Slashdot Mirror
IBM WebSphere SE To Be Opened?
JoyToy writes ""AS PART OF its crusade to marginalize operating systems such as Windows, IBM is leaning toward giving the Standard Edition of its WebSphere application server to the open-source community."
"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
BEA WebLogic is similar WebLogic, in that it's a good App server. Still closed source, last I checked.
Dare I ask, why bother shifting products just because IBM changed it's licensing?
There are a number of perfectly legitimate reasons to switching to Netscape server from apache, but it's folly to think "it's opensource" to be one of those reasons.
My two Cents.
-K
I downloaded it a couple weeks ago, and tried to get it to at least run, and it did abosolulely nothing on any boxes, no servers starts, no apps poping up, nothing. Tech Support was a joke, install instructions are worthless. Documentation was nil. Is it me? or am I totally missing something.
--pug
If IBM wants to give Linux (and other Free/Open Software) a real kick in the pants they can do one thing: Get Mozilla out there Do whatever it takes--lend some programmers, delete all Bugzilla entries labelled "enhancement", hire some hit-men to kill the current managers, whatever.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
although I can't help wondering what they really think is in it for them?
are they seeing the light or is it just payback time?
I think, waffle I am
Its more correct to what your sig is. Yoda like, it sounds.
Point 1: Was OS/2 free? No. It still isn't. In fact, it's more expensive than Windows 95.
Point 2: Linux cannot "go under within two years", since "Linux" is not a commercial entity. If all the commercial Linux vendors dissapeared today, there would still be distributions available, and there would still be Linux users.
Point 3: Are you seriously saying that Linux is endangered because IBM may refocus the emphasis of the platform toward the geek community? Have you ever met a Linux user?
but how does this impact Windows? You see WebSphere is an Java based web application server and Windows is an operating system. The competitors of Websphere are the likes of ATG, BlueMartini, Broadvision etc. The idea of the two competing is like IIS/ASP taking market from linux. It just dont make no sense.
For someone who's set up WAS (WebSphere Advanced Server) on both *NIX (Solaris) and NT, this is interesting. WAS on *NIX is a royal pain in the arse - impossible to administer, difficult to configure, and generally a black art.
./'s collective eyes, even if it is a nightmare from the coding pits of hell.
On NT, on the other hand, it works. And it works well. You may be interested to know that IBM internally build WAS on NT first ('because it's cheaper'), then port to AIX, Linux, and Solaris. The NT SCM (Service Control Manager) controls the WAS services properly, unlike the rather dodgy shell scripts shipped with the *NIX version.
Still, if they go open source, then nothing will make them wrong in
First off, IBM can't kill the open source movement. At this point no one could, and that's the main reason the open source movement is catching on outside of the "pocket protector" crowd.
0S/2 didn't fail because it targeted the techie market anymore then Apple failed because of its success with graphic design.
IBM lost to Microsoft because they couldn't expand their user base past the tech crowd and more importantly, because they didn't provided developers with compelling tools that made them want to recommend OS/2 for internal projects.
When punk rock is outlawed, only outlaws will have punk rock.
these were the primary "windows killer" technologies of 1995...
Hmm,
with the advancement of CORBA 3.0 there is already support for the component objects in the OSS environment. Maturity ? That is an issue that would be addressed by the community! If it is already mature what would you do for a kick!
don't like c#?
change the hell out of it!
just compile IL in the CRT and who gives a crap
if it's composed of abacus symbols
guess what? you'll be able to interop with anbody else's idea of what code should look like -- that's why it's an open standard
Quite correct. But the AE comes bundled with DB2 for serialization and the EE comes bundled with CICS/Tuxedo, MQ, Components, IMS connector etc. The Standard edition is Apache+Xylan+Xerces+..+..+ - your apache website with all its tools (one year old) nicely bundled in a neat front end. But they did commit a lot of development resources to this. But AE & EE are absolutely robust in nature. They are scalable and tie into any old system that cuts your paycheck to supplies electricity to your home (i.e. all ibm technologies since 1965). So as much as they need to indulge the developer community, they have other needs in mind too
And there is certainly hype, or at least inaccurate reporting: why even mention EJBs in an article discussing an application server that doesn't support them? Correct me if I'm wrong on this point, but WebSphere Standard Edition (including latest version 3.5) provides a simpler JSP/servlet engine without support for EJBs at all. The "EJB container" isn't available without paying $$$ for Advanced or Enterprise edition.
Either this was a mistake or it was a deliberate statement. If the former, it could easily have been caught with some simple fact checking. If the latter, well...
Personally, the "WebSphere Application Server ready for e-Business" message displayed in the admin console when the server starts up leaves little to the imagination as to IBM's motives.
Within the context of the application server market, this is also a smart move by their part. I'd expect at least one other "major vendor" to soon follow suit.
