China DOS Union

　　 From mainframes (zSeries) to Intel servers (xSeries), and even wristwatch-type computers (WatchPad), IBM of the United States is investing in Linux to an extraordinary degree. The company announced that over the three years starting in 2001 it would invest 36 billion yen in Linux (about 225 million yuan RMB) to strengthen Linux-related services. So why is IBM, a company that has both its own technology and ample capital, so enthusiastic about Linux? Also, what kind of business model is the company trying to build around Linux as open source? Recently, our magazine's reporter interviewed Daniel A. Powers, Vice President in charge of Linux solutions at IBM USA. The purpose of Powers's visit to Japan was to attend LinuxWorld Expo/Tokyo 2002 (held in
May 2002) and give a keynote speech. (Interviewer: Kenichi Takebe)

　　BizTech: Since IBM has its own self-developed OS, why is it still putting so much effort into Linux? Please talk about the reasons from a strategic perspective.

　　Powers: That goes back to 1995, when IBM as a company began advocating open standards. First there was TCP/IP, then support for Web standard specifications, support for the open-source Web server Apache, and the launch of the J2EE application server WebSphere.

　　Customers also felt that “solutions based on open standards are very satisfying,” and at the same time the open-source community was developing high-quality Linux software. Another reason was that Linux software has relatively high portability across platforms. As for portability, WebSphere can achieve that to some extent, but improving portability even further is beneficial both to IBM and to users.

　　BizTech: Within your company, were there any opinions like “we should use IBM's own OS” and opposition to Linux?

　　Powers: When a technology appears that is similar to a company's own technology, all sorts of opinions naturally arise. In Linux's case, AIX is the most similar technology, so debate and opposition were unavoidable.

　　But in fact, there was not much opposition between AIX and Linux. I say that because, judging from Linux's scalability, its limit is 4-way SMP (symmetric multiprocessing). From the standpoint of “low-end UNIX,” Linux is quite good. It works well in the low end, and in terms of cost performance Linux is somewhat better than AIX, Solaris, and HP-UX. So we wanted to make full use of its strengths on Intel servers.

　　●Supporting Linux just like supporting IBM's own OS

　　BizTech: Can IBM's Linux strategy be viewed from the angle of “targeting Microsoft” or “targeting Sun”?

　　Powers: IBM's focus is on “solutions based on open standards.” I think that is where we differ from Microsoft and Sun. Linux is currently the fastest-growing OS in the world. The real key is that “customers want open standards.”

　　BizTech: But in Japan, companies like Fujitsu, Hitachi, and NEC have also already begun supporting Linux. From IBM's point of view, where do you think your originality and advantages lie compared with those companies?

　　Powers: IBM fully supports Linux not only in the server field, but also in middleware. The same goes for services. We are building a framework in which we can support Linux just like we support “IBM's own OS.” Most companies competing with us have not yet reached that stage. In addition, our Linux Technology Center has 250 engineers, and they have been working exclusively on open-source projects all along. That is also a major difference between us and other companies.

　　●Even with open source, most users still want support

　　BizTech: Speaking of “middleware,” IBM currently has commercial middleware such as WebSphere and DB2. On the other hand, there is also quite a bit of open-source middleware such as PostgreSQL and MySQL. If in the future that open-source middleware improves in scalability and reliability, how will IBM respond?

　　Powers: Good question! Let's take a look at the open-source business model. First, there have to be excellent open-source projects, like Java, Linux, sendmail, GNOME, and Eclipse. Second, there have to be companies that sell open-source software as commercial products. Once you have the open-source code, you can then provide commercial support and satisfy users' needs. GNOME is commercially supported by Ximian, sendmail by Sendmail, and Linux by distributors (such as Red Hat). As for Apache, IBM has already begun supporting it as part of WebSphere. In the future, companies and individuals that provide commercial support for PostgreSQL and MySQL will also appear.

　　Although there are customers who say “source code without commercial support is fine,” they are not the majority. Even though most customers think “open-source software is very good,” when problems occur they still want support. I think many users will want someone to modify something for them, or at least want to make a phone call and ask for help. Customers who feel “it's fine even without support” probably will not make up too large a proportion in the future either.

　　BizTech: Among Japanese companies, there is a lot of discussion about “who takes responsibility” after adopting open source. Is it the same in the United States?

　　Powers: Of course. American customers also like versions that come with support. If something goes wrong and there is someone they can shift the blame to, then... (laughs). I suppose that is the same all over the world.