The Diffusion and Adoption of Desktop Linux in Government

The Diffusion and Adoption of Desktop Linux in Government

by David B. Rankin

Introduction

Linux and the Open Source Software movement have affected worldwide computing -- first in the data center and now moving in on the desktop. Even though Microsoft Windows is the de facto desktop and office automation standard worldwide, more and more countries and their governments are looking to desktop Linux as an alternative. The adoption and diffusion of desktop Linux is the U.S. has lagged behind other parts of the world; however, federal, state and local governments in the U.S. are adopting desktop Linux much more than in the private sector. If government adopts desktop Linux, it can have an escalating effect on adoption in the private sector. Industry experts predict that desktop Linux adoption in government in the U.S. will happen in two to five years.

This research paper will look at some examples from the current body of published work related to Linux with an emphasis on the use of Linux for desktop computing, and will attempt to accomplish the following:

1. Describe the worldwide Linux phenomenon
   
2. Examine the reasons why Linux is being considered as a viable desktop operating system alternative to Microsoft Windows
   
3. Explain the reasons why desktop Linux has not been adopted more widely, especially in government use, with correlation when appropriate to the concepts described in the book Diffusion of Innovations by Everett M. Rogers
   
4. Predict where the future of desktop Linux may go

A Brief History of Linux and Open Source Software

The history of Linux and Open Source Software (OSS) are intertwined. In September 1983 Richard Stallman founded the GNU's Not Unix (GNU) project. Stallman's goal was to develop a UNIX-like operating system composed of free software (Linux.Co.Uk., n.d.). During that point in time in the 1980's, UNIX vendors had priced the UNIX operating system prohibitively out of the range of those that ran small Intel processor-based systems. Additionally, the source code for UNIX, which was once available on University campuses as a teaching tool, was now being carefully guarded and not published (Wikipedia, Linux, n.d.). The early 1980's marked a significant moment in time for small system computing, with the introduction of the IBM-PC in 1981, and IBM-PC clones appearing by 1983 (Wikipedia, IBM-PC, n.d.).

By 1990, the GNU project had developed or assembled all the components of their free operating system except the kernel. GNU made several attempts to develop a kernel -- first with a kernel development effort called Trix and later with one called Hurd.

In a completely separate and unrelated effort, Linus Torvalds, a computer science student at the University of Helsinki, Finland, was developing an operating system as a hobby. Torvalds based his "Linux" operating system kernel on Minix -- a UNIX-like operating system used for educational purposes. He released his software on the Internet for all to see, modify, and extend in September 1991. Torvalds' vision was to make his work publicly available and user-modifiable. The only caveat was that any modifications include the source code for re-release to the computing community for their use and learning. This model of sharing software with the computing community for development, education, and personal use is based on the Bazaar free software model as stated in the essay "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" by Eric Raymond (Wikipedia, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, n.d.).

Torvalds and other Linux developers tailored their kernel to work with the GNU components and utilities, in order to create a free, functional operating system. The Linux kernel and the GNU components and utilities are both powerfully impacted by the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL). The GNU GPL gives computer users the right to run the software for any purpose, study how it works, modify it if desired, redistribute copies of the software, improve the software, and re-release these improvements to the computing community. The GNU GPL was written in 1989 (Wikipedia, GNU General Public License, n.d.).

The expansion of the Internet during the same timeframe as the introduction of the Intel-based, IBM-compatible PC, Linux, and GNU programs and utilities helped to distribute Linux and the GNU programs to people worldwide.

The Linux Phenomenon

Linux adoption worldwide has many different motivations; however, some are the same in every country. Linux's low initial cost -- freely downloadable, installable, and distributable -- is an enormous draw. However low total cost of ownership, flexibility, security, and control are common attractions to Linux adopters internationally (Hanrahan, 2005).

The Apache web server is initially responsible for the introduction of Linux many organizations. Apache, written by Rob McCool, was developed in 1995 as an open source alternative to the commercial Netscape Web Server. By 1999, Apache web servers running Linux were the most popular web serving operating system, with 28.5 percent worldwide usage.

By 2002 about 28 percent of all servers worldwide were running Linux and 2.8 percent of all worldwide desktops (Wikipedia, Linux Adoption, Trends and History, n.d.).

There are several reasons why people are considering Linux as a desktop replacement for Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. Security, stability, initial cost, and independence from Microsoft's software licensing and upgrade paths are a few big incentives.

