Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney

Sorry Linux but the chicken came first

By | June 2, 2009, 9:05pm PDT

Summary: In our association we operate as a consortium, like the open source consortium. They want to promote open source and Linux. But if you begin from the PC you are afraid of Microsoft. They try to go to the smart phone or PDA to start again.

In the old question of which came first, the chicken or the egg, I got the answer this week, at least as it relates to computing.

The chicken came first.

I started my day on a hunt for Linux, preferably desktop Linux. 

It was depressing. It’s not just Asus and MSI who have gone Windows in Taiwan, it’s everyone. The Microsoft booth dominates in a corner of the show floor. Instead of bragging on what they have done, they are pushing embedded systems for games and home servers. They are pushing outward, not defending their turf but attacking.

I visited the SUSE Linux booth, the only obvious Linux presence on the main floor. Where is my penguin, I asked. Where is the gear running Linux?

Intel has some, I was told. So I went to the Intel booth. After some shrugs and shaken heads, I was taken to a bank of three monitors showing network applications, under Linux. All were behind glass. You could look but you better not touch.

I wandered over to AMD. AMD dressed girls in high boots and short skirts. They are still showing what is known here as “fighting spirit.” Certainly they would be fighting for the penguin.

Where is Linux, I asked. I was pointed to a corner of the booth, where an AMD embedded system was shown, naked, running Ubuntu. But not for the office. This is an OEM product, I was told. Next to it stood the application. A slot machine, apparently developed for the Macau market.

Later, at a press conference sponsored by TAITRA, the Taiwan trade authority, I asked executive director Walter Yeh (third from left in this picture) about where the Linux went.

He passed the question to Li Chang (to the right in the picture), vice president of the Taipei Computer Association.

Chang mentioned a press conference yesterday where Google announced an Android phone to be made by Acer. But then he put it to me straight.

“In our association we operate as a consortium, like the open source consortium. They want to promote open source and Linux. But if you begin from the PC you are afraid of Microsoft. They try to go to the smart phone or PDA to start again.”

Taiwanese OEMs would love an alternative to Windows, but the sale comes first, before production. The chicken comes first. And since the chicken belongs to Microsoft, the penguin is helpless here.

After the press conference I wandered over to the Acer booth. I was looking for that smart phone. They have smart phones in the Acer booth. All of them run Windows mobile. The Google smart phone is not yet available for display. (I took this picture before I learned the phone shown is Windows.)

I don’t know if my response could be translated.

“Cluck,” I said,

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for 30 years, a tech freelancer since 1983.

Disclosure

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a journalist, writer and part-time futurist for over 30 years.

At the present moment I run only a personal blog in addition to my ZDNet open source blog.

DanaBlankenhorn.Com has the subtitle The War Against Oil. In the past I have used it to write about political history, e-commerce, personal matters, some ideas related to open source, and The World of Always On, which is the idea of using sensors, motes and RFID to turn WiFi links into platforms for applications which live in the air.

My IRA account at Schwab holds a few tech shares, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials, but there are no open source companies in it. I don’t even own any CBS stock.

Biography

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement, and dozens of other publications over the years.

Talkback Most Recent of 175 Talkback(s)

  • Try Hall 2.
    There are three Linux booths there.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ShadeTree
    3rd Jun 2009
  • The Monopoly Endures Forever
    The Microsoft monopoly is nearly unassailable. Everyone wants Windows not because it is better or cheaper but because that is what everyone has and what everyone has always had. Massive entrenchment causes massive inertia. Microsoft will go on producing mediocre products at exorbitant prices because people prefer a known quantity - however flawed and expensive - to change.

    Change, even when it brings something much better and much cheaper, usually demands a modicum of effort on the part of people to learn how to benefit from the change.

    But people will spend a great deal of time and money trying to avoid effort, even when that effort is minimal and very, very much to their overall benefit.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    trentreviso
    3rd Jun 2009
  • Not unassailable
    MS has defeated multiple monopolies in the past. Word Perfect, Lotus 123, Dbase II-IV, and yes, Netscape. Also Linux on netbooks. happy

    I might also mention the mighty Sony, the PS2 which roundly trounced both XBox and Nintendo the first round has a pitiful replacement in the PS3 which XBox 360 triumphed over, also the Wii is now leading the pack handily--a come from third place win. happy

    So no, monopolies are not unassailable. It's just MS knew how and apparently no one else has twigged to the trick yet--except maybe Nintendo.

