Saturday, March 10, 2007

Is Linux is “Open”?

How can anything be “Open” if honest discussion isn’t allowed?

If you think a Microsoft product sucks you can say that to great detail without having to be afraid of your job, apparently even if you work for Microsoft (which I kind of find surprising). But if you suggest that Linux isn’t ready for the desktop — which I do often because it isn’t – you’ll have folks coming after your job and, sometimes, suggesting you won’t be long for this world. Some of the mail has been rather nasty (though I do admit it has moderated of late).

No product is perfect for everything. What made Windows good for the desktop is largely what makes Linux a better product for some servers.

I think the thing that bothers me the most about Linux is IT advocacy. IT shouldn’t be an advocate of any product, because it needs to make determinations between them. Whether it is Microsoft, Apple, or Linux, once IT takes a side it is no longer capable of properly assessing a solution based on the needs of the business. And that is the job.

IT needs to ensure, not prevent, discussion so that the best product, company, or service is chosen, and when they can’t do that, they should find other jobs.

When only one side is heard, you don’t have “Open,” and you sure as heck don’t have “Free” as in Freedom, which, to me is more important than “Free” as in “Free Beer.” If, to get “Free” Software, we give up “Free” Speech the cost, at least to me, is way the heck too high.

Labels: Linux