During a presentation on IBM’s involvement with Open Source, Andreas Pleschek from IBM in Stuttgart, Germany, who heads open source and Linux technical sales across North East Europe for IBM made a very interesting statement. “Andreas Pleschek also told that IBM has cancelled their contract with Microsoft as of October this year. That means that IBM will not use Windows Vista for their desktops. Beginning from July, IBM employees will begin using IBM Workplace on their new, Red Hat-based platform. Not all at once – some will keep using their present Windows versions for a while. But none will upgrade to Vista.”
Take that IBM!
Not likely. IBM and MS probably have a contract together for IBM to supply PPC chips for the XBOX360. You can’t just break a contract and find another supplier when you have a contract.
It doesn’t matter whether a contract exists to supply PPC chips to Microsoft “contractually” for the next 10 days, or the next 10 years. MS is stuck with IBM and their offshoot of the PPC Cell Core for the entire life of the 360. There is no other supplier for that varient of the PPC. They can not change processors until the XBox720 is released. At which point MS may not matter on the console front anyway. (Personally I’m hoping that Nintendo will come on strong.)
Funny MSFT jumps on PPC after the platform dies! Just like they jump into the PDA market after it was already clear that market was going nowhere.
PPC platform dead? Are you certain? Because, AFAIK, they’re still using it hevily for servers (well, basically anything but desktops, that was Apple’s role for them). If I have been misinformed, please correct me.
The PPC is *far* from dead. The PPC processor is in almost everything.
The short short list?
Microsoft Xbox360
Sony Playstation 3
Nintendo Gamecube
Cisco Router Processor Cards
Proprietary Telecom Processor Cards
Proprietary PBX Cards
Automotive BCU (Body Control Units)
PowerQUICC (PPC Derivative) DSL Modems
Various Printers, Copiers and Fax Machines
IBM’s own Power Series servers
the list just keeps going. Yes, PPC is no more for the Mac, but the problem Apple had with their needs for the chip was that it was always looked at in an embedded format in almost all forms but the Power5 and prior server level chips. IBM basically told them to jump off the pier because they had hundreds of companies buying PPC chips from them, Apple was just a blip on the radar.
The short short list?
Microsoft Xbox360
Sony Playstation 3
Nintendo Gamecube
Cisco Router Processor Cards
Proprietary Telecom Processor Cards
Proprietary PBX Cards
Automotive BCU (Body Control Units)
PowerQUICC (PPC Derivative) DSL Modems
Various Printers, Copiers and Fax Machines
IBM’s own Power Series servers
.
.
AmigaONE
Pegasos systems
MobileGT platform
Blue Gene supercomputer
.
.
.
more? SURE
Edited 2006-03-08 10:55
All that’s left are the low-margin markets (other than the servers).
“All that’s left are the low-margin markets (other than the servers).”
Go away dummy.
That would be really intelligent for MS, yeah.
Not surprising though, IBM is still smarting from the OS/2 days, a jump from Microsft to anything else is not surprising,
but if this is worldwide, the groundswell effect by a complete shift of a major company could have a major effect on linux adoption on the whole. Its that whole lead by example thing,
And “Red Hat-Based”
Fedora Core perhaps?
Edited 2006-03-07 21:39
Remember, IBM is all about Enterprise computing.
And “Red Hat-Based”
Fedora Core perhaps?
More likely to refer to their own in-house improvements on Red Hat. Paying for RH support in general is probably still cheaper than rolling their own–which they’d have to if they just went with Fedora, I assume.
Fedora Core perhaps?
Probably. CentOS is a possibility as well, but since IBM already has a relationship with RedHat they may want to support RH by using their product. Using CentOS may also be a useful choice since it would show that a community-based distro is viable in an Enterprise environment.
If you would follow the link further on Groklaw, LinuxForum Day 2
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060305214231974
This is what is THE NEWS here.
At the end of the presentation, Andreas Pleschek revealed that the laptop he used for the presentation was running a pre-release of their new platform, the Open Client. It is actually a Red Hat work station with IBM’s new Workplace Client, which is built in Java on top of Eclipse. Because of Eclipse, it runs on both Linux and Windows, and they have been able to reuse the C++ code in Lotus Notes for Windows to run it natively on Linux via Eclipse. Internally in IBM, for years, they have had a need to run Lotus Notes on Linux, and now they can. And they will offer it to their customers.