Plus there is the problem of convincing enough people to switch to C# when it offers only marginal benfits over Java.
I doubt that'll be much of a problem, MS can make C# the language of choice for writing Windows apps, and the Windows cult will follow. I suspect IBM will have a hard time truly adopting C#, both because it will be tied to Windows (that was the whole point of ditching Java and coming up with C#, Sun wouldn't let MS make a Windows-locked version of Java), and, as you say,
Microsoft can change IL however it likes with each upgrade to C#, making sure everyone else (including IBM) plays catch-up to MS and can't really produce a good C# compiler.
(See OS/2 and Windows app compatibility)
-- Sigs are for losers
Never used it myself... but is that only on AIX? How about Linux, Solaris, HP-UX?
.technomancer
.technomancer
This is not as radical a move as it looks, and so I find your comment difficult to understand. IBM has long been a big supporter of the Apache and the HTTP server IBM provides with WebSphere is based on it. If a company has a real distrust of things open source they shouldn't have been going near WebSphere to begin with. If IBM's blessing is what rescues the "heathen open source" then that shouldn't change if IBM open sources WebSphere.
Actually working in one of the IBM labs in North America, I can tell you IBM is becoming very very open about embracing the open source movement. This is really just a taste of what might come later. Being a open source supporter aside, I can certainly understand their strategy to move away from proprietary solution to give them an edge over products like Microsoft's Visual Studio... They get better publicity, better 3rd party developers and better software in general. I am very happy with where they are going with this.
2: Linux can go under in the sense that the recent Linux craze can crash and turn to be a fad. And it will.
3: I am a Linux user. Here's how IBM can kill the platform.
I'm not saying IBM's mistake is focusing the platform on geeks. I'm saying IBM's mistake is focusing on geeks, period. They're using Linux as the evagelization tool of choice to attract geeks.
However, by trying to take Linux out of its OSS context, IBM is exposing Linux to mass markets before it is ready to take on the desktop market head on. They're trying to press the advantage of OSS, and frankly, I don't think they care for Linux beyond the fact it's a good way to endear themselves to the geeks.
Thus, IBM is once again taking a product before it is able to compete on the desktop market, and pushing it to the sky. Too bad this means Linux will receive a lukewarm reception from the mass market, and will forever be remembered as another attempt by IBM to promote an OS with not chutzpah.
In closing, I really, really didn't care for your sophism-laden condescending attitude, Mr. 'Have you ever met a Linux user'. For crissakes, did you notice this is SLASHDOT?
Dude, it starts up a lot faster if you change the -mx in the admin.config file. Also, the way to shut it down is to startup ./adminconfig.sh and stop the server. You must not have used a recent version (ie > 3.0). Never had a problem with having to reconfig the whole thing though. I have had problems in getting the Advanced edition EJB's to work, though.
Hope this helps.
I need a TiVo for my car. Pause live traffic now.
Ok so they open source it. (I don't know anything else about it but from what I've heard sounds pretty cool) And then because "with enough eyeballs all bugs are shallow" we as a community fix this and other bugs and have a good system.
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
Second, while not espousing theories of conspiracy that the evil blue empire is on the verge of world domination, I would be cautious in approaching the blue flag of universal friendship. Bad blood between the Unix vendors runs deep and wide and the "embracing of OSI" initiative is a largely political stance to get IBM back into the mainstream culture. I've heard some of the top AIX developers/integrators say "there's a few good ideas in Linux .. like the small graphical install packages", while at the same time saying that they will introduce new functionality in AIX that comes directly from linux source code without giving proper due credit. This effectively goes to the point of stealing code back out of some linux utilities, and then figuring out how little of it they are obligated to make public again.
On top of this AIX has never been a strong O/S (BSD base and slow to adopt later SVR4 revisions - only recently with the acquisition of SCO do they have the license and have things like truss been announced for the O/S) .. IBM knows this, and is looking for ways to popularize their lack of technology and innovation - mainly the good old fashioned way of copying and changing a little to make it look like your own (like a good percentage of dissertations out there) .. much in linux has this same form of flattery, and a merger of the two means that we now have a hybrid imitation of many things that are better done and supported elsewhere with no real advancement in the field itself. This muddying of the technical waters has persisted for many years, and through the duping of much of the "technical mainstream" will persist for many more while a rift develops between what people understand and what they think they understand. All the while this leads to large $$ capital position as phony needs are created, and a large "enterprise with XX years experience" steps in and says we can support that .. it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the s/w industry will be peanuts compared to the future h/w and service industry.
sigh .. enough ranting for a day ..
OK, I am a little confused here... The "Open Source Community" begs companies to release open source software. IBM then announces the opening of the source for a major product. Next, I read crap like this with all sorts of conspiracy theories. What the hell?!?!
