Slashdot Mirror
Where Will IBM Drop Windows?
TurboProp writes "An article by the Associated Press on Friday (1/09/2004) Says that IBM has plans to abandon Microsoft operating systems on it's internal desktops by the end of 2005. The news originated from an internal IBM memo published by the Inquirer, a British technology news site. Further stories from the Inquirer, indicate that IBM May already have begun dumping windows. While this all bodes well for Linux users, and would seem to be a good PR move for IBM, executives at IBM seem to be trying frantically to put a much milder spin on the story. They say that the memo was taken out of context. I really can't imagine why they wouldn't be posting it on billboards."
Not sure why IBm is pussyfooting arond on this one either, unless it's to make sure they don't piss off Microsoft so they'll be penalized in the retail or business support sector. Who knows why they're pussyfooting around with this.
They should have done that when they launched OS Warp almost 10 years ago - instead, they pre-installed Windows everywhere - from their retail machines to their own network. OS2 Warp was technologically speaking more advanced than other flavors of Windows of the time.
What were they thinking???
Is that they do it at the prom and it is really embarassing for Microsoft.
Oh man! Zing!
I think it's great news. I like that they're playing it cool too; seems like maybe they're positioning themselves to represent "levelheaded business people" who are making the move away from MS.
All the basic functionality of the Office Suite is there in Free form, so all MS has to play up are advnaced features that require you to drink their kool-aid on an enterprise level. Many corporations are now realizing that locking their data to one provider isn't necessary anymore for "great moments in business" to happen.
Howard Dean for president
I remember when it was Multimedia. Now it's open source. So why are we celebrating that IBM is using new hype words to motivate its workers?
So what about their past sins?
First off, they won't be dropping it on their desktop or laptop lines anytime soon...
Totally, but the point isn't that they're going to stop shipping windows desktops and laptops; the point is they're going to stop using it internally for themselves.
You're right that the process will take a lot of time, but this is big. It basically send a message to the business IT community; "Yeah we'll sell you this crap pre-installed. We don't use it ourselves; but hey, the customer is always right..."
This is the kind of think that can help tip business desktops away from MS in large numbers by giving local IT managers confidence and evidence that kowtowing to Redmond isn't a prerequisite to success. A 10% shift now will precipitate a lot more movement a year or two down the line. It's a marathon, not a sprint.
Howard Dean for president
screw that . I just want a linux compatable thinkpad....
I really can't imagine why they wouldn't be posting it on billboards.
IBM does *billions* of dollars of business selling Windows systems, and this declaration would be tantamount to throwing that all away.
The first rule for growing a business is to preserve the existing business above all else. Then you can figure out a way to obtain new business opprtunistically with an alternative offering.
Even if they only have one or two divisions or sub-divisions running on it, they will find out EXACTLY what the benefits and deficiencies are.
It's easier to sell something to someone if you already use and prefer the product.
I'm pretty sure a secretary PC can be replaced now with little interruption.
The people I worry the most about are accounting and other professionals who rely on deeper parts of the os on a regular basis.
I live in a giant bucket.
There are two reasons why IBM would be juditious in how public they make this. The first big reason is IBM and M$ have a strained relationship to say the least. The big bit of control M$ uses to manipulate PC vendors to do their will is windows and office licensing. Even if you are IBM or Dell if M$ decides to pull your dirt cheap licensing of windows and office and make you pay like they do all the little people your bottom line just got crushed. IBM most likely has no interest in seeing one of there cash crops get killed and knows M$ would tolerate misbehaivor from them least of all their big partners. The seccond reason is IBMs server business is becoming more and more dependant on Linux and its related technologies. Even though desktop and server Linux tech are not always related, IE what is good for a big server is not always good on my PC and the other way around, and sometimes the same thing is good on both, a failure is a failure. If they have to back pedal and go to windows again for any reason its a failure for Linux and PHBs will hear about it. The conversation will go like this.
"We want to sell you this Linux server."
"I heared you guys tried Linux and had to swich back, why would I want to go through that."
"No we use Linux on lots of server systems its desktops that we had to go back to windows for."
