Who Is Trying to Seize Linux's Right to Speak in China? - China DOS Union Forum

Who is trying to seize Linux's right to speak in China?
Source: eNet Silicon Valley Power
Responsible editor: jlj

　　The shadow of Linux moving toward monopoly

　　When the security problems of Microsoft's Windows system were being criticized full of holes, and when it was encountering doubts, resistance, and rejection in China, the government placed its only hope on open-source Linux. Linux became the weathervane for ministries, bureaus, and commissions in government procurement when choosing products. Policy guidance and industry encouragement all tilted toward Linux. From the perspective of information security, the strategy of setting Linux right and building up its image in China was obviously correct, and it was also a strategic decision concerning the lifeline of the information industry. However, while Linux is seeking a commercial model, it still does not yet have a stable and widely recognized one. Under the premise of a shortage of Linux technology in China, Linux naturally plays the role of establishing a new continent for OS software. When domestic Linux operating system software can hold up half the sky, Linux in China can build a truly independent platform, a whole new world completely detached from Microsoft's Windows system. But can everything really go as hoped?

　　The world economy is changing, and Linux is also constantly evolving. Between freedom and commerce, Linux is gradually abandoning its noble open-source model. Favored and promoted by commercial software giants including IBM, SUN, and HP, Linux has taken on a stronger and stronger commercial flavor. After IBM and SUN madly married their own technologies and standards to Linux, what they grafted out were low-cost Linux product “variants,” and the most critical point is that their products, services, and solutions all carry the Linux brand. And this just happens to fit China's national conditions.

　　The Linux concept is becoming an object closely eyed by IT industry giants. Database and management software vendors such as IBM, ORACLE, and SAP are all porting their products to the Linux platform and penetrating this huge Chinese Linux market that worships freedom. This is a strategic adjustment and shift, a bet on future trends. On the one hand, it caters to the domestic call to use Linux; on the other hand, it quietly builds a new monopoly. Under the cover of the Linux concepts of freedom and no cost, anyone can take it and use it as part of their own products.

　　Will Linux in China become a new “Microsoft”? While the domestic government and industry experts are trying to build an independent flagship system in China and extend it into the layers of application software, database software, middleware, and general software, foreign multinational giants have already keenly smelled the business opportunity. By comparison, domestic Linux vendors are muddling along, half-dead and struggling. Even in the Linux server field, which has quite promising prospects, very few have begun to show any real promise.

　　Not to mention the application software, database software, and middleware built on the Linux system platform. While foreign IT companies are entering Linux platform development one after another and recommending Linux products to target customers, their domestic peers turn pale at the mention of Linux. Aside from forcing themselves to develop Linux versions just to cooperate with government policy, how many companies are taking the initiative? Why? You are not smart enough; what you lack is strategic vision and decision-making ability to grasp the prospects. In the future, when Linux becomes prevalent, foreign manufacturers will still rule the domestic Linux market just as Microsoft rules the world.

　　Domestic Linux vendors seek an external breakthrough

　　Recently, there was news saying that IBM would strongly support the Linux operating system, preinstall Linux on all PCs, and at the same time broadcast advertisements promoting Linux during prime time on American TV next month. IBM said: huge advertising expenses will make Linux become a household name, just like Microsoft Windows.

　　Although IBM soon came out to deny the rumor and said that for the time being it would not consider launching PCs with Linux installed in China, obviously IBM's throwing itself into Linux's embrace is not because it expects to achieve something in the Linux desktop field. But its intention to strengthen its image and position in the Linux market is plain to see. Just as IBM expects, Linux is to be turned into a name equal in standing and importance to Microsoft Windows, and IBM naturally covets the throne of Linux leader, because that means the emergence of a new monopoly overlord.

　　On October 9, 2002, a memorandum closely tied to the fate of Linux development in China was signed between the Beijing Science and Technology Commission, the Beijing Municipal Informatization Office, and IBM. IBM will join hands with the Beijing municipal government to jointly promote the development of the local Linux industry.