Of course IBM wants to dominate the industry. Every public company has a fiduciary duty to it's stockholders to attempt to gain a monopoly position in every market it enters. (Remember having a monopoly is not illegal, just using illegal means to maintain it.)
Next, who cares what IBM's intentions are? So what if they want to dominate hardware and services? Take the source and run! Ignore IBM's pleas to pay them to integrate. Hang up on the marketing rep when he tries to sell you hardware. Once you have the source, what the hell do you need IBM for? If you don't want IBM to be a focal point for change, fork the code!
Don't like "Tivoli Ready Modules"? Don't use 'em! Don't want to use VisualAge? Fine, who is going to stop you?
Exasperated at hair-trigger morons,
SirWired
IBM are really running a rearguard action here. There are already two good open-source Java server apps out there, Jakarta and Enhydra, and the currently available ones are significantly ahead of IBM's basic offering in terms of supporting the most recent versions of standards.
If IBM released the EJB container, on the other hand, that'd be cool. There isn't a halfway-decent free-as-in-liberty EJB implementation that I know of.
I work with Websphere Advanced Edition for my day-job and really like it, but I don't think I'd bother with the standard edition even if it were open-source - there's already enough code out there, and Websphere isn't particularly friendly to install or configure on *nix.
On the other hand, IBM have been really good lately about releasing Java stuff to the open-source community. The XML/XSLT packages that they donated to the Apache project are pretty damn funky, for example.
--
The more I learn about the Internet, the more amazed I am that it works at all.
The source code for the OS/2 version of OpenDOC is already available to DevCon members.
However, it requires SOM/WPS which aren't open source.
I would like to see the source code to SOM and WPS made available to all. It is curious that the last version of SOM was version 3.0 yet OS/2 is still shipping with version 2.4
-- The universe began. Life started on a billion worlds...
-- Except on one where stupidity was there first.
Christian R. Conrad
My ISP is the Saunalahti company, of Finland.
Christian R. Conrad
mail me at iki.fi ; same user ID as here
I have no problem with a company being dominant; what I do find objectionable is companies who become dominant by locking you into a solution.
That is when you lose the fairness in competition.
There is a great difference in being dominant through being the best than being dominant through being the most crooked.
Slashdot Beta should die a painful death.
Operation Ivy rules.
sure I'll have a sig.
Who needs directories and files when you have LIBRARY and MEMBERs!!!
Green screens shall inherit the earth.
sure I'll have a sig.
c# is compiled. The IL is most likely part of the standardised process, but it doesn't matter so much, since its easily reverse engeneeringalbe, and just like Java 1.2 needs a new JRE, so would MS common language runtime 1.1. What is outside the standard process is this common language runtime. Its what needs the most porting effort. c# is basically c++ with vbrun700.dll architecture.
How can OpenDOC need WPS. There are OpenDOC implementations on things that don't have WPS (such as NT and AIX.)
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I was writing of the implementation which IBM has opened the source code to - which happens to be the OS/2 version.
IBM has left it to Apple to open the sources to the NT and Mac versions. Something which I don't think they will do.
-- The universe began. Life started on a billion worlds...
-- Except on one where stupidity was there first.
I've admined WebSphere Application Server on an RS/6000 / AIX box. The officially sanctioned method for shutting it down is to "kill -9" it. If you (or anything else) shuts it down ANY other way, it rapes its configuration database, forcing you to start configuring from scratch if you didn't save a "known-good" version someplace. It also takes an ungodly amount of time to start up.
Use Adsense for Charity
IBM is really heading up on my respect-o-meter. Moving to Linux, making a very good JDK, and now Web Sphere. Cool.
info here find out more here
don't mod this up, it's just for reference. (ie, not insightful!)
I need a TiVo for my car. Pause live traffic now.
I would like to see Open Source implementations of the following.
OS/2> At least make it free for personal use. The bloody thing is still $200 or so. I mean it only gets used in a small market, so why not free it up? They can't possibly be making much money of it.
SOM> There needs to be a CORBA independant object model on free OSs. Nothing against CORBA, but there needs to be a lighter weight alternative.
OpenDOC> The perfect thing to boost up Linux. Of course both GNOME and KDE are working object models and embedding, but OpenDOC/SOM are both more mature, and a good deal lighter in weight. However, they might have problems opening this up due to the cooperation with Apple.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I think that the decision of IBM is the unique one. The standard edition of Websphere has nothing more than jakarta except it is late in implemetation of the J2EE specification and except it is not free.
Jakarta : jsp 1.1 servlet 2.2 (jakarta.apache.org) websphere se : jsp 1.0 servlet 2.1
bull-hockey!! while I agree with the first part (prevention of Sun or Microsoft to gain dominance), IBM is still out to be dominant. This is attempted (subtle distinction) not through creation of a new technology but rather assimilation and change of "popular" technologies as they set themselves up to be the source point for change
.. beware of large wooden gift horses ..
