in Open Source

Can adoption of GNU/Linux help recession?

Recession: For some, economics is still doing fine!

Photo by Yankee6161

RecessionFor some, economics is still doing fine!

Terms like “landslide fall” have been heard in abundance this month and it is high time for everyone to realize that we are heading into recession (if we’re already not into it). Though some might argue, that we are still not there, the fact of the matter is that the stock market’s performance resembles the mountain peaks. The picture looks gloomy for a Linux user too.

A bad news for these users has been made public by a statement from Matt Asay of Alfresco; a Linux based open source content management system wherein he states

Short terms — the next few weeks — everyone, whether commercial or proprietary, is going to find life unpleasant.

On the flip side, the long term view for the Open Source users would be good as companies would be looking to shake their budgets and adopt Linux across their company.

The few advantages companies would have on adoption of Linux can be:

  1. Huge savings as the acquisition cost of Linux is low.
  2. Minimal operational cost.
  3. Reduction in advertisement costs.
  4. No effect on the efficiency of vendors who are into supply and support.
  5. Growth potential looks the best as compared to any other time.
  6. Cost leadership would result in less number of job cuts.
  7. Solutions can be fixed online with the help of the developers in the open source community.

So, the emphasis here lies on being creative. Innovation in recessionary times is always a safe bet. Profitability for a company is the only relevant parameter that would determine the level of their fight against recession.

The additional significant strategies that Open Source companies should execute are the Michael Porter’s competitive strategies viz. Cost leadership, Product differentiation and Focus. As aptly put by Asay,

Make sure you have significant differentiation between what you sell and [what you] give away. Extensions, add-ons, enhanced support experience, online services like SaaS [Software-as-a-Service], hosted [software]. Hosted is a primary area open source should be investing in. Give [customers] the ability to sign up month-to-month. That could be a big winner.

Red Hat has rightly started implementing the accurate practices by venturing into global consulting. Another thing that should be duly remembered is the fact that a company should not lose it current customer base in lieu of gaining new customer base. The abundance of Linux and Open Source technology should be used to develop a new generation of professionals who have the foresightedness to bring an economy out of recession. It is time we shed off those domains which whose authoritative and pecuniary interests have created an oligopolistic scenario in which proprietary software has just benefited a few, rather it is our intellectual logic to substitute contemporary services by using Linux and other open source applications, thus enabling apt allotment of riches and resources further largely and equitably.

16 Comments

  1. How does Open Source save costs if you're paying for it? To save costs you want companies to switch to an entirely different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform?

    You do understand that this involves re-training the entire staff and making them to switch to a completely new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform which will drastically reduce efficiency and increase costs as a company will have to invest heavily in re-training and also switching to the new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform. Not to mention that the new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform requires highly skilled (Read: People with lots of time to waste) for maintenance and fixing the simplest of issues, 'coz 1 needs to go in to that shit hole called Terminal for every little thing. Also, porting all their existing applications to the new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform means investing more money for research and development, which again means that all the time and money spent in their ecosystem built would be down the drain.

    So you know what? If you were to think at a macro level rather than attempting to promote Linux/Open Source using recession as your piggy back, you should do an insight at a macro level of how much the company would have to invest.

  2. How does Open Source save costs if you're paying for it? To save costs you want companies to switch to an entirely different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform?

    You do understand that this involves re-training the entire staff and making them to switch to a completely new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform which will drastically reduce efficiency and increase costs as a company will have to invest heavily in re-training and also switching to the new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform. Not to mention that the new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform requires highly skilled (Read: People with lots of time to waste) for maintenance and fixing the simplest of issues, 'coz 1 needs to go in to that shit hole called Terminal for every little thing. Also, porting all their existing applications to the new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform means investing more money for research and development, which again means that all the time and money spent in their ecosystem built would be down the drain.

    So you know what? If you were to think at a macro level rather than attempting to promote Linux/Open Source using recession as your piggy back, you should do an insight at a macro level of how much the company would have to invest.

  3. People like the commenter above (Manan) are talking about things they don't understand. They heard some time ago about an old Slackware distro and now still don't get that modern Linux is even more usable than their beloved OS.

