Adam Rutherford and two other science-minded friends The subject, frequently regarded as a delicate one, genetics and whether there could exist an unknown but contributory genetic factor(s) or influences in determining what we broadly understand or misunderstand as human intelligence.

I won’t discuss this subject in any great detail here, being completely unqualified to do so, but I’ll point you at the document we were discussing, and Rutherford’s excellent new book, ‘A Brief History of Everyone.”

What had sparked my own interest was the story of my own grandfather, Edmond Greville; unless you are an expert on the history of French cinema, you are unlikely to have ever hear of him but he still enjoys an almost cult-like following for his work, half a century after his death.

I've been enjoying the series "Genius" on National Geographic about the life of Albert Einstein. The four of us ha…
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…