Slashdot Mirror
Ford To Move To Linux
KingDaveRa writes "The Register is reporting that motor giant Ford is switching to Linux for its sales systems, human resources, customer relations and infrastructure, referencing a report in yesterday's Scotland on Sunday. According to The Register, the biggest battle was over which Linux vendor to use - RedHat or SuSE." Update: 09/16 01:51 GMT by T : An anonymous reader points to this NewsForge report, according to which Ford is not moving to Linux.
For the purposes of any company, there are some good reasons to use linux. Firstly, you can often increase security. Secondly, you can reduce hardware costs, compared to windows. Thirdly, your employees probably won't be able to figure out how to play minesweeper on company time :)
====
Crudely Drawn Games
If I were an IT manager, this is exactly what I would do. It is a cheaper option and more secure IF the administrator knows what he is doing. I would still keep Windows clients for the marketing and sales people so that they can create powerpoint presentations and smear bullshit everywhere to sell stuff
Is anyone going to listen to Ford?
with the current state of Ford Vehicles...I'd say No.
We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
to match it shit cars with a shit os...
i thought i was at slashdot???
wtf?
where is the 'new' linux hangout??
We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
" No longer does each client/end-user of the application have to download and install certain drivers or use a certain computer"
right they just need to download and install a certain web browser.
Ford probably doesn't get a lot of MS formatted documents from customers (i.e. people who buy cars). They probably do get a lot from suppliers, but if Ford switches, you can bet they will as well.
to try sending Ford an invoice!
Come on Darl!
My rights don't need management.
I am a Ford Customer and I have never sent a Word, Excel or Powerpoint document to them. I would doubt that any Ford customer would send them a Word, Excel or Powerpoint document. Suppliers are going to have to adjust if Ford does this throughout their organization.
That you would like a single point of failure, the web browser, to be entirely out of your control and in the hands of a third party that doesn't care about the needs of your business.
You would like it to be in the hands of people who build obsolescence into their products either by discontinuing support for your happily working Operating System and Userland or by pushing new standards into the common platform.
By funneling the majority of your applications through one client API you could end up staring at "we have to upgrade the browser to make Application X work but Application Y breaks".
The web browser has set back application development 20 years.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Apparently no one listened.
Amazon, IBM, Walmart, and now Ford. The first 3 run profits during a time when many companies went out fo business. I would say some are listening.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I agree. The trend to produce major applications based on "the Web" (a term I find hard to use when referring to, say, intranets, but will accept) is one that benefits almost everyone.
We're in an age when even the smallest hardware store can buy a highly reliable Linux server and have MySQL and Apache running on it for under $500. All you need then is the software that'll keep your stock inventory, and the equipment to network your existing -- probably low spec -- PCs up, and off you go.
Web apps are beautiful in the way that small ma-and-pa outfits don't necessarily need to upgrade their crusty old 200MHz PCs bought in 1995. All they need is a Web browser (and perhaps some proprietary format to handle checkout scanners, and the like), and with a small investment in a server, they're up and running.
Web Hosting Reviews
Yeah, except if it is, its the worst move ever. Compiled programs are still what run mission critical software. They're faster and more reliable. And its not as if the web still works the same on everyone's PC. Opera and Mozilla and IE6 might give three much different appearances to the same page.
I use a web-based call tracking application in my IT job. Its slow, buggy, and not enterprise worthy by any standard.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
great, these people will be using Linux desktops. How many of them use some sort of full-screened terminal application to access the information anyway?
Banks (while running OS/2 on the desktop) use full-screened VT-102 terminal emulators to access the bank's server. Have we ever seen those employees running to OS/2 because they used it at work?
Now how am I supposed to believe a anonymous coward.
Got Code?
I'm seeing the same trend, but I believe to a large degree it's a mistake. The web was originally designed for sharing of documents, with minimal interactive capabilities added later. Most corporate desktop apps do much more than just display data and require much user interaction, but are being ported to the web. My development team's main application is for contact, account, and time management, plus reporting. It's data intensive and lets the user lay out lots of windows with a variety of info. The boss has us rewriting the entire app on the web because some other PHBs think it looks cool. Now the users will be forced to go through many more clicks and can't display as much data at the same time without opening many web browser instances. Being on the web it also can't easily be as "smart". For example, we can have alerts automatically pop up on schedule (kinda like Outlook) in a client app, but not in an HTML page.
It seems too many apps are going the way of the web when a client app would be best to handle a wide variety of user interaction.
Developers: We can use your help.
Come on, it's just a sales system. It's not like the onboard computer is running linux. I wouldn't base a car/truck purchase based on their sales sytem.
Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
Believe you me, I despise the Great Redmond Beast as much as any other /.'er. But when a company has over 2x their yearly revenue in savings (ie, $50Billion or so), they can afford to spend a few years in the wilderness. I'd say they have quite a good deal of time left... now if you're talking about other companies that are willing to deal with them after their dirty laundry was aired with the DOJ affair.. I'd agree that might be their most limiting resource.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Due to your geography knowledge I'd hazard a guess that you are American, right? Now go ask Garrison Keillor were the Fjords are
No but, yeah but, no but...
