Why server vendors are giddy over Linux Mar 19, 2001 Gartner © 2001 TechRepublic, Inc. G. Weiss Server vendors, such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard (HP), and Dell Computer, are eagerly declaring their allegiance to Linux as a strategic operating system (OS). This vendor "bandwagon" effect represents a new stage in the progression of Linux to achieve enterprise and government acceptance. In the early startup stage, Linux was largely an unknown, and vendors were hesitant to climb on board without further evidence of user demand. Now, vendors are declaring that user demand for Linux has accelerated and warrants new OS strategies and commitment. To understand this new commitment from vendors, even at some risk to their legacy environments, we analyze the reasons behind the vendor statements of support for and commitment to Linux and how users can gauge vendor sincerity. For years, Microsoft has set the direction of the foundation software technology, as powerful server vendors, such as IBM, HP, Dell, and Compaq Computer, were forced to depend on, and march to, one vendor's pace of development. The forced march involved inflexible licensing, fixed functionality and upgrades, technology obsolescence, and weak transitions. The open nature of Linux has been to some extent a breath of fresh air, allowing vendors to declare "independence" from one dominant party (although full loyalty to Linux will be tested against continued allegiance to the vendors' own UNIX installed bases). Microsoft's OS, as well as middleware and database software stack, represents competition to the server vendors' own software ambitions and limits a viable revenue stream. Thus, vendors are beholden to an OS company with higher ambitions in the software infrastructure that competes against the vendors' own software strategies. Linux enables server and software vendors to pursue their own offerings and customize solutions without the fear and pressures Microsoft exerts because of its overpowering hold on the application programming interfaces. The downside may arise if open-source software (OSS) creeps ever higher into enterprise functionality and erodes vendor profits gained from intellectual property now in open source. The Internet is responsible for opening up significant new opportunities in network services, specific-purpose server appliances, and Web applications. Much of the new technology is based on standards in communication protocols and portable software that exists in open source and General Public License availability (e.g., Apache, Sendmail, and Perl). Linux is a continuously evolving operating environment that absorbs and integrates the best of open-source and standards developments in real time. Linux creates a dynamic build-to-order model of customizable and tunable solutions. Its large and mostly volunteer development community enables it to absorb these technologies at a quicker pace than traditional software environments, such as UNIX and Windows, which tend to be locked down in legacy heritage. The new and evolving computing utility model for outsourcing, application service providers, and network service providers enables the concept of virtual data centers (VDCs) to emerge. As technology rapidly advances, traditional enterprise data centers will struggle to keep up and roll out timely and competitive services. The new virtual data centers will depend on an ability to massively scale, churn, and cluster new technologies. Linux is an inexpensive approach to "appliantizing" these data centers with flexibility to isolate and customize configurations by customers. Vendors are discovering a potential way to bridge legacy environments (i.e., their legacy investments in UNIX) with Linux. If standards are developed for Linux (a big "if"), it may be possible to enable Linux binaries to run on Intel-based servers under UNIX, assuming compatibility is resolved. Thus, vendors can keep their UNIX stake and capitalize on new application developments and OSS for Linux, while hosting the Linux binaries under an enterprise-proven OS environment that includes mission-critical capabilities for storage backup and recovery, application failover, and centralized consolidation and administration. Some second-tier vendors (i.e., market-share-lagging front-runners) will likely perceive Linux as offering renewed benefits to reestablish credibility and competitiveness. Consolidation to fewer UNIX and proprietary OSs will intensify and add pressure on revenues and margins. Vendors are gradually cutting the umbilical cord with Microsoft, perceiving a company weakened and distracted from the U.S. Department of Justice's investigation and hoping to generate new market opportunities and revenue streams that would not otherwise have been afforded. Despite the new vendor initiatives, our Linux vendor positioning chart, shown in Table A, has remained largely unchanged (with the exception of HP's Vision upgrade from a minus to a plus due to recent announcements). <<r00220010319ggp01_01[1].gif>> Table A Users must recognize that the degree of vendor commitment is variable and strategies for Linux can change from month to month. For example, Dell's recent comments about Linux commitment were met with mixed reviews as open-source advocates questioned Dell's sincerity and willingness to contribute as well as to capitalize on open-source benefits. Our questions concerning vendor commitment and sincerity are based on several assumptions: Vendors must believe that Linux can generate a major new revenue opportunity incremental to their current platforms. Vendors cannot expect to selfishly take and not return to the community without a backlash in being regarded as insincere mercenaries. Vendors on dead-ended road maps or with failed products may try to resuscitate their position by throwing technologies into the open-source community but fail to establish credibility. Vendors may become engrossed in geographic imperatives (Linux popularity in China, Latin America, and parts of Europe) but have different strategic barometers and messages according to geography. The willingness of vendors to continue financial contributions to and investments in the OSS community and Linux distributors to ensure the financial viability of the Linux market may be tested after the negative reviews by the Wall Street investment community. Sales and marketing execution in the field may become confused as users and independent software vendors increasingly confront vendors about their commitment to UNIX as a strategic enterprise OS vis-a-vis Linux. Bottom line The user implications are as follows: Linux is a disruptive emerging technology, and, because of this, players will appear and disappear. Guaranteed service levels and known financially viable organizations with the backing of the major server vendors must be established if Linux is to be deployed on a widespread enterprise scale. Where specific-purpose server appliances are the enterprise's direction, users should look for build-to-order services, easily replicated configurations, and vendor services that can tune, reconfigure, patch, and upgrade installations in automated and remotely administered fashion. The total cost of ownership between equivalent UNIX, Windows 2000, and Linux configurations should include all of the support services as well as costs absorbed during life cycle upgrades in addition to the hardware and software (vs. entry pricing). Gartner originally published this report on Oct. 13, 2000. ________________________________________ - too long a sacrifice can make a stone of heart - -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