　　For IBM, this will be a crucial move in competing for the Chinese Linux market. Joining hands with the government to build a domestic Linux industry chain not only consolidates its own position in the Linux field, more importantly it allows it to seize profits from it. The media have had quite a few critical words about this; some even used headlines saying domestic Linux vendors had encountered a life-or-death crisis to express deep concern. Actually, this is not the same concept. What the government values in cooperating with IBM is IBM's solutions and services built on Linux, while domestically there is almost no one with real achievements in this field. The government, in seeking a partner, had no choice but to settle for IBM.

　　According to informed sources, after IBM signed the memorandum of understanding with the government, domestic Linux vendor Red Flag Linux began stirring, repeatedly throwing bouquets toward IBM, trying to seek benefits from it and get a share of the pie. Some experts also believe that IBM has long had comprehensive cooperation with Red Hat, the world's biggest Linux vendor, including Red Hat providing IBM with Linux operating systems based on IBM servers, while Red Flag's Linux system just happens to be a Chinese-localized version built on Red Hat. Therefore, if Red Flag and IBM form an alliance, IBM's voice in the domestic Linux market will certainly be strengthened, after all Red Flag Linux is the representative figure in the government's lineup.

　　Others hold different views. In the field of Linux industry applications, Red Flag Linux obviously lacks confidence and cannot be mentioned in the same breath as Red Hat. Whether in capital, technology, or key points such as industry applications and cluster computing, it is the weak link. Joining hands with Red Flag to expand the market might very well end up becoming a burden for IBM. Red Hat's influence and technological maturity in the Linux field are beyond reproach; forming an alliance with Red Flag as well would be somewhat unnecessary.

　　When will the two major domestic Linux vendors shake hands and make peace?

　　There is no doubt that the government supports Linux development in China, but this has caused Linux development in China to follow a unique route. Indoctrinative and forced development has become the theme of Linux's advance in China. Yet the vendors who truly understand the government's difficulties and actively cooperate are very few. Clinging stubbornly to the Linux desktop field will only cause opportunities to be lost.

　　After Beijing adopted Linux through bidding, it improved Linux through the “Yangfan” and “Qihang” projects, for example Chinese support, interface, ease of use, device drivers, and so on. The “Yangfan” system is a hybrid of Red Flag Linux and CS2C Linux. The government's intention was to unify the current mainstream domestic Linux system vendors and establish new industry standards. Obviously it could not favor one over the other between these two domestic Linux systems.

　　But a compromise choice is not conducive to establishing Linux industry standards. A friend from CS2C Linux said that after all, Red Flag and CS2C Linux still have great differences, including in hardware support, software settings, and many other aspects. Complete integration and unification would require a huge amount of effort and funding. It would also require finding a balance satisfactory to both sides in technology, scale of capital investment, and profit distribution.

　　Looking at another hidden crisis, Red Flag Linux and CS2C Linux are still competitors in the market fighting each other to the death. If the government steps in to mediate, the result may be that both sides simply piece together a system to cope with the situation. Then for the government, which intends to establish standards and unify domestic Linux system software, satisfaction with “Yangfan” will be greatly reduced. After all, a forcibly twisted melon is not sweet.

　　One expert's attitude seemed even more radical. Establishing a domestic Linux system platform requires solid R&D and sufficient funding. If the underlying platform foundation is unstable, how can application software based on that platform be built later? The most perfect combination would be to merge Red Flag Linux and CS2C Linux into one. Only that would be true integration, and it would also avoid the buck-passing and wrangling of shifting responsibility to each other. However, how to merge the two systems would involve conflicts of interest in different areas, so the difficulty would be great.

　　After contacting people on the CS2C Linux side, the reporter found that standard unification for domestic Linux systems cannot be avoided. A simple example shows this: the system platform needs to win the cooperation of hardware vendors in device drivers in order to ensure that hardware conflicts do not occur. This is only the tip of the iceberg in building a stable system. That is why united linux led by Turbolinux appeared. China likewise needs real cooperation.