Workplace uses Lotus Notes for mail, calendar, etc. and Firefox as their browser. For an office suite, they use OpenOffice.org.
Gotta scrap this one from my list of usual bitchin’ topics:) IBM has just become better Linux citizen in my eyes. IBM will finaly provide native Linux client for Notes. Uaaaaaahhhhhh, no more wine-Notes crap for me to administer Domino server I’m forced to support.
Google, your turn now!
Edited 2006-03-08 01:19
Google actually stated that they wanted to port their Win-apps (Picasa, Google Desktop, Gtalk etc.) to Linux using WineLib. So my guess will be that Google apps for Linux will look like crap and offer little integration with Linux (e.g. no right-click options, no system tray icons etc.). See details here: http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9556554213.html
IBM, 5 years behind the times again! Maybe by 2010 they’ll be ready to upgrade to OS X. In the mean time, LINUX is an excellent baby-step. At least it gets them over the Windows-addiction that seem to be so endemic in enterprise!
An interesting observation. When I arrived at IBM in 2000, all my coworkers were running Linux on the desktop. Since 2003 many of them have been running OS X. Apple’s switch away from PowerPC and native Notes for Linux may push people back to Linux, though.
Let the exodus begin
Everyone should take this claim with a grain of salt. IBM has already tried to convert its desktops to Linux — and failed.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/01/25/HNibmsilent_1.html
Personally, I think he’s full of cr*p.
The article you linked to really doesn’t back up your claim that IBM tried and failed. You could’ve supported a “they tried and it turned out to be slower than expected”, but 15,000 out of 40,000-60,000 for a company as large as IBM is hardly a mark of failure.
Personally, I think he’s full of cr*p.
Wrong he’d not the one who is full of cr*p.
In the article you link, they point out that one of the problems slowing the adoption of the Linux desktop in IBM was having to run the Notes client on WINE in Linux.
IBM have now had a broad roll out of Workplace whose Java based Eclipse RCP runs on Linux. In addition the up and coming Hannover client for Notes is Eclipse RCP based and will run on Linux and will be the first Notes client that runs natively on Linux. This is made possible by porting the Notes client C++ code as an Eclipse RCP plugin. Now the same code can be compiled for Linux, Windows and Mac OSX then run on the appropriate platform in the Eclipse RCP.
In addition IBM’s fork of Openoffice the “IBM Editors” has been developed as an Eclipse RCP plugin and Workplace and potentially the Hannover based Notes client are being supplied with a soon to be ODF compliant office suite (to which IBM has even added a new project management application) which can also read and write the old legacy MS Office formats.
With all this happening IBM has no need of either MS Windows or MS Office. I am sure IBM will never deploy Vista or Office 12 for their internal use. The impact of this on the corporate world could be significant
1. IBM actually switches. Computer geeks rejoice.
2. IBM gets a better deal from MS. Computer geeks frown and move on.
I hope it is 1.
There does seem to be something in the air, though. Companies seem to be praying for deliverance from MS and Windows, but are still uneasy about moving to Linux or other alternatives. With this move many more companies might find the confidence to switch to Linux or other Oses (like the BSDs). Hopefully people will get used to the idea that computers don’t have to have Windows installed and inturn will breed an acceptance of variety and choice.
Indeed. They might have looked off this trick from Dell (used on Intell) or Apple (used on IBM).
Otherwise this move should be regarded as mostly symbolic, since IBM already encouraged Linux solutions.
hmmm. “1” is smarter in terms of TCO, performance, and security. My money is on “2”. We are talking IBM, here, the company that had an Intel-killer chip and couldn’t be bothered to keep it up-to-date. Heck, we are talking the company that opened Pandora’s box and let Bill G. crawl out to set the computing world back 20 years.
>>
1. IBM actually switches. Computer geeks rejoice.
2. IBM gets a better deal from MS. Computer geeks frown and move on.
<<
A lot of companies threaten to move to Linux as a way to get a better deal from msft. But, I don’t think that is IBM’s motivation.
IBM is hugely invested in Linux. IBM wants to prove to the world that Linux in a viable solution. IBM relying on Vista would send the wrong message.
