IBM, HP, Intel, NEC Announce Open Source Lab

cmuncey writes: "Salon has an Associated Press article that IBM, HP, Intel, NEC have announced an 'Open Source Testing Lab' for testing Linux for large corporate systems that will open by the end of the year in Portland, OR. The main four sponsors are putting up a couple of million and Red Hat, Turbolinux, Linuxcare, VA Linux, Dell and SGI are also kicking in. The lab itself will be run by a nonprofit corporation that will be neutral in picking the projects to be tested. Sounds a bit better Mindcraft, doesn't it?"

In case you were wondering, the article tell us that "Linux is seen as an alternative to proprietary operating systems like Microsoft's Windows and Apple [sic] OS." Certifications, labs like this, and Official Stamps of Approval mean perhaps more than they ought (corporate decision making being what it is) but that's hard to get around. And it sounds like they'll get to play with cool toys! ;)

Comments

Recipe for Success

[NoWhere Man]

Take 1 Large Room.
Add some open sourced software.
Add 5 tons of computer equipement.
Stir in a number of different techs over a number of months
Add caffine, pizza and other assorted junk food.
Bring to boil

Serves large corporations

NYTimes Article

[CMU_Nort]

There's also a NYTimes article about this here.

blah blah free registration required blah blah

CNet Story

[CMU_Nort]

CNet is also carrying a version of this story here. Unliks some of the others, this isn't just a copy of the Reuters story.

Question regarding dell's hardware, etc

[abrager]

Does anyone think that this will have an effect on the amount of proprietary hardware (for lack of a better word) that is included with their systems? For example, Dell saves some of its BIOS information on a hidden hard drive partition (much cheaper than CMOS). Compaq used to (I don't know if they still do) do the same thing on their Proliant servers. Hopefully we'll get some standard hardware here and less trouble getting systems to work with n*x.

Comments, anyone?

Who let the watchdogs out

[Jon_Sy]

Certifications, labs like this, and Official Stamps of Approval mean perhaps more than they ought (corporate decision making being what it is) but that's hard to get around. And it sounds like they'll get to play with cool toys! ;)

Is it just me, or is assuring the quality of open source projects (both in terms of openness and functionality) more or less impossible? I mean, by its nature, open source holds no associations to any governing bodies that carry sway. There's the argument that accepted standards organizations for open source just don't exist, but that's not even true...it's more a case of public trust being a fickle thing.

Industries that market tangible products have no problems creating standardization bureaus and bodies, usually because these sorts of things can be governed in turn by governments, by qualified authorities, by laws. Could the FCC have been created without respected, universally trusted leadership? Doubtful. Who then will take on the challenge of developing an overseer for open-source?

It has been tried...there are any number of open-source websites that act as collectives for development. There have been attempts to create instituions of authority as well, notably the group led by Eric S. Raymond, the Open Source Initiative, which has had undetermined effectiveness, as far as i can tell. Still, i can't help but think that, currently, excellent open source becomes accepted by reputation, and reputation alone.

I wonder if this lab will have the power to start the responsible monitoring of open source...just an interesting idea. Really, do we even need such a system, or can the open Freshmeat bazaar and word of mouth serve as adequate testing grounds? Sometimes i think it would take an organization with direct influence over the net, like the IETF or ISOC to get the ball rolling...from innovators to watchdogs.

If anyone else knows of any other certitification programs for open source, i'd like to hear about them.

-j

Just my take on this...

[Kierthos]

Potentially, it could be a very Good Thing if these companies are all working together, and as the contributor points out, the current plan beats the heck out of Mindcraft (the more you pay, the better your benchmark). It will also, if it doesn't go up in smoke, provide for a lot more portability of applications between various Unix flavours. (I've seen a few Unix apps that didn't work quite the same depending on what flavour you had running.) Or at least, that's the theory...

Now, the article seems to indicate that this will be a seperate company with backing from various larger interests: Anyone know if this is true or will this end up as some kind of 'holding company'? Also, if it is a seperate company, any word on an IPO?

Kierthos