"So windows works better then I want a windows server!"
"No Linux is a better server OS most of the time."
"I am calling HP bye."
If I was IBM I would much rather make the swich under the radar incase things don't work out and then tell the world what a great success the swich has been if it does. If not then it never happend.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
I'm still lusting after the Mail implentation that was recently on /. - more stuff like that, all over Linux, and I might be convinced.
I believe this was taken out of context.
IBM is a thousand companies within another. Each with seperate financials, goals, etc, etc...
This memo was issues to a select number of small groups within the company and was not indicitive of a company wide shift.
None of the secretaries I worked with had any trouble using DOS or earlier versions of Windows. They used the arcane key sequences in early word processors and later managed the transition to GUIs without a hitch. They were using computers before most of the workforce in many offices.
The idea that secretaries are typically technically incompetent is one of the strangest ideas that persist around tech web sites.
The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
Not only did you not read the fucking article, you didnt even read the fucking POST! This is on *internal* IBM machines! Not the stuff they sell to customers!! Idiot.
"I really can't imagine why they wouldn't be posting it on billboards."
Likely because outside of the slashdot / computer professional crowd, Linux is either unknown, looked at skeptically, seen as an outsider, and/or seen as a tool solely for the computer geek. You all may view Linux favorably, but the OS still has a long, long way to go before the common consumer truly embraces it.
Besides, the move away from Windows only affects employee laptops and workstations. Why would most of the rest of the world care?
> "Yeah we'll sell you this crap pre-installed. We don't use it ourselves; but hey, the customer is always right..."
According to IBM.com: IBM recommends Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Professional.
Fact is, IBM is always going 10 directions at once. Some in internal IT is saying "Linux!", but that does not mean that IBM will offer the correct ThinkPad Linux drivers to anyone, including internal users.
The 'official' position from IBM is that Linux would work well as a dumb terminal replacement. They would LOVE to have a humungo support contract covering Linux desktops, but they are realistic enough to realize that nobody is buying at this point.
Never underestimate secretaries. Linux may very well be quite right for them too.
In the mid-90s, I was working a place where Unix (no, not Linux, Unix - we were in academic business, probably had huge discounts) was standard on the desktop. Things worked all right, and everyone was mostly satisfied. There was one exception, our house-economist, which needed more tools. Today, even he would be satisfied, I guess.
Anyways, the administration increased in size, and at some point, someone decided that we, too, should go the Windows way. Needless to say, tecnical staff was less than satisified, including me.
We had two secretaries. I did a little mini-poll on what they would prefer on the desktop? The answer: It doesn't matter, as long as it makes communication with the tecnical staff easy.
Well, it seemed for a while like we were going the Windows route. Then, one day, over lunch, one of the secretaties dropped the magic line: "I think I would prefer this. Now, I've learnt it, and don't really want to switch at all".
This seemed to have done the trick. Not long after, the course changed, instead of standardizing on Windows, one standardized on formats that made it easy for everyone to choose for himself. Nowadays, people are using Windows or Linux depending on what they like, and as long as you avoid the lock-in-traps in Microsoft,this is quite possible it seems.
So, yes, a mixed environment is possible, but don't automatically assume that the secretaries will be slow picking up Linux. They will use whatever tool makes them do their work best, given choice. As should everyone.
I agree with the comment that IBM is soft-pedaling the memo to avoid public timelines. This would be a huge transition, and needs to be taken at its own pace. Good luck, Big Blue.
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.
I would have to disagree with the statement that engineers would be a prime target before secretaries. Engineers are less likely to have software that will run on multiple systems (like custome chip design software), than a secretary running pretty generic out-of-box software that is more likely to be available on multiple platforms (word processing, excel spreadsheet, etc...).
If the average person hasn't heard of Linux up until now, they have been getting more familiar with it in the last couple of weeks. At least football fans have.
Why? Those IBM commercials with Linux as the "adopted kid" that have been running during the NFL playoffs. There have been other commercials mentioning Linux in the past couple of years (from IBM and Dell), but this is the first one that emphasises it.