I don’t think the cost of Vista is huge factor to IBM. IBM needs to make a statement by using Linux.
JMHO.
This time, can be done. Windows Vista will not be happy on the average lenovo / thinkpad notebook (T43) of adopted for IBM people. And Linux on Desktop / Laptop begins to be an option even for non geeks (like, Gentoo and Linux user #379747).
This comes like a new one, but should be expected. The alternative is finally here. Who knows about the office suite?
This time, can be done. Windows Vista will not be happy on the average lenovo / thinkpad notebook (T43) of adopted for IBM people.
Technically, Lenovo is different from IBM and the thinkpad notebook is a Lenovo and not an IBM product. So the consumer laptops and the desktops might just have Vista rather than any distro of linux.
Haven’t RTFA, but my guess is that this might by only for the emplyees’ and the corporate desktop used internally at IBM.
Any thoughts?
I’m always delighted when I hear any company or government declaring that it is switching to free software.
I use Linux as my primary OS both at home and at work, but I still deal with Windows at least once a week. It’s my opinion that the complexity and bother of Windows has risen and the barriers of Linux have fallen to the point that a big switch makes perfect sense.
And the more people that use it, the more pressure it puts on all companies to support it, so it just gets better and better.
I’m not motivated by any desire to hurt Microsoft. I still think back to Bill Gates’ goal that he stated in the 80’s, which I can’t remember, but essentially he wanted to make the PC significant on every desk. The whole civilized world has benefited from Microsoft’s influence. But now we have better things, like Linux.
IBM cannot be seen to promote Linux if it is not prepared to use it itself.
Now, this relevation, (if it is true), could be the start of many. I honestly cannot see a reason the vast majority of business users would switch to Vista.
In fact there are still millions of users who have not switched to XP.
Windows fanboys here always say Linux is playing catch-up, and that it is years behind Windows…. it is time to make that a marketing hook and push Linux onto corporate desktops.
I agree. Most people will not make the switch because they “know” Windows and they “know” Office. The new version of Office is NOTHING like what they are used to, and Windows will be the same.
People Will not be able to say Linux is unfamiliar to them, as Windows will be unfamiliar too.
TIME TO DITCH IT.
Windows fanboys here always say Linux is playing catch-up, and that it is years behind Windows…. it is time to make that a marketing hook and push Linux onto corporate desktops.
babe, I get called a ‘Windows fanboy’ when I’m nothing of the sort – all I want is my software available on Linux; I want my iPod to work out of the box with Linux, I want my printer to work, my sound card, my video card to work reliably, and a all the software I need, available for Linux.
Now sure, I don’t really *need* Office, I can use any office suite that is available for Linux, but I sure as hell am not going to give up my beloved Creative Suite, Macromedia Studio or infact, any of the various other titles that make up my collection of applications.
I sure as hell have no love for Windows, but I am pretty much jammed between a MacOS X or Windows – I’ve now switched to a PC (‘donated’ my Mac to my brother who is using it for his engineering degree), so I’m back to Windows – want me to use your distro Mr RedHat, get those applications I want on your platform, then we can talk.
I want my iPod to work out of the box with Linux
My iPod Nano worked out-of-the-box with Linux (using Gtkpod and Amarok).
I want my printer to work
I have yet to see a printer that doesn’t work with Linux.
my sound card, my video card to work reliably
Again, most do. Ati drivers are getting better, but of course you’ll usually get better results from Nvidia cards.
What’s your hardware?
and a all the software I need, available for Linux.
Well, it depends on the software, of course.
want me to use your distro Mr RedHat, get those applications I want on your platform, then we can talk.
Do you realize you’re asking the wrong person? It’s not up to RedHat to make the software available, it’s up to the people making the software!
I’m sorry, but that seems kind of obvious…
Do you realize you’re asking the wrong person? It’s not up to RedHat to make the software available, it’s up to the people making the software!
Bullshit; If RedHat wanted Adobe software on Linux, its just a matter of paying Adobe a visit, offer a proposition of Red Hat carrying half the development costs, if need be, and provide some other incentives.
Sitting on your ass whilst girating your finger up your hole isn’t going to get things moving along on the desktop front – getting out of your office, and talking ISV’s and creating partnerships will.
