Linux.com Article DB: Pessimism at LinuxWorld Misplaced

Linux at Home: The Personal Benefits

To address this the user must have a way to counter the centralizing tendency of server based smart display use. The route to that is Linux at home and that idea brings us to part two: the magic triple whammy of benefits that can make this alternative - Unix servers and smart displays at work and Linux or FreeBSD on PCs at home - compelling for reasons that go beyond cost and performance to embrace personal benefit.

The first part of this triple hit addresses the issue of user control. The perceived problem with centralized control doesn't have much to do with technology or the realities of data storage or daily operations. It pertains, instead, to the fear that systems people will extend their power over the user's desktop into power over the user. Redressing the balance while keeping the centralized architecture requires giving users power over systems people in ways that go beyond organizational hierarchies and role statements to actual enforcement of user privileges.

Linux at home provides a big part of this because the user runs the same software on his home machine - but directly under his own control. That forces operational IT decisions into the open because it is impossible to con or cow an informed user for long - and the opensource movement is all about open information. The traditional excuses for not doing something, or doing it badly, - no budget, no staff, too busy, too difficult, no benefit - are all pretty hard to get away with when users can just open a window on their smart displays to their (or someone else's) home machine to show the thing working - and can then point at a dozen sites to show what other people are achieving.

The second part of the benefit package is more directly similar to what happened when the PC beat the Mac. The first people in any office who convert their home machines, and their thinking, to Linux will get immediate and enormous social rewards by becoming the local agents for the imposition of user control on Systems: the opinion leaders their colleagues consult and whose views IT staff have to consider.

The third part delivers the additional social benefit without which the decision makers won't see advantage to themselves. That benefit consists of a relatively minor financial saving as they opt out of software churn and hardware upgrades and a major social coup as those savings let them respond in silence - a silence that screams "I'm smarter than you" - when others talk about the money they spent on their latest PC upgrades and Windows product licenses.

This triple whammy defines the motivator, the social benefit package, that lets the decision maker see the Unix decision as putting him ahead of the pack and therefore validates the suggested alternative architecture as a saleable package.

How to sell it to the masses is, of course, a different problem but I think we have to let people discover the social benefits for themselves. We need, that is, to talk up the technology and its benefits in terms of cost, performance, and reliability -the public values people cite in support of their decisions - but let people work out the social benefits to themselves -the real basis for these decisions - for themselves. Do it right and we'll unleash a wave of systems change on a scale that's never been seen before.

Footnote:

The ability of Wintel boosters to delude themselves and others is a source of continuous amazement to me. For example, there's a current article on Cnet.com in which the authors compare Apple and Microsoft tech support. To do this the writers picked 6 Windows issues and 7 MacOS X ones before attempting to answer them either from the documentation or via calls to support. In the end they asked Microsoft technical support four questions, paid Microsoft $70, endured a difficult and tedious access procedure, and spent 68 minutes in conversation with Microsoft staff, all to get two right answers (50%) and some bad advice.

They asked Apple representatives four questions, one of them - on Microsoft Outlook - twice; had an easy time getting through to support, got four right answers (100%) in 51 minutes (and a referral to Microsoft in another 19) and were charged nothing for the service.

This, in the Wintel mindset, evaluates as a tie.

Originally Published: Tuesday, 25 September 2001	Author: Rudy de Haas
Published to: opinion_articles/opinion	Page: 3/3 - [Printable]
Pessimism at LinuxWorld Misplaced In this startling essay author Rudy de Haas lays out his strategies for the future of Linux and open source technologies both at home and in the corporation. Haas exhibits an uncanny understanding of the factors that motivate companies and individuals, and this thought-provoking essay should be required reading for anybody who thinks of themselves as an open source advocate.

	<< Page 3 of 3
Linux at Home: The Personal Benefits To address this the user must have a way to counter the centralizing tendency of server based smart display use. The route to that is Linux at home and that idea brings us to part two: the magic triple whammy of benefits that can make this alternative - Unix servers and smart displays at work and Linux or FreeBSD on PCs at home - compelling for reasons that go beyond cost and performance to embrace personal benefit. The first part of this triple hit addresses the issue of user control. The perceived problem with centralized control doesn't have much to do with technology or the realities of data storage or daily operations. It pertains, instead, to the fear that systems people will extend their power over the user's desktop into power over the user. Redressing the balance while keeping the centralized architecture requires giving users power over systems people in ways that go beyond organizational hierarchies and role statements to actual enforcement of user privileges. Linux at home provides a big part of this because the user runs the same software on his home machine - but directly under his own control. That forces operational IT decisions into the open because it is impossible to con or cow an informed user for long - and the opensource movement is all about open information. The traditional excuses for not doing something, or doing it badly, - no budget, no staff, too busy, too difficult, no benefit - are all pretty hard to get away with when users can just open a window on their smart displays to their (or someone else's) home machine to show the thing working - and can then point at a dozen sites to show what other people are achieving. The second part of the benefit package is more directly similar to what happened when the PC beat the Mac. The first people in any office who convert their home machines, and their thinking, to Linux will get immediate and enormous social rewards by becoming the local agents for the imposition of user control on Systems: the opinion leaders their colleagues consult and whose views IT staff have to consider. The third part delivers the additional social benefit without which the decision makers won't see advantage to themselves. That benefit consists of a relatively minor financial saving as they opt out of software churn and hardware upgrades and a major social coup as those savings let them respond in silence - a silence that screams "I'm smarter than you" - when others talk about the money they spent on their latest PC upgrades and Windows product licenses. This triple whammy defines the motivator, the social benefit package, that lets the decision maker see the Unix decision as putting him ahead of the pack and therefore validates the suggested alternative architecture as a saleable package. How to sell it to the masses is, of course, a different problem but I think we have to let people discover the social benefits for themselves. We need, that is, to talk up the technology and its benefits in terms of cost, performance, and reliability -the public values people cite in support of their decisions - but let people work out the social benefits to themselves -the real basis for these decisions - for themselves. Do it right and we'll unleash a wave of systems change on a scale that's never been seen before. Footnote: The ability of Wintel boosters to delude themselves and others is a source of continuous amazement to me. For example, there's a current article on Cnet.com in which the authors compare Apple and Microsoft tech support. To do this the writers picked 6 Windows issues and 7 MacOS X ones before attempting to answer them either from the documentation or via calls to support. In the end they asked Microsoft technical support four questions, paid Microsoft $70, endured a difficult and tedious access procedure, and spent 68 minutes in conversation with Microsoft staff, all to get two right answers (50%) and some bad advice. They asked Apple representatives four questions, one of them - on Microsoft Outlook - twice; had an easy time getting through to support, got four right answers (100%) in 51 minutes (and a referral to Microsoft in another 19) and were charged nothing for the service. This, in the Wintel mindset, evaluates as a tie.
	<< Page 3 of 3