The little kernel that could

Microsoft has long pooh-poohed the Linux challenge, disregarding the OS as the folly of Internet hackers and hobbyists. But the cracks are starting to show and recent information, including a memo leaked from the company`s internal strategy group, shows that Microsoft clearly takes the Linux challenge more seriously than it admits.Recently, several cost of ownership studies have produced contradicting results. Microsoft – and a number of publications – pounced gleefully on the results of an IDC report, which shows that over a period of five years, Microsoft server software is marginally less costly than Linux, except in the case of web servers. Of course, this doesn`t take into account a number of factors, including that a five-year upgrade cycle is not something Microsoft would recommend. It also does not take into account that the study was commissioned by Microsoft itself.IBM, which uses both proprietary and open source software, commissioned a report from another research house. It found that while some initial costs were higher for a Linux deployment, the ability to scale horizontally without paying additional licensing fees yielded a three-year cost for Linux less than half of that of a Microsoft deployment. Microsoft, in turn, came in at a third of the three-year cost of a Solaris implementation.Cost arguments are often subjective and differ dramatically in individual cases, and to argue the merits of Linux purely on the purchase price is missing the bigger picture. So what is it about Linux that is making it so popular? Cost isn`t everythingAdvocates such as IBM`s sales manager for Linux, Richard Voaden, say Linux offers a host of opportunities for realising cost savings – for example through consolidation, and through hardware cost savings.But the biggest advantage to business, says Voaden, is to be gained through the consolidation opportunities offered by Linux. Rather than maintaining a whole server farm to serve data or host applications, companies are realising savings by installing these processes on a single server running Linux. And this is not just talk. Voaden, who works primarily in the European market, says the trend towards Linux consolidation is booming. Given time, he can reel off a growing list of businesses that have gone the Linux mainframe route, including the likes of Deutsche Bank and a host of telecommunications companies.Anton de Wet, founder of local Linux company Obsidian Systems, sold his first Linux system in 1995, just months after the release of version 1.0 of the OS. De Wet is perhaps South Africa`s most ardent supporter of Linux and its most dedicated champion. He says the biggest reason to use Linux is its reliability. He cites this as the biggest money-saver, and the area where the quickest return can be obtained. He is confident that Linux is the path of the future.“We are still at the beginning of the growth slope,” cautions De Wet, who matches the growth of Linux to the growth of the Internet. “In Internet time, Linux is at the stage at which the web was introduced,” he says, predicting significant growth for the operating system in the coming months and years. Take it seriously – IBM does“As part of an opportunity-ready infrastructure,” says Dave Botha, marketing executive at IBM, “Linux is one of the key elements as far as IBM is concerned.”Botha says that in the next generation of e-business, as envisioned by IBM, the key differentials that mark the line between success and failure are speed to market and flexibility. And IBM is betting the business on the fact that Linux is the way to achieve this. But IBM is more than just a vocal champion of Linux. It is also investing significant resources in the development of the OS. In its Austin, Texas facility, IBM has 250 IBM-sponsored programmers whose sole task is to develop open source applications. Most – if not all – are destined to run on Linux on one of IBM`s servers. Internally, the company runs more than 1 300 Linux servers.But IBM, much like Sun, is also betting Linux will be the bridge between the low-end user and the high-end enterprise Unix user. Botha says one of the most important reasons Linux is drawing the attention of business its the fact that it can be run not only on high-powered mainframes but also lower-end PCs and servers. IBM`s Voaden builds much of his IT worldview around the commoditisation of hardware that Linux brings to the market. He believes it`s about taking advantage of relatively cheap off-the-shelf hardware and putting it to use in high-end processes and applications.Linux doesn`t replace high-end Unix he says. But it does fill in many of the gaps in a growing server market. So much so that IBM is actively working on a Linux replacement strategy for the many banks around the world that favoured its OS/2 over Microsoft Windows in the early days, and still rely on it. Over the next couple of years IBM is hoping to encourage as many banks as possible to leave OS/2 behind and in its place install Linux.At the other end of the scale from the IBM enterprise world is the market highlighted by SCO`s regional manager for Africa Mark Knight: point-of sale machines and other customer-facing environments in which reliability and speed are key success factors.“Linux is ideal for environments in which cycle time is important. Client-facing terminals need to be robust and they need to reboot as fast as possible in the case of error. This is where Linux is strong.” SCO`s enterprise channel manager Dean Richter adds embedded devices to the list of applications where speed and reliability are important.SevenC Computing`s Paul Kotschy, a long-time advocate of Linux and former chairperson of the Linux Professionals Association of South Africa, highlights another key area in which Linux excels. The call centre, he says, is an ideal environment for Linux because of its stability and low overheads. Typical call centre operators don`t need the full-blown capabilities of a Windows-like desktop, but simply a single application built for speed. This makes Linux an ideal choice.Despite its strengths, capabilities and cost-effectiveness, Linux has its critics. Among them are those that argue that Linux lacks support. Typically this view holds that because of its loose-knit nature and the fact that no one owns Linux, support is lacking or hard to come by. It is an assertion that few in the open source world put up with.