- AN ARTICLE FOR YOU, FROM ECONOMIST.COM - Dear CLUG, Doug Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wants you to see this article on Economist.com.
The sender also included the following message for you: The word spreads... (Note: the information above has not been verified.) MICROSOFT SEPTEMBER 11TH 2003 Governments like open-source software, but Microsoft does not IN MAY, the city of Munich decided to oust Microsoft Windows from the 14,000 computers used by local-government employees in favour of Linux, an open-source operating system. Although the contract was worth a modest $35m, Microsoft's chief executive, Steve Ballmer, interrupted his holiday in Switzerland to visit Munich and lobby the mayor. Microsoft even dropped its prices to match Linux--a remarkable feat since Linux is essentially free and users merely purchase support services alongside it. But the software giant still lost. City officials said the decision was a matter of principle: the municipality wanted to control its technological destiny. It did not wish to place the functioning of government in the hands of a commercial vendor with proprietary standards which is accountable to shareholders rather than to citizens. Worryingly for Microsoft, Munich is not alone in holding that view. Across the globe, governments are turning to open-source software which, unlike proprietary software, allows users to inspect, modify and freely redistribute its underlying programming instructions. Scores of national and state governments have drafted legislation calling for open-source software to be given preferential treatment in procurement. Brazil, for instance, is preparing to recommend that all its government agencies and state enterprises buy open source. Other countries are funding open-source software initiatives outright. China has been working on a local version of Linux for years, on the grounds of national self-sufficiency, security and to avoid being too dependent on a single foreign supplier. Politicians in India have called on its vast army of programmers to develop open-source products for the same reasons. This month, Japan said it would collaborate with China and South Korea to develop open-source alternatives to Microsoft's software. Japan has already allocated YEN1 billion ($9m) to the project. Why all the fuss? Modern governments generate a vast number of digital files. From birth certificates and tax returns to criminal DNA records, the documents must be retrievable in perpetuity. So governments are reluctant to store official records in the proprietary formats of commercial-software vendors. This concern will only increase as e-government services, such as filing a tax return or applying for a driving licence online, gain momentum. In Microsoft's case, security flaws in its software, such as those exploited by the recent Blaster and SoBig viruses, are also a cause of increasing concern. Government purchases of software totalled almost $17 billion globally in 2002, and the figure is expected to grow by about 9% a year for the next five years, according to IDC, a market-research firm (see chart). Microsoft controls a relatively small part of this market, with sales to governments estimated at around $2.8 billion. But it is a crucial market, because when a government opts for a particular technology, the citizens and businesses that deal with it often have to fall into line. (In one notable example, America's defence department adopted the internet protocol as its networking standard, forcing contractors to use it, which in turn created a large market for internet-compliant products.) No wonder Microsoft feels threatened--the marriage of open-source software and government could be its Achilles heel. Policymakers like open source for many reasons. In theory, the software's transparency increases security because "backdoors" used by hackers can be exposed and programmers can root out bugs from the code. The software can also be tailored to the user's specific needs, and upgrades happen at a pace chosen by the user, not the vendor. The open-source model of openness and collaboration has produced some excellent software that is every bit the equal of commercial, closed-source products. And, of course, there is no risk of being locked in to a single vendor. That said, open-source is no panacea, and there are many areas where proprietary products are still far superior. Oracle, the world's second-largest software company, need not worry (yet) about governments switching to open-source alternatives to its database software. But Microsoft is vulnerable, because an open-source rival to its Windows operating system exists already, in the form of Linux. If Microsoft is indeed squeezed out of the government sector by open-source software, three groups stand to benefit: large consultancy firms and systems integrators, such as IBM, which will be called in to devise and install alternative products; firms such as Red Hat or SuSE, which sell Linux-based products and services; and numerous small, local technology firms that can tailor open-source