So Much for the Linux Threat

Windows IT Pro ^ | 4 February 2005 | Paul Thurrott

[ShadowAce]

I've reported in Windows IT Pro UPDATE several times over the years about Linux and its potential to unseat Windows Server as the most used enterprise OS. As a general rule, each January seems to bring a collection of "This Will Be the Year of Linux" stories, typically from analysts who've been bowled over by the Linux hype. To be fair, I've always assumed that Linux and Windows would some day run neck-and-neck in the server world, with Linux's perceived security, cost, and reliability advantages as the major reasons. Also, the past few years have been tough on Microsoft, as the company has suffered through a mind-boggling series of security snafus.

The Linux hype has just one little problem. Despite steady improvements over the past several years and the support of major IT companies such as IBM, Novell, and even Sun Microsystems, Linux seems stuck in a perpetual holding pattern, unable to eat away at Microsoft's server market share. And as the PC industry comes out of an economic recession and enterprises resume technology spending, it's interesting to note that Microsoft solutions, not open-source solutions such as Linux, are making the biggest gains.

Case in point: In its most recent quarterly earnings announcement last week, Microsoft once again beat forecasts and set an earnings record. Record earnings happen so regularly at Microsoft now that it's almost not worth mentioning. But key to the company's success, interestingly, is its Server and Tools division, which is responsible for such products as Windows Server 2003, Microsoft Exchange Server 2003, and Microsoft SQL Server 2000. The Server and Tools division made revenues of $2.8 billion in the quarter ending December 31, 2004, the same amount of money as the Information Worker division, which sells the Microsoft Office cash cow, made. Indeed, Server and Tools almost edged out Microsoft's other cash cow, the Windows Client division, which earned $3.2 billion.

Those results are amazing. Server and Tools grew more than 18 percent year-over-year, compared with flat or single-digit growth for Windows Client and Information Worker. SQL Server growth topped 25 percent. And Exchange 2003 is off to the fastest start of any Microsoft server product. These figures indicate two things: First, the IT industry is spending money again. Second, Microsoft's server products are kicking butt, and they're doing so at a point in time in which all the core products--Windows Server, Exchange, and SQL Server--are fairly mature. And because both Windows Server and SQL Server will see major updates this year--Windows 2003 Release 2 (R2) and SQL Server 2005, respectively--we might expect the upgrade treadmill to keep revenues rolling for quite a while.

"Our server business has a track record like the [New England] Patriots in the NFL playoffs," Microsoft chief financial officer (CFO) John Connors said, according to a report by Todd Bishop of the "Seattle Post Intelligencer." The comparison was carefully selected, I think. The Patriots, which have advanced to the Super Bowl in three of the last four years, are seen as a modern sports dynasty and widely respected for their leadership and team-oriented attitude. Microsoft would like to see its server products as well-respected as the Patriots are and would like to foster the notion that, although each individual server has certain strengths, they work together in such a way that the whole is more valuable to customers than the individual parts.

Some key challenges will still bedevil Microsoft as it attempts to fight back against the Linux threat, although recent history suggests the company might have finally latched onto a winning strategy. First, Microsoft must counter the perception that Linux is more secure than Windows. We're just starting to see some people come around to the notion that a largely untested solution such as Linux can be as insecure or more insecure than Windows, given improper configuration.

Second, Microsoft must prevent an upswing in support for Linux and other open-source solutions in world, regional, and local governments. In some cases, Microsoft has won government contracts by sweetening deals financially. But more often than not, fear of moving to an unknown and unproven system has kept many governments firmly in the Windows camp. And widely publicized Linux conversions--such as the one in Munich, Germany--have predictably run into problems. More important, they still represent a small portion of the overall worldwide government IT market.

Third, Microsoft should continue pushing its integration approach, which is truly a huge competitive advantage. Turnkey products such as Windows Small Business Server (SBS) 2003 and the awesome services industry built around it are unparalleled in the open-source world and will likely continue to be so for some time. Although it's interesting to make product-to-product comparisons--such as Windows 2003 versus Red Hat Enterprise Linux--few customers think in such fine-grained ways. Enterprises want solutions. And I think this is an area in which Microsoft comes out on top.