“Of course there is support!” says De Wet. “We offer support, and so do other companies in this business.”IBM similarly offers service and support contracts with all its Linux offerings. SCO`s Knight points out that commercial Linux is no longer free. “Clients take out a support contract from the vendors ... and while it may not be as much of a cost as other operating systems, they will still get support. People are prepared to pay for it ... and vendors are supporting it.” And the pitfalls?Linux does have its challenges, though. De Wet says Linux may not always be the most cost-effective solution initially, but in the long run the returns are greater. He puts forward as an example the training costs that companies don`t often calculate into the overall costs of implementation. Because of the need to train staff on a new system, often internally and for a price, the start-up fees for Linux may not be as cheap as many users expect, he says, mirroring the conclusions of IBM`s research.“Initially, your investment may actually be more than a similar system from another vendor,” he says, “but in the longer term the returns will be greater.”A decision framework paper released in May by the Gartner research group highlights other pitfalls users should be aware of when evaluating Linux. Among these is the multiple distribution Linux mindset which leads to additional management requirements, vague support contracts, experimental projects initiated by small groups within the company and poorly developed and supported applications provided by third parties.When considering a potential switch to Linux, Gartner cautions, it is important to evaluate the entire Linux deployment, including skills, training and hardware costs, with a comparable Windows or Unix deployment. “It`s often difficult to find valid comparisons, because enterprises typically use Linux for basic functions while the more mature operating systems take on heavy duty deployments.”Where Linux is a worthy competitor with Unix, says Gartner, is where it is used in relatively simple and small configurations on Intel platforms. “Against Windows, Gartner believes that Linux will generally excel in large horizontally scaled clusters and replicated server placements because it lets you avoid replicated licence fees.”However, Gartner warns that as configurations become more complex, specifically in large symmetric and multi-processing environments, Linux will lose its cost of ownership advantage to Unix. And next, the desktop?One point that repeatedly surfaces in the ongoing Linux debate is its chances as a desktop operating system. Just about everyone in the field has strong opinions in this argument.Linux is not (yet) widely seen by industry as a viable desktop replacement for Windows – and with good reason. For many years its strengths were available on the command line and not in the graphical interface.But this is starting to change as desktop environments like Gnome and KDE, and open source office application suites become increasingly smooth and mature. Desktop usability is about a lot more than just an attractive interface, however, and it is in the compatibility with dominant data and document formats (such as Microsoft`s Word, Excel and PowerPoint) that Linux has to date come off second.De Wet predicts that this will change in the next year. “The Linux desktop is still difficult for many users, but this will change, particularly with the release of products such as Open Office.”SCO`s Richter agrees that compatibility issues are the biggest problem with the deployment of Linux on the desktop. “The problem is that it is still harder to get all the bits to fit together and it requires more knowledge.” In addition, he says, “Microsoft has a closed product which makes it harder for developers to develop compatible products.”Issues around drivers and libraries for Linux also hinder its desktop evolution, according to Richter.What everyone agrees upon, however, is that ongoing desktop development is good for the operating system. For some, such as Richter, it is important that the desktop becomes a prominent feature of Linux because, he says, “one of the reasons Microsoft is successful in the server room is because most households and offices have Microsoft on their desks”.De Wet sees it similarly but adds that the Linux desktop will become important when “people realise that Linux is a very good backplane and become ready to move to Linux desktops”.Linux does not have all the answers. It started as the idea of one man and has developed into a world-changing phenomenon. Even if business is not widely using Linux yet, the influence of the open source movement has been significant, and just about every major software developer has an open source strategy.Internationally, developers have been talking the language of open standards for years, and many of them are starting to invest both time and coding hours in the development of open source software. IBM leads the pack in this respect, but Sun and Oracle are equally significant players.And yet, despite its relative immaturity, Linux continues to gain mind share and server room space. Projects such as Beowulf, a powerful supercomputer infrastructure built with low-powered computers, and remote management abilities have made it a powerful addition to the technical quiver of any large corporation. Whatever the conflicting claims on both sides of the debate, the little penguin is no longer playing catch-up. With some trackside support from its big buddies, it has become a credible challenger for the lead.