Forbes on Linux

mvdwege writes "It appears that Forbes is doing a Linux Special. Lots of nice articles showing off the state of the art in Linux development today. It's nice to see Linux get some good mainstream press without hype or FUD. A very objective treatment that might definitely make some people think."

Comments

Why is this an unusual occurrence?

[altgrr]

IMHO, it was at first unusual for Linux to be given credit in the "real" OS stakes: I remember the first time I saw Linux in the UK, on a Computer Shopper cover CD. I can't remember what the distribution was, but it was incredibly flaky.

However, what Linux has proved, more than anything else, is not that Linux is a viable OS, but, far more importantly, that Open Source developments are a viable option for companies these days.

It will be interesting to see if, ultimately, businesses do perform a complete about-turn on their strategies and, rather than going for licensed software, with maintence contracts etc., have maintenance in-house for software which, for the most part, has a bug patch written for it before the user finds the bug.

Re:Why is this an unusual occurrence?

[strictnein]

that Open Source developments are a viable option for companies these

How has it showed this?

I'll probably get flamed for this, but where are all the open source Linux companies that are currently truely making a profit (and not just using some creative accounting tricks)?

Or maybe I'm just oblivious to all of the open source success stories....

Re:Why is this an unusual occurrence?

[millette]

Probably in the embedded market. That's one reason you won't hear too much about them. Look at http://www.linuxdevices.com for a few examples.

Re:Why is this an unusual occurrence?

[skippy5066]

That's a pretty interesting point. I work for one of many IT groups inside a major financial company, supporting mostly NT servers. About 90% of the applications we run here in-house are custom built.

They don't rely on outside vendors for supporting software and creating patches; the entire process takes place internally. This would seem to be the ideal situation for application development on Linux...

Obviously the learning curve for developers used to MS developing environments has to be considered, but next to the potential cost savings of migrating hundreds of servers off of a (relatively) expensive OS to one that is (relatively) free, one could make a pretty good argument that the time and money spent on training for the dev guys would be well spent.

I wonder if any of the developers have thought about that. Pardon me, I think I need to go drop a clue on someone.

-Jeff

Re:Why is this an unusual occurrence?

[mborland]

However, what Linux has proved, more than anything else, is not that Linux is a viable OS, but, far more importantly, that Open Source developments are a viable option for companies these days.

I totally agree. In my last project for a large financial services company, I was looking for some third-party libraries for use in our application. After conducting some research, I found an open-source solution which just blew away the alternatives.

I was a little concerned at the beginning of the project that people would be fearful of my recommendation--that they'd be afraid we'd have to reveal all our sources, or that our code would be more prone to exploits because of the open-source library.

I did spend extra time making sure that the licenses matched our corporate policies, which they did. And I was very surprised, just yesterday a guy who was reviewing the project was particularly pleased we had used open-source software--not because he was a zealot, but because he understood the drawbacks of black-box software and nasty licenses.

Linux and Apache are the two best-known systems which have caused people to understand open-source software. Thanks to everyone involved.

P.S. The libraries we used in the project have worked wonders. Seriously, the commercial 'peers' were completely unreliable and hard to use, all for thousands of dollars more!

Re:Why is this an unusual occurrence?

[mborland]

where are all the open source Linux companies that are currently truely making a profit

I think that the viable options are for the companies that use the software. For example, the option to use Linux for an OS on a server is cool: no forced upgrades, no unneeded bells and whistles. For PostgreSQL or MySQL: no having to pay more in licenses just because your user base or usage has increased. Etc.

P.S. I hope you didn't get flamed, it is a good question.

Re:Why is this an unusual occurrence?

[spitzak]

As several other responders here have stated, it's the companies that use the software that are making profits.

This straw-man argument keeps getting posted here. I think it is obvious to even the biggest OSS supporter that a company saying "here is some source code to a program that many people (not just you) want, give me $1000, and incidentally the license allows you to give the code to anybody else" is not going to make any money beyond 1 sale.

It is totally bogus to claim that OSS supporters say that you can make that money that way, and then try to ridicule them because of this false claim.

There *are* other ways for software to appear:

1. Ignore making money and make the software because you want to, as a hobby, or because of a philantropic desire to help the world. Admittedly this is the main source of Linux software today.

2. Sell OSS software that only ONE person wants, ie highly customized solutions. Actually it has been normal to give the source code with such customized solutions throughout computer industry history.

3. Sell OSS software with a modified license that does not allow the person to give it away.

4. Or (unbelievable but true) sell software EXACTLY LIKE YOU DO FOR WINDOWS. Anybody claiming this is impossible should check out the special effects industry where I work, where virtually every major piece of commercial software is available for Linux, and (GASP!) people PAY MONEY FOR IT (so none of this crap about people not paying for software on Linux, if it was available people are going to pay!)

Good series - what motive?

[pubjames]

I've been following the Forbes series for the last few days. It's nice to read some rational, non-baised information about Linux in a respected publication like Forbes.

But since Forbes is an US publication, and there doesn't seem to be anything done is the USA that doesn't have something to do with promoting some company's agenda, I have to wonder if Forbes has a alerior motive for publishing this? Is Forbes owned by someone who doesn't like Bill Gates, for instance? Or who has shares in Red Hat? It is so uncommon to come across truly unbiased factual information in the US press these days I find it hard to believe that there isn't something behind this...

Re:Good series - what motive?

[oever]

Don't be so paranoid!

This series is very good. It takes away part of the fears that executives have of Linux. Especially the article on the retailer going Linux.

The readers will get mixed feeling from this article though: "These programmers are weird, they can't make money from this. But it is free software and it seems to work."

I'm not sure reading about Linux is healthy for executives.

Re:Good series - what motive?

[Beautyon]

Is Forbes owned by someone who doesn't like Bill Gates, for instance? Or who has shares in Red Hat?...It is so uncommon to come across truly unbiased factual information in the US press these days I find it hard to believe that there isn't something behind this.

You are in shock; It will pass.

Even if the articles do have an agenda, it doesnt matter as long as they are factual, and even if they were not factual, its par for the course with much journalism today.

When ideas are at war, lies are as the sharpest of swords.

Re:Good series - what motive?

[Moridineas]

Ok sure, I can buy that--(Nor do I think it ridiculous that Forbes might have an alterior motive for publishing this extensive series on Linux.), however when you say:

there doesn't seem to be anything done is the USA that doesn't have something to do with promoting some company's agenda

That statement just seems a bit silly.

Out of curiosity, in your travels here, where did you go and what as you say coloured your opinions? I'm always interested in how peoples opinions form. For instance, in the experience of a friend who lived in Pakistan for awhile, he said that talking to many Pakistanis who had been to America and back, they thought America was debuached and immoral and full of loose women--of course what did they do when they were in America? Visit a stripclub, see a porno theater, etc--all kinds of things not available in Pakistan, yet hardly representative of the average in America either.

somebody woke up

[tanveer1979]

well so t seems. Though till now it was a geek geek thing, linux users were a bunchof social outcasts and what not.. finally we have THE FORBES taking interest. This had to happen someday. After all the business community wants to mae money, and in a slowdown scenario like now linux makes sense. To some extent slowdown has been a blessing in disguise with cash strapped managers wanting to take the buck an extra mile.

This is definately a first and really a great achievement... and the goal now is to sustain linux rather that develop!

Re:Cult?

[Salsaman]

The title on that page says "Forbes: The Cult of Linux (2 of 6)" What does that say about it?

It means in the next issue they will have:

The Cult of Microsoft (7 of 9).

This should confirm

[Vanders]

Actually reading through the articles (Shock!) gives a very positive image of Linux and the various Linux projects overall. Galeon, Gaim, even Pine, have all got nice, positive reviews. KDE take a bit of a kicking, but then its a review, and someone has be the winner!

Some hackers out there might want to take note of the sorts of things the Forbes reviewers found important; things like a clear user interface that doesn't shove big, glossy, eye-candy in your face, basically. They all rate intuitive, uncluttered user interfaces as a priority.

Oh, and before anyone starts flaming about "Point and drool" or some other nonsense along those lines; remember that they liked Pine.

Oh God!

[Mike Connell]

Forbes gets their info from /.? I quote:

"(Full disclosure: VA Software owns OSDN, whose Slashdot Web site provides tech news to Forbes.com.)"

In the next issue, "Exploring hostile takeovers and hot grits"...

Re:Oh God!

[ethereal]

I don't get it - Forbes usually has very good grammar and spelling. There's no way they're getting anything from /. :)

Re:Development?

[tanveer1979]

well you are worng in a way. The forbes market wants to make money, and they will go to any extent to do it.

I work in a company that does not have anything to do with OS's etc and many sections were using proprietry software.. but in current scenario, though we are till pretty comfortable, managers are looking at linux farms for computing needs and servers, and 3 years from now this would have been unthinkable.

Another misconception is that business houses run away from open source. This is not entierly true. Of course most of staff in such companies breaths on proprietry office solutions, and this will remain the case for a long time to come.

but look at the brighter side.. server share is growing and growing. And if you want to check what is forbes running on here it is... and yes its apache :-)

Tastefully done

[Anonymous Coward]

Everybody read the part about cost and aggravation savings. Now read it again. Memorize it. Got it? Good. THAT is the angle to use with management. Not "freedom", not "evil empire", not "Windoze sucks". UPTIME + COST SAVINGS = MORE PROFITS. Show 'em the numbers (in Excel if necessary).

About LinuxToday's coverage...

[JanneM]

Linux Today has covered these pieces over the week. Interestingly, the piece about browsers on Linux was inexplicably missed. I refuse to think it's because Galeon came first, and Konqueror next to last in the comparison. A couple of attempts by me to alert the editors to the missing article have gone unheeded for _some_ reason, however.

You're wrong

[Subcarrier]

The Forbes target audience will be very interested in anything that can cut costs for companies.

Re:You're wrong

[Subcarrier]

See my point now?

Not really. People are finding it exceedingly difficult to make money off OSS and its not a surprise that companies like TurboLinux are facing difficulties.

Ironically, companies with commercial Linux offerings face the same kind of troubles that M$ does in trying to compete with Linux. They cannot be cheaper than a free download, so they will have to offer better added value in their service offering and packaging than anybody else in order to survive. And they will have to offer attractive prices.

The other side of the coin is the cost of using Linux. Linux can be a very cost effective solution and that, if anything, has the potential to convince large companies to adopt Linux as part of their IT infrastructure. That's why I'm happy to see such well written articles about Linux in a major business publication like Forbes.

If you can convince IT managers that Linux is a viable alternative (and many are beginning to see it as such), this can only benefit Linux and the currently ailing Linux companies. Now that the dot com bubble is over and done with it is time to evaluate things calmly and realistically. And Linux is still looking pretty darn good.

The screenshot and description of Pine amused me

[Jack Hughes]

In the article about email they say that "pine is the most linux specific" coupled with a screen shot of pine on Windows 2000!

Of course, we all know that pine is the least linux specific.

And all the apps featured run on at least UNIX....

Moral: Whatever Forbes does, it shouldn't do software reviews.

A revered teacher and researcher

[jsse]

According to Linux legend, a revered teacher and researcher told Linus Torvalds that he "would not get a high grade" for his creation.

The "revered teacher and researcher" in question is Professor Andy Tanenbaum.

His book "Computer Network" is a bible in networking for many people. Yes, what he thought about Linux is proven wrong but we still respect him.

Btw, my favourite quote of the above conversation is:
"As an aside, for those folks who don't read news headers, Linus is in Finland and I am in The Netherlands. Are we reaching a situation where another critical industry, free software, that had been totally dominated by the U.S. is being taken over by the foreign competition? Will we soon see President Bush coming to Europe with Richard Stallman and Rick Rashid in tow, demanding that Europe import more American free software?"

It has already proven that there's an free OS(a software) that has not been totally dominated by U.S., we yet to see Bush(well, if not old Bush. :) coming to Europe with Richard Stallman and Rick Rashid. :)

excellent article

[tps12]

I really enjoyed this article. Although I consider myself somewhat of a Linux "guru," I actually learned a lot, if not about how Linux works, then about how it is perceived by those outside the community.

One thing that particularly struck me is Forbes' recommendation that "Linux not be depended on for mission-critical applications." In my business, I've always been willing to bet a lot on Linux's performance, and never (yet) been disappointed. After reading this article I may look into the offerings of Sun and HP, just to be on the safe side.

It goes to show, you can work in an industry for 20 years, and still learn something. I look forward to more informative articles from Forbes.

Relatively unbiased compared to past reports

[f00zbll]

Compared to other article on linux in the past by all the news sources out there, this set of articles are reasonably objective. One particular quote from "Retail Therapy" struck me as sign of people's frustration with MS's attempt to extract/extort more money from consumers.

Microsoft is helping me make the decision to look for alternatives, Roberts says.

I have no actual proof of the following statement, but is it possible that people view MS differently than pre law suit? Has a significant percentage of the population taken the view that Microsoft is a poster boy of Corporate America gone agro against consumers?

Check this out

[kruczkowski]

Scroll you mouse over the "BUSINESS" tab above the article. (Don't click!) It's between the HOME and TECHNOLOGY.

Notice what ad shows up above Linus' name!

"Never"

[truthsearch]

The word "never" should never be used in a technology news article. Well, maybe if they're referring to OS/2... ;)

It's hard to believe the author of this article has been a technology news writer for at least a decade. "Linux will never be..." "Linux will never gain..." She doesn't mean never. I think she means in the short term (5 yrs maybe), which seems like an eternity in the tech industry. But to say something, especially something new, will never take over a market or will never be used for critical systems is simply rediculous. By this author's writing, some execs, if they're smart enough to read that far into the articles, will think Linux has mostly run its course and found its place in the industry since it'll "never" get beyond certain levels. By her logic, if she wrote an article about Microsoft back in 1985, she'd have said "Windows will never be a serious player in the server market."

This author's writing is incredibly irresponsible.

Overall, a good read...

[Andy Dodd]

I even learned a few things from the article... After reading their browser review, I'm going to be giving Moz and Galeon another try. (Previously, they were slower than NS 4.76 on my 64M P133 laptop - And FAR slower than Opera.) If Forbes is to be believed, they've really chopped down on the bloat. (The fact that NS7PR1 is far faster than NS6 could be a sign of these improvements...) Of course, what may be faster on a fast machine with lots of memory could be slower on a low-power machine. Some apps respond better to extra resources than others.

Seemed their most flawed review was Pine. (The most cross-platform as opposed to the least as they claim, and it IS capable of launching external viewers for attachments.) But I was impressed by their claim that text-only wasn't as bad as one would think and is in fact faster than GUI mailers. What next, Forbes extolling the virtues of bash? :)

poor RMS....

[Nomad128]

hehe....as he fumes about GNU being mentioned in a Linux article only because of Galeon. :-)

http://www.forbes.com/2002/07/17/0717tentech.html

Re:The Cult Of Linux?

[MrResistor]

I think it's important to recognize that in the market Forbes targets, the word Cult doesn't have the same negative connotations that it does in the rest of society. The Cult of Personality around someone like Bill Gates, or a Cult Brand like Apple, which has a core of devoted customers it can depend on no matter what, are things execs lust over.

The strong beleif and devoted following connotations of the word are much stronger with this crowd than the blood sacrifice, shaved head connotations. But then, if someone is willing to shave their heads and perform blood sacrifices for your product, well, nothing says "Success!" quite like that... ;-)

And really, success is what Forbes is all about.

Re:"Objective"

[mvdwege]

I specifically submitted the link because some of the articles do mention Linux shortcomings. It's not my fault that overall Linux leaves a positive impression, and I am not surprised as that seems concur with my own experiences. Remember, all software sucks, some just sucks less.

Perhaps something's wrong with your objectivity? Did you discount your own possible bias when reading the articles?

mart