　　Domestic Linux development must reject restlessness

　　Linux development in China requires a persistent attitude, while domestic Linux R&D has been much more restless. When government procurement listed Linux development as the preferred system, both Red Flag and CS2C Linux won bids in last year's government procurement, but up to now, other application software based on the Linux system has still rarely been seen supporting the Linux platform.

　　China needs companies with the courage of IBM to stand up and form a Linux industry alliance including both hardware and software. If domestic Linux market development relies only on selling desktop editions, that can be called childish behavior. A platform like the surfing platform once popular in China could only rely on money raised from the stock market to stay alive. This also explains the essence of the problem.

　　It is said that a certain office software vendor that won a bid in government procurement had long since terminated development of its for linux version, and the explanation given was to avoid wasting funds. This shows that choosing Linux in government procurement must avoid becoming mere formalism. Linux development must be placed at a strategic level, and the government should also increase its efforts in urging and supervision, ensuring that Linux can truly play its role and be popularized on a large scale.

　　According to a media report, “The Linux operating system is quietly becoming hot, and demand for Linux talent is also heating up. According to statistics, within five years after our country joins the WTO, demand for Linux talent will exceed 1.2 million people.” Linux development requires a pragmatic attitude. Encouraging development does not mean exaggerated boasting divorced from reality.

　　Restlessness in the domestic software industry has always existed, from the pursuit of the software blue-collar concept to the everywhere-blooming situation of software colleges, and then to the magnified gap in software talent demand. It is hoped that Linux will not repeat the same mistakes.

　　Closing words:

　　For domestic Linux, waiting and tentative probing should no longer continue. First establish system platform standards, then devote effort to the enterprise application market, developing application software, database software, solutions, and management software based on the Linux platform. Waiting is not the answer to solving problems, and the government should also give full support in funding and guidance of public opinion, establishing training and policies matched with Linux. Otherwise, what awaits in the future will be a new round of monopoly.

