Slashdot Mirror
Linux Lands Big Bank Account
An anonymous reader writes "The European arm of Banco do Brasil, the largest bank in South America, is switching from Windows to Linux to cut costs and centralise support. The long-term strategy is to phase out Windows completely. Linux is also being used to replace Windows on desktops. Vnunet has the whole story."
more likely they just want a fat discount from Microsoft...
is that banks even use Windows, considering it's reputation as a "secure" OS.
-Anonymous Howard
The price differential is too huge. Most people don't use any of the features of Windows. Really, it's a great OS. I love using it. But if I was a MIS dude at a bank, I would toss it out the window (pun!) because of the cost. Most of the folks at the bank need some email and some access to accounts.
It just makes sense to create an Intranet for all of the internal form filling out work and account access and then use CGIs to do the computing. Let the servers do the work and let the client boxes format it for the screen with Mozilla.
It will be interesting too see how bank to bank communicatuions pan out. Wether they fall victuim to the dreaded offcie format as alot of compnies have or have used to block such a move themselfs.
Banks have a reputation for being extremely conservative and set in their ways when it somes to changing software, and I'm surprised that a bank would make such a wholesale switch like this, especially to a platform no other bank has really used before. Still, good luck to them, it will be interesting to see who successfull the project will be. Not wanting to start another debate on Linux on the desktop, I won't mention that the plan to throw away all the Windows desktops and replace them with Linux sounds a little over ambitious, not least because of the cost of retraining staff. Mark
"XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, use more." - Anonymous Coward
I thought is was BSD that had been fully source-code audited.
Assuming the bank follows SOP, will it release the results of it audits to the world? And the bugfixes resulting from the audit?
As for desktops, it's about time we see this in a corporate setting on the desktop. All the functionality is there, and what the several word processors available can't do (what, 3 or four things that word can?), WordPerfect can do just fine. Slightly different feel, but it works.
Of course, I'm waiting for the day that hell freezes over so you can find Microsoft Office for Linux....
This sig no verb.
And they're doing Linux on the desktop, too! Break out the champagne. Somebody actually bothered to see that Linux does Java quickly!
A troll with money. Stop, you're killing me!
A sweaty Steve Ballmer was rushed to the hospital this morning after suffering a massive heart attack.
Doctors clam the heart attack was brought on by his recent over commitment to winning back his old customers. One Doctor was quoted as saying "He's just too over booked."
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
So ... is Bill Gates flying to Brazil this time? He seems to be doing a lot of "damage control" nowadays.
The bank will consolidate 41 Windows NT servers in eight European branches down to three IBM iSeries servers in London with six remote IBM xSeries Intel servers.
To me this sounds like they simply needed to revamp their whole setup to start with, be it with 3 windows/Mac/*nix servers.
"We had about 70,000 Windows server and desktop licences and eight NT networks serving Europe," said Tim Evans, UK IT manager at Banco do Brasil.
Again this sounds like saving from a reorg not an OS switch. They don't mention why they didn't choose windows when they reduced their server farm. It's a misleading statement that makes you think _only_ *nix allowed them to reduce their server numbers.
I really wish when stories like this were written they made things clear. It really don't help *nix much with shallow claims like this article makes. I'm all for people using the best thing that works for them, but I like consitant reasons and effects.
Additionally, I also wonder if these articles take into account the admin costs. Ignoring the misleading numbers the article gives. Is it easier to admin 3 Windows servers or 3 *nix servers? In my experience windows seems to be more hands off than *nix, or Solaris in particular. Maybe I'm comparing Apple's and Oranges though given my experience.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
This almost makes hopeful that Linux will truly be able to compete with Windows prior to the release of Paladium.
[gripe] Paladium will be a total disaster for us, the users, otherwise. For instance, their recent "leaked" document about music sharing may be to get users to forget that Paladium will likely prevent various types of file sharing. I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't kill some critical function of linux. Any hardware they get to only run with Paladium will be very bad. Encrypted RTC? Encrypted access to RAM? [/gripe]
I think, though, if linux provides the features the masses want (aparently we are getting close), hardware manufacturers will stop and consider their adoption of Paladium more carefully.
Simple economics - employees are far more amenable to changes in their work environment when unemplyment is high. This is exactly the time to make such a change.
I agree. I really think MS needs to offer radically different versions of Windows. I don't need/want the majority of stuff windows comes with. I'd really like a stripped down windows and just add things as I want. Where my grandmother may want all the flashy stuff to be there.
.exe not just the stuff in the Add/Remove Control Panel.
It would be really need to see some stats on the frequency apps that come preinstalled are actually used. I'm talking about every single
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
Could someone explain to me why this is so great (spare me the "MS is Evil" drivel). From my perspective, this is yet another business profiting off of the backs of developers who work for free. I Still Don't Get It(tm).
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
I have a friend who works for ING Bank, and apparently they are putting together a group to test the feasibility of Linux for their day-to-day. He's complaining because they chose people he considers inferiour, and is trying to get in the project...
Kinda amusing, considering he's a card-holding MSCE.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
There's more people in your so called "third world" than in the "industrialized nations" or whatever you might want to call them... :)
But think how much more convenient it will be for you to steal from a .NET web service. You can just consume a banking web service, exploit one of the many security issues, and use your favorite tools from Visual Studio. But hurry, there's limited time available between blue screens, service packs and reboots.
IBM is probably one of the few companies who are well enough equipped to deal with Microsoft FUD, probably because they were heavily into the FUD business themselves. IBM is also a major consulting company, and for such a move, they are well equiped to help.
I would guess that in reality, they would phase in Linux. Probbaly replacing certain internal servers and desktops running more specialised apps, after that it is just a metter of time.
Does it really take so long to retrain someone from MS Office to OpenOffice?
See my journal, I write things there
This seems to be a long term play, since they're spenging huge amounts of money on extremely high end IBM hardware (server side), so logic dictates they;re in it for the long haul since the only way to realize the indicated cost recovery, is to retain this new platform choice for at least 10 years.This is great to see.
