**** ZDNet News reader Oliver Drobnik believes Microsoft will go open source, but not for at least another 3-4 years. Read Oliver’s opinion below. ****
Much has been said and heard about the ins and outs of making Windows open source. There are a few factors that make it quite clear why Microsoft will be stepping on the breaks to delay such an opening for at least 3-4 years.
Microsoft’s current most prevalent problem is the fragmentation of its operating systems. With two different main code bases (also two different main driver APIs) it is unthinkable to have one big open source OS. But wouldn’t an open source Windows be what the industry needs? Yes, nice idea Johnny, sit down.
The main reason and the main driving factors behind Microsoft’s current strategy are these:
* See how the lawsuit turns out
* Unify the OS tree. Whistler to the rescue!
* Leverage on current investments and latest technology (see research.microsoft.com) advances to…
* …make money from the core OS as long as possible.
* Make the Windows promise to developers and system admins the most compelling possible.
* Make Windows the best platform for ALL systems.
Has anyone noticed the kind of improvements seen in Win2K and SQL Server 2000 that illustrate the last point? Man, Windows and SQL learned to SCALE!!! This new duo can cluster and perform like nothing before! This is what those who bet on Windows wanted and at a relatively low cost. (Buzzword: Total Cost of Ownership)
Windows.NET Version 1 (formerly known as Whistler) and Office 10 (currently BETA) will show some important steps on the way to open source:
* It will have a subscription type variant where you would get the software more or less for free but would pay small monthly fees to get new patches and upgrades automatically.
* It will be a much more open platform due to the goals and requirements of the general .NET initiative. Microsoft’s SOAP, XML and biztalk will take over some core functionality.
* “Software as a service” is basically what the Linux distributors see themselves doing already. Now think that instead of buying a box you could get a constantly polished Windows automatically streamed to your PC. How does that sound in relation to having to buy new SUSE CDs every now and then or constantly download patches?
* Microsoft is trying to get a good base of application servers (ASPs) worldwide that would take care of the above-mentioned subscriptions.
* Win.NET will be one core system as a replacement for the current two branches.
Having said all of the above we still know that open source will be a viable path, but we all know Microsoft well enough that we can see them pursue such a way only if they have maneuvered themselves into the most favorable starting position.
Once Microsoft has become the main PROVIDER of Windows (which will be a “service” by then) then it will care much less about who puts what into the OS, because they will still be the ones to earn the money on the OS subscriptions. This will be the time when the open source movement will have conquered Windows … at a bitter cost: it will make Microsoft even richer.
As you can see: Microsoft’s future looks bright.
Oliver Drobnik is a 26-year system administrator and developer at an Austrian cellular network provider.