Business Issues
RSS Feed:
Linux: The Penguin Marches On
 |
By: Robin Bloor, Chief Research Officer, Bloor Research Published: 12th November 2001 Copyright Bloor Research © 2001 |
 |
- October 2005
The Abuse of IT Resources - September 2005
The Future of Email - July 2005
2005 Predictions: Mid Term Review - Part 3 - July 2005
2005 Predictions: Mid Term Review - Part 2 - July 2005
2005 Predictions: Mid Term Review - Part 1 - June 2005
Apple Ascending - June 2005
Is Firefox already the dominant browser?
Delicious
Digg
reddit
Facebook
StumbleUponIBM informs us that it has over 300 zSeries customers who are piloting Linux. It also claims that a further 400 are likely to get involved in pilots. The zSeries is the current brand name for the S390 mainframe. So we are witnessing a significant interest in Linux from big companies (by and large, it is only big corporates that have mainframes).
To this news, we can add the remarkable conversion of Amazon to the Linux cause. Amazon.com, the online retailer, claimed in a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission to have cut technology expenses by 7 million (about 25 percent, from 1m to 4m). It attributed the bulk of this impressive cost saving to a migration from Unix to Linux, although it also managed to cut some of its data and telecommunication services costs.
Linux now appears to have somewhere in the region of 30 percent of the server market, although much of the anecdotal evidence suggests that it is taking more business away from Unix that it is from Windows NT. In reality, this should be what we should expect - after all migrating to Linux from Unix is easier and most software will port from one to the other.
Linux cuts costs in a number of ways. It costs nothing for itself and it comes with a whole set of software that also costs nothing, including the very popular Apache web server, an email server and a whole host of other utilities. The hardware used is often cheaper and it can often be put into service on old Intel machines that might otherwise be thrown away. There are also some inexpensive white box options. Even software that you have to pay for often turns out to be less expensive on Linux.
Although compelling as a server choice, Linux has yet to make it as a credible desktop option. It currently has about 1.5% of this market. 2002 may be the year when it actually manages to make an impact here, although this is by no means certain. In order to be a credible PC platform Linux needs to offer a windowing interface, provide office software and offer integrated email.
All the pieces seem to be falling into place for it to be able to do this. Windowing can be provided by two products; Gnome or KDE. The latest edition of Sun Microsystems' Star Office (version 6.0) is good enough or better for word processing, presentation, spreadsheet et al. to challenge. A new web browser, Mozilla, is due for release in April and an open source clone of Microsoft Outlook, Evolution from Ximian, is soon to be ready.
There can be little doubt that some companies - small companies mostly - will try out this combination. The potential for cost savings that it represents is very large and has been estimated at 50 per PC. However a migration of this kind may not be so easy to pull off without running into a series of niggling problems. We would have to see a number of detailed case studies before we were convinced that savings of 50 per PC were realisable.
Our guess is that Linux on the desktop is still too early to call, but on the server it now looks to be unstoppable.
Reader Comments
Sorry, we are no longer accepting comments on this item. We suggest trying to contact the author directly.
9th November 2001: 'Joel' said:
The article, while interesting in parts, did make some bloopers - they said that linux needs a windowing interface, office software and offer integrated email.
Well, Linux has has all 3 for years. I sit typing this on my Linux workstation using netscape mail running under X windows - all of which I have been using since the early 1990s.
9th November 2001: 'lpbbear' said:
A few years ago the standard line from the mainstream IT media was that Linux was for hobbiests and had no chance of making a dent in the OS server market or desktop. Obviously those media pundits were wrong. Now the standard line from the IT media is that Linux is doing well in the server market but has no chance on the desktop. Meanwhile companies are starting to save huge amounts of money by switching to Linux for server roles. Somehow these same media pundits don't think its possible to let go of Microsoft's desktop money pit and switch to a desktop based on Linux. Well those pundits were ignorant a few years ago and guess what? They are still ignorant now. Companies that switch to Linus as a server are showing huge savings which in turn makes them more competitive against companies who are still stuck in the Microsoft money pit. The same thing applies to those companies smart enough to switch to Linux desktops. I use Linux both as a server and a desktop. There is nothing I need from the Windows world anymore. I'm saving money and so will those who make the switch to open source desktops.
BTW, this was posted from Konqueror using Mandrake 8.1.
10th November 2001: 'Olivier' said:
Mozilla is not due in April. Releases have been occuring about every 5 weeks, for months now.