Also, several folks have mentioned their concerns regarding trusting open source software with their money. I presume custom banking software will be ported, from it's original platform, so open source vs. closed source is meaningless where the software is all custom developed anyway. Systems with specific definable requirements such as will be used here is significantly easier to secure than systems where hundreds various and sundry services are allowed to continue running. Microsoft won the antitrust suit so we can't expect to see a stripped down truly secure Microsoft OS any time toon. All in all, this seems like wise strategic move.
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
Oh, he normally sends his ever vigilant watchdog: Ballmer.
A friend of mine works in the public sector in Brazil (an office related to the Ministry of Health). His Boss asked him about some ideas on how Linux could be used to cut costs to the taxpayer.
After careful study, he produced a report proving that is was possible to replace most (if not all) MS servers with Linux servers.
When word got out about this possibility, Steve Ballmer paid the country a visit and mysteriously, the project was put on the shelf in favor of Microsoft... Of course, the licensing method chosen was very unfavorable to the taxpayer.
We all know what happens here...
I feel so sorry for those desktop users who have to suffer by using linux.
Its only a matter of time before the world comes to an end.
If you use FreeBSD you can just "make world", and all will be well again.
That sounds all very even handed, but no one switches there entire infrastructure from one platform to another simply to "reorganize." If a company goes through the expense and time to switch platforms, they are doing so because of a measurable advantage (and enlightened staff savvy enough to recognize and take those advantages), namely in this case:
Again this sounds like saving from a reorg not an OS switch. They don't mention why they didn't choose windows when they reduced their server farm. It's a misleading statement that makes you think _only_ *nix allowed them to reduce their server numbers.
It isn't misleading at all, and while it may be as easy to manage 3 Windows servers as it is 3 Unix servers, it is vastly more easy to manage 300 Unix servers than it is 300 Windows servers, and infinitely easier to manage 3,000 Unix workstations than it is 3,000 Windows workstations. The difference in manhours required, the advantages of scripting and automation over Windows GUI admin designs, etc. are well and thoroughly documented (and painfully obvious to anyone required to manage both).
They chose to move to GNU/Linux for several reasons, among those cited are cost and easier management (unequivocably true, regardless of the disinformation eminating from Redmond). No company does this lightly, and the move was almost certainly decided based entirely on the merits (punctuated by the fact that such a decision likely ran counter to political corporate mindset, which means the merits not only had to be present, they had to be exceptionally compelling).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
If I may bitch. You don't want a single skillset. You've got a C++/Linux project? Good! Hire half C++/Linux developers, half a mixture TCL/Linux, Perl/BSD, Visual Basic/Windows. You don't want a single skillset. Why? Generally the VB/Windows head will think a certain way. If you actually achieve your fantasy of a single skillset, you've lost the diversity of thought that comes with a staff from multiple backgrounds. People with different skills think of things different ways and can contribute great ideas.
Now if he said, converge on a single goal -- that would be far more encourage and far less pointie haired.
Sorry to harsh the buzz.
-- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
But Hip Hip Hooray!!! To all the Linux coders that have worked so hard, for all the advocates this is the payoff you've been looking for. You work is well recieved for banks move slowly and deliberatlty, your stuff works just like it should, the GPL works just like it should as well.. the prize is validation!
3000 dead over past 2 years, still no free Palestinians, still
Here in Brazil, there are small banks that use Linux in terminals.
When will Microsoft start publishing (fake?) "user success stories" of switching from Linux to Windows?
- Tal Cohen
Banks are conservative, yes. But banks are also, well, greedy. Very greedy. They aren't betting on Linux, they're betting on IBM, and if IBM promises them big savings, and IBM-quality enterprise support, the greediness of the bank takes hold.
-- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
I went the other day to my bank to ask for some stuff, and all the information that I requested was queried/retrived/printed via a some sort of web browser. The bank has some sort of terminals where you sit with a member of the staff and you can see them typing and using the computer. The browser, rather than have the "explorer" logo or mozilla or whatever, it had the logo of the bank....the computer run win NT. I remember as well going to the bank to get some money out from the cash point. That day they have changed the ATM's interfaces from the old text based ones to fancy graphical ones.
Out of 6 ATM's 3 had the nice "graphics" running, 2 had "please press ctrl+alt+delete to log it" and the last one had a "green" screen of death, as the the screen was totally brigh green due to color of the screen. It was the last day I saw fancy "graphics" on the ATM's, I wonder why...
Here in Brazil, there are several brazilian and multi-national banks going to linux all they way. The Banestado (a state bank) changed all the ATMs from DOS to Linux. HSBC is using it on several layers of the organization. There's more comming but AFIAK it's not public information yet. Besides, I'm quite convinced there's a few others who already switched but don't tell anyone as a way to keep their internal process secret or just because they think some clients might feel unconfortable to have their accounts managed by a "hacker's OS". Well, whatever ;)
Adilson.
Faith can move mountains. I prefer dynamite.
I love to read these kind of articles.
Smart open-minded folks "just saying no" to M$. Tickles my fancy to no end..
I don't believe a site called "wininformant" is reporting Linux news -- and expects to be taken seriously. I only read Slashdot, because its news coverage is not at all biased.
Mostra pros europeus como se faz...
With Windows, you have a shorter uptime strategy (code for lousy uptime), configuration reboots, and the OS doesn't have the overhead for handling larger computers. The logical thing to do is to buy lots and lots of servers, and share the load between them.
The "reorg" is mandated by the way the operating systems scale.
-- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/021126/financial_ing_1.htm l : "Like most European insurers and banks, ING's solvency, or its ability to pay future claims, has been threatened by crumbling stock markets that have wiped a fortune off its capital base." Linux is a smart move for any company looking to cut costs. It'd be nice to see a domino effect: Banking, then insurance, then retail, then ... consumer's desktops.
I don't think it was 2 years ago pundits were saying 'Linux will NEVER be on the desktop! No good apps, games, office suite, etc! During that time I have seen more and more stories where companies world wide [yeah INCLUDING the U.S. too]that are deploying it their businesses.
