Slashdot Mirror
Review Of Small Business Suite for Linux
JoeT-Bone writes "Found this at LinuxToday, It's a UnixReviw.com review of the of the IBM Small Business Suite for Linux. " Part of Big Blue's continuing move to porting to programs to Linux - anyone had experience with this? Good, Bad? Post below!
forwarding or sending mail and distributed mailing.
Yeah, I sent an e-mail to my friend just before turning on my "I'm on vacation" auto-reply software. The next thing I know, for 2 weeks my mailbox was exchanging "sorry but I can't answer your mail for the moment, here's what you said" messages with the auto-reply software of my friend (which happened to be on vacation too). 2.7 GB of mail to delete when I get back. Thanks for the enhanced office productivity.
I just got thru doing a marathon week of installing and testing the latest Linux distros of: SuSE 7.1, RedHat 7.1, Mandrake 8.0, Corel LINUX OS Second Edition. IMHO the two best are SuSE and Mandrake. I was most impressed with Mandrake 8.0 and will probably settle on it as my desktop and SuSE on the servers. HOWEVER, one *big* glaring roadblock is in the way of me wanting to roll out a Linux desktop to replace Windows in my "MS Exit Strategy". StarOffice52 is good enough as an office suite. It gets the job done just adequately with one big exception. All the on-screen fonts displayed in any word processor... StarOffice, KOffice, Abiword (which blows up left and right) all these fonts are ugly as hell, They suck. What the heck do I have to do to get the on-screen fonts to look as clear as on a Windows box? Right now they look like they're drawn with big crayons and missing pixels all over the place, and looks like a complete lack of anti-aliasing. As long as the on-screen appearance of any of these office apps continues to look so damned crude, Linux will continue to fail to push Windows out of the desktop stranglehold.
The trouble with all the office suites for Linux is that they're all just half-assed clones of MS Office. How about forgetting that whole MS Office paradigm, and starting afresh? We should rethink what we really need to do in the office, and how we should do it; and then create new apps and suites around that. Too often, work and workflow is centered around the features and functionality of existing office suites, when it should be the other way around.
And I'm sure someone will trot out the anecdotal example of someone that knows of a company where the users are so clueful that they can run the whole show without any of those pesky sysadmins. In everyone of those cases you still need at least one person with not only the technical skill to solve problems but the time to do this while still doing their real job. Once a company starts to scale, you simply can't afford to live without dedicated resources to delegate sysadmin tasks to.
In short, there is no TOC savings with Windows because even though its easy for users to use (not nearly as easy as a Mac though) its not easy for those users to do anything other than install the simplest of software, and follow very simple instructions from the help desk(s) they will always end up calling.
So, the tired old argument about needing a sysadmin for Linux vs. Windows is very very misleading. Its the rare business that doesn't have a sysadmin or someone to call on for this task already.
Python
Python
I would seriously doubt the firewall "solution" included would be of much use if they do not have the a system admin capable of properly securing a Windows NT/2000 box. (Plus there is already a flaw discovered with that ISA product http://www.securityfocus.com/vdb/bottom.html?vid=2 600, heck knows how many will be discovered in the future)
:)
An SMTP server is pretty much a default on any Linux system (Sendmail/Qmail), an IMAP server would be definitely useful though.
MS SQL is definitely not low-maintenance software. I can imagine what kind of disaster some badly written ASP code in Frontpage by an using sa privileges on SQL can do...
You CANNOT get away from having a competant system admin - I had to recently deal with a company running some core business software on Interbase. One day the database crashed and when I asked for a backup the sysadmin (if you can call the monkey that) gave me an Windows 2000 backup file, which contained all the files but the database file (because Interbase must have had it in some exclusive access mode or something while running and when I mentioned that you need to either stop the DB or do a online backup using th DB admin software, the guy didn't have a clue what I was talking about...). So there has been no effective backup of the DB for months. I can imagine these small businesses using the MS software finding out the same thing if they think copying the database file for MS SQL will give them a backup
But just think... all those shinny new boxes with SQL running ready to be hijacked for other purposes...
Kill'em! Kill'em all!