Floor1　党委书记	Posted 2002-12-11 00:00
高级用户　Posts 217　Credits 912　From 广东
Who is trying to seize Linux's right to speak in China? Source: eNet Silicon Valley Power Responsible editor: jlj 　　The shadow of Linux moving toward monopoly 　　When the security problems of Microsoft's Windows system were being criticized full of holes, and when it was encountering doubts, resistance, and rejection in China, the government placed its only hope on open-source Linux. Linux became the weathervane for ministries, bureaus, and commissions in government procurement when choosing products. Policy guidance and industry encouragement all tilted toward Linux. From the perspective of information security, the strategy of setting Linux right and building up its image in China was obviously correct, and it was also a strategic decision concerning the lifeline of the information industry. However, while Linux is seeking a commercial model, it still does not yet have a stable and widely recognized one. Under the premise of a shortage of Linux technology in China, Linux naturally plays the role of establishing a new continent for OS software. When domestic Linux operating system software can hold up half the sky, Linux in China can build a truly independent platform, a whole new world completely detached from Microsoft's Windows system. But can everything really go as hoped? 　　The world economy is changing, and Linux is also constantly evolving. Between freedom and commerce, Linux is gradually abandoning its noble open-source model. Favored and promoted by commercial software giants including IBM, SUN, and HP, Linux has taken on a stronger and stronger commercial flavor. After IBM and SUN madly married their own technologies and standards to Linux, what they grafted out were low-cost Linux product “variants,” and the most critical point is that their products, services, and solutions all carry the Linux brand. And this just happens to fit China's national conditions. 　　The Linux concept is becoming an object closely eyed by IT industry giants. Database and management software vendors such as IBM, ORACLE, and SAP are all porting their products to the Linux platform and penetrating this huge Chinese Linux market that worships freedom. This is a strategic adjustment and shift, a bet on future trends. On the one hand, it caters to the domestic call to use Linux; on the other hand, it quietly builds a new monopoly. Under the cover of the Linux concepts of freedom and no cost, anyone can take it and use it as part of their own products. 　　Will Linux in China become a new “Microsoft”? While the domestic government and industry experts are trying to build an independent flagship system in China and extend it into the layers of application software, database software, middleware, and general software, foreign multinational giants have already keenly smelled the business opportunity. By comparison, domestic Linux vendors are muddling along, half-dead and struggling. Even in the Linux server field, which has quite promising prospects, very few have begun to show any real promise. 　　Not to mention the application software, database software, and middleware built on the Linux system platform. While foreign IT companies are entering Linux platform development one after another and recommending Linux products to target customers, their domestic peers turn pale at the mention of Linux. Aside from forcing themselves to develop Linux versions just to cooperate with government policy, how many companies are taking the initiative? Why? You are not smart enough; what you lack is strategic vision and decision-making ability to grasp the prospects. In the future, when Linux becomes prevalent, foreign manufacturers will still rule the domestic Linux market just as Microsoft rules the world. 　　Domestic Linux vendors seek an external breakthrough 　　Recently, there was news saying that IBM would strongly support the Linux operating system, preinstall Linux on all PCs, and at the same time broadcast advertisements promoting Linux during prime time on American TV next month. IBM said: huge advertising expenses will make Linux become a household name, just like Microsoft Windows. 　　Although IBM soon came out to deny the rumor and said that for the time being it would not consider launching PCs with Linux installed in China, obviously IBM's throwing itself into Linux's embrace is not because it expects to achieve something in the Linux desktop field. But its intention to strengthen its image and position in the Linux market is plain to see. Just as IBM expects, Linux is to be turned into a name equal in standing and importance to Microsoft Windows, and IBM naturally covets the throne of Linux leader, because that means the emergence of a new monopoly overlord. 　　On October 9, 2002, a memorandum closely tied to the fate of Linux development in China was signed between the Beijing Science and Technology Commission, the Beijing Municipal Informatization Office, and IBM. IBM will join hands with the Beijing municipal government to jointly promote the development of the local Linux industry. 　　For IBM, this will be a crucial move in competing for the Chinese Linux market. Joining hands with the government to build a domestic Linux industry chain not only consolidates its own position in the Linux field, more importantly it allows it to seize profits from it. The media have had quite a few critical words about this; some even used headlines saying domestic Linux vendors had encountered a life-or-death crisis to express deep concern. Actually, this is not the same concept. What the government values in cooperating with IBM is IBM's solutions and services built on Linux, while domestically there is almost no one with real achievements in this field. The government, in seeking a partner, had no choice but to settle for IBM. 　　According to informed sources, after IBM signed the memorandum of understanding with the government, domestic Linux vendor Red Flag Linux began stirring, repeatedly throwing bouquets toward IBM, trying to seek benefits from it and get a share of the pie. Some experts also believe that IBM has long had comprehensive cooperation with Red Hat, the world's biggest Linux vendor, including Red Hat providing IBM with Linux operating systems based on IBM servers, while Red Flag's Linux system just happens to be a Chinese-localized version built on Red Hat. Therefore, if Red Flag and IBM form an alliance, IBM's voice in the domestic Linux market will certainly be strengthened, after all Red Flag Linux is the representative figure in the government's lineup. 　　Others hold different views. In the field of Linux industry applications, Red Flag Linux obviously lacks confidence and cannot be mentioned in the same breath as Red Hat. Whether in capital, technology, or key points such as industry applications and cluster computing, it is the weak link. Joining hands with Red Flag to expand the market might very well end up becoming a burden for IBM. Red Hat's influence and technological maturity in the Linux field are beyond reproach; forming an alliance with Red Flag as well would be somewhat unnecessary. 　　When will the two major domestic Linux vendors shake hands and make peace? 　　There is no doubt that the government supports Linux development in China, but this has caused Linux development in China to follow a unique route. Indoctrinative and forced development has become the theme of Linux's advance in China. Yet the vendors who truly understand the government's difficulties and actively cooperate are very few. Clinging stubbornly to the Linux desktop field will only cause opportunities to be lost. 　　After Beijing adopted Linux through bidding, it improved Linux through the “Yangfan” and “Qihang” projects, for example Chinese support, interface, ease of use, device drivers, and so on. The “Yangfan” system is a hybrid of Red Flag Linux and CS2C Linux. The government's intention was to unify the current mainstream domestic Linux system vendors and establish new industry standards. Obviously it could not favor one over the other between these two domestic Linux systems. 　　But a compromise choice is not conducive to establishing Linux industry standards. A friend from CS2C Linux said that after all, Red Flag and CS2C Linux still have great differences, including in hardware support, software settings, and many other aspects. Complete integration and unification would require a huge amount of effort and funding. It would also require finding a balance satisfactory to both sides in technology, scale of capital investment, and profit distribution. 　　Looking at another hidden crisis, Red Flag Linux and CS2C Linux are still competitors in the market fighting each other to the death. If the government steps in to mediate, the result may be that both sides simply piece together a system to cope with the situation. Then for the government, which intends to establish standards and unify domestic Linux system software, satisfaction with “Yangfan” will be greatly reduced. After all, a forcibly twisted melon is not sweet. 　　One expert's attitude seemed even more radical. Establishing a domestic Linux system platform requires solid R&D and sufficient funding. If the underlying platform foundation is unstable, how can application software based on that platform be built later? The most perfect combination would be to merge Red Flag Linux and CS2C Linux into one. Only that would be true integration, and it would also avoid the buck-passing and wrangling of shifting responsibility to each other. However, how to merge the two systems would involve conflicts of interest in different areas, so the difficulty would be great. 　　After contacting people on the CS2C Linux side, the reporter found that standard unification for domestic Linux systems cannot be avoided. A simple example shows this: the system platform needs to win the cooperation of hardware vendors in device drivers in order to ensure that hardware conflicts do not occur. This is only the tip of the iceberg in building a stable system. That is why united linux led by Turbolinux appeared. China likewise needs real cooperation. 　　Domestic Linux development must reject restlessness 　　Linux development in China requires a persistent attitude, while domestic Linux R&D has been much more restless. When government procurement listed Linux development as the preferred system, both Red Flag and CS2C Linux won bids in last year's government procurement, but up to now, other application software based on the Linux system has still rarely been seen supporting the Linux platform. 　　China needs companies with the courage of IBM to stand up and form a Linux industry alliance including both hardware and software. If domestic Linux market development relies only on selling desktop editions, that can be called childish behavior. A platform like the surfing platform once popular in China could only rely on money raised from the stock market to stay alive. This also explains the essence of the problem. 　　It is said that a certain office software vendor that won a bid in government procurement had long since terminated development of its for linux version, and the explanation given was to avoid wasting funds. This shows that choosing Linux in government procurement must avoid becoming mere formalism. Linux development must be placed at a strategic level, and the government should also increase its efforts in urging and supervision, ensuring that Linux can truly play its role and be popularized on a large scale. 　　According to a media report, “The Linux operating system is quietly becoming hot, and demand for Linux talent is also heating up. According to statistics, within five years after our country joins the WTO, demand for Linux talent will exceed 1.2 million people.” Linux development requires a pragmatic attitude. Encouraging development does not mean exaggerated boasting divorced from reality. 　　Restlessness in the domestic software industry has always existed, from the pursuit of the software blue-collar concept to the everywhere-blooming situation of software colleges, and then to the magnified gap in software talent demand. It is hoped that Linux will not repeat the same mistakes. 　　Closing words: 　　For domestic Linux, waiting and tentative probing should no longer continue. First establish system platform standards, then devote effort to the enterprise application market, developing application software, database software, solutions, and management software based on the Linux platform. Waiting is not the answer to solving problems, and the government should also give full support in funding and guidance of public opinion, establishing training and policies matched with Linux. Otherwise, what awaits in the future will be a new round of monopoly.

