"Some high-profile Linux adoption stories have
circulated lately that feature companies such as Amazon and Intel
espousing the wonders of the open-source solution. One crucial fact
these stories don't reveal, however, is that these Linux adoptions
are replacing proprietary and expensive versions of UNIX, not
Windows. And as both Amazon and Intel are quick to point out,
neither company has even considered replacing Windows boxes with
Linux.
Amazon's story is typical. The company reports that adopting
Linux cut its technology costs nearly 25 percent last quarter--a
key concern given the current economic climate and Amazon's
historic inability to perform financially. "The decline in absolute
dollars spent primarily reflects our migration to a Linux-based
technology platform that utilizes a less-costly technology
infrastructure, as well as general price reductions for data and
telecommunications services due to market overcapacity," the
company said in a filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). Technology news agencies seized on these comments
as a huge win for Linux and, possibly, a huge loss for Windows.
What they didn't point out, however, is that Amazon replaced
proprietary UNIX servers with Linux, which it uses for its back-end
services. Amazon also uses Oracle database software for its
e-commerce operations.
Meanwhile, Intel Vice President for Information Technology Doug
Busch made comments this week that also hit the radar of the
anti-Microsoft press. Busch said that Intel has saved millions of
dollars by implementing an intranet application based on
Napster-like technology that lets the company inexpensively share
streaming-video feeds across the corporation. Busch says the
software, which runs on small Intel-based Linux servers, has saved
the company $200 million this year. But again, Intel's previous
solution ran on massive and expensive UNIX servers, machines that
didn't use Intel technology. When asked whether the company would
ever consider replacing its Windows machines with Linux, Busch said
absolutely not, noting the lack of "robust office packages" on that
platform. And Busch threw another wrench into any mass Linux
migration by noting that the overall cost of Linux and Windows 2000
is almost identical after you factor in support and
maintenance."
