Microsoft hits back at Linux in the Middle East

The Linux operating system has caused great interest in the Middle East in recent months, and IBM has won some major contracts with this system, including a Bahrain Government deal last week. But is Linux really the low-cost solution that it is cracked up to be?

In a recent study of the four-year cycle of small and medium sized business, Microsoft compared the total economic cost of Linux versus it own software.

What emerged is that the operating system comprised just 1.2% of smaller and 4% of large companies' total IT costs. This is not so surprising. Developing applications, installing networks and service costs are very important expense items.

'So if you adopt Linux you are not saving much from your total budget,' says DPE Regional Director of Microsoft Middle East & Africa, Nasser Khan Ghazi. 'It is seemingly a zero cost, but the reality is very different.

'Where do you imagine IBM and others are going to make their money? They will make it from the additional service costs that Linux users incur.'

So is it right, Linux is not a free lunch after all, but a charter for software engineers to write themselves large checks?

Microsoft executives also point out that Linux users have to agree to share any code that they develop themselves with other users. This is the open architecture environment. But what if that fellow Linux user is your main commercial rival? You have no intellectual property rights. Another problem is that Linux users have to sign a disclaimer that absolves Linux from any responsibility for the failure of its code to deliver.

'Our DotNet strategy offers an entire software road map for the development of an IT system,' adds Mr. Ghazi. 'How do you know that you will not miss the next industry trend when you are using Linux? You could end up a year behind everyone else, while Microsoft will keep you on top of developments with continuous updates.

'And from an intellectual property perspective DotNet has core advantages. Development times are much quicker, typically two to three times faster. That means faster time to market and a lower total development cost. The code is also far more integrated on a DotNet system, and there is a common language system.

Mr. Ghazi also has a more general argument against the use of Linux by the regional IT industry. He notes that having an intellectual property regime is critical to the development of a local software industry. In brief, if you keep giving your expertise away through an open architecture then you will not feel the economic benefit of your work.

This he likens to the inventors of steam trains. Without patents how would they have benefited from this invention? It is the same for software. Copyright needs to be protected to allow the industry to develop and recoup its investment.

'If the Middle East is to leverage software then it needs to follow the commercial software model,' he argues. 'This is how to engage software in an upward spiral of economic growth and to make it a driver of local economies.'

There are a staggering 2.5 million DotNet software developers worldwide, a number that now exceeds rival Java, including thousands in the Middle East. This is where Microsoft sees the future of software development, and the Middle East might be a lonely, poorer place if it goes too far down the Linux path.

Clearly the Linux versus Microsoft, open source versus commercial software development argument will rage and rage, and it is tough for non-experts to follow the debate. But a lot of the hype surrounding Linux is nonsense.

Red Hat charges a $149 'commercial distribution fee' for one of its most popular 'free' Linux packs. Is this really so much different from buying the latest Microsoft Office 2003 box from your local computer store?