I just got off the phone with a friend of mine who said that they are working on a client for RNext.
This will be made available after the release of RNext and its associated Windows/Mac clients.
But what people need to realise is that the reasons for the client taking so long, are good.
1) Lotus uses a widget set which is based on MFC. Bitch to port to Linux.
2) IBM sees little corporate strategy at this point to maintain a client for Linux, since, despite what everybody says, Windows is very dominant on the PC desktop.
3) iNotes is being pushed to be used more and more. This means that local clients may become obsolete soon. Right now the iNotes client is built on top of a bunch of MFC code, such as Windows DLLs and so forth, so it's not usable in Netscape/Linux quite yet. But it will change in the near future.
4) IBM/Lotus wants to put more effort into developing the server, rather than the client. Reason is that some people like Outlook. Others like something else. The point with Notes and especially RNext is increased interoperability for "BYOC" (Bring Your Own Client).
Just thought it might be interesting...
Alex
Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. -Ayn Rand
Oh, c'mon...
.com crash very well, thanks).
I've admined both NT and Linux.
I've found Linux upgrades far far easier (due to things such as ftp updates, apt-get, so on, so forth.
You could teach a newbie to keep Debian up to date.
Log in, apt-get.
Takes a little more teaching, going to each machine and doing tweaks and fiddles.
If you can't expect ports while giving source away for free, just give free binaries. That works nicely, don't you agree?
Nothing to stop that happening.
Plus, if someone ports, and tries to give it away, they're effectively copying an IBM program (same source, it's copywrite).
Giving away someone else's code as yours is a big no no in ALL licenses.
As for time to learn.. To do the job properly, an NT admin takes just as long to teach. It's not teaching them which buttons to press, it's teaching them WHY they need to press buttons/type things in in the first place!
If you don't know what you're doing, you shouldn't be doing it.
A good admin is competent on ALL platfroms necessary to get a job done.
As for businesses having to hire a Linux admin.. Learn before you preach.
I'm a consultant (used to be full time, now part time) to many small businesses. I've installed Linux boxes for FAR less than NT licensing would cost.
The IT support techie on site gets a crash course in how to use the admin tools provided, and my phone number in case of emergencies.
And ya know what? They never call. They have a list of Linux sites, they have the books, and they learn darn fast.
However, in the main part, I work for a small company, which is one of the largest European based Web companies (yes, it's weathering the
We managed a nice round 250,000,000 page VIEWS (about 5x that in hits). This was done on a pleasant 50 Debian boxes (dual pIII 500s).
They are spread out around the world in places such as India, Pakistan, USA, UK, South Africa, Australia, Newzealand. Essentially, they are administered by two people. There are guidelines to make sure that all the rest of active maintenance staff for 24x7x52 support know what to do when things go strange in any server.
All in all, there are about 7 people maintining and developing these machines, along with other projects. That includes a 24 hour support in three different shifts.
They are updated just about weekly, with the latest tested versions of various tools and so on.
One person does the updates around the world.
I'd sorely love to see NT do that, without thousands of dollars worth of extra software and configuration.
As for default installations. Do check out apt-get, and rpm installs and uninstalls.
Please, please get a clue before posting.
NT does a good job in some arenas, Linux does well in others.
I find Linux better for the tasks I have to achieve.
When you've learned both, and you're EXPERIENCED with both, please comment again.
But, learn your subject first.
Thanks,
Malk
Come on big blue, we sure could use WordPro and 1-2-3 on Linux.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
I think your math is off, and doubt that you've dealt with MS servers recently. Let me give you my take on the situation:
- Lets say your "entrepeneur" wants support for his Linux, so he buys Red Hat Linux Professional Server. For $180 bucks he can provide file sharing, printer sharing, domain logons for Windows, mail service, etc for all of the users in his office.
- Windows 2000 professional might make a fine desktop (still crashes too often for my taste), but it will in no way provide you with a server. For that you will have to buy Windows 2000 Server with client licenses for each user. If this is a *really* small office, you might get away with 10 CAL's, and pay around $1000. You're a lot more likely to need 25 for even a small office and pay closer to $3000. On top of that, you still have to buy Exchange for email, and probably MS SBS, too. Throw in a few thousand more dollars. The cost difference for the OS is not insignificant. It could easily pay for several visits from a consultant.
- IBM's SBS isn't free, but neither is Microsoft's.
- A linux box can be set up in short order by almost any technically apt person. You probably have one on staff if you work with any number of computers, but you may not if that's not your feild. So you hire a consultant to set it up. Once done, Linux installations rarely need baby sitting. A configured box can usually be left on its own to do its job.
- Windows is not easy to "use and administer", and if you think it is, you haven't used MS SBS. For instance, adding users in SBS will create users with a default login script. However, that login script will be overwritten every time you add a user. Managers want to use MS SBS because (this is a quote from a customer) "I don't have to do things the NT way, this is simpler". What's that I hear? The NT way is too complicated? However, when working for this particular customer, we had to do most things the "NT way" because the SBS way screwed them up. Overwriting the default login script meant loosing any local changes they'd made. The only option was to add users with the standard NT user manager. I have other examples, but listing them would take so long, I'd never finish this post. And as an aside... I've *never* seen an RPM install hose a system, so I don't know what you're referring to in your "user error" comment.
- Whether Windows or Linux, your need for a dedicated admin will depend on the number of users and tasks handled by the system. It's about the same for both, and most small businesses can get by with outsourced support. The difference is that Windows will need it more often. Having serviced customers with Windows and Linux boxen, I am qualified to make that statement, and I have the experience (as opposed to your speculation) to back it up.
- It's easier and faster for me to install PostgreSQL or MySQL on Linux than MSSQL on Windows. And don't forget that MS's default installation was responsible for *many* hacks in the last several months, including Wells Fargo.
In summary, people don't buy and use MS because it's better. They buy and use MS because of FUD like yours. Them that have consultants that they *trust* frequently choose Linux.
Hasn't this guy heard of alien? Using alien, rpms can be turned into debs and tar.gzs. You may have have to mess around a little to find the correct libraries to meet the dependacies for IBM's Small Business Suite, but I'd be very surprised if you can't get it to work with Debian.
--
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations
And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.
Berke Breathed
No, the one server license is $499. I'm interested in the WebSphere Hompage Builder... if it puts out standard html, it's the first WYSIWYG deticated webpage designer on Linux. It supports CSS, dhtml and other nice things in a program designed for people who buy "...for Dummies" books.
At $69, I can think of plenty of people I would recommend this to, most of whom use FrontPage right now. You know - the guy who has one Geocities site with three pages about the summer drama camp he runs, the guy who has a few pages on the RC model airplanes he builds - people who don't want to (amd shouldn't have to) learn html. It's also a nice example that WineLib is making it easier to port apps over.
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
The package looks quite complete. I wonder how much they sell it for.
It's pretty hard to beat MySQL, Sendmail, pop3d and inn when it comes to price, and often when it comes to performance also.
I only hope the big companies start making some serious money on server (and desktop) apps for Linux. Maybe then we'll see many more.
- Click location on bottom right corner of Notes Client window
- Select Edit current...
- Select Internet Browser tab.
- Change Internet Browser: field to Notes to use the Lotus internal browser.
- Save and close.
- Browse with pleasure.
By the way, you get a half-decent document viewer for things like Word & WordPro documents, 1-2-3 spreadsheets and Freelance presentations, etc if you view them as attachments in your Notes messages.Helps if you actually read the article/press release. IBM isn't releasing any client software for Linux--just Notes/Domino Server, WebSphere and DB2.
Unfortunately, IBM/Lotus dropped support for Solaris with the 5.x series of the Notes client, so it is unlikely that they will now port to Linux. Anyway, I have the 5.04 Notes client running quite well under Linux with WINE. It's pretty feature-complete--the only problem I have at this point is launching URL's, since it tries to launch either IE, or a Windows version fo Netscape. A "real" ported client would be great (even better performance and integrated/launchable web browser), but I'm pretty happy with what I have right now...
The boss-man doesn't care about things like technical quality, unless you can explain it in terms that are meaningful to him.