    "'coz 1 needs to go in to that shit hole called Terminal for every little thing". Sit in your own shit hole and don't even try to use Ubuntu, Mandriva or Fedora. Otherwise you'd be surprised with how retarded you were.

  4. People like the commenter above (Manan) are talking about things they don't understand. They heard some time ago about an old Slackware distro and now still don't get that modern Linux is even more usable than their beloved OS.

    "'coz 1 needs to go in to that shit hole called Terminal for every little thing". Sit in your own shit hole and don't even try to use Ubuntu, Mandriva or Fedora. Otherwise you'd be surprised with how retarded you were.

  5. @Manan

    It is sad that you don't like the Terminal.
    However, let me tell you that the Terminal is the most powerful tool. I'm on Mac OS X, but I drill down in the Terminal when I need to get few other things done -- like GIT, et al.

    Sometimes, typing and firing a command in Terminal can be faster than click-click-click.

  6. @Manan

    It is sad that you don't like the Terminal.
    However, let me tell you that the Terminal is the most powerful tool. I'm on Mac OS X, but I drill down in the Terminal when I need to get few other things done -- like GIT, et al.

    Sometimes, typing and firing a command in Terminal can be faster than click-click-click.

  7. @Manan: I would like to add to Dim's And Brajeshwar's word. Firstly, Linux has grown to be a well crafted GUI based OS. I am not sure which era are you living into. Grow up to learn and see the better halves of Linux life cycle.

    Secondly, if you're afraid of terminal, I doubt you'll be running your PC for a lopt of powerful tasks. Please refer to our previous posts in which we have tried to throw some light on the importance of Terminal vis-a-vis GUI. I do not intend to say that Terminals are for geeks but then, there is not harm mastering it, if you haven't already. Best wishes ahead!

  8. @Manan: I would like to add to Dim's And Brajeshwar's word. Firstly, Linux has grown to be a well crafted GUI based OS. I am not sure which era are you living into. Grow up to learn and see the better halves of Linux life cycle.

    Secondly, if you're afraid of terminal, I doubt you'll be running your PC for a lopt of powerful tasks. Please refer to our previous posts in which we have tried to throw some light on the importance of Terminal vis-a-vis GUI. I do not intend to say that Terminals are for geeks but then, there is not harm mastering it, if you haven't already. Best wishes ahead!

  9. Manan: Honestly, you are either retarded or a stupid cow. Nowhere in
    the article did the author ask companies which are already `into'
    proprietary systems to switch to GNU/Linux. It'd be a very expensive
    operation and might be downright impractical. One of the perils of
    betting one's career / business on proprietary systems is that you are
    forever chained to your overlords and have to believe in / use /
    promote whatever crap your bosses come up with. Not so with Free and
    Open Source Software, where the power lies with you.

    And as far as the ``shit hole called Terminal'' is concerned, it seems
    you have either been living in a cave all this while or are in
    complete denial. Let me re-iterate, you don't have to use the Terminal
    to perform day-to-day tasks on a modern GNU/Linux system. And the
    ``shit hole called Terminal'' is more of a power-tool than a handicap;
    but a non-technical luser like you would hardly understand that.

    I also like the way how you called GNU/Linux a
    ``new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform''; in one
    fell swoop you proved that Google, Yahoo!, Facebook, Twitter are all a
    bunch of morons. I personally congratulate you on having a sub-100
    IQ.

    I doubt if you have ever tried writing any application besides using
    them. I am sure you will understand the power of the same
    ``new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform'' then.

    You can now get back to your favorite Windows box and
    re-format/re-install/re-update the whole system. I know you get a lot
    of kick out of it.

  10. Manan: Honestly, you are either retarded or a stupid cow. Nowhere in
    the article did the author ask companies which are already `into'
    proprietary systems to switch to GNU/Linux. It'd be a very expensive
    operation and might be downright impractical. One of the perils of
    betting one's career / business on proprietary systems is that you are
    forever chained to your overlords and have to believe in / use /
    promote whatever crap your bosses come up with. Not so with Free and
    Open Source Software, where the power lies with you.