Fourth, I think Microsoft has finally won the battle over cost. Depending on whom you talk to, Linux solutions are cheaper or as expensive as Windows-based solutions. That comparison doesn't resonate very loudly with IT administrators who are already familiar with Windows and would dearly miss functionality and compatibility if they left the platform. Even if some Windows solutions are a bit more expensive than Linux-based alternatives, the benefits of Windows often outweigh what is essentially a small price differential, spread out over time.

So what do you think? Is Linux the next big thing, or will it simply snag a few key niche markets like most of Microsoft's past competitors have?

[Doohickey]

The only accurate measurement of OS market share is hardware volume. Most companies tend to buy their servers and desktops with the OS already installed. The number of organizations that either buy bare metal or pave an already installed OS with another is statistically insignificant by comparison.

Not even close to true. Virtualization and reducing data center footprint is all the rage right now. I run VMWare ESX and have 70 OS instances running on four discrete pieces of hardware. And I'm only getting started. I can easily run the same number of OS instances on 60% of the hardware I have right now.

[Beckwith]

There is no such thing as open-source and there never will be despite all the noble efforts.

We live in a market-driven, capitalistic society, like it or not. The profit motive drives everything, not nobility.

[Doohickey]

Linux has not been a free operating system for enterprise customers for some time. Any company with regulatory requirements can't and won't touch any product they cannot get vendor support on.

[Southack]

"but if I'm a Tivo developer and I had my choice of free *old* windows code and free *new* linux code ... why would I choose Win95?"

Because as a professional, profit-oriented firm, you want to leverage existing Windows game and utilities code libraries onto every family's high-definition big-screen TV in every den in America.

Think: Doom, Quake, Age of Empires, and every other old game that still has followers.

...And this doesn't mean that *your* firm puts those games onto TiVo...it simply means that because you selected the right OS, that you get to benefit by association, since those games *already* run on Windows.

As a 3rd party development shop, you want to be on the hot new platform. Well, having popular existing games run on your new platform gives you a substantial head start towards that goal.

That's why you want to go with Windows; not because it may or may not be technically superior, but because the better games already run on it.

This goes back to BetaMax versus VHS: BetaMax was technically superior in picture quality...didn't matter...VHS had more hot movies...so everybody wanted VHS...for the content, not for the superior technology.

[Southack]

"Linux has not been a free operating system for enterprise customers for some time. Any company with regulatory requirements can't and won't touch any product they cannot get vendor support on."

You're thinking like a computer nerd; Linux's big move has been to quietly take over millions upon millions of TV screens, all while no one in the tech world would label such consumer product displays as "desktops."

TiVo is a Linux box. TiVo watchers don't care IN THE LEAST about regulatory requirements or vendor support. What they care about is that massive high-definition big screen plasma TV display that commands their den's center wall...and they want their digital movie/show/game content displayed on that wall at their command.

So as the computer and TV converge, Linux suddenly and unexpectedly finds itself controlling the most important video screens in millions upon millions of American households.

Already these Linux boxes are connecting with existing home networks. Already these Linux boxes are on the Internet (TiVo downloads software and content updates nightly via phone, DSL, and cable modems).

So step away from your ancient computer for a moment; your computer isn't running a giant plasma high-def TV in your den.

But there is a computer that is running millions of them...wrapped up inside a Linux box and packaged as TiVo.

This is the new revolution. This is *precisely* what Bill Gates predicted...the convergence of TV, computer, and telephone...yet it isn't happening on any of Gates' operating systems.

[Southack]

Because they're stuck with Linux, TiVo developers have to develop for Java right now. For gaming, that's less than ideal.

Had TiVo been able to go with a free Windows 95 OS instead of Linux, then you'd have Age of Empires, Doom, Quake, and most other MicroSoft compatible games on TiVo...as well as very mature, hip code libraries with which to develop your newer games.

