The international governmental focus on developing and using Linux on servers negates one of Microsoft's arguments against the rival OS--that little is being invested in developing the alternative platform. However, the danger is that these large organizations as well as vendors (e.g., IBM and Hewlett-Packard) using Linux will create semi-proprietary branches in Linux development (known as "forking"), which is what happened when the hardware makers of the 1980s adopted Unix. This will be a key issue in Linux adoption by governments, particularly state and local governments in the U.S. and elsewhere. The less "forking" that occurs as software is developed (or ISVs release software for the Linux OS), the easier it will be for users to manage Linux in their architectures, and therefore the more likely they are to adopt it.

We believe Linux development will not result in significant branching. High-level officials at IBM involved with Linux work have said they specifically want to avoid the mistakes of Unix, and they recognize that only by maintaining a single Linux version can they hope to counter the Microsoft tide. Therefore, they plan to release any advances in the Linux kernel that they develop back to the open-source community, and will concentrate their proprietary efforts on the layers above the kernel (e.g., WebSphere).

Looking ahead, we expect the governments of numerous nations, including Germany, China, India, Taiwan, Singapore, and of course Finland--homeland of Linux founder Linus Torvalds--to increasingly adopt Linux in their server architectures during the next few years. In the U.S., NASA is already using Linux fairly extensively on servers, and the development activities by NIST, DoD, and NSA all imply that the U.S. government may add more Linux server platforms in the future.

On the other hand, most U.S. state governments will have little money to spend on anything other than homeland security in the next year or two. This year, 40 states are running budget deficits due to the major reduction in tax income caused by the recession. Therefore, we do not expect much movement toward Linux among U.S. state or local governments for at least two years, except where it clearly saves money by replacing Unix/RISC servers. When such movement does take place, government agencies will mainly buy prepackaged systems that come with tightly coupled applications that are already installed and happen to be running Linux from IBM, Oracle, or other vendors, rather than as the result of a purposeful policy to standardize on Linux.

User Action
Government IT departments should consider Linux as a possible server operating system platform when either swapping out legacy systems or purchasing (or developing) new applications (e.g., in homeland security). However, they should make their system choices on the basis of overall cost of ownership, security, and other important issues, rather than looking solely at the OS. Also, IT organizations should keep in mind that introducing Linux in their data centers and server farms will increase the complexity of overall systems management by adding a new OS to the mix. They must ensure that adequate management software is available before adding Linux server platforms to their environments.