4-6 yrs ago, many of those same pundits were saying that Linux would NEVER be in Enterprise server farms [or lack thereof].
Well they were wrong about the servers and they will be wrong about the Desktop. Even though it may not overtake the desktop [and I don't think even that is a forgone conclusion], it will seriously dent into Apple AND Microsoft's dominance on the desktop.
When businesses start realizing the mistake they made on MS's arrogant 'subscription' biz model and when MS realizes too late what an arrogant goof they made, then the floodgates will open.
Wait and see if I am wrong, pundits.
> I can fully administrate any of my FreeBSD/OpenBSD
> servers from anywhere in the workd using my Iridium
> Phone and a Psion Revo with an SSH client.
Wait, wait, wait, you do have a working ssh client for a Psion Revo ? Could you tell me which one exactly you are using ? Thx!
seb.
Memory fault -- brain fried
It was learned today that Operating System MSDOS has been declared dead. In a statement read to the press by Dr. Balmer! Balmer! Balmer! Balmer! from MSDOS's descendants, the Windows family, he said that while there may some isolated activity, everyone agrees that MSDOS is definitely brain-dead, and is scheduled to be removed from life-support at the end of the year.
The nature of Open Source security issues is rather different. First, the Open Source community is more forthcoming in its report of security vulnerabilities. Second, all the vulnerabilities in the report so fairly reported by a Windows advocacy site have been fixed. Third, most of the security vulnerabilities reported by CERT are less disasterous than their Windows counterparts.
Any OS has security vulnerabilities, including UNIX based systems. The difference between Open Source and MS issues is that MS users are at Microsoft's mercy when it comes to fixing them. Open Source problems are there for anyone to see and patch. Better the devil you know than the devil hidden away behind Redmod's closed source.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
Anybody used to MS Windows can get used to a Linux/KDE or OpenOffice setup within ten minutes.
I really wish I could remember where I read this, but I read somewhere that one of MSs problems is that they are trying to expand into a market that they really aren't suited for.
They went on to place solaris, linux, and windows into their appropriate market locations
MSs was vastly on the desktop, while holding a modest position in the small server market.
Linux took up the rest of the small server market and had a small chunk of the Large end server market.
Solaris/mainframe systems had the rest of the large end servers.
To the author MS was trying to take hold of more of the small end server market that it could an also trying to wedge itself into the large end server market, all while maintaining the hold on desktop systems. Linux was also trying to take too large a hold of the desktop market instead of just staying with small end servers and the random techno geek.
I really agree with the authors assesment, really wish I could remember who it was. All I know is that he is rather promenent in the tech industry.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
Microsoft: Nanny nanny boo boo! Bill: Nanny nanny boo boo! Bwaaaaahaaaahaaaahaaahahahaahahahahahahahaha!
Ser iously now. DOS-based systems have historically been convenient for embedded and other systems that don't have the power to provide complex services. I say DOS-based because there are many different DOS lookalikes that serve the same purposes. Unfortunately, the design of Windows has built too strongly upon assumptions made in DOS, and even though it is no longer running on DOS in newer versions, certain problems do exist due to the system's background. On the other hand, the design of UNIX has always been a better architecture than the DOS-based operating systems for complex, flexible systems that provide reliable services. Although it has many shortcomings, these are being addressed today so the architecture is changing to support the today's needs. Linux gives business the ability to use an architecture close enough to UNIX that it can be considered the same for discussion purposes. It has the support of programmers and heavyweight companies worldwide. It can be customized by anyone for any purpose. Corporations and governments can be sure that no company will hold them or their data hostage. And there are no per-user licensing costs, regardless of Total Cost of Ownership arguments. I strongly believe that these advantages will eventually displace Windows in such a serious manner that, although it will continue to exist, I think it will become one of many "front-end" systems on the market, and Microsoft will have a very difficult time differentiating it from other products so that they will have a competitive advantage with it. Even if assholes, I mean, Microsoft, tries to compete by releasing code or whatever, it'll never help them because nobody cares. And their code is probably a pile of ugly crap that somehow works only because a hundred zillion programmers are hacking it together so that it works somehow. Although they'll probably be around for a while, I have a feeling Microsoft won't be so powerful anymore, and FINALLY, computing won't be held hostage by them. So there... nanny nanny boo boo. I hope that in 10 years, Microsoft's entire distribution will account for 1% of the entire software market. And I hope they don't spread to other markets. Actually, what I really hope is that they'll go out of business through huge fsck-ups that will leave all Windows-based systems crippled, as they are tied into the existance of the company. That would be cool. Microsoft SUCKS! Linux RULES! Microsoft SUCKS! Free Software RULES! Microsoft SUCKS! Open Source RULES! Microsoft SUCKS! BSD RULES! Microsoft SUCKS! Talking shit on them RULES! Microsoft SUCKS!
If this news is really true it is very good news, but I couldn't understand what the guy mean by "Linux runs Java much quicker than Windows". The speed of Java heavily depends on the compiler and runtime technology being used. As far as I know Microsoft Java was one of the fastest JVMs out there. ORP was comparing its own performance with MS's JVM and for many programs it was behind.
In a way this makes sense. A big corporation will not only (if at all) consider ease of use at the GUI level to determine the right OS to save costs and get the job done.
It is normal for a big corporation to have standards and procedures and if they have them to get things done in windows they can certainly have them to do stuff with linux. As long as it can be proven that Linux can do the same tasks with the same amount of effort (but different knowledge and mindset) then the last decision will be about cost.
To pay Microsfot for support or have it's own support staff becomes irrelevant. What is important is the independence from the policies of ONE vendor.
Right now these options STILL are not as clear to many CEOs or even CIOs. With time and with improvements similar to Xandros will force Microsoft to change their ways (and as we have seen before, they will).
Most banks actually use big hardware for the REAL data processsing, everything is done via an terminal emulator or complex screen capture programs to make it 'pretty'..
