Free Newsletters

   All InfoWorld Newsletters
Open Sources | Rodrigues & Urlocker » Responses to "Why Microsoft should buy Red Hat"

July 26, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Responses to "Why Microsoft should buy Red Hat"

Earlier this week I wrote a "what if" post suggesting that Microsoft buy Red Hat. The comments here and on my personal blog were lively to say the least.

Many comments were a variation of the "wow, you're clueless" theme. I approved every single one of these comments.

Some readers suggested that it would never happen because of the DoJ & EU. A valid point that I hadn't even considered when I ended the post with:

"PS: I truly doubt this deal will ever happen, but it’s interesting to think about the possibilities."

Private email discussions I had on the topic suggested that Microsoft's culture would severely limit any hope of a positive outcome. Valid point. But corporate cultures evolve.

I was somewhat surprised by how strongly readers debated the very notion of such a deal based solely on Microsoft's history towards open source. Don't get me wrong, Microsoft has done plenty of clueless things in various open source areas. But, to judge the possible outcomes of a Red Hat acquisition based only on history is, I humbly suggest, missing the point. (Again, keep in mind that this acquisition will likely never happen, but stay with me for a second longer). For Microsoft to even consider this acquisition, they would have to dramatically change their historical views on open source. For companies like Microsoft, change is a lot easier than holding steadfast to outdated strategies.

Change doesn't happen overnight. However, the impacts of a threat like open source are not felt overnight either. It's taken Red Hat nearly 15 years to get to where they are today, and the open source movement has over 40 years under its belt. The results have not been industry shattering on either front. I am not minimizing the success of Red Hat or the open source movement by any means; I'm only putting them into perspective.

Sometimes we build deep rooted views about technologies and companies that don't allow ourselves to consider situations in which the technologies or companies evolve. Is it really "clueless" to think that over the next 5 to 10 years Microsoft could increasingly adopt open source strategies into their broader corporate strategy?

While buying Red Hat may never happen, what if Microsoft launched a Linux distribution, maybe even based on RHEL? Ahh, but what about Microsoft patents and GPLv3. True, but what if Microsoft realized that the revenue potential from shipping "Microsoft Linux" is 2x or 10x the revenue potential from licensing their "Linux patents"? These are the types of decisions that companies like Microsoft make daily. The point isn't whether Microsoft, its culture, or employees hate Linux/OSS. The point is that Microsoft, its culture and its employees are interested in the future success of the company and making as much money as they can. To date, Linux/OSS has been seen as a risk towards this goal for Microsoft. In the future, Linux/OSS may well be a driver towards this goal.

Change happens.

PS: The *most* surprising thing about my post is that Dave Rosenberg had a similar post encouraging Microsoft to buy JBoss and/or Novell....back in 2005. Sigh…and I thought I was an original thinker.... :-)

PPS: I should state: "The postings on this site are my own and don’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions, strategies or opinions."

Posted by Savio Rodrigues on July 26, 2007 02:21 PM


RATE THIS ARTICLE:





 

  •  
  • COMMENTS




I was going to respond to that last post on Red Hat, but it was so Dvorak-like that it felt like biting the bait.

In other news (off topic, I'll admit), it appears as though Microsoft wants to become "unamerican" now (according to Jim Allchin).

See the news:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2162940,00.asp

background:
http://archive.salon.com/tech/log/2001/02/15/unamerican/index.html

It's just like the OLPC. They can't compete with something they once ridiculed and they hope that the world will simply forget the past. Amazing! The ISO, by the way, with its approval of badgeware, has completely lost its way. It's back to "Free software" now. Know your freedom and rights. "Open Source" (as a _TERM_) is clearly dying. Not just because of "open source wine", "open source politics", and all that malarkey.

Posted by: Roy Schestowitz at July 26, 2007 04:22 PM

Savio:

The problem with the idea is that it completely overlooks human nature. You suggest (rightly) that companies can change. But people rarely do. Not significantly, anyway.

I lived through the Novell acquisition of SUSE. Here was a company that had every reason to believe it had everything to learn, and no reason to cling to the past. Yet it has taken years and rounds of layoffs to get Novell even remotely open source/SUSE focused. Arguably, the company still has a long way to go on this front, too.

It doesn't matter if this makes sense on paper. (I, personally, don't think it does - Microsoft's model is to pull people into its ecosystem and to (mostly) develop that ecosystem. The company doesn't do many acquisitions, comparatively speaking.) It's the people who matter, and I doubt that either Microsoft employees or Red Hat employees would look kindly on a marriage. The Microsoft employees would dig in their heels and the Red Hat employees would leave. Simple as that.

Unfortunate? Maybe. But I don't think so. I'm looking forward to ten years from now when it's blindingly obvious that open source was the right way to go, and the proprietary companies continue to try to stonewall change. Yes, it will be like that. Because it's been that way with every technological revolution to date.

Posted by: Matt Asay at July 26, 2007 04:58 PM

@Roy, Dvorak...ouch, low blow :-) I didn't say that MS would enter the open source arena to make friends. They'll do it remain relevant and drive revenue. We may not like what they're going to do with open source, but that won't stop MS from trying. Your example of Microsoft's efforts with OOXML vs. ODF is telling. The industry said: "Open standards matter". Microsoft said: "okay, then we'll create our own standard, tied to our stuff, and take it to a standards body that we can influence". To the un-interested bystander, MS is driving standards....and remember most IT buyers are un-interested bystanders.


@Matt, I won't argue about whether people can or do change (as I'm not sure there is a right answer).

I'll reiterate that MS will make business decisions that drive revenue. If that means working with open source (to some degree), they will. I don't think MS employees like/hate OSS. They've seen it as a competitor and acted accordingly. When they see OSS as an enabler for further MS revenues, they'll act accordingly again.

Case in point: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2163112,00.asp

The problem is that OSS will never be as successful as you hope it will. We'll come back in 20 years and still see ~ 90% of software revenues tied to Traditional software (i.e. extrapolate the IDC data on OSS revenue vs. total SW market). There is absolutely no incentive for a vendor like MS to open source their stuff or adopt a complete OSS strategy. There is an incentive to add OSS into their portfolio, which I'm certain MS and every other large software vendor will do. It’s also possible that MS will make certain acquisitions that are intended to slow community development under the guise of "we love OSS".

All's fair in love, war and business.

Posted by: Savio Rodrigues at July 27, 2007 10:02 AM

Microsoft Mini Spotlight
  • Get Started
  • Port 25 Blogs
  • OSS News
  • Join a Project

{Open Source} Heroes Happen Here

Start today and order your own Hero Hack Pack – which includes Getting Started with Open Source, Windows Server 2008 and Visual Studio 2008 Trial. Each pack is a chance to win a free pass to OSCON 2008.







Technology White Papers

 

InfoWorld Technology Marketplace

» Technology White Papers Library

Technology White Papers by Topic

Technology White Papers E-mail Alert

Find out when the latest white paper is available:
 
 
» BUY A LINK NOW

Sponsored Technology Links