The new Netscape 6.2 browser, based on Mozilla is also already available...
10th November 2001: 'Veran' said:
"Windowing can be provided by two products; Gnome or KDE"
Actually, those are Desktop Enviroments, windowing is provided X Windows System, and is managed by a Window Manager (Sawfish, KWM, Enlightenment, Blackbox, FVWM, IceWM etc.) Both Gnome and KDE build off the windowing functions already available.
10th November 2001: 'codifex maximus' said:
Nice piece of information gathering and presentation. Might we take a closer look into the various components of your story? Some simple links embedded in the story in strategic positions would likely satisfy.
Thanks for a very positive story.
10th November 2001: 'Gilad Ben-Yossef' said:
To understand where Linux is going on the desktop, simply read what most pundits said about Linux on the server two years ago, and then re read the last sentence of the article.
Any addtional work is redundant.
10th November 2001: 'bobzibub' said:
30% of the server market or 30% of the webserver market??
(hopefully server! ; )
10th November 2001: 'Geert' said:
When I look at our small business office, if only we had file filters for office 95, 97,2000 applications, we could still be happily using our windows 3.1 for workgroups woth word 2,0. Still the stablest version up to date. Everything we do now, we could do it with the old configuration. Why move anywhere if we can save costs by staying where we are? By the way, did anybody ever get support from microsoft? This support issue concerning open source is really overrated.
10th November 2001: 'Ganesh Prasad' said:
Linux is unstoppable in both markets.
Linux is on the same trajectory on the desktop as on the server, only a bit further behind.
Its advantages are exactly the same:
cost savings, adherence to industry and Internet standards, interoperability with most other systems, absence of lock-in, long-term viability, etc.
The only thing in its way is a lack of general awareness, not a lack of actual features. This awareness is higher in the server market than in the workstation market, which explains its current position in both markets.
Once the desktop market matures in terms of awareness, Linux's acceptance and market share will correspondingly increase.
10th November 2001: 'Ganesh Prasad' said:
Linux is unstoppable in both markets.
Linux is on the same trajectory on the desktop as on the server, only a bit further behind.
Its advantages are exactly the same:
cost savings, adherence to industry and Internet standards, interoperability with most other systems, absence of lock-in, long-term viability, etc.
The only thing in its way is a lack of general awareness, not a lack of actual features. This awareness is higher in the server market than in the workstation market, which explains its current position in both markets.
Once the desktop market matures in terms of awareness, Linux's acceptance and market share will correspondingly increase.
10th November 2001: 'Anonymous Coward' said:
In order to be a credible PC platform Linux needs to offer a windowing interface,
It has at least one free window manager, and at least two major desktop environments.
provide office software
StarOffice, KOffice
and offer
integrated email.
What exactly does this mean? If this means an e-mail client like Outlook Express, then it has that (minus the virus toolkit, powerful scripting features).
10th November 2001: 'Scott' said:
"In order to be a credible PC platform Linux needs to offer a windowing interface, provide office software and offer integrated email."???
Ever heard of KDE or GNOME? Two 'windowing' interfaces that are standard on most distributions of Linux.
As for office software, StarOffice? E-mail, try Balsa for point-and-click, or try Pine, Elm, Mutt, Netscape, etc.
10th November 2001: 'rts' said:
You say:
"...although much of the anecdotal evidence suggests that it is taking more business away from Unix that it is from Windows NT."
Every switch from Unix to Linux is missed potential for a switch from Unix to (say) NT. So to say that Linux is "just stealing from Unix" is completely missing the point.
10th November 2001: '...' said:
boy oh boy, when you thought the internet media is not biased, something like this happens. when linux fulfils all you critics suggestions, you guys think of some more?
10th November 2001: 'anthony' said:
$250 would only be a good
estimate for up front savings.
Ongoing savings could potentially be even more,
much more.
12th November 2001: 'Rodd Clarkson' said:
An excellent article.
Sadly, your estimate of $250 in savings falls way short of the reality. I am assuming that this $250 only covers that savings from not having had to purchase Windows.
Actually the savings would be far higher, especially if Linux is integrated into the work environment as it should be.
Assuming that you install Linux on each desktop, (not the best way, but it's a start), then you would save not only the cost of the Windows OS, but also the cost of Office. On top of this you wouldn't need to purchase upgrades for all the Norton type tools for viruses and disk repair which adds up to more savings. Infact, just considering the savings on software can easily add up in excess of 1000's of dollars. On top of this, server software cost are greatly reduced. No 'per seat' license to access the file or email servers. Or the database.