Have him contact a head hunter and find out what the going rate is for somebody who can admin an NT 4 net. When he recovers from sticker shock, remind him that the cost of these services doesn't go away just because he decides to do it himself -- they just steal from other priorities, such as (in his case) growing the business. This would be a good time to ask for a raise.
Of course it's expensive to hire a Linux admin too, but that's not the point. The point if he thinks he can do it himself it's wishful thinking. (1) He can't and (2) he shouldn't, unless the business runs itself. Another way of putting this is that of the two entities -- the computer network or the business, which is more likely to be able to more or less run itself?
Complex, large, or rapidly evolving networks simply don't run themselves; and they're not for amateurs to run. Simple, small, or stable networks are easy to admin either way, if you have somebody who knows what they're doing set them up and you don't get too cocky.
I don't think there's much to choose between MS and its open source alternatives in terms of TCO in this kind of environment, with one exception. You are forced to perform upgrades in the closed source world, even if you are satisfied with what you have now, because the owner of the sofware can simply refuse to license it to you.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
windows is not free, but a Windows 2000 Professional license costs about $200
/factories etc. They are good at what they do, and earn their money by their trade, and not IT. When they need an IT solution, they would nornmally not hire a dedicated "IT-wizard", but outsource it to consultants. So the consultants will do the network design and set up the server to the clients wishes. The company will then make a couple of employees "super users", who does mundane IT tasks (adding users, changing toner), as a small part of their work day.
W2k Pro? Thats the desktop version of MS Windows, right? While the desktop version might be used as a server, a much better comparision would be MS SBS (Last version I installed was a NT 4.5, but it is probably in a 2k version now).
Now MS SBS is quite "cheap", but it is hardly 200$. So I don't think your math add up;-)
IBM's SBS is roughly comparable with MS's SBS.
DB2 vs MS SQL
Lotus Domino R5 vs Exchange.
etc, etc.
IBM's SBS isn't free, but at 475$, ex. clients, it is quite cheap. (Check www.redhat.com for prices, and features).
Don't know the US prices, but it should be significally cheaper, than MS-SBS.
What really makes IBM-SBS interesting, is iNotes. According to IBM, you should be able to use MS-Outlook as a groupware client, instead of the usual Domino client. If that works as advertised, that's a killer feature.
A Windows box, which takes very little time to learn to use and administer.
I agree, and disagree. It all depends. Eg., if a person has no knowledge about what a "user" and a "group" is, no GUI in the world is going to help that person setting up a server.
Installshield installations are uniformly bad, but rarely go wrong and trash a system or application due to user error.
I strongly disagree here. I do think that rpm is way, way superior regarding installing, upgrading, downgrading, and removing software, especially on servers. In my experience, almost no Windows programs ever uninstalls without leaving funny registry keys and dll's. That most config files are text, and easely identified, and backed up, gives me great confidence in upgrading, and if neccesary, downgrading Linux software. It also helps, that it is very easy to browse the rpm-archive (using eg. MC). So even if it is a closed source rpm, it is very easy to see what goes where and what changes are made.
Many business owners, when faced with the task of maintaining a computer system for the first time, would likely have to hire a Linux system adminsitrator for $30k-80k a year for even a single Linux system.
That is a ridiculous assumption, especially in the SBS market. I used to be a consultant in a IT shop which targetet that segment: Most small buisiness's are non-tech companies, meaning, that IT is just a tool; law firms, accountants, production companies
This is the most cost effective solution for most SB's, and the smartest too.
Even a fat consulting job like setting up a server, is nothing to the cost of having a regular employee, all year round.
IMHO the difficult part about setting up, even a very simple network, is the basic, conceptual knowledge. If the concept of dhcp is totally alien to a person, it does not matter, that this is an easy thing to set up in MS-w2k. On the other hand, if people are well versed, in the concepts of tcp/ip etc, designing, and maintaining a network, is easy, regardless of OS. (for varying definitions of easy).
All in all, I think your analyze is wrong. Everything else being equel, the TCO would probably be lower using Linux with IBM-SBS, than MS-SBS. Linux is a really good OS, easy to maintain, and with a lot of flexible options.
But TCO's are not everything (or else, Linux would be much more dominant). Buisiness applications, like accounting, trade journal cdroms, etc, are a much more deciding factor.
MS is clearly leading on that front (except perhaps for web-oriented shops), however, Linux keeps improving on that side too, as this IBM-SBS package shows.
Take a note, Linux developers.
Linux will slowly start to get a significant share of that fat & rich buisiness server market. Take a note of that, windows developers;-)
It also offers signifigantly more than the IBM Linux distro: e-mail, firewall, SQL. /emacs), a huge amount of different scripting languages, network monitoring (Netsaint is way cool), MTRG, log analyzers, OpenSSH (and even VNC), NTP servers, industrial strength email servers like Sendmail, Qmail for the paranoid etc. And regarding mission critical software like "Solitaire" and "Freecell", Linux wins hands down with xpat2.
/groupware by Lotus Domino /Notes, and Red Hat Linux contains similar, perhaps even better firewall support, than MS-SBS. (that said, I would always run the firewall on a separate box).
Redhat sells the IBM-SBS. And come on, regarding extra features, and application, nothing beats a Linux distro; compilers, editors of choice (vim
All Linux distributions contains a firewall solution (kernel 2.2 =ipchains, kernel 2.4= iptables). Iptables is a statefull inspection firewall, which I guess is more than w2k's (mostly screening, portfiltering, right?)
Apparently you can go up to 50 clients, but then you hit a hard block.
I could swear MS had upped that to 100 clients with MS-SBS 4.5, like IBM-SBS.
There used to be other limitations in the MS-SBS package, like hard limits for the MS-SQL database size, etc. In short MS-SBS was quite, not entirely, unlike MS-NT+MS-Exhange, with small limitations (and sometimes its own service packs/hot fixes).
MS-SBS is a "good" and cheap solution for a small buisiness, but it seems almost like MS is trying to hide it away(too cheap?). The y2k fixes came way after the regular NT fixes, and it almost seemed like MS had abandonded it. Again, when Win 2000 started to arrive, there where some hinting, again, that there would be no upgrade path for MS-SBS users.
$1,499 for server and 5 CALs then $299 for 5 more CALs or $999 for 20 more CALs
So, figure for a business of 50 employees, you're talking about $3,800 total for the software.
Red Hat sells a RH 6.2 Linux server, with IBM-SBS for 475$.
A five pack CAL should be 175$ (90$ for one user)
So a comparable, dare I say, superior;-) Linux solution, should be around 2225$ (compared to 3800 for a similar MS-SBS). Now what to do with that saving: How about almost 2 years of Red Hat "Network System Response" support (unlimited incidents), when you have a question about configuring that firewall or DNS server. (biz hours), and 24/7/365 "emergency" support. (the DNS stopped working, and won't come up again).
Mind you, this isn't including hardware, support, etc., but it's signifigantly lower than the $8000+ mentioned earlier. And the IBM Linux offering doesn't offer an e-mail or firewall solution that I could tell (at least not from the review.)
The review was way to short; IBM-SBS includes email
Judging by price and features alone, Red Hat+IBM-SBS is a winner combo. whether this Linux combo is the right one, for a particular biz, is of course another matter. It all depends.
Check out the "XFree86 Font Deuglification HOWTO"
It led to an huge improvement the fonts on my desktop.
-Bruce
...then move all your fonts from a Windows box onto the Linux box, and you'll find that using Linux is a much more pleasant experience.
.ttf fonts to /usr/share/fonts/truetype. /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 file to include: FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/truetype" (In the appropriate section) /usr/share/fonts/truetype
To be more precise, follow these steps.
1: Move your windows
2: Edit your
3: run 'mkttfdir' in
4: restart X, or if your fontpath was already set to that dir, run 'xset fp rehash'
This is the short version of the font deuglification HOWTO. The other things in that are about making your non ttf fonts look better, and technical hacks like changing your dpi.