If RedHat wanted Adobe software on Linux, its just a matter of paying Adobe a visit…
No, it’s not. If that’s all there was to it, do you really think Apple would have shipped the Intel Macs up to a year before native versions of Photoshop and Illustrator will be released for it?
No, it’s not. If that’s all there was to it, do you really think Apple would have shipped the Intel Macs up to a year before native versions of Photoshop and Illustrator will be released for it?
*knocks on Conan’s head* HELLO! ANYONE HOME!
Adobe aren’t going to port to Linux because there isn’t a market, and if there isn’t a market, they aren’t going to re-coop the costs associated with porting the software and maintaining it on a new platform, hence RedHat come into the picture to help out with some of the costs; if some of those costs can be absorbed by BOTH parties, Adobes costs would reduce.
Adobe, quite frankly, couldn’t give a shit what their software runs on, what they ARE concerned about is making a profit, and they aren’t going to start porting things to a niche platform with bugger all end users actually using the damn thing for anything more than just typing some code and rallying 3 people around the idea of ‘over throwing Microsoft’.
Adobe want to see profits; its just that simple.
Yeah, thanks. I got your line of reasoning the first time.
What I’m saying is that Adobe may have their own reasons for not playing with Redhat even if they did exactly what you propose. Yes, they want to see profits, but they may have their own long-term strategy that would prevent them from working with Redhat even if they Redhat made a better offer than the one you proposed.
Bullshit; If RedHat wanted Adobe software on Linux, its just a matter of paying Adobe a visit, offer a proposition of Red Hat carrying half the development costs, if need be, and provide some other incentives.
You obviously have no idea how software development works. First, it wouldn’t be a matter of porting the program to “RedHat” but rather to the *nix platform as a whole. The one thing they would have to decide would be which toolkit to use (Adobe might go with Qt, since they’ve used it before, or opt for a neutral one like OpenOffice).
But it’s certainly not up to RedHat, or any single distro, to approach a company like Adobe. It doesn’t happen like this for Windows, it doesn’t hapen like this for OS X, it didn’t happen like this for any commercial program already available for Linux. The only thing that matters is perceived demand vs. production costs, as well as strategic alliances with Apple and/or Microsoft.
Just for the record, Adobe would probably use GTK, since Adobe Reader 7 is already a GTK app. A pretty badly programmed one, actually, and using a static and ancient version of gtk, but it’s nonetheless a good starting point, I guess.
Out of curiosity, where did Adobe use QT?
Just for the record, Adobe would probably use GTK, since Adobe Reader 7 is already a GTK app.
It’s a really crap GTK app (and the Windows version has becoming increasingly, more and more, bloody annoying), and is useless since the Linux world has KPDF and Evince along with Poppler coming along underneath.
Out of curiosity, where did Adobe use QT?
Adobe Photoshop Album, and a couple of other things I can’t remember.
I like Linux and I use it on my Desktop for a very long time. But there are issues with drivers, not because of Linux but because of vendors not providing drivers. If you haven’t heard for a printer that doesn’t work in Linux try. Lexmark X2250. Last time I searched there were no drivers for it. Not for printing not for scanning. (it’s all in one).
IMO Linux is very god operating system, but vendors aren’t doing very well to not release drivers or specs. I’m looking forward to OpenGraphic card and I hope that project won’t fail.
You really think MS will care deep down if IBM PCs are not gonna have Vista on it?! Like that is going to make a dent in the MS market…..please! Its not. Most people dont even buy stuff from IBM. Sure there are corporate sales and so on but I am thinking more in numbers of new computer users. THey go Dell or HP/Compaq and Gateway. Some noob enthusiasts go Alienware. Those are the companies that have the most sales not IBM AFAIK. Hence no matter if Linux is a great OS and geeks will rejoice it wont faze MS in the least bit IMHO. Good thing bad thing I dunno.
“You really think MS will care deep down if IBM PCs are not gonna have Vista on it?”
Actually they will – AFAIK – IBM is one of the largest dealers of Microsoft products on earth. There’s more to life than the operating system itself.
I hope you don’t think IBM will stop reselling MS products on their workstations, laptops, and servers. That’s like shooting yourself in the foot while cutting off your nose to spite your glass houses.