So even though TiVo has the right concept and even though it has taken over millions of home TV screens, going the Linux route was less than ideal.

Nonetheless, that's still the wave of the future if MicroSoft refuses to play in the consumer products arena (or pretends that the revolution isn't there...as MS did at the beginning of the Internet revolution).

We've been down this road before, after all.
About the HME Developer Challenge

HME is the code name for TiVo's powerful, open platform. HME allows developers to build exciting, new applications for broadband-connected TiVo Series2 using the Java™ programming language. Starting today, TiVo invites the developer community to download the HME SDK and get started with their own creative development. And to celebrate, we're sponsoring a contest called the TiVo Developer Challenge. Winners will be announced at the 2005 JavaOne conference in San Francisco.

Make sure to read the contest rules and submissions guidelines, and submit your app by May 1, 2005. Prizes will be awarded for several categories described below.

• HME applications run on home PC’s or remote servers hosted by TiVo. At this time, HME applications cannot control any of the TiVo DVR’s scheduling, recording, or video playback capabilities.
• Developers use the HME software developer kit (SDK) to create these applications. The SDK is released under the Common Public License (CPL).
• Currently, HME is an early-access developer release, and is not available to all TiVo subscribers
  

[N3WBI3]

But, if you want to run Linux in your company as a database server or in some other kind of mission-critical role that demands five 9's of availability, it's not going to have the same kind of track record or reliability as Solaris.

Actually IBM global services will give you the same number of nines on a Linux or a Solaris box. And we have mission critical Databse servers running Linux, we have had no unscheduled outages in a year. I like solaris and for me it is a per situation basis onto which one I would use. If I were to replace a mainframe with a Oracle/J2EE solution I would go with Solaris..

[Nick Danger]

Because they're stuck with Linux, TiVo developers have to develop for Java right now.

Surely you don't believe that Java is the only programming language available on linux. It's the only programming language supported by Tivo, and that's a policy decision on their part, to keep third-party app developers in a "sandbox" where they can't get to the bare iron.

That was the problem with Windows 95... those VxDs that did talk to the bare iron, and were responsible for most of the crashes. I can see why Tivo would not want that. They also don't want you messing with the other stuff they have in there, like the thing that spies on you and tells them what you're watching.

This way, the developers get a few tightly-defined services they can call, and that's it. Which is just how Tivo wants it.

[N3WBI3]

hink: Doom, Quake, Age of Empires, and every other old game that still has followers.

None of which can be played on on the free windows95 code, it would require a total rewrite..

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Your's is an interesting theory but I can see all sorts of reasons why this never happened. First of all as you point out MS didn't make old Windows 95 code avaailable as Open Source. Secondly, if they had what kind of licensure requirements would they have imposed? None? Somehow I doubt it. Thirdly, what would be the upgrade path? With the linux model life keeps moving forward. With Win95 it would be a technological dead end or it would be whatever Tivo could hack up. Finally, while the gaming angle is intriguing Tivo would never be in a position to be a gaming platform without being very good at their core business. And having linux on their box undoubtedly was a good technological move for their core business - it certainly doesn't seem top have hurt them in any way. For their core business and mission it was probably linux all the way and I bet they aren't sorry. Even if Tivo itself doesn't survive, the name and the concept certainly will and they've had a hell of a good run.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

That's interesting. My experience has been pretty much the exact opposite (with the exception of Solaris). We've found over the years that Windows does not want to be good citizens with other OSes. Of course, like anything else, your mileage will vary.

[Southack]

"Surely you don't believe that Java is the only programming language available on linux. It's the only programming language supported by Tivo, and that's a policy decision on their part, to keep third-party app developers in a "sandbox" where they can't get to the bare iron."

My point was more along the lines of a perfect world...had TiVo been given the choice of Open Source Windows 95 or Open Source Linux, the business decision would have been to have gone with Windows 95; that would have given TiVo Doom, Quake, Age of empires, and other top selling Windows 95 games at the time.

