• On GameSpot: Wii Fit tells 10-year-old she's fat

October 15, 2004 10:49 AM PDT

Advice to Microsoft: Learn to love Linux

Related Stories

Microsoft: Linux may mean price cuts, fewer sales

September 3, 2004

Pandora's box for open source

February 12, 2004

Why great companies fail

November 25, 2001
PORTSMOUTH, N.H.--Management guru Clayton Christensen has a paradoxical answer for Microsoft to the challenge posed by open source: Invest in Linux applications for handheld devices.

Christensen, an associate professor at Harvard Business School, is the author of the 1997 "Innovator's Dilemma," a book that describes how good companies often fail because business managers don't embrace "disruptive" technologies.

Open source is a clear disruption to Microsoft and the software industry in general, Christensen told attendees at the Future Forward technology conference here Thursday.


Clayton Christensen
"Where Linux takes root is in new applications, like Web servers and handheld devices. As those get better, applications will get sucked off the desktop onto the Internet, and that's what will undo Microsoft," he said.

The software company can respond to this market disruption by setting up a separate business that will "kill Microsoft," Christensen said. If it doesn't react to the rise of Linux desktops on handheld computers, it will miss a coming wave of new applications and market opportunities, he said.

Microsoft has already conceded that open-source software poses a significant challenge to its business. The company could not be immediately reached for comment on Christensen's remarks.

Christensen has observed that companies regularly stumble when they follow the well-established management practices of planning and listening to customers. To succeed, companies should not only cater to customers and continue improving their existing products, he argues. They should also set up separate business units to capitalize on new technologies, even though these may be poor-quality, low-margin products.

Digital Equipment, for example, grew rapidly in the late 1980s by selling mini computers, which were a simpler, lower-cost option to mainframes, he said. But when other PCs began to take hold, the company didn't pursue that market for economic reasons: PCs offered substantially lower profit margins and didn't meet the technical needs of existing mini-computer customers.

In Microsoft's case, Linux applications on handheld devices are a threat to its lucrative business of selling desktop PC applications for its Windows operating system.

"As computing becomes Internet-centric, rather than LAN (local-area network)-centric, their stuff runs on Linux, because it's all new," he said. He noted that people increasingly leave their laptop PCs at home when they travel and instead rely on handheld devices, such as Research In Motion's BlackBerry.

Linux also provides a cheap, commoditylike alternative to Windows--the basis of Microsoft's business. Although Linux didn't use to be as functional as Windows or Unix, adoption of the operating system grew rapidly because it met the needs of simple applications and is relatively cheap. A similar dynamic is now occurring in the database market with open-source products such as MySQL, Christensen said.

Christensen said that Microsoft should move progressively into Linux applications over the next six or seven years, because that sector will offer better opportunities for growth than operating systems or databases. He suggested that Microsoft acquire Research In Motion to accelerate the move, rather than continue to invest in making Windows run better on handheld devices.

"As the BlackBerry becomes more capable, applications will get sucked onto it. Those are kind of places where growth is," he said. "If Microsoft catches it, they'll be all right."

See more CNET content tagged:
handheld device, Linux, handheld, Research In Motion Ltd., RIM BlackBerry

Add a Comment (Log in or register) 20 comments
There's no new thinking here, the way I see it ..
by October 15, 2004 12:48 PM PDT
Clayton Christensen knows less about these matters than he thinks. Sure, open source poses some measure of threat to Msft but in the long run, the open source business model is not sustainable--developers want to be paid for their efforts and the cost of open source products will escalate over time to accomodate this fact. It's already beginning to happen with Red Hat and others who now charge for their products. Recall, the DOS & Windows markets have always had freely available software and its had little effect. And very few users of open source want or need to review and/or change source code.

What's more important is the degree of innovation demonstrated by a company. Regardless of what many antagonists think Microsoft has a tremendous advantage in this aspect because it controls or otherwise influences such a vast portion of the software ecosystem. That is it can make its innovations profoundly available.

Microsoft doesnt need to support Linux apps though perhaps this could be part of its strategy (afterall its not really a religious entity-- msft will do what it has to to thrive and its proven that many times already). It simply has to outlast its many open source antagonists while accelerating the pace of its innovation.
Reply to this comment View reply
There's no new thinking here, the way I see it ..
by October 15, 2004 12:48 PM PDT
Clayton Christensen knows less about these matters than he thinks. Sure, open source poses some measure of threat to Msft but in the long run, the open source business model is not sustainable--developers want to be paid for their efforts and the cost of open source products will escalate over time to accomodate this fact. It's already beginning to happen with Red Hat and others who now charge for their products. Recall, the DOS & Windows markets have always had freely available software and its had little effect. And very few users of open source want or need to review and/or change source code.

What's more important is the degree of innovation demonstrated by a company. Regardless of what many antagonists think Microsoft has a tremendous advantage in this aspect because it controls or otherwise influences such a vast portion of the software ecosystem. That is it can make its innovations profoundly available.

