July 28th, 2004
Open source about vendor choice?
Speaking at the O’Reilly Open Source Convention, Peter Schay, executive vice president of The Advisory Council, made the case for Linux versus Windows in simplified terms: avoidance of vendor lock-in at all costs, even if on paper or whiteboard TCO a Microsoft deployment is less costly than Linux.
"The economic value of ‘open’ is in the ability for users to walk away from onerous vendor pricing and licensing," Schay said.
That’s a common sense statement. You want to have the advantage in negotiation and low switching barriers help that situation. Today switching from one Linux distribution to another is easier than a Windows to Linux migration, but it’s not a seamless process. On the other hand, Schay is right that more choice and openness should lead to more advantageous pricing and service. If so, then why does Red Hat have such a dominant share. Is it there enough choice and interoperability in the open source world? Can the open source community take care of its own, in terms of ensuring a more competitive marketplace of highly compatible, interchangeable components?
| 04/19/05