Floor2　党委书记	Posted 2002-12-11 00:00
高级用户　Posts 217　Credits 912　From 广东
Turbolinux Sells Cluster Business to Axceleon Source: PConline Responsible editor: jlj Author: GemStone 　　Turbolinux, the well-known Asian Linux distribution vendor, has sold its EnFuzion cluster software to the newly established Axceleon company. Axceleon was founded by three former Turbolinux members with the support of investment firm Havenhill Technology Group. 　　Axceleon is headquartered in California, USA. This time the company acquired Turbolinux's EnFuzion cluster product and development team, though the exact acquisition price was not disclosed to the public. After the acquisition, Axceleon plans to continue developing cluster software and further open up the market in this field. EnFuzion cluster software supports not only Microsoft's Winodws platform and Unix platform but also the Linux platform, and it can provide load balancing, resource sharing, and fault tolerance for cluster systems of up to 1000 nodes. 　　Axceleon was founded by company president and CEO Michael Duffy, vice president of engineering and CEO Rok Sosic, and vice president of sales and marketing Robert Graziotto. These three were all previously employees of Turbolinux. Among them, Duffy was senior vice president for sales and services, SoSci was CTO, and Graziotto was head of the global accounts group. In addition, Duffy is a managing partner of investment firm Havenhill. 　　The establishment of Axceleon and its acquisition of EnFuzion came after the August acquisition of Turbolinux by Japan's Software Research Associates (SRA), making it yet another acquisition. SRA acquired the Turbolinux name and its Linux operating system distribution business, but Turbolinux's U.S. management team planned to establish a new company based on the PowerCockpit service delivery software. 　　But now three members of Turbolinux have instead founded the rather influential Axceleon, and this has raised many questions about the PowerCockpit-based business. Originally, the U.S. Turbolinux management team had planned to establish a new company within a few weeks after SRA's acquisition of Turbolinux, but now two months have passed without any news at all, and in the Web world the PowerCockpit product has also disappeared without a trace.

