• On CHOW: Sexy vampire party
June 5, 2009 9:26 AM PDT

As chip sales plummet, which software vendors will survive?

by Matt Asay

The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) is now projecting that global chip sales will drop 21 percent in 2009, reflecting a souring view since its last projection in November 2008, according to The Wall Street Journal. Fewer chips means fewer new servers and fewer personal computers sold, which is consistent with IDC's report of a 25-percent decline in server sales in the first quarter of 2009.

Against the backdrop of these hardware declines, which software vendors are best-positioned to withstand CIOs' spending frigidity?

Recent earnings reports from Novell and from Red Hat suggest that Linux and open-source vendors may clean up even as spending gets chopped.

Indeed, Red Hat CEO Jim Whitehurst has suggested that the darkened economy spells "light" for Red Hat:

Our value proposition is even more compelling in a challenging economic environment, and we believe that's a key driver to our solid financial results and market share gains.

IT departments woke up on January 1, 2009, almost certainly looking at shrinking IT budgets but a continued need to make themselves useful to their enterprises. Enter open source, with its nonexistent (at least initially) license fees and try-before-you-buy mentality, which is precisely the right message for a down economy.

I work for Alfresco, an open-source content management and collaboration company, and advise over 10 open-source start-ups, including MindTouch, Volantis, SugarCRM, JasperSoft, Openbravo, and others. Across the board, the sour economy has been a net positive for the open-source companies with which I'm familiar, with pipelines growing by a factor of three in many cases, albeit with longer than usual sales cycles.

The question for companies that peddle proprietary products is whether they can replicate the ease of adoption that open source affords. Oracle has gone a long way toward this by making its products available to developers to download and try for free, but some companies still have yet to find a clue, as Cloudera CEO Mike Olson discovered recently with GitHub.

The market has tightened considerably, and is likely to get worse. The software vendors that can deliver superior value at a lower cost and less hassle will win in this environment. This should bode well for open source, but open-source companies still have their work cut out for them to come out ahead.


Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay.
Recent posts from The Open Road
Google shifts software value to operations, away from IP
Mobile: Still waiting to see what sticks
Google privacy controls: Most people won't care
Amazon's move mocks EU's fear of Oracle
Skype to open-source far too little
The difference a few years makes to open source
Novell cuts 3 percent of its workforce, plus benefits
Data's one-two punch in open-source business models
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (19 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by Mr. Dee June 5, 2009 11:32 AM PDT
Let me tell you the Company's that will certainly survive the current industry woes:
IBM, Microsoft, Oracle and other major players that are considered foundational.

Let me tell you the Company's that should be worrying:
Redhat, Novell, MindTouch, Volantis, SugarCRM, JasperSoft and Openbravo to name a few.
Reply to this comment
by odubtaig June 5, 2009 3:50 PM PDT
You're looking at those upside down.
by common--sense June 6, 2009 8:57 AM PDT
foundational like cobol?
by empirestatebuddy June 5, 2009 12:57 PM PDT
If free Linux doesn't catch-on during this long recession (when consumers are more cash-conscious), when will it ever? Like it or not, most people are happy with Windows and Macs... and don't really want to learn a new OS. Perhaps, Linux can find a way in (maybe through smart phones), but I'm still skeptical. It's been years, and Linux is still below 1%... and, after dominating the netbook market early on, within a year, Linux has lost 96% of new netbooks to Windows. If Windows were as bad and vulnerable as so many journalists claim, this wouldn't be the case. But it is...
Reply to this comment
by santuccie June 5, 2009 5:02 PM PDT
Well spoken.
by odubtaig June 5, 2009 6:11 PM PDT
Yes, his numbers are wrong (vastly in the case of Netbooks) and with them being the basis for his claims, the entire comment... and it's written. But the spelling's good.
by santuccie June 5, 2009 8:21 PM PDT
I won't claim he's right or wrong, but will point out that he said NEW netbooks. Given the fact that Linux-based netbooks have been pulled from store shelves to be sold exclusively online, 96% of NEW netbooks doesn't sound unreasonable. I saw 90% being claimed by Microsoft, and it could have grown since then because of the shutout on walk-in sales. If you can link me to a resource that says otherwise, I'll accept that.
by santuccie June 5, 2009 8:41 PM PDT
Sorry, I posted in the wrong place...