The Adoption of Desktop Linux Worldwide

According to Gartner Research, in 2005 there were 12.8 million Linux desktop users worldwide, representing about 1.6 percent of all installed worldwide desktops. Desktop Linux has the greatest installed base percentage in the Asia/Pacific region, with 2.1 percent or 3.2 million desktops. The second largest installed base is Western Europe with 1.9 percent or 3.4 million desktops. The U.S. has the smallest installed desktop Linux base of 0.6 percent or 1.4 million desktops (Jump, 2005).

Gartner also says that the use of Linux in emerging markets (e.g. China) is making PCs more accessible by reducing software costs. They state that governments in emerging markets are using Linux to make computers available to less educated and affluent people (Ench et. al., 2005). One of the issues preventing Linux's adoption in some emerging markets is the widespread piracy of Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. Also related to putting Linux in the hands of the masses is a non-profit organization called One Laptop Per Child (OLPC), which is dedicated to developing a $100 laptop computer. This computer, if developed, would run open source applications, be Linux-based, and have innovative power abilities like solar, wind-up, etc. (OLPC, n.d.).

In Europe, the governments in Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom are all using increasing amounts of open source software (IDABC, n.d.). One very visible adopter of desktop Linux is the local government of Munich, Germany, who decided in 2003 to move 14,000 government-owned and operated desktop computers from Microsoft Windows to Linux. Also, the country of Brazil is planning to convert 80 percent of state-agency computers from Windows to Linux (Hwang, 2005).

Even though the adoption of desktop Linux within the U.S. has not been as successful as in Europe, Asia, or South America, there are still some significant signs that desktop Linux is being looked at more critically. For example IBM, Dell, HP, Novell, and Red Hat are all established U.S. companies that are supporting and endorsing Linux in the data center as a general purpose server platform and as a desktop operating system alternative.

Gartner says that Linux is now a viable and serious replacement operating system for certain niche functions like kiosks, data entry, terminals, and appliances. They also state that Linux should enjoy a one to five percent adoption by mainstream consumers in 2005, and that in about two to five years desktop Linux will be on the rise for mainstream business users and consumers (Ench, et. al., 2005).

One example of desktop Linux in a niche application is the adoption of desktop Linux by Ritz Camera to run its in-store cash registers across the U.S. Ritz has 1,200 locations in 45 states and the District of Columbia. Ritz says they will use Novell Linux Desktop, as a dedicated point of sale application; Zenworks, to provide desktop, patch, and configuration management of the systems; and Novell's NetMail (Novell, 2005). Another corporate example of desktop Linux is LA Gym Equipment's migration from Windows to Novell Linux Desktop for its general staff's use (Gasperson, 2005).

There are efforts to address many of the reasons that U.S. corporate customers are not adopting desktop Linux more readily. For example, the Open Source Development Labs (ODSL) has surveyed what Linux desktop users really want and need for adoption, and has facilitated meetings with open-source and commercial companies to tackle the adoption barriers discovered in the survey. This effort is supported by Intel, IBM, HP, Linspire, Mandriva SA, Novell, Real Networks, Red Hat, Trolltech, and Xandros (Vaughn-Nichols, 2005).

According to a survey by Gartner Research, only one percent of corporate IT users run Linux desktops. Additionally, Gartner estimates that 3.2 percent of enterprise users will run Linux by 2008 (Hadfield, 2005). Reasons behind the slow corporate adoption will be addressed in the next section of this paper, "Why Desktop Linux is not adopted more widely."

In contrast, governments throughout the world, including federal, state, and local governments in the U.S., are considering and using desktop Linux. The web site, Government Forge, is dedicated to providing open source related information, programs, and tools relevant to government and the public sector. In a recent article in Government Computing News (GCN) titled "Ready for a Windows-free desktop?", Carlos Soto, a GCN staff writer, wrote about the increasing interest in the government for alternatives to Microsoft products.

Because of this interest, GCN tested three desktop Linux distributions: Novell Linux Desktop 9, Red Hat Desktop 4 ,and Xandros Desktop OS 3, along with BSD-based Max OS X version 10.3.7. GCN determined that although Novell and Red Hat's offerings had positives, they were not quite ready yet for use on commodity hardware because of driver issues. Xandros was determined to be in a good position to provide competition for Windows XP out of the box (Soto, 2005).

A June 2005 Gartner research article states that an undisclosed U.S. Midwestern state had decided to adopt Linux and open source software to provide computers for each high-school student in every class, with the goal of installing and supporting 300,000 Linux-based laptops and desktops (Rust and Silver, 2005).