    Certainly not the penguin, that's for certain.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wolf_z
    3rd Jun 2009
  • Uh-huh...
    MS has defeated multiple monopolies in the past. Word Perfect, Lotus 123, Dbase II-IV, and yes, Netscape.

    And incurred the Department Of Justice to look at that.

    Looks like that may be happening again. happy

    I might also mention the mighty Sony, the PS2 which roundly trounced both XBox and Nintendo the first round has a pitiful replacement in the PS3 which XBox 360 triumphed over, also the Wii is now leading the pack handily--a come from third place win.

    Xbox is a piece of junk. Fortunately I don't game but I know plenty of people who do and they say to stay away from it. Xbox is a 'success' for fools.

    So no, monopolies are not unassailable. It's just MS knew how and apparently no one else has twigged to the trick yet--except maybe Nintendo.

    Sure. Exclusionary agreements, threats to withhold supplies, deep legal pockets... With those kinds of resources, I'd be in first place, too.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Wintel BSOD
    3rd Jun 2009
  • PS3 trumps Xbox 360
    Xbox 360 does have a nice online interaction
    enviroment called xbox live, but that costs
    extra.

    PS3 online play is FREE!!.

    PS3 hardware kicks azz, built in Blue ray,
    great processors kicking out better graphic
    resolution than Xbox 360.

    PS3 support WPA2, Xbox 360 wireless adapter,
    (which costs $99 extra) only WEP and WPA1,
    which are both crackable and unsecure
    standards.

    Original PS3 not 2nd gen ps3 fully backwards compatible with PS2 and PS1 games, except for
    maybe guitar hero 1 and 2.

    Large Hard Drive Standard, HDMI Standard in the
    PS3. These features are only standard in the
    elite version of Xbox 360.

    The Xbox 360 is inferior in most cases across
    the board, except for maybe the upcoming natal
    project.

    I play many games on both platforms. You could
    probably talk me out of my xbox 360, but you
    would be prying my PS3 from my death grip.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    xXSpeedzXx
    3rd Jun 2009
  • ZDNet Gravatar
    dougbeer
    3rd Jun 2009
  • Except where it matters
    Which is units sold, profits made, and so on. The bottom line, you know?

    For whatever reason the 360 sells more games, makes more money, and has lots more units out there.

    Sony lost this round. Badly. In fact Sony's had a rather bad year as a whole.

    Empires die for any number of reasons. The point being no monopoly is invulnerable.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wolf_z
    3rd Jun 2009
  • So you're saying...
    "Sure. Exclusionary agreements, threats to withhold supplies, deep legal pockets... With those kinds of resources, I'd be in first place, too."

    This applies to the netbook marketplace how? MS can't make exclusionary agreements any more, it's pure volume discounts only.

    What threats to withold supplies? MS had *0* market presence! Not to mention they couldn't touch normal OS supplies without alerting their compliance watchdog.

    Linux lost because people don't buy OSs. They buy computers to run the stuff they already have. That's why Linux lost the netbook market.

    Not shady MS tricks.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wolf_z
    3rd Jun 2009
  • I'm saying I have no reason to doubt....
    ...they aren't continuing with their shady practices of the past.

    The Bush Administration practically ignored them the last eight years, since they encouraged this kind of monopolistic behavior. In their eyes, unaccountable monopolies are considered "free enterprise"

    This applies to the netbook marketplace how? MS can't make exclusionary agreements any more, it's pure volume discounts only.

    The same way they've always done it. Do you really think they would come out and tell us?

    lol... grin

    What threats to withold supplies? MS had *0* market presence! Not to mention they couldn't touch normal OS supplies without alerting their compliance watchdog.

    They have a history of anti-competitive behavior. I have no reason to doubt that's changed.

    http://www.albion.com/microsoft/findings.html

    http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation

    None, whatsoever.

    With the government no longer longer looking over their shoulder, it's back to business as usual.

    Linux lost because people don't buy OSs. They buy computers to run the stuff they already have. That's why Linux lost the netbook market.

    Linux lost because nobody's heard of it and in their desperate rush to shut Linux out, M$ took XP out of mothballs and is giving it away for free on new netbooks.

