Free for all.

There's a new kid on the IT block and he is threatening to challenge the established gangs. Geoff Tyler asks whether Linux can actually deliver its promises and take on Microsoft

Few management accountants have ever shown much interest in the operating systems used on their company's computers. The reason for this is simple -- Hobson's choice. Windows is the standard for PCs and most LAN servers and Unix is used for more onerous jobs on large network servers and specialist computing systems.

Traditionally, financial managers have been called in only when IT staff are keen to install a newer version of Windows or Unix and they need approval for the investment. But things are changing. There is a war brewing in IT circles, not between Windows and Unix -- which users treat as complementary -- but between these two and a newcomer, Linux. And Linux is pretty much free.

The new system is not actually that new. It was conceived in 1991 when Linus Torvalds, a computing student in Helsinki, encountered an operating system devised a few years earlier as a classroom exercise by Andrew Tanenbaum, a Dutch professor.

Torvalds recognised that this had the makings of a capable system. His work became the kernel of the Linux operating software and he made the source code available free of charge with the proviso that no re-seller should charge users for it. This magnanimous gesture was taken up by software developers and other academics. It created an operating system that is basically free -- users pay only for after-sales support and for capabilities, such as packaged software tools and applications, which the distributor has added to the program.

Derik Belair, director of strategic applications at software developer Corel, argues that the decision to make the software free will have a huge impact on the IT market. "The high cost of PCs in the past has obscured the cost of operating software and applications," he explains. "But with consumer pressure pushing the cost of PCs down to under $600, the operating system and software applications will visibly inflate the cost of ownership. The Linux system is available free of charge and Linux-based applications are cheap, which puts Linux in good position to meet market demands."

Dealers are charging 50 [pounds sterling] or less for the complete system, but not everyone agrees that Linux will fulfil its early promise of low costs. Prominent among the sceptics, unsurprisingly, is Microsoft. Mark Tennant, manager at Microsoft UK Windows 2000, points out that initial software costs are a very small part of the total cost of ownership. The most expensive aspects are ease of use and user-support services.

"In general, Windows NT has a lower cost than Unix -- more than a third lower in some studies," he says. "And there is no reason to believe that Linux is significantly different from other versions of Unix when it comes to total cost of ownership."

Linux's Unix connections are undeniable, but Tennant's view that it is merely another version of Unix is controversial. His punchline, however, is rather more convincing. "Because Linux is open (ie free) software, commercial companies such as Red Hat will make money by charging for services," he argues. "Therefore, commercial support services for Linux will be fee-based and are likely to be priced at a premium."

He has a point -- suppliers have to make money and, as Corel, Red Hat and other enthusiasts try to make Linux more user-friendly, user-support is likely to become increasingly important.

But Belair was talking of PCs and, so far, Linux has been applied only to servers and networks. Could this be a potential threat to Microsoft's dominance of PC operating software? And, if so, what happens to those who have invested huge amounts in Windows-based applications software?

Linux has already made its presence felt in networking circles -- Red Hat Linux for internet servers is now in edition 6.1 -- and it is becoming an alternative to Windows NT and Netware. NT is still the dominant system over Netware, which seems to be getting less development these days, but Linux is gaining ground and is being energetically promoted by an ever-wider band of enthusiasts. It is also benefiting from those who are keen to move away from total dependence on Microsoft.

Corel's work developing Linux for PCs is believed to be the most comprehensive and advanced, although the Linux fraternity is particularly co-operative. Commercial sensitivity still exists of course, but suppliers are keen to encourage the cross-fertilisation of ideas and so are bypassing many competitive barriers.

The work is co-ordinated by Linux International, a non-profit organisation set up by the companies promoting and using Linux. It is based in the US and has a website (www.li.org) for experts. Red Hat, Caldera and SuSe are developing Linux operating system products, while firms such as Corel and Sun are interpreting Linux for end-users, adding new applications and improving compatibility with existing applications.

The problem is that Linux has been developed by contributions from experts all over the world and experts tend to like things complicated. Linux has a reputation for being more sophisticated than Windows -- more like Unix -- and, as such, is more difficult to install and configure. Belair argues that this is what companies such as Corel are addressing.

"While installation applications have improved considerably, many (in basic Linux) are still in a non-graphic or text environment that is primitive and unfamiliar to users accustomed to graphic operating systems such as Windows," he says.

"Most Linux applications require users to use cryptic tools such as fdisk to partition their hard drive. The rest of the installation process can be time-consuming and requires users to answer what seem to be complex technical questions without adequate background information. For example, the user must start the graphic environment without any instruction or direction."

So it seems that IT staff are unlikely to have a problem installing and setting up Linux, but end-users, such as home workers, could find it difficult. Roger Lawson, managing director of software company Streamserve, agrees. His company has just announced a Linux version of its Intelligent Output Management communications suite.

"Linux has tended to be bought by IT professionals as a server-operating system and it is already looking like a rival to Windows NT. But in the office environment it is still not a client desktop system," he says.

