Can Microsoft Beat Linux or Vice Versa?

This past week two economics researchers at The Harvard School of
Business released research that predicts neither Windows nor Linux can
drive the other out of business. They used sophisticated modelling to do
this and even included scenarios where Microsoft did not play fair, in
anti-trust terms. Their prediction is that both will share the market in
relative parity for as far out as they can model.

Well, Duh!

While I am sure wild-eyed zealots in either camp wish their side would
win decisively, I don't share that wish and never have I thought it
would happen, regardless of my personal sympathies.

First off; the world needs competition to spur progress. In the absence
of real choice, things tend to coast along. Witness Microsoft's Internet
Explorer web browser. When it was the only readily available choice,
Microsoft let it's development lag, with the exception of some
functional and security patches. Mozilla and Firefox (along with some
other minor players, such as Apple's Safari) arose and began to capture
market share in significant numbers and Microsoft felt forced to revamp
IE and push development of a new version.

Second; While Linux, in my opinion, is easier to secure well, and by
some accounts has had fewer serious security vulnerabilities, Microsoft
has initiated their "Trustworthy Computing" program(s) with some very
real and meaningful successes. There is no doubt MS has the ability to
turn out more secure products and only someone unreasonably prejudiced
can say they aren't "getting it". I would be willing to bet that with
the debut of Longhorn (if it ever gets here) we will see all but the
most minor security issues between the two rendered almost moot. And
that in the mean, MS will make great progress on existing operating
systemss and applications via service packs and updates.

Make no mistake about it; security will eventually be a real selling
point for Microsoft. I know that seems far-fetched, but it will
eventually be true. MS is a huge company and so has great internal
inertia. It is taking them a lot of time to turn their focus to security
at the level it needs to be. But they will do it and do it well, now
that it has become a priority.

Third; If price were such a factor, MS would already be out of business.
The truth is that there are MS shops who love Windows and it's related
applications and feel they are getting a bargain when paying the license
fees. And Windows support is reasonably priced, if one shops, where
currently and for the foreseeable future, Linux support is only
available at a premium.

The same goes for the freedom to view and modify source code. While some
shops do take advantage of this, most do not. It is important to a much
smaller segment of IT departments than is generally stated. At the same
time, this freedom is very, very important to some shops. It is simply
that the numbers have been overstated, judging by my experience alone.

Fourth; Microsoft innovates much less than they claim, but does have
some truly innovative products on the market now, and in the pipeline.
The One Note collaborative application is really a compelling product.
The coming WinFS and the "Metro" (code name) document formatting and
storage system will be another stunning success. Microsoft is
ridiculously good at application integration, too, and there are many IT
operations that depend on that integration and will not give it up.

Fifth and finally; Conversion from one system to the other is fraught
with problems and even danger. It costs real money, as well. I've done
it and know that most shops could do it, given the will. But there are
an awful lot of shops who simply have not the will to change at such a
fundamental level. Many of these shops will employ Linux in a subsidiary
role, but will not make the conversion to any significant degree.

I hope that dismisses another tempest in a teacup.

Jack