-* Integrated support for Windows NT®, FTP, HTTP, Appletalk, and Novell environments, which enables consolidated administration in heterogeneous networks. 

-* No support for SSO, thus requiring end users to use at least two logon names and passwords— one for Windows and one for Linux/UNIX. 

-Furthermore, clustering solutions are new to Linux, lack some key features, and documentation can be insufficient. For example, Red Hat's High Availability Server is a customized distribution of Red Hat Linux version 6.2 with Red Hat's Piranha clustering package. In its review of the product, ZDNet noted: "Offices without Linux gurus on staff should seriously consider buying Red Hat's service package, especially because the documentation included with the software does not describe how to implement the product with any operating system other than Red Hat Linux 6.2". ZDNet also noted that Red Hat’ s High Availability Server also "lacks content replication support", a critical feature for Web server appliances in Web farms. The OEM would need to source or build and then integrate and test these technologies itself to build a comprehensive solution. Taken together, these limitations make building and maintaining a clustering solution on Linux a challenge for the OEM and can increase both cost and time-to-market. 

-Linux now has over five options for a JFS. All of these are new to Linux and the depth of integration and regression testing can be scattered and the number of real-world implementations limited. The [OEM] will need to verify for itself the integration, depth of testing, and in-field results. With Linux, the OEM will have to take on the extra integration work to incorporate an add-in [JFS] or opt for a vendor-specific Linux distribution such as Red Hat, tying the OEM to that vendor for ongoing upgrades, support, and maintenance at an extra cost. Furthermore, Linux offers only limited support for Plug and Play, no kernel mode protection, and no functionality equivalent to Windows File Protection— significantly increasing difficulty and time when recovering from a failure. 

-* Linux vendors and open source participants rely heavily on source access, taking it on faith that the "many eyes” of open source developers equal a more secure operating system. Recently, a TechRepublic article comparing security between Windows and Linux reported that up to its publication date in the autumn of 2001, Windows had 24 reported security vulnerabilities. In comparison, Red Hat Linux had 28 vulnerabilities. When you consider the difference in the size of the installed base of Windows 2000 to Red Hat Linux, the percentages indicate a higher degree of security vulnerabilities for Linux. 

-To ensure proper management of its intellectual property rights, an OEM must carefully examine an array of licensing complexities around the General Public License (GPL) that govern Linux. These complexities have resulted in embedded and dedicated operating system companies such as Wind River saying that they are seeing “ a growing problem due to the growing uncertainty of using GPL-based code in embedded devices". An example of this risk can be taken from NVIDIA. An NVIDIA programmer, in the course of developing a driver for one of its products, used a portion of code from a freely available video driver. The developer failed to realize the code was licensed under the GPL and would therefore require NVIDIA to release the source code for its entire driver. Because NVIDIA did not want to release the source code to its commercial software, the company incurred substantial cost to develop a new driver that did not contain the GPL code.