Any commercial that features such diverse talents as 95-year-old ex-UCLA baseketball coach John Wooden, "Laverne & Shirley" star Penny Marshall, and Muhammad Ali all in the same ad, is pretty good.
BTW, where was Linus in all this? Shouldn't he be involved in these somehow?
Microsoft's VP of Customer Service is Helen Waite. If you are having problems with their products go to Helen Waite.
The problem is that Microsoft has now chosen to drop all versions of Windows previous to Windows ME, including NT version 4. Because Windows is a closed source operating system, this means that if a serious security breach is now discovered in these versions of Windows, Microsoft's attitude is "tough - upgrade". The problem is that many Businesses use these older versions of Windows, because they work. They are not interested in using the latest version of Office, as they have no need for the use of the new features provided, or even may have a compatibility issue they cannot resolve.
Sure, Linux systems cost money to operate, but they tend to be more secure, as the system administrators must be better trained. Overall, huge long term savings can be made by using an operating system that can be maintained without a serious upgrade every 3 years as the company that sold the operating system decides not to support it. Anyway, many companies outsource their IT don't they?
The other advantage is that there is more profit. By offering to support an operating system by up to 10 years, the supplier can charge more, as the customer will save money, as they don't need to spend money on re-training or new hardware. By adopting Linux across the business, IBM can show their customers how it can be done. Remember, that many older versions of Windows software can be made to run on Linux through the use of WINE. Yes, there will be some re-training, but not as much as the operating system will be better tailored to the customers needs.
The bottom line is that IBM is re-adopting the old white shirt principle. This is where systems were designed to meet customer's needs, not enforce new requirements on customers. Remember, the customer is always right.
My own private, personal interpretation goes like this:
1) IBM is a *very* conservative, slow-moving, large and cautious organization. Even if everyone at IBM decided tomorrow that a switch should be undertaken, and there were no technical/implementaion hiccups, it would take time, lots of it. They have gotten burnt by trying to lead an unwilling maket before, they have not forgotten.
2) The value of the IBM name is affected by people's perception of how well they succeed at an endeavor they undertake.
2) IBM does not have a culture dominated by strong top-down directive-based management (there are exceptions of course). Rather, a lot of management directives are "sold to" subordinates, achieving buy-in, at least to some degree. Viewed in light of this, it is reasonable to interpret the note at face-value: a challenge to see if it can be done or at least explored, issues investigated, etc...
3) No one really *knows* with certainty how easy it will be to move 300,000 people (90% of whom are not OS/software technical) over to linux: how many little unforseen gotchas will pop up; least of all high-level managers who are paid to think about strategic rather than tactical issues. More to the point, no one know with certainty what the adoption-percentage vs. time curve will look like or at what level it will saturate (how long it will take, what the final % will be). Many of the details have yet to be fully fleshed out or even listed, so predicting a time-line at this point is risky at best.
Given these points, I think that IBM is merely trying to manage (perhaps unreasonable) expectations to guard against a backlash if on 01Jan06 they only have x% of their people migrated over, or worse if there are issues that pop up that push it out further, or make it unreasonable at this time. We may all have opinions about the likelyhood of those things, but we don't actually *know*, and neither do the IBM execs. See #1,2 above.
obviously you don't know what you are talking about - the fluidity of gnome and kde is superb, and if you'd spent more than a passing glance at a linux desktop, you'd feel ashamed. Windows sucks! Period!. Now, you fucking bitch, go get yours! The same idiot logic applies to McDonalds, which is the market leader as far as crappy burgers and lard goes, but I see no harm in ditching it for a nice dinner at Botin. Market Leader, Shmarket Leader, Windows is a market leader by no single market force, it's monopoly, cheating, bribes, and strongarming, that got them there. The only thing they are leader in on this market is the number of worms and viruses and CPM (chrash per minute)
Since IBM makes its money from its Global Services department, and since Global Services writes software for other companies, and since almost all companies use Windows, IBM needs to keep Windows on their engineers systems so their engineers can keep writing software for other companies. So no, IBM is not dropping windows. Ever.
