Burak Ozdemir ’s Blog » Blog Archive » Would open source operating systems be an alternative to Microsoft?

Free software is a sort of misnomer. It is a matter of liberty rather than the price. It is essentially about freedom to users to copy, distribute, change or improve the software. Access to source code is essential to achieve this.This debate on whether Microsoft offers a better and stable operating system or a free operating system developed by Linux, Fedora or Ubuntu would make better option, is being fuelled by growing perception about Microsoft being greedy.

No doubt, for a long time, in mid nineties, when there was no credible substitute for its products, it tried to manipulate the market to the extent possible. It was the first major software company to enhance software upgrade charges to 50% against 20% which was industry norm. Standard practice of Microsoft had been to add features to its software that would put its competitors out of the business and later on selling those as add-on features.

Free open source operating systems were perceived as answer to Microsoft’s perceived greedy attitude. Free software was started as ethical movement as constructive alternative to Microsoft’s growing monopoly.

In numerous court cases, Microsoft maintained its stand that it is not monopolistic, while every tactical action of it drove its competitors out of OS and development tool marketplace. Microsoft never encouraged healthy competition. Killing Netscape is an example of it. Microsoft actively promoted use of ActiveX technology to make web sites. ActiveX is a Microsoft component and web pages made through it lock Netscape users out of it.

All along with, starting from MS-DOS times, its users were tired of viruses and spyware. Each upgrade of its operating system called for expensive upgrades to the hardware.

All these factors that made people sick of Microsoft. Free open source operating systems were perceived as answer to Microsoft’s perceived greedy attitude. Free software was started as ethical movement as constructive alternative to Microsoft’s growing monopoly.

As the concept of free operating system, developed by community of freelancers, emerged, many large hardware manufacturers lapped it up. The concept was actively promoted by various corporate houses for which the obvious consideration was to cut cost of their products. Many companies as IBM, HP, Computer Associates, Intel, AMD etc. are funding the development of open source operating systems. Dell supplied lots of machines with Ubuntu installed.

Would these operating systems be able to remove the security loopholes that the windows users have been complaining? Would these systems be essentially cheaper after comparing the expensive cost of experts that one might need for these? It may be noted, today in most countries, there is no dearth of users who are experts in Microsoft platforms. Experts in open source platforms are not easily available every where and command higher price.

Future of the operating system market

Criticizing Microsoft for failure in plugging security loopholes that made it vulnerable to attack of virus is not fair. A creator of virus or worm would target only the operating system with maximum presence. As the popularity of Linux or other operating systems spreads, it is only matter of time that these too would be attacked by viruses. Even otherwise, at present, the open source operating systems have their own drawbacks.

Linux users are convinced that it is great thing to happen to operating system market. Linux is successfully running in many large institutions who can not accept ant compromise in the quality. Companies like IBM, Hewlett-Packard have embraced Samba and other open source packages; and even Intel, has invested in open source Linux companies.

Open source program is not free; it is cheaper as it does not call for royalties. The entire open source development is being substantially financed by hardware companies are looking for an alternative to reduce the cost of their product by sourcing a cheaper operating system, and, we must say that they have succeeded, to create an incredible alternative to Microsoft products and looks promising.

Competition is good any time. Surely, whether you prefer windows or any open source, competition is bound to help customer. What remains to be seen is that if free-code remains free or it would fall in hands of few companies that are financing its development in their own commercial interest? What is the guarantee that they too would not become another Microsoft in the times to come?

Technorati Tags: microsoft, linux, bsd, redhat, ibm, free