Linux is just imitation
Is Linux just imitating features in Windows, Vista and OSX? That is what Emmett Dulaney would have you believe. In his article in CertCities he suggests that Linux is mostly playing copycat via Mono, Wine, OpenOffice and the X/Windows desktop managers like Gnome and KDE. He then suggests in his blog that he is going to "be quickly blasted" for writing this article and asking these questions. As of this read, one reader (Ray Reynolds of NYC) came out swinging against Mr. Dulaney.
May I suggest something to people like Emmett Dulaney?
First - Mono, Wine, OpenOffice, Gnome and KDE are examples of how Linux is expanding the scope of Linux-based software to ease the transition for Windows and Mac users
Second - He mentions that even the in the space of web hosting Linux the lead is questionable (perhaps statistics from Netcraft point to this) - however, if you look at pure numbers, the Linux/Apache combination has nearly a 60% market share compared to Windows' 35%. Even if we factor in the large numbers of "virtual domains" out there, Linux still wins hands down here, barring the last quarter of 2006. Windows appears to have shown a major positive jump owing to the addition of over nearly 620,000 hosts using Windows Live.
Third - Where is the innovation in Linux? For starters, let us focus on security. A good illustration of Linux security versus Windows is available in this fine article showing a comparison of the Linux and Windows.
Fourth - Virtualization is also referred to in the article above. User Mode Linux and Xen are two great examples of innovation in the Linux world. Of course XenSource is reaping the benefits of the open source community to sell their products and services in the commercial space. Nothing wrong with that.
Fifth - I somehow believe that Mr. Dulaney's idea of innovation centers around glitzy user interface elements. How about something less visually appealing but equally important for people to use like BitTorrent? Open source innovation at its best, according to me. "Joe User" would also like to watch web downloadable movies and listen web downloadable songs and radio shows, right? Technologies like BitTorrent are making this possible.
Sixth - How about collaboration using Zimbra? Brilliant technology, great features, and Ajax-based unlike Microsoft's clunky SharePoint.
This list could go on but I hope I have set the ball rolling on the response to Emmett Dulaney. As I reread the article a few times another point struck me. He mentions the multitude of Linux versions causing problems ("What you know RedHat but not SuSE?"). I believe this makes no sense. Choice is wonderful. I would much rather have more operating systems to choose from than depend on one vendor. This is very much like making the OS a commodity. We don't worry any more about whether MS Office will work on an HP PC as opposed to one from IBM or Dell. The same should and will happen with Operating Systems too.
As for his assertion that all Linux vendors are now asking for a maintenance contract, I would like to know which closed source innovator does not insist on a maintenance contract to support a customer? If one were to perpetuate the myth that Linux is "free" then this would be an issue worth pointing out. But nobody said anything is for free. Emmett Dulaney should know this oft-repeated American slogan - "there ain't no free lunch". Which is true of Open Source and Linux too. What it means, however, is that because the product is Open Source, even a fairly underused Linux distro is bound to get support from the community.
I would also like to end with another fantastic innovation in the Open Source/Linux world. The development of Linux as an OS that competes and clearly surpasses Microsoft in the cellphone, handheld and specialty devices are taking over the technology world like a tsunami. Visit LinuxDevices.com to see what is going on.
May I suggest something to people like Emmett Dulaney?
First - Mono, Wine, OpenOffice, Gnome and KDE are examples of how Linux is expanding the scope of Linux-based software to ease the transition for Windows and Mac users
Second - He mentions that even the in the space of web hosting Linux the lead is questionable (perhaps statistics from Netcraft point to this) - however, if you look at pure numbers, the Linux/Apache combination has nearly a 60% market share compared to Windows' 35%. Even if we factor in the large numbers of "virtual domains" out there, Linux still wins hands down here, barring the last quarter of 2006. Windows appears to have shown a major positive jump owing to the addition of over nearly 620,000 hosts using Windows Live.
Third - Where is the innovation in Linux? For starters, let us focus on security. A good illustration of Linux security versus Windows is available in this fine article showing a comparison of the Linux and Windows.