Windows currently is needed for compatiblity with stuff like 'word', 'exchange', and piddly loan processing programs, etc.
So somoene hacks in and grabs a email.. big deal. the statemnts/and $ are safe.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Canada Trust, one of the biggest banks in west Canada (I am not sure about their reach) use linux heavily. I went there to open an account, and while I was answering questions, what was on their desktop? KDE everywhere. People at desks and people working behind the counter were all using Linux and KDE on PCs. I would also suspect that if Linux is used on every desktop that it, or at very least some other Unix is used for all the servers.
This Wiki Feeds You TV and Anime - vidwiki.org
It is nice to see that people are seeing the viablity of Java and Linux. We ported our Java app to Linux and saving ton of money , downtime and dev time.
Our apps runs better in linux than windoze our dev pc boxes are redhat 8.0 too.
Customer like it that they can have Linux servers that cost nothing as it can run on old hardware running our server side java app
Thanks Linux
I see this everywhere I go, businesses running windows with one app maximized to the screen, running on a cheap pc. Food Places, Gas Stations, Department Stores, the list is endless. Each one spends $$$ to MS just to be able to run that 1 .exe that they use. Its my opinion that they ALL should be switching to open source solutions. Take Quick Trip for an example, lets say they have 1 million stores ( just an example )worldwide. 3 PC's per store, $100 per pc to MS so they can run that 1 app. Thats $300,000,000 to Microsoft. Good lord man.
The only bad thing is, most if the time the OC makers force Microsoft onto the PC when its purchased. I forget if the are now forced to , or if they can offer OS-less systems?
Anyway, take that example, times 1 million businesses worldwide like it. Thats a lot of money thrown our the WINDOWs (pun) .
Comment removed based on user account deletion
To: Linus
Subject: Patch to move all rounding errors into a Cayman Islands bank account
superman-III.diff.gz follows....
A bank doesn't have their production & accounts servers connected to the internet. They do have web servers which interface with other internal servers that have transitory information.
Batch procedures take care of saving and balancing all daily transactions.
Banks get audited, and I beleive (at least in the US) if the government finds out that a bank is risking its servers through the internet they will make them pass a really bad time (and still the public wouldn't know about it).
Anyone knows if this also apply to the 24-hour cash machines?
I know there is one bank, Banrisul (bank of the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil) uses linux heavily, including on their cash machines. There is even a neat penguin on the lower right corner!
Oh, he normally sends his ever vigilant watchdog: Ballmer.
Don't you mean bulldog?
Too bad it don't mean squat. Fighting the losing battle Linux is...
Maybe it's just me, but I can't understand what's worth giving a news if some big company starts using linux? Are you guys here in slashdot having an anti-microsoft world domination plan with list of every more significant company and then just draw a line over them when they are succesfully converted?
What's next on Slashdot "Switch"-campaign?
- xyzzy fast-food chain starts to use linux in their registers. Too bad the front-end hides evert hint of running linux.
- Eskimos of the Antarctica have succesfully ported their vast population to a database run on linux.
- Gregs' one-person garage-based company switches to linux - claims less costly.
Maybe I just better customize my Slashdot to not show stuff like that. Or maybe I'm lazy and like to complain instead of doing something about it.
I don't know anyone who could switch after they've used Linux. Its just too hard and too different. But if i was a new user and could choose with all the knowledge I have now I would go for a *nix OS.
Their uptime says all.
Anyone want to explain to me how a whopping 9 boxes is considered a "big" account? I may be a bit confused, but last I checked, 9 is a relatively small number. True, not as small, as say negative 10 billion, but since the number of computers can either be be zero or greater, 9 is relatively small. I mean, the only way you could have fewer boxes is if you had 8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1, or 0 boxes. 9 machines. Whoa. Now, I am blown away. I'm thinking that /. should just start reporting every time someone installs any kind of OSS software at home. Headline, "Bob Smith of BE, NJ installed Redhat on 10 PC's at home today!" Now 10. That would be impressive. More so than 9. One more, actually.
*whoosh*
Once the avalanche has begun, it is too late for the pebbles to vote.
*whooooosh*
well, I suppose it's a good thing that Microsoft got a light telling off. A modular Windows would have increased there monopoly.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I wonder what version of Linux they are installing? Red Hat 7000000000000.2?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
I've seen many a BSOD or login prompt on ATM's that are running windows.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
of the baord now. "Gentleman we have switched to MS and we are seeing incredible savings, increased security, and greater stability. And, the most incredible thing is... the support..is free. Yes free the IT Dept. uses IRC, mailing list and forums to get all their questioned answered.
e &p=F S
If I've helped you see what I care about:
http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=listjunki
One thing that I haven't heard mentioned yet is the time/cost factor of retraining all of these individuals. Any idea how hard it is going to be to retrain a Windows user to use a Linux gui? How many times is tech support gonna hear..."where's the Start button?"...or "how do I do this in Koffice?" I'm all for a changing of the tide, but it's not going to be all fun and games. There is going to be some SERIOUS cost involved in retraining end users and hiring more helpdesk personnel. Porting the organization I work for over to Linux would initially give me some serious nightmares. I mean we have end users that can't even operate a f**king mouse so migrating them to Linux just sounds like a major headache.
Money not found! A)bort, R)etry, D)eclare Bankruptcy
Off topic? Hello, 'tard, the topic was the article. I know Engish is really difficult, but please try to pay attention.
Sorry, pad're but dweebs NEED the buttclucked names - awksedgrepGIMP it's bingo night at church of the Dweezle. 8-I-N-6-0 They suck it up like horses suck snake-venom.
and what the several word processors available can't do (what, 3 or four things that word can?)
Seriously, we all know Linux is great. We all know freedom is great. We also know that no Open Source word processor can touch the feature count of MS Word. In terms of the most commonly used features, your point (while still wrong) starts to make sense, but don't fool youself.
You can make a great point for Linux while sticking to the facts -- don't dillute things by making up statistics.
