The Change Mariner

First Linux Desktop Conference: To push desktop Linux, radical shift may be required

OnLamp.com:
A conference on desktop Linux, the first of its kind, was held in the Boston, Massachusetts area on November 10. The forum allowed the leaders of Linux and free software development to evaluate the progress these have made on the desktop.

Linux as an end-user system is at an early stage, but inroads are impressive. One statistic puts annual growth of Linux on the desktop at 44%. It is already in heavy use as a limited, kiosk type of application (point-of-sale terminals, for instance) and as a technical workstation. More general use is expected to come within the next couple years

...So why hasn't Linux made big inroads yet among ordinary computer users? Let's look at a few theories--two that are relatively commonplace, and one of my own.

The first theory is that Linux's advantages will eventually overcome corporate and government conservatism. A roadmap was even laid out in the Desktop Linux Conference (described in my weblog from the conference). In fact, the tipping point could be so near that we may all soon be laughing about the time we were worried about Linux's difficulties. Japan and China, combining one of the world's most important established economies with one of its most important emerging ones, are pouring huge amounts of money into Linux. IBM is no slouch either. People are getting it: Linux is a solution to many current computing ills.

A second possibility is that Linux may not catch on at all for Mr. and Ms. Average Schmo, at least not for the foreseeable future. But is that so important? Linux could meanwhile become dominant for servers, embedded systems, and kiosks. It could also reach the Average Schmos on large organizational networks using Linux Terminal Server Project.

But we should also consider a third theory. Nat Friedman of Ximian (now Novell) explained at the Desktop Linux conference that the highest barrier to Linux adoption is the cost of rewriting applications. This was the conclusion of a consulting firm brought in by the city of Munich to determine whether it should replace Windows with Linux. The consulting firm warned that application migration costs would override the savings in licensing fees, and Microsoft came in with a stunningly low counter-offer. Munich decided to move to Linux anyway, for strategic reasons. But it's a hard decision to make.

Friedman and the Munich consulting firm were not the only ones to point this out. Back in September, the well-known consulting firm Gartner reportedly told companies that it would cost them money to move to Linux--precisely because they'd have to rewrite their applications. For desktop users, "migration costs will be very high because all Windows applications must be replaced or rewritten." And this is the same Gartner that had warned companies to get off of Microsoft Windows because of security flaws! (Before Gates and Ballmer started to make grand promises about putting security at the top of their priorities.) Despite Linux's advantages in the areas of licensing, stability, and openness, Gartner believes companies would lose money by switching.

Another article is more hopeful but suggests that it would take five years to see financial benefits after a switch from Windows to Linux.