Why Desktop Linux is not adopted more widely

Dr. Nir Kshetri has researched the diffusion and adoption of Linux, and published a brief paper with his findings titled "Diffusion pattern of Linux: An assessment on major technology dimensions." Kshetri maps challenges to the adoption of Linux to the Rogers' characteristics of a technology influencing its diffusion rate (Kshetri, n.d.). Kshetri focused his research on developing countries, with the belief that a vast majority of the world's population live in developing countries and should drive the diffusion and adoption of new technologies. In an attempt to continue the hypothesis of his research, this paper will map a few challenges of Linux adoption to Rogers' five dimensions, but will focus on desktop Linux adoption in the U.S., in particular.

Rogers describes five characteristics of innovations that help to explain their rate of adoption into the population (Rogers, 1995):

1. Relative Advantage -- The degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it supersedes. Examples can be cost (TCO), social prestige, convenience, or satisfaction. Rogers states that the greater the perceived advantage of the innovation, the faster the rate of adoption.
   
   
2. Compatibility -- The degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of the potential adopters. In some cases this means that using the innovation so similar to the technology it is replacing, any perceived differences are unimportant to the adopter.
   
   
3. Complexity -- The degree to which an innovation is perceived to be difficult to understand and use. If an innovation is perceived as being too difficult to try, adoption will suffer.
   
   
4. Trialability -- The degree to which an innovation can be experimented with on a limited basis. Being able to try a new technology before total adoption decreases uncertainty.
   
   
5. Observability -- The degree to which others can see the results of an innovation. If people see the results of an innovation, they are more likely to adopt it themselves.

Microsoft Windows XP is the current de facto desktop standard in the U.S., and Microsoft Office 2003 is the current de facto business and personal productivity software application. Gartner states that Microsoft has a U.S. Windows installed base of about 95.3 percent or about 242 million (Jump, 2005). Of that 95.3 percent, 60.6 percent or about 154 million are running Windows XP.

Microsoft says in its 2005 Annual Report that it is the world leader in business and personal productivity software applications (e.g. Microsoft Office). The report states that Microsoft Office and its related products (called Information Worker by Microsoft) are designed to be released using a "wave" approach, with a major release every 24 to 36 months. In 2005, Microsoft enjoyed a 3 percent increase in its Information Worker revenue and earned $11.013 billion in this single division (Microsoft, n.d.).

In a three part series of articles titled "Stopping Linux desktop adoption sabotage," John Terpstra alleges there is a conspiracy to purposely place hurdles in the path of Linux desktop adoption in the U.S. Terpstra is a member of the Desktop Linux Consortium and a long term member of the Samba open source team. Terpstra states that the commercial IT retail market purposely limits consumer choice by not offering pre-loaded Linux PCs, even when doing so would be more profitable by 5 to 10 percent on the sale of Linux-only machines. He states that stores like Best Buy, CompUSA, and Circuit City do not carry Linux-friendly peripherals. Terpstra says that the U.S. consumer has to bear considerable additional costs just to try Linux (Terpstra, 2005).

These challenges to desktop Linux are examples of Rogers' relative advantage, compatibility, and trialability characteristics. If consumers do not get the opportunity to try desktop Linux and compare it with Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, this is a direct example of preventing trialability and observability. Since the average consumer may actually have to pay more to get Linux to run on commodity hardware and peripherals, this would directly affect their perception of the relative advantage of desktop Linux. Additionally, if hardware and peripheral manufacturers are purposely limiting the development of Linux-friendly network cards, wireless cards, sound cards, video cards, printers, scanners, etc., this will affect the consumer's Linux adoption experience and directly influence their compatibility perceptions.

One of the arguments for desktop Linux adoption is that since Linux is free, it is less expensive to operate and support. It is true that many Linux distributions have a freely downloadable component; however, supporting Linux as a part of an enterprise is not the same as a Linux enthusiast supporting a single machine. Supported versions of Linux, like those offered by Red Hat and Novell, are not free. If you do download and install the enthusiast version of a Linux distribution, you will then have to get your Linux support from the open-source, enthusiast community, or develop that support expertise from within your IT technical support group. If you want vendor support for your Linux installations, you will need to purchase support agreements just like you would do in a Windows environment.

Some Windows environments use desktop management software like Intel Landesk, Novell Zenworks, or Microsoft's SMS to provide centralized desktop management capabilities. Even without this software, Windows environments that use Novell's eDirectory or Microsoft's Active Directory can leverage Windows' local group policies or Microsoft's domain group policies to control many aspects of the local desktop. To manage a Linux desktop environment with the same level of policy, controls, and lockdown you would have in a managed desktop Windows environment, you will need to buy or build software to enforce organizational computing policies, provide machine lockdown and software installation restrictions, and provide your technical people appropriate support tools like remote control, software push, and patch management.

