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."

Comments

Sounds a bit unlikely

[moderators_are_w*nke]

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

Bogus, particularly with high unemployment

[Ars-Fartsica]

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.

Need for diverse windows versions.

[Flamesplash]

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.

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 .exe not just the stuff in the Add/Remove Control Panel.

Hardware costs or Support costs

[hillct]

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

Hold on there

[Bouncings]

Reading the article, a quote jumped out at me:

In the future, he said, the bank hoped staff would converge to a single skill-set.

Ok, I generally like the sound of companies jumping ship to Linux, but we've heard the "converge to a single skill-set" dozens of times in the past few decades, and seldom with favorable results.

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.

MSs Place in the Market

[Flamesplash]

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.

Re:I'm shorting MS stock.

[Anonymous Coward]

> Nobody every got fired for choosing Microsoft.

Not true.

At the company where I work, the previous sysadmin was fired because he wouldn't stop using ActiveX in the company website.

In California, a vice-president of a bank was apparently fired due to his decision to use Windows NT in the bank's ATMs. The Windows-based ATMs kept locking up with BSODs (there were pictures of a BSOD'd ATM on the Internet).

And everyone lost their jobs when the company that bought out my former employer went bankrupt. The buyer was trying to reduce costs in anticipation of an IPO, and, despite our warnings, they insisted on replacing our "expensive" Unix servers with Windows NT servers. As a result, our formally-loyal customers started leaving in droves. The problem was that our customers were stock brokers, who required 100% uptime, and the new NT servers couldn't match the near-perfect record of the Unix servers they replaced (similar to the experience that Microsoft had with Hotmail).

So don't tell me that nobody ever gets fired for choosing Microsoft. It happens every day.

And it's going to happen even more often as business leaders learn about the benefits of Linux. Employers are going to realize that when they hire an MCSE, they are hiring someone who has been trained to put Microsoft's interests ahead of what may be best for their own company.