It all goes downhill from first post
With the current economy and Microsoft's licensing costs this should become an on-going event. One business after another switching from windows to Linux. Maybe then Windows will lose its hold on the market and we will all benefit as a result.
I can't wait!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
C'mon man! Vi, TeX and CVS are all you need. :)
On a serious note, the text editor / TeX / CVS / scripts method works wonderfully for large documents (50+ pages). Much, MUCH better than any word processor I have ever used (including Word, Word Perfect, StarOffice, etc.)
Just write the copy, use scripts to handle conversion of disparate formats into TeX (CSV, etc.), a makefile to put the thing together, and CVS to track changes. Works beautifully.
In systems such as those used by most modern banks, they are interested in one thing. Money. Since accounting doesn't fundamentally change very much, the most important things are:
1) Reliability. The system should be rock stable. Upgrades are not a concern very often (mainly for security), and should involve as little downtime as possible. In this case, time quite literally is money. Well, I had a slackware 3 box that ran 3 years. Few people will argue windows is more stable. In addition, the ease with *nix services can be replaced, upgraded, restarted, and restored is unparalleled in the Windows world.
2) Interoperability. Unlike most places where it is important to be able to support a broad range of different applications (a Windows strongpoint, due to the size of the Windows market), most bank applications are very specialized, in-house or contract work. As such, they simply get applications for their OS of choice. 3) Security. Unlike many places that want a working, secure system right out of the box, banks and other financial institutions are willing to invest the time (and money) into securing any box. As such, linux does not have as big a impact on the overall security here. However, it should be noted that it is _far_ easier to remove unnecessary and/or unusued services, and as such it is easier and less time-consuming to do, and more likely to be done in a secure manner, if the person securing the network is lazy (highly unlikely).
In a system such as this, Windows loses many of it's benefits such as a well-known GUI, and ease-of-use for the enduser. Because all operators _must_ be trained in the operation of the bank's systems, this is not such a big factor. Also, the convenience of Windows Update is also irrelevant, as the operators should not have the priveleges to install updates anyway.
Cost:
Because banks tend not to update their software unless absolutly necessary, the Linux cost advantage is not so great here; however, it should not be overlooked that Linux tends to be easier to remotly administer and repair, allowing for less use of expensive on-site service. Furthermore, the open-source nature of Linux allows banks to customize their OS to their Software, instead of the other way around.
Contact Me (got tired of viruses emailing me).
Why do so many people react with such bitterness when an organisation does something that makes financial and practical sense? The bank is large enough to have the resources to develop their own applications and running Linux is probably financially practical for them because they don't have to pay the MS licences or worry about BSA audits.
MS can only blame itself with it's restrictive licencing practices and high prices, not to mention extreme amounts of FUD that are not worthy of serious busineses.
I give MS 5 years.
I believe it would be more nerd-friendly as
"You had me at EHLO."
I know it's an extension, but truly more nerdy!
It all goes downhill from first post
I don't think it was 2 years ago pundits were saying 'Linux will NEVER be on the desktop! No good apps, games, office suite, etc! During that time I have seen more and more stories where companies world wide [yeah INCLUDING the U.S. too]that are deploying it their businesses.
/. geeks) may be using linux on their desktops, I don't think anyone can account for a large enough desktop share to claim that *nix is on the desktop.
While some people ( read
Don't get me wrong, I like *nix, just as I like windows and Mac/Os. I just don't think the numbers are there to make any hard hitting statement like this.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
> change the name to GNU Image Editor...
... GIMP!"
Perhaps we should ask Monty Python.
"We are the Developers Who Say
Every time some chooses linux as an operating system, it gets front page treatment from slashdot. However, Windows 2000 server has been landing even bigger accounts (federal government), but those stories get ignored. Overall, Windows 2000 Server has been growing in popularity, but you wouldn't know that trend from Slashdot.
Noticed this at the bottom of the page. "The number of Unix installations has grown to 10, with more expected." -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June, 1972
----
Go canucks, habs, and sens!
A third iSeries server (a model 270) is used as a Lotus Domino server running mail for 250 staff throughout Europe. It also links into the bank's private intranet.
Apparently IBM has committed to a Linux version of the Notes client in the near future. Once that is a reality then Domino can be a full Linux app on both the server and the desktop. At the moment the Desktop Notes client will only run well under Windoze (or WINE with a lot of tweaking), while Domino has been running under Linux for awhile now.
From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
Idiot. It should be "Big bank account lands Linux!" Not accounts, just account. Unless the headline was different a couple hours ago...I still love you.
I'd say likely. Read this excerpt from a report in an Indian Mag: For instance, says a Linux distributor speaking off the record, his company had recently concluded a deal with a large public sector company to implement Linux across the organisation. This was done after the company rejected a Rs. 9-crore (approx USD 1.875 million) Micro$oft proposal to upgrade its system. Even as the ink on the deal was drying. Micro$oft staged a counter attack by offering to implement the infrastructure for just Rs. 2 crore ( USD .4 million). "And we lost out on what could have been the best lighthouse projects for Linux in the country"
Hence, I suspect Micro$oft's ulterior motive behind its philanthropic father donating "I'm not sure how much" for AIDs in India.
Ironically, two huge condoms greated Gates on his visit to Hyderabad. I wish they were worn on larger than life middle fingers, with the rest of the fist clenched!!
All your Peso's are belonging to US
Yes, but in Open Source comunity, all the bugs are shown. We don't hide any bugs that someone found, we don't need to hide anything! But Micro$oft needs to hide Window$' bugs, therefore we can't know if that "Service Pack" has more bug fixes that it says, or even if a bug in Window$ that Micro$oft knows but doesn't have a fix yet exists. I think that there are lots of bugs that Micro$oft staff don't want to show to the press.
Anyone care to make a wager? Next issue of slashback, assuming the eds will swallow their pride to print it, will include a story about how the same bank is buying brand new Microsoft licenses at disgustingly discounted prices... "Leye nux" what now?
[o]_O
superman-III.diff.gz follows....
Linux will never apply your patch if you send it that way.