BTW, when I check Net Applications, I'm seeing Linux to be at .99%. Of course, this only reflects Internet-connected machines, but I would tend to expect standalone Windows systems to be proportionally lower than standalone Linux machines. Doesn't mean I'm right, but that's my opinion.
by santuccie June 5, 2009 8:45 PM PDT
I said that wrong. I meant proportionally higher.
by santuccie June 5, 2009 9:33 PM PDT
Here's a blog that looks fairly objective and reliable: http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/desktop_mobile/windows_is_not_on_96_of_netbooks.html

Apparently, Brandon LeBlanc started the 96% rumor which, according to the author of the above-linked blog (Joe Wilcox), is the correct figure for the United States. Worldwide, however, the percentage is lower; I'm seeing 80% or less in Wilcox's blog, and 75% in another. 75% is lower than 80, so that works for me. Cheers!
by odubtaig June 6, 2009 6:17 AM PDT
Net Applications is known to be a poor measure given that it collects data from its own customers only . As ITWire says:

"[of approximately 160 Million (~16% of all computer users) visitors to sites per month] if Microsoft?s TechNet web site is included (which may or may not be the case, but a Microsoft logo is part of a rotating list of logos displayed) then you would expect it is likely visitors to that site tend towards using Microsoft operating systems."

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/25361/1141/

Contrarily, if the user forums for every Linux distro out there were added (assuming none are on there already) there would be a bias towards Linux which would have to be discounted.

Approximately 1% is also the most conservative estimate with the median (depending on source) being ~2%.

Yes, Linux is small-time on the desktop, yes it still needs a lot of work but a little objectivity never hurt anyone (except those with vested interests).
by santuccie June 6, 2009 11:04 AM PDT
Thanks for the info. Any resources in particular that you use?
by santuccie June 6, 2009 12:18 PM PDT
BTW, iTWire makes no direct implication as to whether Net Applications is affiliated with platform-specific sites, nor what sites may be in their network. However, Net Applications does monitor "430+" search engines, including Google. And not just Google in the U.S., but all over the world. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can think of no better crop for Web statistics than search engines, not even portals. Of course, they might not monitor surreptitiously installed spy search engines such as MyWebSearch, but this would only boost Windows stats anyway. :P

Just a thought. What do you think?
by santuccie June 6, 2009 12:23 PM PDT
Actually, I may have read that too quickly. The site says they "classify 430+ referral sources identified as search engines." That sounds like they're just looking at cookies. My mistake.
See more comment replies
by santuccie June 5, 2009 8:40 PM PDT
BTW, when I check Net Applications, I'm seeing Linux to be at .99%. Of course, this only reflects Internet-connected machines, but I would tend to expect standalone Windows systems to be proportionally lower than standalone Linux machines. Doesn't mean I'm right, but that's my opinion.
Reply to this comment
by santuccie June 6, 2009 12:22 PM PDT
Actually, I may have read that too quickly. The site says they "classify 430+ referral sources identified as search engines." That sounds like they're just looking at cookies. My mistake.
Reply to this comment
(19 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next

After 5 years, Firefox faces new challenges

Mozilla helped reshape the Web since releasing Firefox 1.0 five years ago. Now it's got a reawakened Microsoft and Google Chrome to reckon with.

There's a map for that: GPS or smartphone?

Almost every handset comes with mapping software these days, but standalone GPS devices are becoming more affordable than ever.

advertisement

About The Open Road

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Open Road topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right