products for governmental users. As a result, the company has been fighting back. Microsoft and its allies have sought to discredit open-source software, likening its challenge of proprietary ownership to communism and suggesting that its openness makes it insecure and therefore vulnerable to terrorism. The firm also created a controversial slush fund to allow it to offer deep discounts to ensure that it did not lose government sales to Linux on the basis of price. And Microsoft has paid for a series of studies, the latest of which appeared this week, which invariably find that, in specific applications, Windows costs less than Linux. More strikingly, Microsoft has been imitating the ways of the open-source "community". Last year, the firm launched a "shared source" initiative that allows certain approved governments and large corporate clients to gain access to most of the Windows software code, though not to modify it. This is intended, in part, to assuage the fears of foreign governments that Windows might contain secret security backdoors. Microsoft has also made available some portions of the source code of Windows CE, which runs on handheld PCs and mobile phones, to enable programmers to tinker with the code. Tellingly, this is a market where the company is a straggler rather than a leader. Jason Matusow, Microsoft's shared-source manager, says that developing software requires leadership and an understanding of customer needs--both areas where proprietary-software companies excel. As for proposed legislation that would stipulate one type of software over another, it is anti-competitive and could leave users hamstrung with products that are not the best for their specific needs, says Robert Kramer, executive director of the Initiative for Software Choice, a Microsoft-supported lobby group. Microsoft will advance these views next week in Rome, where it is hosting the latest in a series of conferences for government leaders. But the signs are that many of them have already made up their minds. See this article with graphics and related items at http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=2054746 Go to http://www.economist.com for more global news, views and analysis from the Economist Group. - ABOUT ECONOMIST.COM - Economist.com is the premier online source of global news, views and analysis. Visit http://www.economist.com for worldly insight as well as market information and exclusive resource libraries. Register at Economist.com to get free e-mail newsletters and special offers. - QUICK LINKS INTO ECONOMIST.COM - * Global Agenda: http://www.economist.com * Opinion: http://www.economist.com/opinion * World: http://www.economist.com/world * Business: http://www.economist.com/business * Finance & Economics: http://www.economist.com/finance * Science & Technology: http://www.economist.com/science * People: http://www.economist.com/people * Books & Arts: http://www.economist.com/books * Markets & Data: http://www.economist.com/markets * Diversions: http://www.economist.com/diversions * Surveys: http://www.economist.com/surveys * Cities Guide: http://www.economist.com/cities * Country Briefings: http://www.economist.com/countries * Careers: http://www.economist.com/globalexecutive * Business Marketplace: http://b2b.economist.com/ * Partner Shops: http://www.economist.com/partners * Shop: http://www.economist.com/shop * E-Mail & Mobile Editions: http://www.economist.com/email * Help: http://www.economist.com/help * Subscribe now: http://www.economist.com/members/aboutreg.cfm?campaign=EMFQ - ABOUT THIS E-MAIL - This e-mail was sent to you by the person at the e-mail address listed above through a link found on Economist.com. We will not send you any future messages as a result of your being the recipient of this e-mail. - ABOUT THE ECONOMIST NEWSPAPER - The Economist Newspaper is an independent weekly international news and business publication offering clear reporting, commentary and analysis on world politics, business, finance, science & technology, culture, society and the arts. If you enjoy this article here are two ways you can get more: Subscribe to The Economist print edition and you'll also get online access to all premium articles and the entire content of the paid archive. Click here to subscribe: http://www.economist.com/subscriptions/email.cfm Or subscribe to Economist.com and get free access to all premium articles and the entire content of our paid archive of over 20,000 Economist articles going back to 1997. Click the below link to take out a monthly subscription to Economist.com for just US$19.95. http://www.economist.com/members/purchase.cfm?subscription=monthly&campaign=EMF Or, save over 75% on the monthly subscription rate and sign-up for a year at US$69. http://www.economist.com/members/aboutreg.cfm?campaign=EMF - COPYRIGHT - This e-mail message and Economist articles linked from it are copyright (c) 2003 The Economist Newspaper Group Limited. All rights reserved. http://www.economist.com/help/copy_general.cfm Economist.com privacy policy: http://www.economist.com/about/privacy.cfm