    And as far as the ``shit hole called Terminal'' is concerned, it seems
    you have either been living in a cave all this while or are in
    complete denial. Let me re-iterate, you don't have to use the Terminal
    to perform day-to-day tasks on a modern GNU/Linux system. And the
    ``shit hole called Terminal'' is more of a power-tool than a handicap;
    but a non-technical luser like you would hardly understand that.

    I also like the way how you called GNU/Linux a
    ``new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform''; in one
    fell swoop you proved that Google, Yahoo!, Facebook, Twitter are all a
    bunch of morons. I personally congratulate you on having a sub-100
    IQ.

    I doubt if you have ever tried writing any application besides using
    them. I am sure you will understand the power of the same
    ``new/different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty platform'' then.

    You can now get back to your favorite Windows box and
    re-format/re-install/re-update the whole system. I know you get a lot
    of kick out of it.

  11. Manan, I would suggest you to see some doctor as you haven't grown up yet especially your mind. You need to do some brain wash to understand the practical world.

  12. Manan, I would suggest you to see some doctor as you haven't grown up yet especially your mind. You need to do some brain wash to understand the practical world.

  13. @Manan:
    After reading above responses, i dont thing you now would've started realizing that the "different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty", actually referred to yourself.

    If not, read at http://www.linuxwins.com/ then surely you will get to know how much an insight at a macro level you have done so far.

    One fact, that i love to quote to people like you,
    "To mess up a Linux box, you need to work at it; to mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it."
    :)

    Walk out of cradle, buddy.
    I would love if u scroll up and read that sentence again.
    :D

  14. @Manan:
    After reading above responses, i dont thing you now would've started realizing that the "different/alien/useless/crap-filled/shitty", actually referred to yourself.

    If not, read at http://www.linuxwins.com/ then surely you will get to know how much an insight at a macro level you have done so far.

    One fact, that i love to quote to people like you,
    "To mess up a Linux box, you need to work at it; to mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it."
    :)

    Walk out of cradle, buddy.
    I would love if u scroll up and read that sentence again.
    :D

  15. LOL! Looks like I hurt a few sentiments :P and the entire OCricket team is probably gonna kick me the next time we meet. :D

    Anyway, the point of Terminal is that I'm not taking away from it that it is highly powerful, but the latter part of the sentence wherein you need to do make extensive use of it. I did enjoy my time with Terminal back when I was using Hardy & Gutsy (compiling applications setting up graphic resolutions, setting fonts etc. etc.) but IMAO command line is just too inefficient for a user. A power user is a different case all together.

    Oh and the doctor and brain crap, keep that out, it's as much of a troll as linux itself.

    @BGhose, you just said what I wanted to say, Yahoo is a messed up company. An arrogant leader of a "startup" can cause it's doom, if you know what I mean. :D

    As far as companies running their backend on Unix is concerned, 1 should use what suits them best and what makes them efficient. But, saying that you know what if you switch to Unix you can avoid recession is laughable.

    Besides, when it comes to desktops Windows still remains a much better option because of it's usability.

    So peace, as you know I am not physically capable enough to take on Hiway & BGhose.

  16. LOL! Looks like I hurt a few sentiments :P and the entire OCricket team is probably gonna kick me the next time we meet. :D

    Anyway, the point of Terminal is that I'm not taking away from it that it is highly powerful, but the latter part of the sentence wherein you need to do make extensive use of it. I did enjoy my time with Terminal back when I was using Hardy & Gutsy (compiling applications setting up graphic resolutions, setting fonts etc. etc.) but IMAO command line is just too inefficient for a user. A power user is a different case all together.

    Oh and the doctor and brain crap, keep that out, it's as much of a troll as linux itself.

    @BGhose, you just said what I wanted to say, Yahoo is a messed up company. An arrogant leader of a "startup" can cause it's doom, if you know what I mean. :D

    As far as companies running their backend on Unix is concerned, 1 should use what suits them best and what makes them efficient. But, saying that you know what if you switch to Unix you can avoid recession is laughable.

    Besides, when it comes to desktops Windows still remains a much better option because of it's usability.

    So peace, as you know I am not physically capable enough to take on Hiway & BGhose.

Comments are closed.