Floor3　党委书记	Posted 2002-12-11 00:00
高级用户　Posts 217　Credits 912　From 广东
Microsoft Rebuts the Theory of Linux's Price Advantage Source: eNet Silicon Valley Power Responsible editor: jlj Author: 　　The advantage of open-source software vendors' products lies in price, and now Microsoft has challenged Linux on this advantage. Microsoft has recently begun promoting the view that in the long run, using Windows costs less than using Linux. Linux supporters have always believed that because Linux is free, it is suitable for businesses and government departments with smaller budgets. However, research on TCO (total cost of ownership) shows that over the system's entire useful life, the OS accounts for only 5%, while other costs are spent on system support and application development/deployment and other aspects, and in these areas Windows has greater advantages. Microsoft believes that although Linux has low licensing fees, it requires heavy investment in other areas. 　　I myself have my own view on this matter. Whether one says “Linux is safer than Windows” or “Windows costs more than Linux,” such viewpoints inevitably carry some exaggeration in order to make things easier to understand, but they are not necessarily accurate. In users' actual working environments, various complex situations are often intertwined. Under some conditions, using Linux may indeed cost less than Windows, but under other conditions the situation may also be completely the opposite.

Floor4　党委书记	Posted 2002-12-11 00:00
高级用户　Posts 217　Credits 912　From 广东
Linux Veteran Slackware Releases Latest 9.0 Beta Source: PConline Responsible editor: adrian Author: Gu Yatao Slackware 9.0 beta has just been released. The entire system has been completely recompiled with gcc 3.2, and it supports many new features, such as optimization for AMD Duron and Athlon CPUs. However, some discussions on the alt.os.linux.slackware newsgroup show that these optimizations still have some problems. For example, most Slackware packages are compiled into i386-compatible code, but all the optimizations are aimed at i686. The new Slackware 9.0 kernel also already supports hardware hot-plugging. If the hardware modules have already been compiled and installed successfully, it will work very well; if not, you still need to define the parameters in modules.conf. And Slackware 9.0 does not plan to provide installation packages for gnome 2. If you really need to use gnome, you can download it here. Slackware 9.0 fans, hurry and go to ftp.slackware.com to download the latest version!