Microsoft vs. Linux: An Updated Perspective: Page 3

For Microsoft to accomplish its goals it needs a product that can embrace what Linux provides, which is largely job security for the old UNIX camp, without creating the threat of a vendor that is both too powerful and misuses that power. For Linux to succeed, it has to find a way to evolve to face emerging requirements for the platform, to hold off increasing internal and external threats, and to guard against power abuses by its own supporters.

In the end, both paths have a long future and it is probably best for the industry that both continue to exist and continue to compete. (And let’s not forget the importance of additional emerging alternatives that help drive innovation.)

But it is also true that from the perspective of the IT buyer, this competition can only go so far because, in the end both sides will need to focus on interoperability. Because allowing one or the other to completely dominate a shop has, historically, not been in the best interest of the companies the IT organizations serve.

In the end, and this always seems to be the ultimate truth, the IT organization that maintains perspective and stays solidly focused on the needs of its company – while maintaining balance between the tactical and strategic – will be the most successful. It is that success, not the success of either camp, which should remain our primary goal.