Or something.
It would be incredibly stupid and bankrupt them. The vaguely worded article we have so far is only clear in that some/all/germanic corporate desktops will continue to use Windows versions after Vista comes out, and then switch to Linux. Maybe. Like last time. Or not.
If you actually read the article…well, forget the article even the summary, it talks about the computers IBM uses inside their own company not the ones they sell Isince now they don’t really sell desktops, anyway, lenovo does). They are basically taling about the few thousands of machines they use internally. Does this make a difference to Microsoft. Well, for really big companies, the cost of buying both Office and Windows per computer can be between $50-100. Going with the lower number and multiplying it with the lower estimate of 40000 computers (that some other comment refers to), you get a loss of sales approximating $2 million for MS not including any service contract that they have. Of course, this is assuming all IBM computers shift etc. While one can still argue that $2 million is peanuts to MS, I don’t know of a company of any size “not being affected” by that kind of number. But more importantly, it does set a precedence since IBM is putting itself behind Linux more firmly therefore, it may convince more large businesses to make the move. While one can argue whether that will actually happen, again, I can’t see MS ignoring that possibility. So, you answer your question, I think MS will care deeply.
IBM has been one of the main companies helping to “Put Linux in the enterprise”. I’m not talking about desktop usage, I’m talking about the brilliant engineers IBM has dedicated to work on the Linux kernel.
With a company as large as IBM migrating to Linux, I can see nothing but a positive outcome. The more engineers you have using Linux, the more engineers you have fixing problems with Linux. IBM’s first attempt at desktop Linux failed due to a lack of planning. Since large companies such as Novell and Cisco have migrated to Linux desktops, I doubt IBM will mess this up again.
…a huge mistake. Linux is too expensive.
Earlier this year, Linksys modified the design of its most recent WRT54G. They halved the amount of flash memory and RAM to just 2MB Flash and 8MB RAM and switched to a VxWorks firmware. According to Linksys, this change allowed them to decrease the memory footprint of the OS and reduce the hardware requirements while maintaining a similar feature set at a reduced cost.
A reduced cost to use a commercial OS!!! How the mighty little hobby OS has fallen.
There are few people out there that would say Linux is the be all and end all of operating systems. There are places where more specialized OSes fit better. Depending on what you are wanting to do, in this case, make a router on minimal hardware for general consumer consumption, Linux may or may not be the best choice. The thing is, they have made those models very limited and still off a version of the WRT54G that runs Linux. Why, because those models are so customizable and fit a large enough niche market to support a seperate model that people are willing to pay a price for.
For their main line of routers, they found something that is smaller and better suited to run on minimal, cheaper hardware. So what? I’m sure they are saving some due to cheaper hardware, but of those savings, how much are they paying for the proprietary firmware licensing and development?
Just because Linux wasn’t the cheapest solution due to hardware, doesn’t mean it’s useless. It’s obvious that people still want their linux run WRT54G’s so they can do lots of cool mods and run little, low powered servers. Where Linux truely shines is in the enterprise (ever heard of LAMP?) and it has made great strides in the desktop arena. Will it replace all other operating systems? I hope not because I like to have the best tool for the job, rather than having to use a tool that works sort-of-kinda without any other choice.
Yeah. I own one of the new WRT54Gs. It’s absolutely atrocious. Literally stalls out completely about every 10 minutes, can’t handle any load at all, and doesn’t deal well with other linksys APs operating nearby.
Check around – there are reports of problems with the new models all over. It is literally unusable for a significant amount of the people who buy it. Heck, I couldn’t even listen to a streaming radio station for more than 5 minutes until the december firmware patch.
This is not the level of quality I usually expect from linksys – I’ve owned several other routers by them, including an earlier model WRT54G from before the change, and they’ve been great – but this one will be replaced as soon as its convenient.
I don’t know whether the change of OS or the hardware reductions are what caused the problems, but I can definitely say that it wouldn’t be a product I’d use as an example of Linux’s inferiority.
I’ve got the new version of the 54GS. Haven’t had any problems with it. My only complaint is they allow port forwarding to specific IP addresses, however, there is no way to ensure what IP address a specific computer will get.
