SCO a Zombie, Not Microsoft’s Latest Monster Deal, Feb 19, 2008

Last week I got a surprise call asking my opinion on whether the $100 million influx of funds was going to make a big difference in SCO’s future. All I could think was: “Damn, someone brought SCO back from the dead!?” I’ve since seen speculation that Microsoft, or specifically Bill Gates, is funding this personally and other insanity so I figured I’d weigh in on this non-news event.

Microsoft has had the word “evil,” as in “evil empire,” associated with its name for nearly two decades. Yet it has nearly unmatched positional power in the tech industry.

I’m watching the progress that Dell is making with their second desktop Linux effort and am increasingly wondering how long before the Linux supporters make it clear to Dell this is a bad idea.

Let’s be clear, Linux really isn’t the most lucrative platform on the market. It goes on the least expensive hardware, and much of what goes into it appears subsidized by other revenue streams. The marketing, such that it is, appears largely voluntary. The organizations that sit at the center, like the Linux Foundation, seem constantly underfunded or in the process of downsizing or changing leadership in preparation for downsizing.

A few years back I wrote my very first column for an online publication called Linux Pipeline on choosing software wisely. The column was to begin a series of events that changed my life

With Linux, the customer often expects to get the product for free and wants the retail price of Windows deducted from his/her purchase price. There are no funds passed back to the vendor and, because Linux is different, customers tend to place more service calls -- at $85 a call. As a result, the vendor generally ends up losing money.

Kidding aside, Linux and open source has penetrated most technical schools, government IT shops, and technology companies. Its membership, while not officially listed, is easily in the millions of people who believe in or support their version of the concept of open source, which Linux, to them, represents.

With servers, where there is a good economic model, Linux would clearly remain favored over Apple because of much deeper support from companies like HP and IBM

Even the fact that we are talking about Linux, which not only isn't a company, but isn't even an operating system, is a sham. There is no Linux product; not really, Linux only refers to the kernel which, by itself, doesn't actually do much of anything. It is more the core point of a concept that surrounds "open source" which, in turn, is based on a false concept. This concept is that people actually want to look at source code.

With the workstation class of laptops carrying strong margins, the companies hope their Linux-based IBM T42-series laptop on steroids will appeal to the engineering community, Rob Enderle writes.

Linux represents a threat and an opportunity for every software and hardware company. Apple is once again at the crossroads. While it will take a couple of years before we know whether the company will make the right choice, one thing is clear: Apple's path is about to become vastly more interesting.

Microsoft's image isn't what it once was. Much like it was with client-server computing and IBM, the IT audience is actively exploring Linux as a desktop option. There are trials backed by vendors like IBM and HP springing up all over the globe. Governments seem particularly enamored with the offering, which is an important development because governments set standards.