...And it would have put MicroSoft in charge of millions upon millions of giant screen home TV's. Win, win.

Yet that option wasn't available. So today, in the non-perfect world, TiVo game developers are stuck with Java (though granted, TiVo could open that up to C++ and other languages, but that still wouldn't run the old Windows 95 high-selling games).

It also locks MicroSoft out, for the moment, of millions upon millions of giant high-definition home TV screens.

That's lose, lose. TiVo lost the ability to run Windows games out of the box, and MicroSoft lost the OS platform control of home TV's.

So TiVo today hobbles along, barely generating any excitement at all...a mere comodity consumer product on millions of TV's...MicroSoft lost millions upon millions of MS games sales to potential TiVo users, as well as lost the consumer product race to Linux. TiVo lost and MicroSoft lost.

TiVo could have replaced the X-Box and destroyed PlayStation before the X-box was even dreamed up. TiVo could have had top-selling MicroSoft PC games running on millions of TV's across America. Not only would TV watchers have wanted TiVo, but hard-core gamers would have gone for it back then, too...games being a market that is *larger* than the entire global movie market.

It's myopia writ large. TiVo and MicroSoft could have been much, much bigger and much more in control of the next generation OS.

[Southack]

"None of which can be played on on the free windows95 code, it would require a total rewrite.."

There is no free Windows 95 code...while Doom, Quake, and Age of Empires run quite well, with no re-writes required, on pay Windows 95.

You missed the hypothetical. Had MS donated Windows 95 code into the public domain (or licensed it for free to consumer products developers at the very least), then existing games would have run just fine on TiVo. Didn't happen, though.

[Southack]

"Finally, while the gaming angle is intriguing Tivo would never be in a position to be a gaming platform without being very good at their core business."

Sony doesn't write all of the games for PlayStation, I'd imagine. Letting 3rd party developers make your games has been a proven money maker for all involved...go with the business model that works...which means that TiVo wouldn't have to do it all by itself.

[Bush2000]

Actually IBM global services will give you the same number of nines on a Linux or a Solaris box.

Show me any reference from IBM that shows Linux running at 5x9's on any other hardware than exorbitantly priced mainframe hardware.

And we have mission critical Databse servers running Linux, we have had no unscheduled outages in a year.

Linux database servers simply haven't proven their worth yet. In time, possibly. But not yet. No vendor even wants to commit Linux to TPC benchmarks.

I like solaris and for me it is a per situation basis onto which one I would use. If I were to replace a mainframe with a Oracle/J2EE solution I would go with Solaris..

In a mission-critical situation, I'd only go with Solaris. Linux just ain't there yet.

[N3WBI3]

Show me any reference from IBM that shows Linux running at 5x9's on any other hardware than exorbitantly priced mainframe hardware.

Odly enough I am not allowed to post contracts with IBM to an internet post, something about confidentiality. The resot of your post was nothing but opinion..

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Great tagline! The left's heros always get a pass. Saw a show on the monster this week and sure enough it was the Slimes and SeeBS that was humping Castro even while he was still up in the mountains. Not much is ever new under the sun.

[Bush2000]

Odly enough I am not allowed to post contracts with IBM to an internet post, something about confidentiality...

Fine. We've merely established that you can't point to a single public reference where IBM promises 5x9's of availability under Linux.

[HAL9000]

Fine. We've merely established that you can't point to a single public reference where IBM promises 5x9's of availability under Linux.

Try this Google search: site:ibm.com linux "99.999" returns about 483 results.

As you alluded to earlier, the results are for IBM's mainframe-class machines. But the difference between 4x9 and 5x9 availability is less than one hour per year. 4x9 is still an acceptable rate for many mission-critical applications, considering the cost difference.

[Richard Kimball]

...and the Linux zealots penchant for tinkering the boxes were a nightmare.

There's your problem. Anyone who likes to tinker needs to get their own box and play around to their heart's content. I've generally found that people who like to tinker with computers have little interest in actually getting them to work. It's a game to them, like a jigsaw puzzle.