WebSphere includes "Tivoli Ready Modules" - is Tivoli open source? Integration with IBM VisualAge .. is this open source? and will most likely run best on AIX (ever look at the licensing structure for their O/S?) which will enable them to sell more hardware (where everyone knows the real $$ come from)
By positioning themselves in the middle of the market and jumping on the bandwagon to pigeonhole and point the finger at other companies, they make their own bad policies and practices less apparent. Ever look at the cost for IBM services? This is what they really want to sell and dominate.
Was OS/2 efficient? Yeah. It was stable, customizable, you name it. But OS/2 had a big problem: it was aimed at techies and geeks, while Windows was targeted at marketers and end users.
Guess who has the most power? Sorry, it's the end users, directors and marketers. OS/2's fate proves that. IBM obviously hasn't learned their lesson in the way they now approach the server market, because they're attempting it all over again by catering to Open Source geeks.
Careful that IBM doesn't accidentally kill the Open Source movement by mistake... If IBM corners the market as efficiently with WebSphere as it did with OS/2, expect Linux to go under within two years.
IBM may have done wonders with OS/2 but that is to be no longer. Rumours coming out of the woodwork are that IBM is going to drop support for its own OS - OS/2 and support NT instead.
Wow, it's 1995 all over again...
Now this has got to have both MS and Sun singing the blues. IBM, who currently has the fastest and best java implementation is promising to back C# if it gains status as an international standard. Ouch. Sun would lose its biggest ally on the Java front and MS would see its next attempt at world domination spinning out of Bill G's control.
I don't think it would set Sun back much - they said they might place support for C# "On Par", or equal to Java support. That doesn't mean they would abandon Java at all...
However, backing C# the language is not really very interesting at all unless they would also back IL, the intermediate language C# is compiled into. As far as I know that is not being sumitted to a standards body so Microsoft can change IL however it likes with each upgrade to C#, making sure everyone else (including IBM) plays catch-up to MS and can't really produce a good C# compiler. Plus there is the problem of convincing enough people to switch to C# when it offers only marginal benfits over Java.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If IBM really wants to eliminate technology choke points, they'll help the EFF and lead an effort to get the DMCA repealed. The DMCA is all about letting copyright owners create new technology choke points by calling them "access controls" or "copy controls".
That being said, I don't doubt IBM's commitment to eliminating choke points that affect them (like Microsoft), I just don't think we should overestimate their commitment to openness. The important thing is that IBM is learning and growing and we can help the learn more and grow more in the future.
I was under the impression that websphere was little more then apache, jserv, and a few other well known software projects.
I was also under the impression that websphere was regarded as one of ibm's worst software packages.
"Mature, international company seeks community support. Knowledgeable in hardware, software, and support, is OSI-curious. Please respond to P.O. Box..."
Mr. Ska
We *need* OpenDoc. We need a component model, and OpenDoc has all the features needed. IBM has already promised it will release OpenDoc as free software. We must email them and remind them of that promise!
The only real changes about IBM WebSphere Applicaion Server SE are the liscensing.
I had the blessed experience of developing a global intranet based on WebSphere, and it was practicaly decidedly Open Source two years ago...
neitzert
This communication is secured using Rot-26 Encryption Algorithm, Unauthorized decryption will be subject to laughter.
Anyone care to shed some light on what some of the more common Tivoli products are? We've recently begun seeing it here around our office, although the Tivoli site offers little information on what's what. (Been told we're migrating to this from SMS, because of stability and "added benefits," although no one has told me what those might be.)
Enquiring minds want to know, and all that...:)
Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
Ayway, if IBM could gain a monopoly in services for an Open Source software industry, that would be quite the feat! And if the source is open, why the hell would it "run best" on AIX only? Have you ever actually USED the product? If anything, it currently "runs best" on NT.
IBM is still a company,and it still needs to make money. If IBM doesn't encourage people to buy more IBM hardware, what possible reason could IBM have to release any software ever?
STFU about slashdot bias.
Holy Cripes! That could have come straight from the mouth of RMS himself! Who would have ever guessed that a corporate behemoth like big blue could start to grok the true advantages of open source?
Now this has got to have both MS and Sun singing the blues. IBM, who currently has the fastest and best java implementation is promising to back C# if it gains status as an international standard. Ouch. Sun would lose its biggest ally on the Java front and MS would see its next attempt at world domination spinning out of Bill G's control.
And this is the part that really rocks my boat,
Perhaps I need to go find a copy of the annual report, but it seems to me that Lou is stating that IBM wants to go full fledged open source to be a pure hardware + services company. I could be wrong, but I don't see what other technological choke points there could be....
Still, if it evens the field a little, then go, Big Blue!
psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo