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."
...that SCO cut them a great deal on Linux desktop licenses, and IBM just couldn't refuse!
Is that they do it at the prom and it is really embarassing for Microsoft.
Enjoy their linux commerical here.
Yep!
AC
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
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
They're "pussyfooting around" and not "posting it on billboards" because they might not achieve the target. How many IT projects fail or overrun badly, even at IBM do you think?
So what becomes a tough internal target to meet can become a PR failure for a product they're trying to push.
"We're increasingly using Linux on our own desktops" is good.
"We're now using Linux on all our desktops" is great.
"Weren't you going to have Linux on all your systems by now? What happened to that?" is a disaster.
The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
IBM is dropping Windows because it is a good business move not as a gimmick. They are not trying to impress Slashdot or open themselves up to abuse.
IBM is simply too big to not sell Windows so they don't want to make this rude. IBM needs to make money from the whole market to support IBM. They do not want the more childish Linux Element posting to the web every time they see a non Linux machine in the hands of one of their reps.
The move is hugely important because it will help them hammer out all the kinks in their understanding of the software. It will help them see where business oportunities lie, more than anything else. They will then be in a position to share how they do it with the rest of the world.
They are not doing it to insult Microsoft. They are doing it because they have more control and bigger margins when they sell Linux.
IBM will run _all_ prevalent operating systems as long as there is an IBM. They are just too big not to.
LS
From a pro-Linux perspective, the worst thing that could happen here is for IBM to publically commit to Linux on the desktop by 2005 throughout its organization and fail to deliver on that promise. Think of all the organizations considering Linux desktop deployments that would think, "Well damn, if IBM failed, what are our chances then?"
Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
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.
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.
if Longhorn is delayed longer than the early 2006 the best estimates have as of now;
If Apple & IBM make the Mac the fastest desktop during those years ( think dual core PPC980 based G6 @ starting >3.5 Ghz by this time in 2005 );
If Apple continues making OS X better at the same level and gets to true 64 bit-ness in time;
I think Apples market share will grow to 15~20% by the time Longhorn arrives.
A year ago, no one could even see Apple where it is now. They were universally dismissed as a cult and a joke. Now IMO they have the greatest mind share in computing right now, and it's only going to get better. HP decided to switch than fight the iPod, and if others get on that bandwagon, look out. Apple may actually win this time.
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!!!
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.