Linux isn't an issue for secrataries. Applications are an issue for secretaries. Do you think a secretary CARES what operating system s/he is using. If anything, they probably would prefer Macs because they could they look prettier.
The issue for a secratary, Linux and IBM is whether NOTES works. It's also whether a suitable replacement for Word can be deployed that retains the interface concepts and speeds transitions.
Outside of the geek world, no one really gives a fuck about the internals of an operating system. They just want something that helps them get their work done. Windows has the most software so it will suit more needs.
For IBM, the biggest milestone will be porting Notes to Linux. Good luck. If the interior looks ANYTHING like the exterior, it will be an INCREDIBLE task.
-------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
I haven't seen anyone mention this, but one sure reason IBM is backing off from announcing that they are going to stop using windows is that they don't want to piss off Microsoft.
Remember that IBM is supplying the chips for the next X-Box. It probably isn't too late for Microsoft to switch to someone else. THey piss off Microsoft by braggin that they aren't using Windows any more and that would certainly make Microsoft start looking for alternatives.
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Remember tho, it's all about profit.
G5 sales are a nice feather in IBM's cap, but Apple makes the money when a G5 goes over the counter. The R&D is more what IBM is interested in, they get to use lessons learned in their POWER line.
That's where they'd like to be making their money, in the high-margin low-quantity areas like server clusters and high availability.
Maybe someone here who's read IBM's SEC filings can tell us where their money actually comes from.. The PC business must move a lot of machines, but I'm forced to wonder if there's any profit in it at all, the market being as cutthroat as it is.
Heh, and don't forget to include Java as a platform IBM can fall back on, they've put a lot into WebSphere.
Will they actually be dropping Windows, or are they simply fishing for better pricing from Microsoft, like India, Israel, et al?
No. Not 10 directions at once. One direction --> directly towards the money.
IBM support (off the top of my head) AIX, OS/400, Linux, Windows (various). Do they still support OS/2 (E-station) ? Any more? They once owned Lexmark, still have IBM badged printers. They badge PC's and make their own midrange and Mainframe computers.
Want something IT? IBM will probably have an expert division waiting to help you get it done (at the right fee).
I'll be very happy when I can get Operations Navigator running under linux. 5250 emulation is great. Some times a gui is also good.
Having a name like IBM behind Linux is great. Yeah, not every detail is going to be nice, but the techs I've met at IBM, do really understand (technically and philosophically) Linux. (Anecdotal evidence score: a few)
Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
If IBM declared war on King Bill, they'd face Least Favored Nation licensing terms for Windows (maybe even an embargo), which would hurt their ability to compete with HPaq, Dell, and Gateway. While many /.ers would love to see IBM boxes shipping without the Windows tax added into the price, mainstream corporate purchasers would be far less happy, and the SOHO market - many of whom actually think of MS as the swell people who "innovated" all these nifty technological geegaws - would come to regard IBM as a freakish Big Bad Blue monster.
I think it's great news. I like that they're playing it cool too; seems like maybe they're positioning themselves to represent "levelheaded business people" who are making the move away from MS.
I agree. I think this is very important for Linux. If they played it up and ran humorous BSOD ads on TV proclaiming their switch, other "level headed business people" would probably group them with the zealots and wackos (us).
By treating this switch as "business as usual", it gives the distinct impression that desktop Linux isn't just for hobbyists and college students anymore.
Just my 2 cents.
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
WHat I heard at work was the contract with MS is up for renewal and MS practically doubled the price. So IBM is threatening going with Linux to get MS to drop the price.
IBM makes a lot from selling Windows products and supporting Windows so they don't want to rock the boat too much with MS. So they are in a tough position balancing their need to make money on Windows and Linux.
"While I'm far from an MS fanboi, Linux isn't ready to take the place of Windows on the desktop."
You don't get it, do you? IBM will invest tons of money into making their own version of Linux one hell of a corporate desktop.
It's in their interest and it's in their customer's interest. I can think of few organizations the size of IBM who will not review their own desktop strategy after seeing Big Blue making the move.
And different from OS/2 way long time ago, this time the alternative to Microsoft is the talk of the town.
