Penguin Not Taking Flight Down Under 294
Bill Bennett writes "New Zealand Reseller News reports that Linux adoption down under is three times lower than North America. From the article: 'Adoption of open source software is slow in the Australasian region according to a report from analyst firm Forrester. Only 18% of the businesses in Australia and New Zealand surveyed for the report were using Linux, while 11% were considering its use. Analyst Sam Higgins says the low rate - three times lower than North America - is because open source is caught between two worlds. He says customers have been conditioned to buy software from vendors and their approved partners.'"
Needs to be said (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux is a subset of OSS
The article pretty much uses OSS & Linux interchangeably, which isn't the case.
Anyways, with that in mind, what exactly does the author mean by "Trojan Horse"?
Sounds like it's 3x more than NA, not 3x less.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Three times lower? (Score:2, Insightful)
33-54%??
Really?
If that's true, that's pretty good!
Can somebody confirm?
'Ay, Digger! (Score:5, Insightful)
Try and download an ISO without local mirrors in Sydney?
Re:bad survey? (Score:3, Insightful)
How about internet connections/speeds? (Score:5, Insightful)
Open-soure in my mind often tends to depend a lot on a decent connection to the 'net. Downloading CD ISO images, installing packages/updates from apt/etc, downloading packages or source files, reading online documentation, etc.
It could be that "down under" is simply being hindered by a case of lacking resources, mainly comparatively crappy internet service.
The Aussie mindset (and conditioning) (Score:5, Insightful)
A guy I used to know developed a product in Australia, and could not sell the product or the business to anyone.
So he moved his family and business to America. Some 3 years later the product was being sold by his American company to Australians, amongst others, and his business was purchased by one of the bigger companies for $US 20 million.
Then he and his family moved back to Australia.
It seems for some stupid reason that Australian businesses want to buy products from overseas companies, America being a popular choice. It also seems that obviously they don't want "free" stuff, because there's "no such thing as a free lunch" down-under. As a culture, we are wary of gotchas, too much for our own good. I believe it to be nothing more than an over-cautious approach to new things without obviously proven major backing.
I'm interested in hearing other peoples' takes on this...
Re:Choice... (Score:2, Insightful)
2 main reasons. (Score:4, Insightful)
company in Australia.
The slow roll out of Linux in Australia I believe is directly
attributable to two things:
1) IT staff are not trained to support this "new" beast in the market,
and if not trained can not offer support.
2) the sales guys all think it's a load of "hippie love" and can't
understand how there can be any money made from it. Those that do
understand are very few and far between, but don't care anyway because
the proprietary software sellers are offering larger bonus's for
selling their gear.
Re:18 %? (Score:2, Insightful)
I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that 50% or more of North American companies are using Linux in some capacity, and plan to continue to add Linux servers in the future. Medium and large companies especially have lots of smallish projects where a LAMP solution (for example) is a perfect fit: setting aside for the moment companies that find good fits for Linux in support of large applications.
As for Australia not following this trend...hey, every company or individual has that choice. I'm not an evangelist: I'm of the mind that you use the right tool for the job- Linux, Windows, OS X, VM, OS/390: whatever. And sometimes, due to skillset, previous investments, or what have you, some companies make a good case for using some platforms that might not make complete sense to me.
Another way of looking at it: its an untapped market for future growth!
Re:Choice... (Score:2, Insightful)
The badness that is McDonalds is not as widely accepted and believed, even if it is just as cancerous and pushed at the kids through advertising and sports sponsorship.
Re:'Ay, Digger! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The Aussie mindset (and conditioning) (Score:3, Insightful)
now, opensource software has allowed a couple of software projects to raise their heads locally (www.zabbix.com, for example) and even companies have lately been more and more positive towards local software (this also has something to do with abroad companies screwing locals over and over...).
maybe oss could push the mindset in other direction, thus resulting in less expenses and better lide for everybody ?
(except re-labelels
Re:Three times lower? (Score:1, Insightful)
causes your computer to be up to 500% slower.
Someone didn't take a math class at some point, you
cannot be more than 100% slower, it would not be moving.
I beleive your assumption is correct, they did it in the forward
direction, then said "1/3 of the speed doesn't sound fancy and
people are scared by fractions, therefore I'm pretty sure I can
flip that upside down and compare the other way around"
Which generally doesn't work.
Re:'Ay, Digger! (Score:1, Insightful)
Needs to be tested. (Score:5, Insightful)
For all we know, 100% of all companies in Australia and New Zealand are using Linux and/or a *BSD for their web server, mail server, ftp server, print server(s), DNS/DHCP server, etc. The only ones of those you can test are the ones with a public interface, and I'll bet you anything you like that these market researchers don't have a copy of nmap handy, even to test those.
It is very hard to determine actual uptake of Linux, until it reaches a critical threshold of acceptability in a region, because it is so easy for it to stay under the radar.
For smaller companies, the bosses may well know about Linux installs but not want to admit to them, fearing looking bad or being perceived as cheap. Again, that's not going to change until Linux is deened acceptable enough. No sane boss is ever going to say something that puts their end-of-year bonus at risk.
Finally, on the results aspect, it also depends on how the question was asked. It is easy for studies to ask questions in a way that forces the response. If you answer a particular way three times in a row, you're likely to answer the same way on the fourth question without thinking about it. Studies are extremely difficult to do well. This is especially significant when someone with a vested interest in a result pays for the study, as it is (by the nature of the beast) extremely easy to ensure the results match what the sponsor wants to see.
(I don't believe a single study on the dangers of smoking, sponsored by a tobacco company, ever established even the remotest possibility of there being a connection between product and result. I've even seen surveys showing sugar isn't a factor in tooth decay... sponsored by sugar companies.)
The bit about trojan horses is indicative that there's something more to this than meets the eye. The implication is that people have been "gifting" companies with Open Source, only to slam them with high service charges, perhaps for maintenance or administration. (eg: a company might provide Linux servers and not pass on the license fee, but charge double for all technical support calls.) Either that OR the reader is supposed to believe that is the case.
The "trojan horse" is really just a play on Microsoft's "Total Cost of Ownership" attack on Linux, where Redmond accused the Penguin of being more expensive when all costs were factored in over time. I can't see Microsoft themselves going after a market that they'd barely notice even if it did switch overnight, but I'd be willing to bet that those sponsoring and/or running this study have read Microsoft's claims and phrased questions accordingly.
Sadly, I know of no country where manipulating market research constitutes conspiring to defraud. If anything, most countries seem to encourage deceptive use of market research to the point where it is simply not possible to trust any results that are produced, even though it is hazardous (in that you're not listening to the user's requirements) to not have such information. However, because it is statistical, such studies can always produce results anywhere in the distribution function, including the extreme tail end. The sample size is generally very small and the confidence limits are usually not stated, so there is nothing anyone can do to really fight the claims. All that can be done is to find a group with greater influence and get them to falsify - err, produce - a counter-claim.
Either that, or conduct a real, in-depth, self-vali
Re:Needs to be said (Score:2, Insightful)
The software then provides a constant revenue stream to the developer/consultant in the form of support, which the customer only realizes once they've already welcomed the software into their organization.
Re:Three times lower? (Score:2, Insightful)
Having lived and worked in NZ for 7 years, I can say for a fact that there are three or four issues contributing to the lack of uptake of Linux in New Zealand.
All I can say is, beautiful country -- shame about the people.
Re:MOD PARENT UP (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry if this offends anyone. It's just from my experiences, and by no means is it a hard and fast rule.