    No, it's time the government looked behind all this once and for all. If M$ doesn't have anything to hide, then they'll appreciate a Government investigation.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Wintel BSOD
    3rd Jun 2009
  • ZDNet Gravatar
    914four
    23rd Jun 2009
  • I'm saying I have no reason to doubt....
    You state your opinion well and I agree with one exception. The government should not be used to allow people to be lazy. People, at some point, need to actually decide that they want to try something else and then they have to have to perseverance to live with the consequences of their decision.
    That is the problem. Those who "try" Linux just because of cost are the same that want it to look, act, install, and manage exactly the same as the Redmond software. Then they become the armchair critics; blaming prices and talking how inadequate *NIX is as a replacement.
    There are plenty of law firms that still "believe" in and use Corel's WordPerfect. That's the dedication that is necessary. You have to believe in a system and accept its shortcomings. People do it with Microsoft everyday!
    It won't be until PEOPLE decide that they WANT to use another OS that they will actually do it. Linux marketing could be better, but, it still comes down to people and personal choice. That's freedom, regardless of the complaints, facts, and flame wars out there.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    icetnet
    1st Jul 2009
  • Look at the machines
    Go in to Best Buy, look at a Windows machine next to a Lin...

    Go into Wal-Mart and comp...

    See the point? MS doesn't have to threaten the OEM with with-holding products when they can control the stores. Linux boxes are made, people want them. People have to go online to purchase them from the OEM because those machines aren't stocked at stores.

    Maybe Linux users should all unite. The best way to prove just how good Linux can be is by taking our machines, setting up outside Best Buy and Wal-Mart and whatever other stores you know of that sell computers, letting people try Linux for themselves. Tell them, instead of purchasing that new machine since their old one is so bad, go in, buy a blank CD or DVD, we'll burn them a copy of our OS after they've tried it, they take it home and try it out. We can even show them how to install it through a VM so they won't even have that problem.

    The best way to advertise Linux and fight the death grip MS has on hardware, go open source with it.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    tmsbrdrs
    4th Jun 2009
  • MS bought exclusive rights for a lot of popular games
    and that does NOT mean that it had better hardware or, better performance than the PS3.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    marcfinnwilson@...
    3rd Jun 2009
  • What is true is
    the hardware was easier to develop for than the ps3. It was also much less expensive and had better games.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ITLeader
    3rd Jun 2009
  • Not Analogous
    MS has defeated multiple monopolies in the past. Word Perfect, Lotus 123, Dbase II-IV, and yes, Netscape. Also Linux on netbooks.

    Monopolies are not about market share; they are about leverage. These products all pretty much dominated in market share at one time, but none of them had that much leverage. The operating system is something you can leverage, and that makes it matter more than any of these products did. In fact, the only reason that Microsoft had success in wresting the major portion of the market from these products is because they leveraged their position in the operating system market. Before Windows 3.1, they couldn't compete against these companies at all, and Windows 95 was what they leveraged to take over completely. (Of course, the "Linux on Netbooks" remark is a joke because clearly Linux never had a monopoly on x86 compatible hardware, which is what Atom based netbooks are.)

    I might also mention the mighty Sony, the PS2 which roundly trounced both XBox and Nintendo the first round has a pitiful replacement in the PS3 which XBox 360 triumphed over, also the Wii is now leading the pack handily--a come from third place win.

    The order in which video game consoles have been the closest to being monopolies is (if you don't count handheld systems) 1)Atari 2600, 2)Nintendo Entertainment System. Really though, the video game console market is nearly impossible to monopolize because the next generation evens the playing field. These companies have nothing to leverage to get you to buy their next system (which is why they are not really monopolies). Anyone with enough resources to bring a competent system to market has a chance. This market is more about having new good games available and/or happening to correctly identify the next fad technology.

    So no, monopolies are not unassailable. It's just MS knew how and apparently no one else has twigged to the trick yet--except maybe Nintendo.

    Microsoft never successfully assailed an application platform monopoly, because none existed before Windows 3.1. They only successfully assailed application 'monopolies' by leveraging their own application platform monopoly. Microsoft's history at assailing deeply entrenched technologies that they can't leverage their application platform monopoly against has not been very successful.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    CFWhitman
    3rd Jun 2009

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources