Linux Gains Ground: Page 3 of 5

In addition to more a more obvious value proposition related to the lack of licensing fees, Pieroni pitches Linux as a bridge between last-generation legacy platforms and emerging technology that doesn't require exhaustive reconfiguration of the legacy portfolio. For example, "moving from a mainframe-centric environment that leverages MBS or other flavors of Unix in the server farm to Linux is not easy-nothing is-but it's certainly a lot easier than historically available options that insurers have had around emerging technologies," Pieroni argues.

Microsoft (Redmond, Wash.) has taken a less-enthusiastic view of Linux, at a time when both its own and the Linux operating system are gaining ground in the server operating system market. According to IDC (Framingham, Mass.) statistics released in October, Microsoft's share of the server operating system market jumped to 55.1 percent in 2002, from 50.5 percent in 2001, while Linux's share grew to 23.1 percent, compared to 22.4 percent a year earlier. Microsoft customers who also wish to run Linux fault Microsoft for refusing to be more accommodating to the open-source platform. An InformationWeek survey of 400 business technology executives found that 88 percent of respondents believe Microsoft hasn't done enough to support Windows-Linux interoperability. A nearly equal number believes it will be the Linux community that works out the interoperability problems.

Josh Lee, Microsoft's global technical strategist, insurance enterprise and partner group, disagrees. Lee opines: "Interoperability is a two-way street. Since Linux is open-source and largely an ABM (anybody but Microsoft), it stands to reason that (the Linux community) wouldn't be that interested in making interoperability a priority."

Microsoft's hostility and IBM's enthusiasm are equally understandable, according to George Weiss, vice president and research director of Gartner's (Stamford, Conn.) server platform group. "IBM can play both sides of the field-they deliver products with Windows as well as Linux," he remarks. "The push to make Linux even more important is one attempt by IBM to increase sales of software products and professional services, and enable a broader choice of operating systems and platforms for the user." By contrast, Microsoft has taken a position where it sees any move toward the open-source world as a slippery slope toward the destruction of its intellectual property-based business model. The software vendor has made a compromise gesture by launching a shared-source program, "but it has a very anti-open-source mindset right now, (believing) that the open-source movement could potentially destroy the entire software industry," Weiss says.

But it's not just a philosophical or legal issue for Lee. While saying he "can't think of any good reasons for anyone to put in Linux," he does acknowledge that the open-source system "is a way that an IT shop can leverage Unix skill sets, as well as freeing them somewhat from heavy Unix licensing or support infrastructures." But apart from "hardcore hobbyists," IT professionals looking to implement Linux are going to encounter serious burdens, according to Lee. "The one path is to get it from IBM, and with that comes an army of Global Service employees, because the Linux kernel itself is not customized to an individual hardware suite," he claims. Those who forego the consultants will face "all the pain associated with the learning curve to get on Linux, spending a lot of time on user groups getting patches and freeware to basically get things up and running-it's a very complex environment to have to program against and to try to implement," Lee adds.

IBM customer ING Canada (Montreal, a division of Amsterdam-based ING Group, $467 billion in assets) managed to develop a Linux-based solution without an army of consultants, according to Isabelle Valois, director, technical services.