IBM InterJet II Uses Embedded FreeBSD

stephen.schaubach writes, "The new IBM InterJet II is a small net appliance that looks cool, is small and has some kick-ass features, including: e-mail server, Apache, Firewall, FTP, DNS and DHCP services. Admin it from a Web browser like the cobalt's. But, best of all it runs an embedded operating system based on FreeBSD UNIX. The down side is that it looks as though you kinda of ASP-lease the thing. Anyone told VA yet? heh " The InterJet is a neat piece of kit, and the developers at Whistle have contributed a lot of high-quality code back to the BSD project, both before and after their buyout by IBM.

Comments

What sucks about it....

[Electric Eye]

...is that IBM won't sell you this neat little thing by itself!!!! You have to subscribe to their Small Business internet service (DSL, FTP, web hosting, etc.) This really sucks. It's a great device, and a lot of IS guys (like myself) would love to pop this on the network. But I can't. I called IBM last week about the InterJet and I couldn't get one w/o the services.

Guess what IBM? Most of us already HAVE high-speed internet service. Sell the damn thing as a stand-alone product and you'll sell a hell of a lot more. = /

IBM: The Next Generation.

[MartyJG]

It's amazing how IBM are turning around their image. In the beginning they were the big monkey in the sky, until their products were seen as too expensive for what they were.

Since they've adopted Linux (and made other changes), it seems they've gone from Big White Box makers to trendy gear for the web-generation - the kind of transformation Microsoft would love to have made about three years ago.

IBM have definitely changed their targets - they started the desktop PC revolution but have turned their backs on that in favour of mid-range servers . Now they're capitalising on the popularity of Linux to sell their stuff - and as long as they bring to it their old reputation of good quality hardware, good luck to them... as long as they don't try to Monopolise!

Whistle Interjet I is also running FreeBSD

[geirt]

We have a InterJet I running in our server room, and are pleased with it. It saves us from the problems with NT (our computer dep. refuses to install anything other than MS products, but they accepted the InterJet, since "you can configure it from MS Internet Explorer"). Whistle was bought by IBM some time ago, and they released the InterJet II afterwards. Our Whistle InterJet I is also running FreeBSD, this is the boot log:

jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: Copyright (c) 1992-1998 FreeBSD Inc.
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel:
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: FreeBSD 2.2.7-STABLE #0: Mon Jan 3 23:45:11 PST 2000
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: dianeh@built1.whistle.com:/usr/prod/ia/freebsd/sys /src/compile/IA
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: CPU: Cyrix 486DX4 (486-class CPU)
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: Origin = "CyrixInstead" DIR=0x361f Stepping=3 Revision=6
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: real memory = 16777216 (16384K bytes)
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: avail memory = 14962688 (14612K bytes)
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: Copyright (c) 1995-1998 Whistle Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: Detected version 1 InterJet motherboard
jan 19 12:17 Critical: /kernel: Probing for devices on the ISA bus:
...
...

Re:This is why I won't use GPL

[HalJohnson]

Normally I wouldn't even bother replying to what is seemingly a troll. But considering that you put some time and thought into your post, I figured that I should give my opinion.

Once again, a Large Corporation takes control of what was previously a fre project, slaps a few worthless features on it, and sells it back to us, the Open Source community for big bucks.

First of all, I doubt anyone with enough of a clue to know the difference between OSS and regular software would even consider purchasing this particular piece of equipment. I mean realistically, a server that's adminstered via http, most likely without telnet/ssh? This is aimed squarely at people who need a workgroup server/firewall and don't have the time/ability to administer it themselves, nor the money to hire someone to administer it. A lot better than a Windows95 box with wingate, don't you think?

Do I hear cries of outrage over IBM's abuse of the BSD and apache licenses? No. Even the BSD users, notorious for their unfounded zealotry (such as implying that FreeBSD is somehow superior to Linux), are silent. Do you enjoy being ravaged by the forces of violent captialism?