I’m glad you aren’t having any problems. Unfortunately there are quite a few of us out there who do (though I’ve heard of more problems with the G than the GS).
i think it’s not very suitable to compare linux to VxWorks, afaik vxworks is a RTOS built for small devices (as well as big ones). And this is not the case for Linux which is a general purpose OS.
If you were to compare, you’d better compare VxWorks with eCos.
Linksys just made a design error when choosing Linux for a small device only requiring 2MB of RAM, they should have chosen eCos.
Yes, VxWorks is a RTOS, and one that is doesn’t even do that great of a job at certain RTOS tasks (for what I would expect in something you have to pay for). Although it’s a pretty good product overall.
OTOH, Linux is NOT a RTOS and Linksys was probably doing lots of modifications to the kernel in order to get it working like they wanted on their hardware, so it isn’t surprising that VxWorks might be cheaper.
I’ve been working for IBM as a consultant since May of last year, and I only wish they were moving all of their desktops to Linux. Even Red Hat! 😉 I’m running an IBM Thinkpad T-23 with a 1.13 GHz Pentium M processor w/256 MB of RAM and Windows XP Pro. To say these are not blazingly fast would be an understatement!
We’ve heard nothing so far, and to be honest, we do too much platform-specific development in a Windows environment, not to mention the tens of thousands of Word docs and Excel spreadsheets that DON’T convert well to OOo.
If the rumors do prove to be true while I’m still working for IBM, I’ll make sure to send a note to OSNews.
This is an opportune time for developers … we could make a killing on porting code from Win32 to GTK/QT or making the tweaks necessary to ensure WINE/Mono compatibility. You could even rake in dough doing regression testing and porting (if necessary) of VB macros to OO.o macros.
We’ll just have to see how the industry reacts to Vista. If a company migrates to it, then damn — they’re stuck, which is fine if you really like Microsoft (and they really like you).
But I think the majority of companies should really be focusing on reducing the number of Windows licenses they have. There is no technological or (sound) business reason why Microsoft should have 95% marketshare.
Edited 2006-03-07 23:08
If this is true, then it is indeed great news for the free and open source software community. Perhaps then IBM can use their clout to convince more hardware vendors to provide drivers for Linux.
They will actually be upgrading to Vista R2 instead of the initial release of Vista, you can’t kill them over that.
Does IBM sell to the general public anymore? If they do then I presume they would also dump windows there and sell linux based machines. What’s good for the employees is presumably good for the general public?
Does IBM sell to the general public anymore?
No.
I don’t remember when, but I heard about this quite some time ago. We had some IBM engineers at our school and they mentioned that they were in the process of developing it. I had thought at the time that it was a linux desktop their product line, but looks like they are using it internally for now. As for the Linksys, the change was made to save money. The memory cost more that the license for the new hardware OS. Course, I find it humerous that the new OS which is designed for hardware, runs worse than general purpose linux.
I’m glad to hear a big corporation like IBM is going completely over to Linux, more choice in the market place is always best.
It probablly has a lot to do with security, not giving MS a opportunity to snoop on IBM using a backdoor, much like the IRS doesn’t use Microsoft software to calculate Bill Gates taxes.
However I do see a problem arising, in that with “Trusted Computing” chip based DRM, documents created with say, Microsoft Word, can only be opened with Microsoft Word. One can’t send a secure document, or perhaps any Word document, to a computer that can’t be determined to be “trusted” or running a valid version of Word.
Microsoft uses their monopoly to leverage out Linux, there’s no law saying they have to provide a version of their software for Linux.
It’s a common problem we Mac users face, big developers who simply refuse to support over 25 million Mac users because they cater to the one standard for most profits for lowest development costs.
So it’s like Windows just feeds upon itself and only a few developers have the foresight to include as many platforms in their development plans as possible.
Look how hard it is just to get websites to comply with W3C standards?
Look how hard it is to get our very own US Government to accept all browsers for data entry instead of just IE only?
Once true open standards gets a chance, MS comes back with something else, now they got Intel with this “Trusted Computing” scheme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing
I wonder if HP will follow next both IBM and HP contribute to Linux, without IBM Udev may not have seen the light of day.
