Linux Today is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Brandioch Conner - Subject: About what I'd expect from the CTO of InfoWorld. ( Jan 9, 2005, 18:45:18 )
...When I first rolled Linux systems into production seven years ago, I have to admit that the “free” part of open source was the main attraction — “free,” as in beer, as opposed to the more abstract “free,” as in speech (see the GNU free software definition).
If it doesn't work, then free (as in beer) is too expensive.
And 7 years ago is a bit cutting edge. That was 1997. Why don't you say what you were using it for in 1997?
...Of course, I was impressed with the stability and overall capabilities of Linux even then, and I admired the revolutionaries who created such great new software.
Organize your thoughts. First comes the functionality and stability THEN comes the price tag (for most end-users).
...In reality, however, I was not so much an ideologue as an IT manager with racks full of Intel hardware, a long list of problems to solve, and little cash to spend on OS licenses. Linux was perfect for that environment.
Which is why Linux has seen such huge growth. #1. Functionality #2. Stability #3. Price
...Fast forward to 2005 and open source means different things than it did back then.
Hardly. It's still about: #1. Functionality #2. Stability #3. Price
...According to IDC predictions for 2005, Linux shipments will account for more than 20 percent of server volume shipments, growing at twice the rate of Windows.
Yup. That's that "growth" thing mentioned earlier.
...Most interestingly, IDC notes that within the manufacturing, financial services, telecom, and government verticals, organizations are clearly moving toward enterprise-grade, commercially supported Linux distributions — that means “paid.”
Welcome to the year 2000. Maybe you should look into this new company called "Red Hat" that recently did an IPO.
...I, too, am now willing to pay for the functionality I have enjoyed at little cost for years now.
Huh? Why?
If it is the same functionality that you already have and have had and have not paid anything for it, then why pay now?
...In enterprise IT, the days of downloading a Linux distribution and compiling it yourself are mostly over — although you can still do it.
"enterprise IT" has seldom done that.
What are you talking about?
...Linux and open source in general remain compelling because they form the basis of a solid technology stack for many applications.
Yes, back to items #1 & #2 that I listed.
If it doesn't work or if it is unstable, then "free" costs too much.
...In the late ’90s, IT was getting good open source software such as Linux for free.
The same is happening in 2004.
...Even though we’re now starting to pay a little for open source software, it’s still a great bargain.
See #1, #2 & #3 above. Again.
...I’ll definitely be watching companies such as SpikeSource that are moving beyond supporting a base open source OS into supporting an integrated and vigorously tested enterprise stack of open source applications.
Great. It looks to me like they're primarily providing additional validation for Red Hat based web sites.
Prediction: If they're around and turning a profit in 1 year, look for Red Hat to branch out into that space and consume them.
Reasoning: It is easier for Red Hat to provide that service because Red Hat has more Linux coders on staff.
...Last year, the InfoWorld IT team implemented SpamAssassin, an excellent open source spam-filtering solution, and it works well most of the time; however, because InfoWorld is a technology media company and our writers’ and editors’ e-mails are published all over the site every day, I think we get a larger proportion of incoming spam than the average IT operation. Sometimes our multiple SpamAssassin boxes with fast processors don’t keep up as well as I would like. We could easily keep throwing hardware at the problem, but that increases the operational burden on a lean staff. So, we’ll probably outsource the problem altogether.
Yep. That's InfoWorld.
An article that starts off with his 7 years of experience with Open Source and how it is predicted to continue growing, ends with his decision to out source the handling of his email because his people cannot deal with the volume of spam.
And he's even the CTO of a "technology" magazine. And he wants to put his IT people one more step away from the actual technology.
Somehow, I don't see the SpamAssassin people using a 3rd party service to handle their email nor do I recall Linus purchasing a OS or the Samba people recommending that people use Windows.
You cannot write coherently about it if you don't use it.