Or, as in all too many cases,
Reinstall
-Rusty
You never know...
And they do it for all the wrong reasons.
Web apps are being chosen because they are the new trend. They do not provide a better platform for the app. They do not provide an open standard for use. They do not provide ubiquitous access. All they provide is a pre-written network transport because far too often webapps are being written by ASP monkeys who couldn't write socket code if their lives depended on it.
"That makes Ford's defection to Linux the biggest potential threat to Microsoft in the software developer's 28-year history"
Yeah, I agree. Microsoft has lost all credibility in the public eye for their ability to fix their permanently defective product line (watched the Comedy channels lately? Comedians are getting laughs at Microsoft's expense). Windows is simply getting in the way of people doing their work (updates, upgrades, security patch, REPEAT!).
Ford's a big name brand company, it's American as apple pie, and has nothing to do with technology. That Microsoft couldn't hang on to them speaks to the value proposition of Linux over Windows. To restate the quote above another way, this is the biggest win for Linux to date.
Ruby on Rails Screencast
msft's business model problem is that they never set up a services group that was profitable.
... hi bingo
When Ballmer lost the Munich deal and went for an extended ski holiday in Switzerland, he already knew what was coming.
With all the licensing pain, arm-twisting upgrades, incompatible Office formats, treadmills from last year and the worms from this year, the momentum will gather and feed itself.
As more companies, governments and educational institutions worldwide adopt Linux, there will be more coders and money to make Linux more usable and an even more favorable migration path for users.
Two years from now everyone will be amazed except for the zealots who will be shaking their heads wondering "What took it so long?".
"Provided by the management for your protection."
right now Linux is a hot news item, so people listen.
Right, and the ironic thing is, before the SCO suit, many people hadn't heard of Linux, or weren't taking it seriously. Now they have, and do.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
They are also being written by perl and C programmers who are tired of writing socket code, and want to get to the heart of the matter: the application the user needs to work.
FWIW, I know from professional acquaintances here in Detroit that Ford also has Solaris machines. In the end, there is no such thing as a one-platform company of the Fortune 100 scale. Even MS has people who use Macs and they probably have at least experimental machines running just about every other OS.
For an 'old economy' business, switching 'primary' platforms isn't something that CAN be done in less than a few years and is something that is not usually done without a lot of planning and in very small steps. I would expect their engineering software to switch platforms on the sort of timeframe that engineering jobs turn over at Ford (i.e. not terribly fast.)
> Those stickers you see all over are not Calvin of Calvin and hobbes fames.
> They are similear, but different enough to not infringe.
They infringe.
People who buy and display them are beneath contempt -- they pollute the memory of The Greatest Comic Strip Evar Bar None.
OTOH, it's sort of a benefit that barbarians who either unaware of such considerations or who don't care publicly identify themselves in this way -- a little like the busty chrome silhouette commonly seen on the backs of trucks, which concisely convey the message "Driver Is Neanderthal".
"There's treasure everywhere." Calvin
Wait a minute. Didn't I say that on the other side of the record? I'd better check
Volvo is owned pa ford you know.
The linked article is woefully short on p[articulars. How can anyone really craft a reasoned opinion based upon that article. There is no mention of the systems that are being replaced, nor how many linux systems are being put in. The article was bereft of any real details. Is this a Linux for Unix swap? How many systems? What will each of those systems be doing? Are mission critical apps, like ERP, financials and HR going to actually be running on Linux? Or is Linux going to be dropped in as a low/mid-range system for authentication, file and print sharing? But I know the majority of the posts here, without even reading them are going to be: Yeah! Linux beats out M$! Bah!
I guarantee you that the combination of Ford's IT department and either RedHat or SuSE is bigger than Ford's IT department alone. Why re-invent the wheel?
Joan Witte, Communications Manager for Ford Motor Information Technology, had this statement to make late this afternoon when I called her at her Detroit office about a story being reported that Ford was moving to Linux.
Witte said "Like any other company, Ford Motor is looking at Linux, primarily in the application space. We presently have an enterprise-wide agreement with Microsoft to handle our collaborative solutions. We aren't contemplating using Linux in this area, and don't contemplate doing that in the foreseeable future."
Regarding the source of the rumor, Witte said "I'm not sure where they got the info from, but I'd like to know."
I guarantee you that the Ford motor company's IT department is bigger than either RedHat or SuSE. Why choose a distro when you can make your own system so easily? I mean, which is better: paying high priced consultants and smooth talking project managers to solve your emergency problems on their terms, or pressuring your own guys to do the same?
If its not in your core business you are just distracting yourself from the part of your business that pays the bills. I've seen companies who allow themselves to be distracted, and it usually hurts them. GM did something like this when they owned EDS, but it distracted them. So they divested.
It really will be enormously more cost effective for Ford to buy thier linux from someone else.
My Weblog