COMMENTARY: CAN LINUX SURVIVE SUCCESS?

Against all odds, a scruffy band of open-source programmers--with no venture funding, no PR budget, no charismatic CEO--has produced explosive growth for an obscure Unix derivative. Corporate developers are jumping on the bandwagon in droves, IBM has made Linux a strategic platform, and Wall Street investors are pouring billions of dollars into Linux IPOs. The only real question left is: Can the Linux open- source community handle the politics of success?

Sadly, most revolutions turn ugly once the upstarts gain power. The Linux community has already felt some friction over the way commercial publishers like Red Hat, VA Linux, Caldera, and Corel have cashed in on the work of hundreds of volunteer programmers. So far, pride in the open-source development model seems to be more important to most Linux enthusiasts than becoming instant millionaires. But the new Linux companies aren't especially interested in enhancing a shared operating system: Rather, their goal is to create applications and services that will compete as commercial products. Linux itself may be free, but the Linux entrepreneurs are determined to create proprietary products--and ultimately there will be some nasty blowups when shareholder interests collide with the altruism of open source development.

But the real peril for Linux, we suspect, is the temptation to measure success in terms of the market position of Windows. Positioning an operating system against Windows has always been a fool's game, yet somehow smart people keep trying. IBM's OS/2 was a decent server and workstation operating system at a time when Windows was barely adequate on low-end PCs, yet IBM insisted on marketing OS/2 as "better Windows than Windows" and got trashed. Apple's John Sculley, who should have known better, dragged the Macintosh away from its roots in the home, education, and graphics markets to compete against Windows on corporate desktops; he failed, too. Sun's Scott McNealy poured tons of money into a now-forgotten Windows-lookalike called WABI. Now, flush with success, Linux inventor Linus Torvalds has begun talking about "overtaking" Windows on the desktop--which may play well in the press, but is also a strategy that lets Microsoft define how "success" should be measured.

The good news is that the positioning of Linux is chiefly defined by Linux programmers, not by Bill Gates wannabees. The great majority of Linux programmers are simply dedicated to making Linux better than what it now is--a rock-solid, multi-platform operating system for fairly sophisticated users. If the Linux community can keep on track with this sensible goal, Windows itself might become the wannabe operating system.