It also offers signifigantly more than the IBM Linux distro: e-mail, firewall, SQL. Apparently you can go up to 50 clients, but then you hit a hard block. But the pricing is much different than outlined above:
$1,499 for server and 5 CALs then $299 for 5 more CALs or $999 for 20 more CALs
So, figure for a business of 50 employees, you're talking about $3,800 total for the software.
Mind you, this isn't including hardware, support, etc., but it's signifigantly lower than the $8000+ mentioned earlier. And the IBM Linux offering doesn't offer an e-mail or firewall solution that I could tell (at least not from the review.)
Food for thought...
Somedays it's just not worth chewing through the restraints...
In order for non-commercial operating systems to succeed, they must deliver competitive software in the following areas:
The first 3 fields are being actively conquered. Sure, there's much room for improvement, but hey -- we've come a long way, baby. The fourth segment is the most crucial for truly capturing the corporate market. Apps like Outlook still remain essentially untouched by the open source movement. (I believe /. did a story on this some time ago). It's still the area which needs the most improvement.
Yes - for corporate adoption, groupware is critical. But tings aren't as bad as you make out. From the commercial side, Lotus Notes Domino server runs on Linux - while much villified and hated, it does fulfil the needs of collaborative groupware. On the Outlook/Outlook Express front, take a look at the abilities of Evolution (GNOME project) - this is getting close to a 1.0 release and has the integrated email/calendar/timekeeping tools needed for groupware.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
It's just a minor glitch in the matrix..
--
$HOME is where the
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
I'm something of a jack-of-all-computer-trades at the small bussiness I work at, and that includes system administration.
Our one file server is currently a GNU/Linux box (Debian), but the PHB wanted to move it to Windows 2000. Why? "Because it's stable and I can take care of it if you're gone" he said (I'm still in college and do this work part-time). My boss knows just enough about Windows to shoot himself in the foot.
And so he goes and gets a consultant to put Win 2000 on it, who shows my boss the price tag for Win 2000 Server (for the number of users we need, it costs more then the server itself orginaly cost). When my boss saw this, he said "um, lets get Win NT 4.0 instead". Great idea! Get an OS even the Microserfs say is a piece of crap!
So we see here how much support can be important. My PHB was willing (for better or for worse; probably worse) to put up with an inferior server OS just because of support. I hope he knows that, because he'll be needing that support with NT 4.0!
IMHO: I have quite a bit of background in trying to get Win9x systems to work (I'm not yet willing to give up gaming). I found myself constantly having problems getting somethings to work on Win 2000 (little things, mostly; setting up network settings, installation, driver support, etc.). I've never worked with it before in any detail, but from what I've heard, NT 4.0 would be even worse in this regard. For someone like my boss, who only what I would consider basic knoweldge of Win9x, these diffrences are bound to make support through him much more difficult.
------
Not a typewriter
That's pretty poor math:
- Windows is not free, but a Windows 2000 Professional license costs about $200.
-Windows 2000 Pro is for workstations - you can not run server software on it. Here are real prices from CDW:
Windows 2000 Server - 5user ~$860
Windows 2000 Server - 10user ~$1,290
Windows 2000 Advanced server - 25 user ~$3,400
Additional Client access - per 10 users ~$1,100
Next... you need backup software.
CA Arcserve 2000 Backup - $507
Now... The backup addition for MS SQL
CA Arcserve SQL Agent - $580
Now... don't forget the defragmentor - you want to compare Windows with Linux after all...
Diskeeper v6 - $290
So, figuring for a company of 50, you would need 2000 advanced server + 3 X Additional client access licenses + backup software + SQL Agent + Diskeeper v6
for... $8077 That is a bit more than $200 you glossed over.
\ Now that company could invest that, plus the consultant fees to install, and figure it will last ~2 to 4 years before they will be forced to upgrade by Microsoft, plus the cost of support over a phone, the bosses time talking to some idiot on tech support that treats him like an idiot, the cost of downtime, and if we want to do a true comparison, how does this guy ever upgrade? How do you test a new system. You have to buy a complete second server, with all the licensing. With Linux, you can install multiple copies, and just give them different ports for testing. I have had 4 copies of Apache running on a single Linux server. One was my production system, the 3 others were new versions with different options. I never had to restart the server to set it up, and when I found and tested the version I liked best, I deleted two copies, put the version I liked into production, and changed the port number of the previous working copy and kept it around for a few months until I felt even more confident about my choice. How do you do that with Windows and IIS? You buy 4 servers!!!