Conan wrote:
> I’m glad you aren’t having any problems. Unfortunately
> there are quite a few of us out there who do (though
> I’ve heard of more problems with the G than the GS).
I’ve got the WRT54G v.3 and it’s performed flawlessly for me. I’ve done 1 firmware update so far (using 4.20.7 which is current). Would like better docs, but otherwise I’m happy with it.
V.3 still runs Linux, and has the larger memory size.
It’s the V.5 and on where they switched to VXWorks and reduced the memory – those are the problem units.
somebody wrote:
> Google, your turn now!
Aw that would be just too good!
Of course, they’re already using GNU/Linux for their legions of servers though.
Linux takes a billion dollar market and transforms it into a million dollar market. Even if the final outcome is a windows desktop, the evolution to Operating systems and office packages as a commodity seems unstoppable now.
The cash cow is dying.
Linux takes a billion dollar market and transforms it into a million dollar market.
??? I personaly charge setup of Linux 50% of what Windows license costs with added 100% value of setting the same service on Windows. Most people I know are having calculation like this. All profit for me, except the licenses I bought even though I wasn’t forced. But companies like RH have to live from something too.
Where on MS case I earn a lot less, because MS tax (all licenses and machine which simply can’t be as cheap as equivalent linux server) usualy takes more than 90%. It is a simple fact, customer is usualy prepared to spend limited sum of money.
In windows case it is just one billion for MS and peanuts for others. I like the first option much better and everybody should unless their name is billg or steveb.
The cash cow is dying.
The cash cow works for MS. For now.
Edited 2006-03-08 01:50
So when they’re not at the office, and Workplace isn’t available, now what? they’ve got a laptop running Linux with sweet bugger all software available?
There’s quite a lot of software available for Linux, including major Windows productivity software (through WINE) if there are no viable alternatives.
I own a Linux laptop and I don’t feel like I’m missing out on anything. On the contrary, I greatly appreciate the ease of use and low maintenance required.
Oh, and Wi-Fi is freakin’ sweet!
IIRC Workplace can work offline; it doesn’t require a network connection.
I suspect that, if IBM goes through with this, it’s less about screwing Microsoft with linux and more about screwing Microsoft with Workplace.
Remember, Workplace and SOA is basically about moving apps and data to centralized servers for better application and services management and building. IBM’s corporate middleware solution emphasizes a centralized services architecture and diminshes relevance of the desktop platform (use Windows, *nix or OSX interchangeably) whereas Microsoft’s approach is about digging their Windows claws even more deeply and irreversably into corporate infrastructures.
They’ve always been big proponents of linux, but mostly in the server room. I don’t think even they see Linux as a viable rich-client alternative to Windows, but as a cost-effective client platform for their own application services, it’s a much more compelling story for them. I mean, how long has it taken IBM to release a Notes client for linux? Until now, that’s how long. And the fact that Domino/Notes are now an integrated part of their Workplace solution plays no small role in that.
This could be an interesting play for IBM. They have a fairly well established Domino/Notes install base that Microsoft is aggressively attacking. Until now, IBM’s middleware strategy still relied on Windows as a delivery mechanism (at the client end if not in the server room). So here they would appear to have an end-to-end business solution that is Microsoft-agnostic and deployable on whatever platform customers choose. And probably the only viable corporate competitor to Exchange, as well (although trailing by a distance).
So I think this is less about eliminating Windows for Linux and more about demonstrating how to eliminate or reduce the Office/Exchange/SQL integration that often anchors Windows in companies. And if that’s the case, and they can pull it off, then things could open up for alternative platforms as enterprise desktops. (Along those lines it’s also worth mentioning that Workplace supports ODF).
But if this is simply about linux replacing Windows but still trying to make it act like Windows, it’s likely doomed to failure. Time to think outside the box.
Some of you guys really need to brush up on your reading skills.
Andreas Pleschek is actually talking about IBM’s contract with MS for their own corporate PCs and Thinkpads.
Furthermore, IBM no longer supplies PCs directly. They go through Lenovo.
IBM internally will be moving on to Linux.
…but also in speeding adoption of Linux by other companies. After all, if IBM can run on Linux desktops…
I think this is the sentence that fired everybody’s imagination. IBM hasn’t been a significant supplier of PCs for some time. But they still have one of the biggest business names in America. So just to hear someone say that this business colossus will begin using Linux on the desktop–well that’s so exciting that it prompted over 80 messages.