Microsoft doesnt need to support Linux apps though perhaps this could be part of its strategy (afterall its not really a religious entity-- msft will do what it has to to thrive and its proven that many times already). It simply has to outlast its many open source antagonists while accelerating the pace of its innovation.
Reply to this comment View reply
Yes, Indeed...
by Jon N. October 15, 2004 1:16 PM PDT
Ever since Apple, Inc. halted the 'Star Trek' project (1993), end users have been looking for a viable alternative to MS Windows on the x86. Now that Linux is in the spotlight, people are beginning to see the whole open-source mindset (I really dig my MOZILLA browser!).
Even though OS X on a Mac is based on an open- source UNIX base, it's proprietary. You have to purchase the hardware with the software, & that can get expensive. Now with the advent of RED HAT, SUSE, & MANDRAKE Linux distributions, the competitive field is widening, & so are our choices. I am eagerly anticipating the release of SUSE Pro 9.2 myself. Longhorn is two long years away, & Apple's Tiger(OS X.4)is due out by 6/05.
I feel that the newest downloads of SP2 & JPEG fixes have stabilized my Windows XP computer somewhat. Most of my problems are still exclusively internet related. I think that one of these Linux distros are going to be one of the top 3 operating systems very soon.
What do you think?
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
Yes, Indeed...
by Jon N. October 15, 2004 1:16 PM PDT
Ever since Apple, Inc. halted the 'Star Trek' project (1993), end users have been looking for a viable alternative to MS Windows on the x86. Now that Linux is in the spotlight, people are beginning to see the whole open-source mindset (I really dig my MOZILLA browser!).
Even though OS X on a Mac is based on an open- source UNIX base, it's proprietary. You have to purchase the hardware with the software, & that can get expensive. Now with the advent of RED HAT, SUSE, & MANDRAKE Linux distributions, the competitive field is widening, & so are our choices. I am eagerly anticipating the release of SUSE Pro 9.2 myself. Longhorn is two long years away, & Apple's Tiger(OS X.4)is due out by 6/05.
I feel that the newest downloads of SP2 & JPEG fixes have stabilized my Windows XP computer somewhat. Most of my problems are still exclusively internet related. I think that one of these Linux distros are going to be one of the top 3 operating systems very soon.
What do you think?
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
History is not on Microsoft's side
by October 22, 2004 5:06 PM PDT
As Christensen explains in his three-book
series, market leaders have historically been
dethroned by disruption since Western Union was
disrupted after the President of WU called the
telephone a "toy" in the 1870s. If you are a
Microsoft shareholder with any access to senior
management, you probably want to first read
Christensen's books, and then ask Microsoft
senior management how Microsoft intends to
address the Linux threat. So far, their reply
basically seems to be "Linux is free, it's a
toy, we're not worried enough to change our
basic business model." Microsoft management
has, of course, responded with giving away some
code; opening code to governments; the Shared
Soure Initiative; patent threats; and embedding
Office deeper into the OS. However, IMHO, none
of the above begins to address the fundamental
challenge to its business model which open
source represents.

Christian Einfeldt
einfeldt@earthlink.net
415-351-1300
Reply to this comment
History is not on Microsoft's side
by October 22, 2004 5:06 PM PDT
As Christensen explains in his three-book
series, market leaders have historically been
dethroned by disruption since Western Union was
disrupted after the President of WU called the
telephone a "toy" in the 1870s. If you are a
Microsoft shareholder with any access to senior
management, you probably want to first read
Christensen's books, and then ask Microsoft
senior management how Microsoft intends to
address the Linux threat. So far, their reply
basically seems to be "Linux is free, it's a
toy, we're not worried enough to change our
basic business model." Microsoft management
has, of course, responded with giving away some
code; opening code to governments; the Shared
Soure Initiative; patent threats; and embedding
Office deeper into the OS. However, IMHO, none
of the above begins to address the fundamental
challenge to its business model which open
source represents.

Christian Einfeldt
einfeldt@earthlink.net
415-351-1300
Reply to this comment
Learn to Love Linux, I don't think so.
by bigjim01 December 27, 2004 8:30 AM PST
The Linux developers have yet to realize that the computer's operating system really does not matter, the most important thing is where their existing data lies and what applications they want to use. Businesses really don't matter because they will follow bad decisions no matter what the cost. I have read articles about business switching to Linux and now that they have realized that people just really don't want to invest the time to learn a completely new system, they are moving back to Windows. Also there is the little pestky thing about SCO's law suit.
The most important thing for normal users is having the ability to do what they want to do, without having to muck around with code and trying to make things work. With Windows, it just works, however with Linux, you just work.
Reply to this comment View reply
Learn to Love Linux, I don't think so.
by bigjim01 December 27, 2004 8:30 AM PST
The Linux developers have yet to realize that the computer's operating system really does not matter, the most important thing is where their existing data lies and what applications they want to use. Businesses really don't matter because they will follow bad decisions no matter what the cost. I have read articles about business switching to Linux and now that they have realized that people just really don't want to invest the time to learn a completely new system, they are moving back to Windows. Also there is the little pestky thing about SCO's law suit.
The most important thing for normal users is having the ability to do what they want to do, without having to muck around with code and trying to make things work. With Windows, it just works, however with Linux, you just work.
Reply to this comment View reply
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

Resource center from News.com sponsors
Aligning CIO & CEO visions
What CIOs need to know

Click Here!
It's a simple truth. The closer you and your CEO see things, the greater your chance for success. Our exclusive report can help you get there—and help your business grow. Get the report featuring the views of 765 CEOs on innovation. learn more

Click Here!
What CEOs think: Innovation Insights for CIOs

Learn How CIOs can deliver strategic success for their enterprises

The New CIO: Beyond Technology

Learn how CIOs become heroes

Podcast: Chris Gorog of Napster

Learn about the impact of technology in strategy execution

The future of the Enterprise

Read more about tomorrow's organization

CIO Vision Series:Innovating within a retail industry disrupted by the Web

Video: CIO of Virgin Entertainment Group, Robert Fort

CIO Vision Series: Innovating around social search

Video: Yahoo CIO Lars Rabbe

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right