That is why I can not figure out how this got modded up to 5. And why the smart business owner will not invest money in renting software that will not be around for very long, but instead will invest in the salary of a good employee or invest in a business relationship with a consulting company that will help his company for years to come.
I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress -J Adams
To quote Louis V. Gerster, Jr., Chairman and CEO of IBM, from the "Letter to Shareholders," part of the 2000 Annual Report to Shareholders:
Additionally, in the "New Fronts" (a.k.a "The Plot Thickens") section of the annual report, the first article is entitled "Why I believe Linux will fundamentally change the information technology industry" by Irving Wladawsky-Berger, VP of Technology and Strategy, IBM Server Group, which sums itself up with:
This isn't some hype being served up by some marketing hack to the faithful at a trade show. This is the frigging CEO and VP talking to Wall Street. IBM clearly sees why supporting Linux benefits their customers (and therefore benifits their shareholders). They're not doing this out of altruism. It's a business decision. Linux is good for business, and IBM Gets It.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
IBM has spent a lot of time getting their apps in the door on linux, I just wish now that we have the lotus notes server on linux, we could also get a port of the client as well. The groupware suite is one of the killer apps, and what I notice half of everyone's time is spent in at the office. Notes is already well recognized in the corporate environment, so when can we get it already???
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end
IBM has a required number of languages to translate for: this grab-bag of distros includes the two IBM has contracts with (Caldera and RH), and includes the other two that support many other languages (SuSE = germany, Turbolinux = Chinese)
/. but I think it ought not to- there are four distros to choose from that are supported, if you can't pick one you like out of four just because it isn't your favorite one at home, lump it.
Now, when you charge $500 to $20,000 for Software (when I pay that much, the S is capitalized, and the 20,000 number comes from some of the WebSphere stuff) there darn well better be support.
If this means they have to rule out a few distros as being on the support list, so be it. EVERY IBM linux software goes through the IBM Linux compatibility testing, to see that it works on other distros, and what sys requirements and dependencies exist. These Software can probably be made to work on Debian and others, but if they don't, or if they break, don't expect support. If you're spending $500 on this, you probably can also spend the bucks on a machine to use just for that software with a supported distro, if you don't want to move your main machine to that distro.
This will probably dissolve into a good old fashioned distro flamewar on
A host is a host from coast to coast, but no one uses a host that's close
It seems to me that in order for another office suite to truly succeed, it will have to be almost exactly like Office, just like KDE and Gnome became popular by copying all the best stuff from Windows. Thats not flamebait, its just that one thing that Linux needs to survive is familiarity to those who would switch.
The problem is just how to make Linux friendly and familiar without just ripping of all of Microsofts good ideas (which many would argue that they ripped off from someone else, but thats not my point).
My point is that its a vicious circle. You can't get people to use your software if its not familiar (meaning, just like MS), but if its just like MS then why bother (and don't tell me because its free as in beer, no way could you make an office suite as comprehensive as Office without paying someone)
-- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
IBM has been known to look for alternatives from MS. They've develeoped their own OS before that died a horrible death. I want to see some of the other prefabs offer linux solutions such as gateway, compaq, HP, etc.
I don't agree with "A Windows box, which takes very little time to learn to use and administer." True, the Windows PC comes out of the box more or less ready to run -- but then you've got to get it hooked into the corporate network, load applications, and download updates to Windows and the applications. And there seem to be many different ways to cause a program to start itself up, so if the computer vendor or a stupid user gets something undesirable launching itself, it can be quite a job tracking it down and eliminating it. So it takes 2-4 hours to bring a new box up to the corporate standard here -- except now and then something weird happens and it takes days.
