Does Microsoft Need Linux?

In my previous post I put forth the idea that Linux needs Microsoft to set hardware standards and drive PC hardware to a commodity. Now for the flip side: does Microsoft need Linux?

I'm sure that many folks at Microsoft wish that Linux would simply disappear. If it weren't for Linux (and its open source followers) the world would be a much simpler place and Microsoft would have a larger share of it.

The question is: Does Microsoft benefit from Linux? I think that it does, in a small way.

Linux keeps people focussed on the desktop model of computing. Desktop computing has been with us since 1981 and the IBM PC -- although some may argue that pre-PCs had some say in that . Let's say that it started, seriously, in 1977 with the Apple ][.

Desktop computing is different from the mainframe and minicomputer models. With desktop computing, each user has their own computer, and importantly for Microsoft, copies (and therefore licenses) of their software.

Several models have challenged the desktop. They include client/server, web apps, and smartphone apps. Client/server and web apps are similar to the mainframe model with a central server and remote users and only the central site paying for licenses. The smartphone app model has individual licenses but Apple has driven the cost of apps down to the $1.00 range, a far cry from the $500 license of PC applications.

Linux is clearly in the desktop application world. Linux may run the Droid smartphones but the mindspace for Linux is a competitor to Windows. It exists and it validates the desktop model. In this sense, Linux helps Windows.

Windows pays a price for Linux support of the desktop and server models. No small number of servers run Linux and Apache, not Windows and IIS. No small number of desktop PCs run Linux and OpenOffice and Firefox, not Windows and Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer. I suspect that the lost revenue outweighs the benefits of keeping people in the desktop fold.

Beyond that, I see little benefit to Microsoft, from Linux or from open source.

So the answer is no. Microsoft may benefit (somewhat) from Linux, but the cost outweighs the benefit. Microsoft does not need Linux and it would probably be better off without it.