----- Original Message ----- From: "Sameer D. Sahasrabuddhe" sameerds@it.iitb.ac.in To: "GNU/Linux Users Group, Mumbai, India" linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 3:46 PM Subject: Re: [ILUG-BOM] Enterprise GNU/Linux implementation (a seminar atMumbai)
The biggest fact that stood out at the Conference was the distinction between OSI and FSF ideologies. All the speakers at the conference were very frank in admitting that the prime reason in opting for OSS (and _not_ FLOSS) was the drastic reduction in costs, and to some extent the possibility of prevent vendor-lockin. But that's where their enthusiasm in OSS ends. Most of the people present looked at OSS from a customer's point of view, and consider the community as just another software vendor. The fact that opting for OSS meant joining a large and diverse, free-thinking community has _not_ found any ground in the corporate decision-making process.
Corporate decision makers are not interested in idiology. They are interested only in what makes business sense, money made or saved. They will always decide on terms of profits and margins and how GNU/Linux will help them in increasing value and profits
I think we should accept that fact. Even if they are using Linux and OSS only because of that, and that they do not bother about FS idiologies, increased user base for GNU/Linux helps the cause. An increased user base makes it worthwhile for companies and software developers to work on the platform even on commercial basis. Finally it is important for people to make money out of Linux, whether it is through creating software or providing services and support.
I am not saying abandon the FS idiology. Keep harping on it in private meetings and disucssion with corporate users. Keep talking of it in conferences and seminars. Out of the large user base who are now using GNU/Linux because it is OSS, there will be some who will understand and appreciate the idiology and will contribute to it. That is enough. Starting an open "campaign" and trying to convince people to move from OSS to FLOSS would probably be counterproductive.
All this said, the conference also reveals a very good business opportunity for most experts in GNU/Linux and related stuff - and that is the service industry. During the panel discussion, people admitted that they understand the viability and financial significance of changing over to OSS. But they were afraid to "take the plunge", since they were not sure who would help them out. Some people expressed the need for agencies/companies that can take up the job of providing support for the migration process and maintenance thereafter.
This is very true. I know of companies who have experimented with it on the fringe and were willing to pay for services of expert teams who can help and support them during and after migration. In one case, a team from mumbai failed misrably to do a very simple thing like set up firewall and proxies (they had very specific requirements which they had put forward well in advance) and in 3 other cases, the support companies (or individuals) promised to come back with a solution, migration path, etc. and didnt bother to revert to the company.
With experiances like this, I am sure another 10 companies who were considering moving to Linux have shelved the idea after talking to these companies.
What is needed is not big guys like IBM and RedHat, whom small companies will not approach due to cost consideration or the fear that they will be marginal clients for them and therefor not given much attention. What is instead needed is a whole set of smaller (but highly reliable and available) companies that can support SMEs. That is the reason why Microsoft succeeded. There are thousands of people in Mumbai who are in a position to install, support and solve problems and write programs for windows system.
Another thing that needs to be conveyed articulately is the option for these companies to hire people from the Linux user community - in-house experts that can deal with situations and provide a good interface to the FLOSS community as a whole.
Small companies do not hire full time or inhouse EDP support staff or programmers if they can help it. The growth of linux will come more from small companies rather than from large enterprises who have the money to put into windows system in any case.