But you aren't done! Windows systems mutate themselves. Sometimes users are to blame, but I have seen my own system repeatedly go from one set of network drivers installed to three, without me ever telling it to load anything more. Then there are the really strange bugs that make permanent settings changes so well hidden that even MS tech support often can't figure out how to restore them. And those lovely MS undocumented features... For instance, every few months Outlook freezes here. It hits one person at a time, but eventually gets everyone. First couple of times, tech support told us to reformat and reinstall. Finally, someone discovered that you could fix it by logging on to each box as administrator, opening each address book in Outlook, and scrolling through them from top to bottom. This includes both locally stored personal address books and the corporate address book on the server. WTF?
So, at best Windows requires re-installs twice a year, or 4-8 hours a year per box. That's with the best users, who don't ask stupid questions, don't change system settings or install strange software on their own, and don't open executable attachments until they are sure about the source. And not too many users fit into that category -- engineers have to install all sorts of CAD and image-processing software, which often conflict with each other, while the salesmen somehow repeatedly put viruses into the e-mail system in spite of the best virus checkers. I don't see how I could get a virus in if I _wanted_ to, but these idiots do it every few weeks...
I don't know much about Linux, but I'm pretty sure you can get the setup correct and then lock the system down so neither naive users nor malfunctioning software is going to do lasting damage. And Linux can be hit by viruses, but Windows and Outlook seem to have been designed to multiply the possible entry points...
As for training, I don't know how hard it is to train Linux users, but if you've got a good, stable GUI and set of applications installed, how much harder can it be to teach that than explaining to a 55 year old clerk that you click Start to stop? Windows looks intuitive only to those that have been using it for so long they forgot what it took to learn the ropes in the first place.
It is quite easy to beat MySQL when it comes to features, though most of the small busnesses will most likely love it.
Sendmail is better then Exchange but can you say Postfix or Exim? Sendmail is no joke to configure and in the end you still get poor performance and potential security problems. Postfix has solid secure design, easy configuration and rocking performance.
Pop3d is what? WUimap, qmail, qpopper, courier?
If you don't mind spending time configuring software the best solution IMHO is Cyrus.
Also check out Communigate Pro if you are looking for a cheap easy email solution.
Kudos to IBM. This is bound to be a bit controvercial, but I believe that IBM is the most socially open of all the closed software houses. They have stated their intentions, and have clearly started a concerted effort to deliver. They are enthusiastic Linux supporters.
Most of the components of their Suite have been released before in individual parcels, but the real news here is the delivery mechanism. Bundling them together with an installer is the key point. If there is an easier to use installer for packages, including remote distribution of packages, this is a GOOD THING.
The other newsworthy piece I get from the links is the inclusion of server hosted applications. These have been available for a while in Unix environments with remote X servers, but this brings the actual processing to the client, and reduces server load while at the same time allowing for central software control.
As an administrator, this is attractive.
As a side note, this just re-inforces Linux in it's role as a server rather than a desktop.
.. if only.
You're probably getting worked up for nothing. DB2 simply needs the scripting features of the Korn shell, don't have the program so I don't know why. The P(ublic) D(omain) Korn shell is simply the shell program they decided to throw in. Nothing evil about it
If god had intended you to be naked, you would have been born that way.
The key component, at least in my mind, is how interoperable it is. How does this office suite handle things from Office for Windows? Like it or not, most of the business desktops in the world use Office 97 or 2000, and if you can't easily open Word files (Let alone Excel, Powerpoint, and Access) then this office suite will fail. Opening in text-only is no good, since then you'll lose all the nice formatting that some poor cubicle drone put together. (and if you don't think the look and feel of a document isn't more important then the content, then you should try working support in an corporate office!)
Anybody have any thoughts? I really want this to succeed.
I have head-explody!
In order for non-commercial operating systems to succeed, they must deliver competitive software in the following areas:
/. did a story on this some time ago). It's still the area which needs the most improvement.
1) Single User applications (mail readers, etc.)
2) Games
3) Content delivery daemons (apache)
4) Group-oriented corporate programs
The first 3 fields are being actively conquered. Sure, there's much room for improvement, but hey -- we've come a long way, baby. The fourth segment is the most crucial for truly capturing the corporate market. Apps like Outlook still remain essentially untouched by the open source movement. (I believe