Add to this the lower hardware needs. Linux will run on the computers you currently have. Windows XP not only requires more memory (cheap at the moment) but may involve upgrading you entire desktop making the upgrade even more expensive.
If you've installed it properly, all the software is actually running of a server for the majority of users. Some users, mostly laptop owners, will need local installs, but most users can easily run linux using there desktop as a terminal. This means less administrative costs as the sysadmin spends less time moving from machine to machine installing new software and upgrades, or worse security patches. As your needs for 'terminals' increase, you can purchase 'X-terminals', which are not only considerably cheaper, they have no moving parts so maintainance costs are dramatically improved. And by moving to a true client/server model, your staff are no longer tied to a single desktop. They can have complete access to their 'files' simply by loggin in at any terminal.
As you can see, the savings to be made for choosing linux go far beyond the simple cost of an operating system. And I haven't even touched on up-time and the savings from not having to redo work because your operating system crashed.
12th November 2001: 'Howard' said:
If a business has Linux on the desktop, then they will have to send almost everyone that works at their firm for, at least, a 3 day training course. With Windows, the workers already know it. Even new ones.
A three day training course costs way more than Windows.
And if something doesn't work well with Linux on the desktop, the employees are going to wonder if they work for Cheapskate Incorporated. Other firms spend the money for Windows, "what's wrong with our company ?" they will ask.
In the long run, Linux on the desktop will be bad for a firm.
Okay for Web servers, but that's it.
13th November 2001: 'Peter' said:
I want to make sure that I understood the article. Amazon.com moved to Linux on VM. The server consolidation brought all these savings.
13th November 2001: 'William' said:
Microsoft will always win the fight with developers as their API is well documented and supported.
14th November 2001: 'David' said:
Linux is well liked by a small crowd of home
users, but in an office environment it
would not go over well. The average office
worker is less computer savy than the average Linux user. Average workers are already happy with Windows and MS-Office.
If a company tried to save money by not
running Windows and MS-Office in their
offices the office workers wouldn't see any
of that saved money show up in their pockets. It would just be a new hassle.
And probably many of the high level managers would just plain refuse to not have Windows and MS-Office on their PCs.
So then the firm would have to support 2 types of desktop environments.
15th November 2001: 'Phil' said:
Peter, Rodd,
The move to Linux for a user is very easy. Most users get going very quickly. Moving from Windows release to the next windows release is always a hassle. Moving from Linux release to the next is rather simple as the basic operation evolves over time.
Companies that have Unix servers already have Linux desktops. The admins will use it.
Give Linux a try. See what it can provide. Then look at the cost. It convinced me.
10th January 2002: 'Enrico' said:
People who think the costs of migrating to Linux from Windows are overestimating the need for end users to employ Windows' more advanced features. Most people use computers as glorified typewriters at work. They only need an office suite, mail program, web browser and a windowed environment. Set up a minimal terminal, give them a minimal understanding of file management for their individual accounts, and I'm sure that for the vast majority of the office, you'll get a productive workplace
25th April 2002: 'Steve' said:
First switch over the servers, then start transferring in house application to web based applications. Then start placing linux workstations around the office. Show people it is just the same thing, with some neat features like multiple desktops. Then goto openoffice, then switch to linux on the desktop. People are afraid of change, they need to do it slowly. In other words if you do something right people won't be sure if you really have done anything at all. Peace
10th July 2002: 'MichelG' said:
United Linux! Sometimes, having some options is better than having lots! Hope Linux´s players join this program to get Corporation´s credibility and, of course, market share !!
30th December 2002: 'dink' said:
AMEN to steve's suggestion! He is one of the few ppl here who makes sense.. unlike william... anyway... In an ideal world Linux would become a desktop system as well.. however the real problems that linux still has are the little stupid things that should have been taken care of a long time ago.. and im working on now since i dont see anyone else working on it... placing icons in the menus and desktop is a must... the typical user isnt advanced enough to go into a shell and type chmod +x somebin file then sh somescripthere or even just plane and simple ./somescript. While these seem like basic easy things they scare the day lights out of nonadvanced users... and with the corporate dont touch unless i want you to touch vibe that goes on it only scares the users more thus they don't advance in skill.
The messages above were all contributed by IT-Director.com readers. Whilst we take care to remove any posts deemed inappropriate, we can take no responsibility for these comments. If you would like a comment removed please contact our editorial team.