According to Gartner Research unless desktop Linux can be locked down, TCO savings will be a challenge (Silver, 2003). Looking at the perceived initial low cost of Linux, the cost of supporting Linux over time, and the cost of developing the appropriate expertise to support Linux, these additional cost factors could erode the current perception that desktop Linux enjoys of relative advantage of cost. Additionally, the Linux environment would need a rich desktop management infrastructure to be perceived as on an equal plane with commercial desktop management products. Although there are open source alternatives to provide some or all of this functionality, the building, implementation, and configuration of such a solution is not free. One advantage of Linux and open source desktop management tools is their high level of trialability. They are free to download and try, install, and use if you have the time and expertise.

Most organizations use Windows applications. As stated earlier, Microsoft Office is the de facto standard of office automation applications worldwide, and even more so in the U.S. Additionally, it makes financial sense for companies that develop commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) applications to target development for the Windows platform, because it is so prevalent. Gartner says that there are many free or open source applications, but questions whether they the applications that are needed in a typical organization. For example, Gartner states there are few open source replacements for large commercial enterprise resource planning (ERP) applications like SAP and Peoplesoft, or customer relationship management (CRM) systems like SAS Customer Intelligence (Silver, 2005). It should be noted there are some web-based or Java-based applications in the ERP and CRM area, but certainly not yet at the same caliber of the commercial industry leaders (Linux Enterprise Computing, n.d.).

The challenge for desktop Linux and the current de facto standard of Windows applications running on Windows desktops relates to the Rogers concepts of relative advantage, compatibility, and observability. Consumers may not see the relative advantage of using open source alternatives to Microsoft Office if they experience problems with sharing documents with Microsoft Office users, experience file formatting problems, experience problems with complex Excel macros, etc. The concept of relative advantage states that the innovation must be perceived as better than the idea it supersedes.

If people do not perceive open source replacements for Microsoft Office or other COTS applications as better than -- not just cheaper than -- the applications they currently use, then adoption will be slow. Until the feature set and quality of applications that can run on a Linux desktop are as good as, or better than, the quality and feature set of Windows-based applications, the consumer's perception of compatibility will be negative and this will directly affect adoption.

Unfortunately, it has been the exception, rather than the rule, for companies to adopt desktop Linux and Linux-based applications. If increasing numbers of people were to adopt Linux applications, this would foster observability, since this would help create a critical mass of desktop Linux users and foster the development of applications that would run on a Linux desktop. It should be noted that web-based applications and Java applications are directly portable to a Linux desktop. Additionally, applications that are delivered via a terminal session (e.g. 3270 or VTxx) can easily be run in a terminal session on a Linux desktop.

Another problem with desktop Linux adoption is the variety of Linux distributions. Gartner says that although all distributions use the same kernel, they have different file formats, runtime libraries, packaging and libraries (Hubley and Librano, 2006). This has an effect on software developers, who have to create different versions of applications for the different Linux distributions. One example is simply the way applications are packaged and delivered. SuSE Linux and Red Hat Linux use Red Hat Package Manager (RPM) to package and deliver applications, but RPM packages on SuSE may not necessarily install and run cleanly without recompilation on Red Hat, and vice versa. Debian uses a completely different package format called .deb, and uses a packaging system called Advanced Packaging Tool. RPM and .deb packages are not binary compatible.

Because consumers and businesses are expecting desktop applications to install and load without a lot of configuration, this is a high hurdle for Linux to have to clear. Since Windows applications will run on all Windows machines and there is backward compatibility built into many Windows applications, this makes the adoption of desktop Linux harder for the consumer and the early adopter business considering migration. This challenge is directly related to Rogers' compatibility characteristic, because of the high technical skill needed to resolve cross Linux distribution issues; complexity is a diffusion and adoption issue for the average consumer and early adopter business.

Most computer users expect a graphical user interface (GUI) to make using the computer and its applications easier to use. In the Windows environment, there is the Windows operating system and the differentiation is simply the version (e.g. 3.11, 95, 98, NT4, 2000, ME, XP, and Vista). Since Windows applications are designed to work with Windows application programming interfaces (APIs), going up or down a single Windows version does not usually cause big problems, since the APIs are well-known by the developer community. In most cases, application developers will document version issues, to warn the consumer before purchase or installation of applications.

Linux has multiple GUI interfaces, but two have emerged as de facto standards. The GNU Network Object Model Environment (GNOME) and the K Desktop Environment (KDE) are two very good Linux GUI environments, each with its own selection of tools, utilities, and packages. Because the two environments have a different look and feel, this can complicate many activities and increase the learning curve for the uninitiated user. Because of this, complexity and compatibility are more problematic for desktop Linux.

