TT,
I don't disagree with any of what you said. But I don't think those who have jumped into the Linux fray early are necessarily the winners. Just being there first isn't sufficient, as we've seen with Borland's fine tools.
IBM signing on is significant -- significant in the fact that they bring more credibility to Linux, but also in that they are likely to bring along a lot of services that heretofore we were envisioning RHAT & CORL providing (for less money, I might add).
The time will come when MSFT sees that not being part of Linux is going to be a problem for them. When they do, there will be Microsoft Linux, you can rest assured. And when this happens, the entire Linux market changes overnight. It would take MSFT no more than 60 days to have its own Linux on the shelves. They'll put it off till the last minute, to keep from cannibalizing NT/W2k sales, but it will happen.
This is a game all businesses today are having to play. "At what point do we cannibalize existing business so that we move ahead with this technology stuff?". Walmart has had to play it, as has the CPA firm in which I'm a partner ("At what point do we recommend Quickbooks to clients at the cost of destroying our monthly writeup service business?"). Microsoft is asking itself, "At what point do we commit to Linux such that we maximize profits?". The question is, they keep selling NT & W2K for a while yet, then pounce on Linux. |