First off, nobody moves 300,000 desktops in one year. You retire maybe 20% per year and refresh them with new machines that can contain a new OS.
Next you have to insure that all of your custom desktop apps are rewritten OR - run under Wine or VM32.
Then you have to create a build and tune it for your network.
Then you have to push all of the legacy apps maintenance to sunset their own apps. You will need to do this for several years unless you plan on migrating entire business divisions at once.
Then and this a BIG thing, you need to train a desktop support infrastructure to maintain it. That includes break/fix, troubleshooting and helpdesk.
And Oh - you also need to develop national language support for all the desktop code, world wide in about 20 different languages including DBCS support and all the supporting documentation.
Increasingly IBM is being mooted as a Linux company. Although I am not aware of an IBM specific distribution. Linux is probably one of IBM's highest sources of revenue.It only makes sense for them to use it internally, it looks better for them if they are using their own products etc.
I wouldnt be surprised if the reason they are not making a big deal about this is due to the impact this may have on their Microsoft revenue stream. Its surely must be a blow to Microsoft that one of the largest tech companies(IBM) is publically ditching microsoft on their internal desktops. My guess is they dont want to harm their non-linux revenue streams , and at the same time avoid any rumbles with redmond.
This also has to be a good thing for the maturing of Linux as a desktop OS. A company such as IBM is going to be able not only to see what problem areas exist with linux as a desktop machine, but due to its commitment to the os will actually be able to input and contributions actually fix some of the issues its internal users will discover.
This is a sound move and one that shows just how strong Linux is becoming, and shows without a doubt that you dont need Microsoft to run your business no matter how large or small.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
That was my thought as well... IBM could definately license Apple's operating system. This would be great for both Apple and IBM as Apple could definately dictate the terms for such an agreement and I think IBM would like it just in principle to stick it to Microsoft.
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
Erm.
IBM has never been big on selling software. They are fairly OS agnostic.
They see OSes for what they are: tools to get the job done with the hardware you have. This is why they have such a large girth of OSes that they deal with: MacOS, Linux, AS/400, Windows. They don't give a damn what their customers do with the hardware they purchase from IBM, they just want the customers to be productive with their products.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
>>They are fairly OS agnostic
Could have fooled me. Watching U.S. football playoffs today, I lost track of the number of IBM Linux commercials. Strangely, I didn't see any IBM MacOS commercials, nor did I see any IBM AS/400 or IBM Windows commercials.
A lot of people like to use the word agnostic as meaning "not supporting one side or the other".
I prefer the version by the guy who most famously brought it to light, Professor Huxley in 1869.
in a nutshell, "we are incapable of knowing"
so if i'm agnostic when in comes to a supreme being, it means that I believe that at this current time, I cannot know if one exists, so I do not bother with such questions.
if i'm agnostic when it comes to operating systems, it means that I believe that with the information present, I cannot know if one is better then the other, so I do not bother with such questions.
IBM isn't stupid, they will give to the customer whatever the customer wants. If that's windows...so be it. But they sure "appear" to be advertising the fact that they know about a "pretty good thing"...and that we may want to know about it too.
That thing is linux.
Agnostic? Could have fooled me.
Excel is closed-source. If you're doing math where the results matter, and if they don't document their algorithms, how can you possibly verify that they're doing the right things to your data?
... by all means, use Excel! Probably best to make sure it's the same version, though ...
Just seems to me that, if you're in the business of producing accurate numbers, having blind faith in your tool's algorithmic accuracy is just a wee bit naive.
Now, on the other hand, if all that matters is agreement, not accuracy
-monique
Or perhaps more likely, if the plans fail (and they very well could), they don't want the negative press associated with that. It's probably better for them to quitely try to switch over, and if it works, then loudly boast about it to the press then. The last thing IBM would want to do in this case would be to prove Microsoft's FUD about Linux.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
Having working in academic institutions for the past 4 years, I've never heard of anyone using Excel for numerical computation. IMHO, people who are using Excel for numerical computation probably really don't know what they're doing anyway.
Besides, if another (OSS) algorithm gives quite different results than 'Solver' the problem was probably never well-posed to begin with.