Windows and Macintosh desktops have set the standard for what users expect from their computers. When a user installs a new peripheral, they expect the operating system to prompt them for what to do or to simply make the device available. When a user loads a DVD or CD-ROM, they expect music to play, a movie to start, or a program to load. Even though desktop Linux can be programmed to do all of these things, the average consumer may be frustrated with devices not doing what they expect, or being as easy to operate as what they are used to currently. This is an example of Rogers' compatibility and complexity characteristics; and because of these two issues, desktop Linux's diffusion and adoption may be affected.

Government Desktop Linux Adoption

Ksherti states in his research that governments in developing countries are the biggest purchaser of computer hardware and software, so the adoption of desktop Linux there will have a powerful secondary effect of forcing people who want to do business with the government to adopt compatible file formats (e.g. OpenDocument vs. Microsoft Office file formats).

In the research paper "Government and the Open Source Software," Jyh-An Lee implies that the battle for government software procurement is critical for software companies. Governments, including the federal, state, and local governments of the U.S., are a very large consumer of computer software. Hence, a shift in the government's position of software -- like a shift from Microsoft Office to OpenOffice -- could have a snowballing effect on its citizens (Lee, n.d.). With that as an assumption, the diffusion and adoption of desktop Linux by the government could be the factor needed to create a critical mass.

Gartner, in its research paper titled "Hype Cycle for Government," describes technology trends in terms of visibility and maturity. The phases of these cycles are as follows:

1. Technology Trigger
   
2. Peak of Inflated Expectations
   
3. Trough of Disillusionment
   
4. Slope of Enlightenment
   
5. Plateau of Productivity

When a technology reaches the Plateau of Productivity, it is a mature technology that is proven and accepted by consumers. Gartner says that 30 percent of the technologies' target audience has adopted the technology or is adopting the technology as it enters this plateau.

Gartner projects that desktop Linux use in the U.S. by government is currently on the rise from Technology Trigger to the Peak of Inflated Expectations, and that the Plateau of Productivity will be reached for desktop Linux use by government in the U.S. in two to five years. Gartner says that factors affecting the increased speed of desktop Linux adoption in U.S. government are the slow economy, the rising percent of software cost relative to PC costs, shrinking IT budgets, and increased pricing by Microsoft. The cost of migrating applications is limiting Linux adoption on the desktop; however, government is moving much more aggressively to desktop Linux than the private sector (Di Maio et. al., 2005).

According to Lee, the adoption of open source software such as desktop Linux can cause the software market to tip to that standard, and that governments need to be careful with their influence. The government's adoption of specific software will not only affect its citizens, but will also impact businesses that deal with the government. Lee says that he has found no empirical evidence to show that the adoption of open source software would tip the market, but the hypothesis seems plausible (Lee, n.d.).

So, even with resistance from the private sector, the lack of support by PC manufacturers, and peripheral makers and campaigns by Microsoft to slow the adoption of desktop Linux, the OS is now getting a serious look as a desktop alternative to Microsoft within U.S. government agencies. Gartner says, in a paper titled "Open-Source Software Running for Public Office," that because of Linux's success in the data center, it is now considered serious enough and stable enough for other uses (Di Maio et. al., 2003).

In short, in terms of the Rogers' characteristics, Linux has achieved trialability, compatibility, and observability with government CIOs.

Conclusion

In his three-part article, Terpstra suggests that the Linux phenomenon has already created a worldwide-supported, alternative desktop platform. The numbers of free applications that will run on Linux are growing daily and application vendors, not wanting to be left behind, are offering versions that will run on Linux. In the U.S., he states, hardware vendors are sitting on the sidelines and electronics vendors are waiting it out because of their allegiance to Microsoft. However, since Linux is worldwide, he sees China emerging as a technology power with Linux as their choice of desktop operating system.

In the U.S., the government appears to be taking the lead on Linux adoption. According to a white paper from the Center for Digital Government titled "Open Source Open Government," there is a growing critical mass of open source in government. For example, the U.S. Department of Defense uses open source for encryption, firewalls, and email list management; the Government Open Code Collaborative provides a shared registry of open source solutions for seven states and four municipalities; the U.S. Treasury Department relies on Linux for tax collection, accounting and budget management. Gartner says that U.S. government agencies will adopt desktop Linux in government in two to five years. Is desktop Linux the next disruptive technology in government? I predict that in three years it may be.