Fourth - Virtualization is also referred to in the article above. User Mode Linux and Xen are two great examples of innovation in the Linux world. Of course XenSource is reaping the benefits of the open source community to sell their products and services in the commercial space. Nothing wrong with that.
Fifth - I somehow believe that Mr. Dulaney's idea of innovation centers around glitzy user interface elements. How about something less visually appealing but equally important for people to use like BitTorrent? Open source innovation at its best, according to me. "Joe User" would also like to watch web downloadable movies and listen web downloadable songs and radio shows, right? Technologies like BitTorrent are making this possible.
Sixth - How about collaboration using Zimbra? Brilliant technology, great features, and Ajax-based unlike Microsoft's clunky SharePoint.
This list could go on but I hope I have set the ball rolling on the response to Emmett Dulaney. As I reread the article a few times another point struck me. He mentions the multitude of Linux versions causing problems ("What you know RedHat but not SuSE?"). I believe this makes no sense. Choice is wonderful. I would much rather have more operating systems to choose from than depend on one vendor. This is very much like making the OS a commodity. We don't worry any more about whether MS Office will work on an HP PC as opposed to one from IBM or Dell. The same should and will happen with Operating Systems too.
As for his assertion that all Linux vendors are now asking for a maintenance contract, I would like to know which closed source innovator does not insist on a maintenance contract to support a customer? If one were to perpetuate the myth that Linux is "free" then this would be an issue worth pointing out. But nobody said anything is for free. Emmett Dulaney should know this oft-repeated American slogan - "there ain't no free lunch". Which is true of Open Source and Linux too. What it means, however, is that because the product is Open Source, even a fairly underused Linux distro is bound to get support from the community.
I would also like to end with another fantastic innovation in the Open Source/Linux world. The development of Linux as an OS that competes and clearly surpasses Microsoft in the cellphone, handheld and specialty devices are taking over the technology world like a tsunami. Visit LinuxDevices.com to see what is going on.
I am not sure why Mr Delaney fancied that he would be blasted, since toasting seems more appropriate. Claiming that Microsoft is innovative and Linux is a simulacrum or pale imitation of the Redmond OS is a bit of the kettle calling the pot black. Any computer historian could point out all the adoptions and imitations that have brought Windows to what it is today. Does VMS, Vines, and SMB ring a bell or two to name a few. And who could forget how long Microsoft eschewed a browser let alone making it the predominant user interface with IE after Netscape/Mozilla had led the way.
So I can only take his ludicrous comments with a pinch of salt. However the point here is not who has the upper hand or who has the corner in innovation. More important by far is the notion that innovation prospers on a bedrock of previous hard gained knowledge and standardization. World scientists base their breakthrough discoveries on mathematical proofs and models that stretch back 4000 years. Equally they challenge and stretch the scientfic method endlessly creating new frontiers, modifying and or rejecting previous scientific notions when they no longer make sense.
I dont think there is any doubt that Microsoft is one of the forces of innovation, but they dont have a monopoly and in reality stand in the shadows of innovations in the world of Open Source (ie not just Linux) and innovations like Chat(Jabber), browsers (Motif/X), Wikis and others. Again it is not just Open Source, Apples innovation sit on MAC/OS which itself is a derivative of BSD Unix. The list is endless but I hope the point is made. It doesnt really matter who is in the lead, what matters is that there is a constant flow of innovation, and that yesterday's best innovations become today's commodities inspiring and supporting human creativity. It is therefor in everyone's interest (including Microsoft) to contribute to the growing foundation of computer standards.
It was interesting to see Mr Delaney pour scorn on Mono as a pale imitation of Microsoft's .NET capabilities. For Microsoft is one of the great proponents and supporters of Mono, helping to define the capability and recently reaching an agreement with Novell (the current owners of the code). Microsoft are wise enough to foresee that their revenues are best served with their applications (Office, Enterprise Server etc), and if Linux now comprises more than 30% of the server market, they should not be excluded from running in that environment. Mono offers a means to extend their business not to take it away. Microsoft sees the value of joint innovation, perhaps Mr Delaney would be able to see the same if he could only peer through his Windows on the world.
Reply to this