That is the end-user position today. Soon, however, embellishments to the Linux core system will provide graphics-based installation that offers users step-by-step guidance, along with default settings and prompts. Implementing a good graphical user interface is a major part of the work of firms such as Corel and Sun.

Even if these developers do succeed in marketing a Linux version relevant to PCs -- and it looks as if they will -- suppliers agree that companies are unlikely to adopt it if it means abandoning corporate knowledge held in Windows.

Linux already has a DOS emulator (DOS EMU) which runs DOS applications, including those requiring VGA or SVGA graphics, and Linux developers claim that they are now on the verge of launching Linux as a replica of the Microsoft Office suite. Corel, for example, is in the process of introducing packages such as Quattro Pro and Corel Presentations which, like WordPerfect 8, are for all practical purposes the same as its Windows equivalents.

Linux also has a Windows file and print service, so Windows PCs can use a Linux server including drag-and-drop. Software called Samba was developed to get round NT's domain security encryption.

Although a full, end-user transparent Windows emulation is not yet in place, several developers are co-operating on a project called WINE. This will run Win 32 binaries in Linux, so there will not even be any need to import Windows applications.

Both Linux and Windows can co-exist on the same server, since both use TCP/IP. This means that files can be transferred. Linux also communicates with SPX/IPX, Appletalk and SNA operating systems and Sun is marketing special offers with Star Office software suites.

Given some simplification and friendly graphics, therefore, Linux seems well on the way to becoming a viable alternative to Windows in all IT areas. To those who ask why they should switch, Linux claims it has many advantages -- apart from cost.

For example, Linux's Unix connections mean that it can support several users -- keyboards, monitors and mice -- on one PC. Once it has USB support, manufacturers will be able to build multi-user PCs as minicomputers and Windows, in its present form, would be obsolete.

Nick Davis, an executive at IBM PC, sees a red (or at least pink) herring here. "The era of the PC in business life is passing its peak. Manufacturers are still racing for more desktop functions at lower prices, but corporate users are telling us they do not want to take this route," he says. "They do not want end-users storing all their work on PCs with huge memories, they would rather users stored files on the server where the company has more control over them. That is where Linux comes into its own."

IT research organisation Ovum agrees. A recent study (Application Servers: Creating the Web-enabled Enterprise) finds that application server technology will take over from the web as the key to evolving application architecture. "In this scenario, the multi-user PC does not make economic sense -- it effectively creates many mini-servers which still need to communicate with each other, a need which one consolidated server would fulfil better," Davis points out. "Consolidation seems to be the trend among corporate users, encouraged by more powerful and cheaper servers."

Whether this is true remains to be seen, but there are other advantages also claimed for Linux. In networking -- for which Linux is already famous -- users claim it gives better server performance than Windows NT, Novel and even most Unix systems. It boasts the fastest TCP/IP drivers and uses IPX via Ethernet, fast Ethernet, ATM, HAM/Packet radio (X25), ISDN, Token Ring, PLIP -- you name it.

It also is reputed to offer full support and integration capabilities for Mac, DOS, Windows 3.1x/95/NT, Novell and OS/2, all using their own protocols -- and using far less memory than most commercial operating systems.

Not everyone is so impressed however. From the Microsoft perspective, Tennant cites evidence that suggests Linux is somewhat less effective when tested on common customer workloads.

"Independent tests by PC Week Labs show that Windows NT 4.0 delivers 52 per cent better performance on a single processor and 110 per cent better performance on a four-way system than similarly configured Linux/Samba systems," he says. "For web servers, the same tests showed that using NT 4.0 plus Internet Information Server 4.0 gives a 41per cent better performance on a four-way system than Linux and Apache."

Further evidence includes the Nasdaq stock market which relies on a system that tracks all market events and alerts staff at signs of any abnormal activity. This huge responsibility rests on an NT-based network.

But fans point to other evidence supporting the argument that Linux uses memory more efficiently than other systems. For example, a GNU C/C++ optimising compiler and its associated editing and management tools use 12MB of disk space on Linux. Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 Professional edition takes up 290MB. The Microsoft version is more visual, but that's a lot of disk space to sacrifice.

There are also claims that Linux is more reliable than Windows or Mac. Certainly Mac's unprotected files can be a weakness and Linux's use of Unix principles suggest that it is less prone to crashing than either of these competitors. The arguments get increasingly technical, but experience of Linux is still too limited to draw sound conclusions.

It is still early days to compare the technical merits of Linux, Windows and Mac. The debate will continue for several years and we must wait for our IT experts to analyse and summarise their findings. But one thing is certain -- the arguments will become more relevant as Linux developers intrude deeper into Windows territory.

Sooner or later many finance departments will be faced with a contract for a completely new software supplier. This contract will show an extremely low purchase price -- but don't forget to look carefully at the small print under user support.

Application Servers: Creating the Web-enabled Enterprise can be found on www.ovum.com

Geoff Tyler is a freelance journalist