Given the title, anyone who knows me is expecting me to predict the demise of open source. I have to admit that’s understandable, because they’ve all heard me rant about the failure of the community to prove the open source model is financially feasible in the long run. Well, they’re in for a surprise.

I’m a fan of open source, having used Linux as an embedded OS several times over the past eight years, from load balancers to switches. When selecting the OS for each of those systems, cost was only a small part of the decision. Linux simply proved to be a better solution each time than the old WindRiver OS we’d used in the early nineties. Windows was never really an option for all the obvious reasons. However, that hasn’t been enough to convince me of open source’s long term viability. There’s a difference, after all, between being a fan and being a believer.

What I’ve been waiting to see is open source taking a lead in breaking new technological ground. Of course there are thousands of open source projects, and the hundreds of startups, and even a few IPOs, but that’s not the point. The vast majority of what I read about is based on the commoditization of existing technology and not new innovation. Even Linux exists only because Linus wanted a free alternative to Minix. So, as venture capital poured into open source in the nineties, I remained unconvinced that much was being invested in fundamental innovation. Instead, the vast majority of open source startups are service plays.

When I tell people this I invariably hear “that’s where traditional software companies make their money anyway, so open source just bypasses the early stages when licenses generate significant revenue.” Perhaps it’s just me, but that seems to be copying what’s wrong with proprietary software rather than what’s right. As a professional marketer, I say this because, in my experience, firms that gain the majority of their revenue from service tend to empower the service organization to begin defining the boundaries product development must work within. When that happens, innovation inevitably suffers. As a customer, I say this because I want vendors to feel a need to continuously sell me on using their products rather thinking of me as an inexhaustible supply of service revenue extracted in ever more imaginative and painful ways.

Having said all this, I find it interesting to ponder the potential interactions of open source with utility computing. At first glance I see two effects. First, as the initial utility computing systems are built, open source is likely to provide the base functionality of both the systems and the deployed applications. With no license fees to negotiate for a virtual deployment and a user base interested in pushing the envelope, this seems natural. More interestingly though, is the impact utility computing will have on open source. I’ve come to the conclusion that utility computing may just be what open source needs. Why?

Of course, it’s only my opinion and I’m likely to take some heat for saying it, but I feel most open source software is beyond the capability of typical IT professionals to use. In fact, I’ve become convinced that’s part of the appeal. Can’t compile a Linux kernel? You have no business in the community. OK, so I’m exaggerating a bit, but there’s little doubt that complexities like compiling kernels limits the scope of open source use. Numerous consultants as well as companies that package open source software like RedHat and SpikeSource are based on monetizing that very niche.

Utility computing, however, can eliminate this barrier altogether. To understand why, consider how VMware and Xen are being used in many data centers. Initially popularized for server consolidation, virtualization is now frequently used to create server templates. A server running the appropriate hypervisor can boot any compatible virtual machine image, thus eliminating the typical server build cycle. Instead, a boot volume that can be used like a master template is created. When another server of that type is needed, a copy the boot image is made, configuration files are updated, and the virtual machine is ready to boot. The whole process can be performed in minutes instead of days. I think it’s reasonable to assume that any utility computing system will have to provide similar capabilities. It’s also likely that a selection of prebuilt images will be part of any service offering. Therefore, for users of utility computing, compiling kernels will be a thing of the past. Open source software will become far more accessible than ever before.

Innovators bringing out new services will be drawn to utility computing because it saves on capital, reduces cycle time and eliminates the bother of building and maintaining a data center. Of course, if they haven’t already, they’ll pick up open source as an offshoot of using utility computing. (For those of you who assume these innovators are already open source users, guess again.

Most I’ve spoken with have no clue how to build a Linux server.) As we all do when building a service, they’ll find pieces of functionality unmet and they’ll write code to fulfill that need. Code that may easily find its way back into the open source community.

So for the first time I find myself not only being a fan of open source, but (just maybe) a believer.