Ok, this is the main thing I must disagree with. The ability for IBM to take the code and use is the whole purpose of this type of license. I develop software for a living. I don't have a boss, I get paid for what I can sell. Whether it's a software package, or an integrated system. I release code under the BSD license for the same reason I try to only use software under a BSD license. This is the spirit of OSS, whether some huge company comes along and decides to take and not give back is irrelevant. In every project I've implemented, I've always given full source, and I don't think theres been a single instance where my work would not have been 100% compliant with the GPL. But I still wouldn't use it. I see the GPL as a restriction, it restricts people from using my code in situations where they might really need it. And where they might not be in a position to use the GPL (it happens). It's simply the golden rule, I don't want to someday be involved in a commerical venture and have to worry about the GPL. Not every OSS developer develops as a hobby. This is why other licenses continue to exist. The GPL simply doesn't make sense sometimes.

This isn't to say your opinion doesn't matter. It does, follow your own principles, but understand that some of us do indeed make a living via software. And just because you pay for something doesn't always make it any less free (glances at stack of FreeBSD cds that have never been used).

This is why I WILL use BSD

[not Bruce Perens]

So what do these announcements entail?

BSD: Companies can use it, but you don't get any money or credit. Realistically, though, this isn't much of a loss -- if the BSDies I've run into are any indication, IBM would never consider hiring you anyway. End result: "Big corporations are taking over. They're doing exactly what the license intended them to do, but that still doesn't make me happy. Bitch bitch moan moan."

Linux: Companies that want to make extensive modifications don't want the GPL to show their secrets to the world. So they use the hated BSD or the even more irrationally hated closed source solution. End result: "Big corporations don't care about Linux. They don't understand how superior we are. Bitch bitch moan moan."

The point: The point of open source software is to improve the world, not to turn everyone into little soldiers for your personal OS/license jihad. You should be celebrating the fact that IBM, with its army of programmers and massive code base, has been impressed with open source software.

Tread VERY carefully with this thing!

[Oddball]

I was using an Interjet I for almost two years. It was nothing but headaches.
If you only use ISDN or periodic dialup, it's fine. If you need nothing but the most rudimentary web serving and mail hosting (I never tested it for relaying. If it is a relay, there's no way to fix it), it' great. If you actually /use/ these services, it's a peice of junk!
There is NO access to anything on the device besides it's web interface. If you're thinking "Well, LinuxConf makes it work..." just stop. This is nowhere near that nice. Instead, it's pretty, but gives you next to no functionality. We had issues about wanting to modify the firewall's activity (opening certain ports, special routing, etc). It was an absolute no-go. Only recently did they add the ability to modify the NAT (static translations and such).
And the it's so-called fast serial interface. God, don't remind me. We used an external CSU/DSU (of course, only a fast-serial port on this thing) hooked up to a full-burst T1. Once we hit about 1.2 mb/s, it would just turn off the serial port, and completly forget about it. We had to power-cycle the CSU/DSU atleast once a day to fix it. It had worse uptime than any of the NT (or 95...) boxes in the building. No, there was no problem with the line. We finally got a Cisco in December, and it hasn't had any trouble at all. We even had to show Whistle how we set up our network. They didn't even know that what we did was possible (nothing special. an NT acting as a bridge on the InterJet's "internal interface" routing all the office traffic to it, since our network was 100baseTX only, and the interjet is only 10baseT).

So, if you're just starting, and you just need something that works (sorta..), NOW, it's fine. So if you're a windows-minded shop (it works, mostly, and don't need to over-customize), it's just right. Once you try to use it to it's claims, it fails miserably.

Sorry about the high rant value, but this thing gave me nightmares for months. Honestly, if you plan on really using the features that this thing claims to have, save yourself alot of time and just get a linux box (mail/web) and a good router. Might cost you an extra 2k, maybe, but will save you hours and hours of maintenance time.