Just append it to your message in plain text, no attachments, nothing.
We live, as we dream -- alone....
Linux will never apply your patch if you send it that way.
Ack! I meant: Linus will never apply your patch if you send it that way.
[Geez, two line post, use preview, still screw up.]
We live, as we dream -- alone....
Don't you mean bulldog?
Whatever.
You know, that guy who's always high on drugs and screams his lungs off on seminars. Yes, that one.
I'm trying to incite riots, with "I'll show him!" bouts of productivity.
You see, I'm in a position where I might be able to get 600 machines with the Canadian Federal Government switched from Windows to Linux. But I can't - for a variety of reasons, Linux simply isn't ready for the desktops of the masses.
Why? www.glowingplate.com/dissent. Linux simply cannot be heralded as a viable replacement to Windows while the most common off-the-shelf distro (RH) is as slow as it is, KDE lacks such basic things as a spellchecker which doensn't suck, and xine's developers are having long debates about which logo to choose (all of which look like they were designed by a 14-year-old Run Lola Run fan from East Berlin) while the xine UI lacks something as simple and common sense as a friggin' repeat button.
And while Open Office is a great start, it amazes me that, despite its Sun ancestry which is the bread and butter of engineering workstations - OO's Calc apparently lacks the ability to do a simple linear regression. Excel's been doing them for years. (It's worth noting that I've RTFM and even though I've designed radar equipment for a living, I still can't figure out how to turn on OO Writer's page numbering...)
As Linux advocates, these things must be addressed. The party lines must be crossed, distro wars must be ended, and a concerted effort to actually get a real 100% ready x86 desktop operating system must be mustered. After all, Linux is almost there.
If I'm so passionate, why don't I program? While I can make Hello World in about a dozen different languages, my programming style ranges from brute force to ignorance. It's so horrible that Microsoft keeps on trying to hire me to work on the IIS Development Team. You don't want to commit my code. I'll contribute in advocacy, documentation, and fanning the flames instead.
Check it out.
Now it's 10:30PM on a Saturday night. Time to go out and drink beer.
(BTW, just kidding about Microsoft trying to hire me. Well, I think I am, anyway; there's a headhunter trying to scout me for an undisclosed position just outside of Seattle.)
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Here in Brazil, the largest private bank, Bradesco is said to run M$ servers for their web operation. I believe that. But the other day I went to their branch and I saw scores of PCs with LCD screens running windows. When I asked them about the status of my accounts, they also brought up a nice terminal emulator screen.
Another large bank, Real ABN-AMRO, does the same.
Banco do Brasil, being the largest Brazilian bank (it's state-owned, by the way), might use terminal emulators on top of Windows as well. I've never managed to see actual windows, as I am not an account holder, but their systems seems to be heavily mainframe-based.
One of the largest credit card companies in Brazil is also entirely mainframe-based.
Seems that the market found equilibrium by itself: keep Windows where it belongs to (desktops) and use IBM mainframes and Unix boxes where critical data and processes must be kept. Frankly, I dont see the point of using Microsoft outside employees desktops.
As you guys know, Linux has a long way to go to achieve user-friendliness and if this trend continues, we'll see corporations forced to pay M$ licenses to run their desktops and paying even more to other companies so M$ can interoperate properly with mainframe and Unix servers.
Maybe this is the rationale behind M$ actions: they create their proprietary ecossystem at the expense of freedom and/or efficiency and/or market choice.
I heard somewhere that Microsoft already found that they need a consulting capability to push their products into the corporate world.
So they have associated with Accenture.
Look at what we do at the bank I work at:
Dear sir/madam:
I regret to inform that I could not read the file you sent. Please save it in the Word 97/Access 97/Excel 97 version.
Thanks.
Yeah. Our IT manager decided to freeze the whole operation at Office 97 versions because our company does not accept the fact that we have to rewrite lots of user macros and scripts every time VBA changes.
So, we're stuck in 1997/98!
sounds to me like IBM sold them servers and said; "We have this cool thing we use called 'Linux' that we are going to be using to run these servers you just bought, and it can be used on all of your desktop computers without any licensing costs. Did I mention it is more stable and secure than MS Windows? Also, it can be installed and updated via the network so that all of the machines have the necessary software and security updates."
Finally a step towards debugging the machine that led to the imprisonment of Mr. Buttle, shoe repairman, instead of Harry Tuttle, illegal freelance Heating Engineer.
*hugs* Where have you been??
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
So I take it that those Transmeta stock options have really paid off?
sound like a lot like M$ Windows XP Embeded
but ha! read this quote from M$'s site:
"Special Offer: Windows XP Embedded for Only $995 US
For a limited time only, get Windows XP Embedded for a special price.
Unlock the power of Windows XP Embedded for only $995 US estimated retail price (ERP), which represents a savings of up to 65% off of the Microsoft standard retail price. This offer is valid through March 31, 2003. Contact your authorized Windows XP Embedded distributor for details.
This offer applies only to the Windows XP Embedded development tools and not to runtimelicenses."
That's like a fancy new über PC assembled....and they want so much for a OS, (HA!), as a customer I sure would want every businnes to follow this example, because the money comes from my spending pocket (not theirs), and I don't want to pay for this sort of coasts when there are alternatives which do the same job...
I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
There's one thing that I very much miss in OpenOffice: a grammar checker. For me, it's what keeps me with MSWord. And I've never seen anyone seriously complain about anything else.
I mean, grep? How counter-intuitive is that?
Your point is right on.
A very high percentage of all office suite users would find OpenOffice works fine for them.
This is the case in business and personal use.
If OpenOffice does not have a feature you really need check out StarOffice. If StarOffice comes up short check out WordPerfect for Linux.
If you think paying $400+ for Office XP is worth it fine. Waste your money.
But, only idiots would buy Office XP for the entire company to run. That is simply a waste of precious resources and should get you fired on the spot.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
I would agree that the corporate market is a bit different than the consumer market.
Any large company can easily break down the number of applications they truly need to get their work done. And, not one of them dictates the Microsoft brand.
The recent developments in OpenOffice, StarOffice, CrossOverOffice and Corel's WordPerfect for Linux prove that any corporation can have a wide variety of office suite applications that are perfectly compatible with each other.
They only have to avoid using proprietary Microsoft formats. But that does not require the non-use of the application feature set.
The smart companies will give all general office employees a copy of OpenOffice when some getting StarOffice or even Corel WordPerfect for Linux. If anyone or any department can make a case why they have to waste $400 or so more per PC to buy Office XP, then let them try.
But, it is stupid for an IT Manager to buy XP Office across the company. Those idiots should be fired for wasting money.
Training a problem?
Give all employees their free copy of OpenOffice now and let them bone up on their home machines. Pay them $50 each when they are ready. My bet is 50% or more of all employees would claim they are ready for their $50 within a week.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
You are absolutely correct.
Businesses simply do not need the Microsoft bloated crap.
It is so true that a vast majority of all business PCs run a small number of applications.
Those companies that only need general office applications, Linux can already provide them at a number of price points.
Get Xandros with CrossOverOffice is you need support for older Microsoft Office applications. Xandros networks with the Microsnort boxes just as easily as they do. The MS Windows Explorer is cloned. And, it comes with Xandros.
A large number of office works would not even know the OS was switched to Xandros instead of Microsoft Windows. Just tell them it is XP with a different Window Manager (KDE). They would not know the difference. Heck, put them on OpenOffice a week or so before dropping out Microsoft and they may not even notice the change at all.
The point here is that the corporate market can easily switch to Linux desktops assuming only that the vertical applications they need are available.
For some businesses, that is not yet the case.
But, if you are a larger corporation and you contact the software developer of a key application. I will bet you they will put out a Linux version if you will sign up.
There is no reason why not to.
Kylix/Delphi now lets developers use either Pascal or C++ to write cross-platform applications. Java runs on both. And, browser based applications can easily be available on either as well.
The general statement that Microsoft crap is required is no longer true. In a specific case it may be true.
Quicken runs on Linux now with the help of CrossOverOffice. QuickBooks is sure to follow. And, that assumes that Intuit continues to refuse to write to the Linux platform because of the fear that Microsoft has put into them.
But, that can change too when the Linux market begins to grow and Intuit is not in it.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
I think you touched upon the key factors for business.
Reliability and Interoperability is important.
But, for corporate users the ability to manage the systems is going to be the key going forward. The total cost of PC systems is directly related to the cost of management.
Both Xandros and SuSE have announced their intention to develop enterprise management systems for PCs. IBM has done likewise but just not limiting themselves to Linux.
The key here is that more than one company is going to putting their resources into this problem. And, it will not be solved by automatic updates directly from the vendor. It will be solved by the corporate IT department directly managing the process. And, it will be solved in more than one way. And, that is key. Xandros and SuSE will not come to the same conclusion on how it should be done. And, that is the way it should be. Ximian also is looking to focus upon this issue.
Microsoft might address this issue too. But, they will only offer one solution. And, one solution is not going to fit all customers anymore than one OS does. One size can never fit all. Corporations do not want to operate the way someone else demands. And, that is true even if Microsoft is the idiot making the demand.
Microsoft products are simply overpriced and highly inappropriate for corporate use.
Bundling IE with the OS did illegally force a monopoly in browsers upon all consumers. But, that made the OS more expensive and single minded. And, it increased the support costs for all customers. Not to mention removing a key ability of corporate accounts to decide what software they buy and use.
On the contrary, Linux will not screw corporate accounts.
Right now you can get CrossOverOffice, StarOffice, OpenOffice, Netscape, Mozilla and other software (including a Windows Explorer for simple networking with Microsoft) all included with an OS distribution. But, if you do not want some of that technology you can get a Linux desktop without it or remove it when you want to.
The idiots at Microsoft will screw commerical accounts by taking away those options.
And, labeling Microsoft as being run by idiots is dead on.
Corporate accounts would all prefer a barebones OS. Or, a number of choices.
Microsoft will screw you by refusing to give you that choice and forcing the purchase of the highly overpriced bundle. And, that is simply not what a corporate IT department wants. Maybe those IT managers who do not possess the intelligence to evaluate software might want it. But, they are the only ones that do.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Sure Microsoft may lower its price.
But, the bloated OS product is wrong for the marketplace.
Who wants to be forced to buy, install, support, manager and run IE?
Only idiots let others decide what they buy and use.
Only idiots let others decide that food they eat each day.
Only idiots let others decide what clothes they wear.
Oh, but you think that others can tell you what food you eat if they pay for it?
It is not only about price.
Microsoft XP could be free and it still would be the wrong solution because of the cost of supporting, maintaning and using software you do not want.
Software is just like clothing and food.
only idiots let others dictate to them what they consume.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Microsoft has more than 5 years left.
But, they run the risk of being an Apple (fine products but highly overpriced and holding about 10% of the market).
That should be the case now with office suites.
About 10% of those who need an office suite may depend upon a Microsoft version. But, 90% simply do not need it and can save big time when they upgrade.
If they do not upgrade the chances are good that CrossOverOffice and Linux will permit them to keep their old version while running Linux. So, even if they do not drop the old Microsoft applications they can switch to Linux and save money there. Plus they can put OpenOffice on Microsoft now and begin to use OpenOffice which also runs on Linux.
Intelligent IT managers only buy cross-platform applications. Period.
There is no value to buying a proprietary solution run by a company that raises prices even during extremely difficult times just because they can screw their customers.
Microsoft is run by idiots. It is a brand that should be avoided if at all possible. And, to the fullest extent possible. The long run benefit in such a policy demands it.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
You waste money on 600 Microsoft PCs because the OpenOffice spredsheet does not do "linear regression"?
How many of those 600 employees do that work? One? Two?
If 10 need linear regression capability in their spreadsheet, then buy 10 copies of the software they need and 590 copies of OpenOffice.
Oh, I forgot. 590 copies of Openoffice are free. So, just buy the 10.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
You waste money on 600 Microsoft PCs because the OpenOffice spredsheet does not do "linear regression"?
How many of those 600 employees do that work? One? Two?
Since polynomial regressions are standard statistical tools, probably quite a few. As in, anyone there who isn't a secretary.
Polynomial regressions - from linear and up - are neither exotic nor highly specialized. They're very basic data analysis tools. And they're lacking.
What's worse is that I only used the lack of data analysis tools as a glaring example which is all the more baffling considering OO's affiliation with Sun and Sun's affiliation with the engineering profession (ie. engineers buy most of the Sun workstations sold).
If 10 need linear regression capability in their spreadsheet, then buy 10 copies of the software they need and 590 copies of OpenOffice.
Anyone who has tried to mix versions of Microsoft Office in a closed environment knows that it doesn't work. Excel 2000 files cannot be opened with Excel 97, which cannot be opened with Excel 95.
Sure, it would be easy enough to try to institute an "Interoperability Policy" which tells people to always save their files as Excel 97 or some other older alternative which is well supported by OO Calc. But you know that doesn't work. People forget, or resist because of the hurdles that Excel throws up, essentially screaming: "WARNING! You will lose data!". They revert to defaults, and the OO users are left out in the cold.
Oh, I forgot. 590 copies of Openoffice are free. So, just buy the 10.
This attitude is the fundamental problem and the reason why Microsoft will continue to dominate the desktop (and creep more into the server space by leveraging the desktop monopoly through closed protocols and extensions).
To most people, the Microsoft name is a good thing. "Oh, it's from Microsoft, it MUST be good!". Remember, to most people, when their computer crashes, it's the computer's fault, not the operating system.
Most people will not have heard of Sun, or know why Linux and Unix are good things. In fact, they may think of Unix as being the operating system on the nasty old timesharing machine for which they had to write programs on punchcards back in college.
Open Office - or even Star Office, with the Sun name more prominent - are going to be viewed with skepticism by these people, most of whom will have been using Microsoft software since the early 1980s (ie. when you were born). They'll have seen the progression from MS-DOS 3.3 to Windows/286 to Windows 3.0 and 3.1, eventually through 95 and up. Not knowing or caring anything about computers more than you know or care how your monitor draws an image on its screen, they won't question Microsoft's position.
To get accepted into this environment, equivalent features are mere credibility.
If we don't get our shit together to fix this and get Linux on the desktops, we're screwed.
Historically, people bought home computers based on what they had at the office - familiarity and the ability to bring files (and pirated software!) back and forth drove the market. Taking the corporate desktop is the key to driving Windows out of the home computer. For Linux to have the majority share of desktop PCs is the only way to stop Microsoft being able to creep into the server space.
Now stop whining, buy a book on statistics, learn what regressions are, and start coding.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
People working in banks are some of the most talented IT individuals (only banks can afford them).
/. crowd is pretty obvious is beggining to permeate to the business leaders in corporate boards in several big name companies.
It is people in the business side who had been bought by the shiny mirrors offered by MS. But believe me, not for much longer.
Banks far bigger than this are looking into adopting Linux All what to most of the
I should know, last week we were in a presentation by IBM and all the people there where very impressed and asking all the right questions about how Linux can be brought into our organization. Suits wanted to know more about Linux. The few techs that were not yet convinced (upper an middle management that have no time to tinker around with computers anymore) were firmly in the "lets get Linux in" side.
If I was MS I would me really worried, companies like Sun and HP at least have the expertise to make Linux work and half baked plans to do so if needed. MS is in denial. They may get to keep the desktop for a while, but sincerely I don't see how they are going to hold the server slice of the market that they currently have.
If you have specialized needs for higher math functions in a spread sheet then fine. But, that case is rare indeed.
The truth is that 80% to 90% of all office type workers have no idea about the mathematical functions you are talking about. They were never educated to deal with them either.
The point being that a very large percentage of office suite users simply do not need the most expensive version out there.
If your employees do, then fine.
But, it is stupid for a corporation to spend thousands if not millions just to buy the most expensive suite just because a few selected employees might know what those features are.
We are talking about the 80% to 90%, not the 10%. If you want to claim that all your employees fit in the top 10% then fine. You can spend your big money on the Microsoft brand. That is NOT typical.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Many workers may need a spreadsheet.
But, few even know how to use them past the very basic functionality.
I would bet less than 5% of all spread sheet users even know what linear regression analysis is much less having the requirement to work it up as part of their job.
It simply does not matter is Excell is the best spread sheet or not. Nor does it matter that it is included in the Office XP suite.
The only question is what software applications are necessary for the various employees of the company. And, it is a rare company indeed that only hires employees capable of dealing with higher level math, operations research or curve fitting.
Even universities and research departments have plenty of clerical workers that do not need the $400 or $500 suite.
No doubt 80% to 90% of all Office XP users do not need support at all simply because they do not use those features, ever. They do not know how.
In fact I would guess that a high percentage of support personnel in most corporations are not capable of supporting the high level functionality anyway.
It is simply foolish to buy BMWs for all employees because some employees may earn them. And, the same is true with software.
You buy and support only the software needed by the various classes of employees. Secretaries, etc., do not need the spreadsheet capabilities nor the support associated with it much less the higher expense to give them the licenses. OpenOffice is fine for 80% to 90% of all employees.
And, that approach might save you 80% to 90% of your IT software budget. Take that $300 to $500 and give them all faster processors or faster printers.
The key is to target the employees with appropriate software not the most expensive of all alternatives. That is a waste and should rightly get you fired.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Is there a web site which collects windows->linux switch stories?
And where is a good advocacy site to show management?
But soon after the election (or just before, I really don`t remember now) the Brazilian newspapers said that Bill Gates had invited the new president to "chat"...
Uncle Bill whistles and his dog heels.BOFH excuse #247:
Due to Federal Budget problems we have been forced to cut back on the number of users able to access the system at one time. (namely none allowed....)
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...