Although you posted the same message twice.
Some of you guys really need to brush up on your reading skills.
Andreas Pleschek is actually talking about IBM’s contract with MS for their own corporate PCs and Thinkpads.
Furthermore, IBM no longer supplies PCs directly. They go through Lenovo.
IBM internally will be moving on to Linux.
As pointed out earlier, this would be the second time in 2 years that IBM was getting rid of Windows and going to Linux. ^_^
I wish someone could clarify if this is just IBM Germany (sure reads that way) or all of IBM. The whole thing sounds bizarro, since IBM will have to support tons of IBM software and IBM customers running Vista/Longhorn when they supposedly have no licenses to run it themselves.
I call shennanigans.
They’ve still got thousands of desktops to move from OS/2 to Windows to do.
Three cheers for the naive and gullible!
nice ibm, way to go!
if more companies could follow this example,
computing world could become really interesting again,
as before, before the ms days..
This is so funny. “IBM moving to “Linux”. Great title … for the 10th times? Just like rock bands doing their 10th farewell tours.
True or not, this doesn’t mean sh*t. Windows Vista + Visual Studio 2005/2007 + Office 2003/12 will be the best set of tools available on the market. It will perform better than Linux, it will be more polished, less buggy than some Gnome/KDE desktops, it will increase people productivity (Visual Studio/Office) …and this is really nothing new, because it all started 6 years ago when Microsoft launched Windows 2000. The Microsoft platform is near perfect and with enchanced security, it will be perfect.
Maybe IBM wants to move to some unstable version of Red Hat (I don’t say Linux is unstable, my Slack box is running for a long long time), using crappy/buggy tools like Eclipse that isn’t designed for productivity at all, and finally using OpenOffice …some overrated office suite that require more ram than Windows XP + another Windows XP running in Virtual PC! Worst, it produces crap documents and it includes a modified version of the freetype library that prevent you from making shit readable by using your system font renderers!
Go IBM Go! While you’re wasting your time keeping your modified Red Hat distro up to date with tons of dependency problems, making slow software with eclipse that nobody will ever use, writing documents on OO.org so no one can render them properly, some other smart compagnies will move on and make more profits by staying good microsoft partners.
Don’t be ignorant modding me down. With all know that Linux/BSD is excellent on the server market as a LAMP combo, ect. BUT IT S*CKS ON THE DESKTOP.
Windows Vista + Visual Studio 2005/2007 + Office 2003/12 will be the best set of tools available on the market.
You sell MS software or something ? Reminds me of all this SPAM I keep getting trying to sell me cheap Windows software. Sorry – not in the market either from them or you.
Edited 2006-03-08 13:41
Whatever IBM does, it won’t make any difference. They lost to Microsoft in the desktop world, and quite frankly, they don’t have the first clue what’s required from a desktop and they won’t get it from Red Hat.
I’m sure IBM’s employees are going to love it.
Hmmm,
As much as I like Linux, when it comes to desktop linux and “User useability” windows has it hands down.
sure Gnome and KDE are getting better with each release, but what people fail to relalise is, that so is Windows. I have had lock ups on my Linux laptops and desktops more then I have had on windows recently. and it may or may not have to do with drivers. but it still happens. to say it does not is just BS.
furthermore,
on this board and even on slashdot and the like. anytime anyone says anthing postive about Windows, they get flamed up the wazoo. most of us are IT professionals and support both Windows and Linux devices. Windows and linux are BOTH getting better,
and YES visual studio is probley the best dev tool out there. and as much as it may pain you, office 2003 is way better then openoffice, Ms office even is more stable and faster when run on linux via codeweaver. then openoffice is.
one of the things you get with Windows, as a company, is you know your software investment, will not go down the tubes. whith each new OS release. for the most part, all ms software will run on all ms OS versions for example MS office 95 runs on win95,win98,win NT,win 2k, winXP
where as, in Linux land, not so. you may even has issues when going from one version of redhat to another.
for a single geek or a small company its one thing, but for a company totaly different, and lotus notes suck &6%$.
🙂
-Nex6
-nex6.blogspot.com