Slashdot Mirror


IBM's Linux Upgrade Roadmap

petrus4 writes "IBM have put together a nine-part series on upgrading from various incarnations of Windows (NT in particular) to Linux. Although it's mainly aimed at corporate customers, it's a good read, and could help the Linux advocacy effort in general."

281 comments

  1. Good to See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's good to see that large companies who understand Linux are willing to publicly fly in the face of SCO.

    1. Re:Good to See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      First point on roadmap.

      Change businessmodel from:
      1: Do stuff.
      2: sell it.
      3: Profit!

      To:
      1: Do stuff.
      2: Give it away for free.
      3: Hmmm.....

    2. Re:Good to See by dmaxwell · · Score: 3, Informative

      IBM isn't giving z-series machines or the service contracts that go with them away......

    3. Re:Good to See by spellraiser · · Score: 3, Informative


      Allow me to fill in the blanks:

      Change businessmodel from:
      1. Do stuff
      2. Sell it
      3. Profit!

      To:
      1. Do stuff
      2. Give it away for free
      3. Sell services.
      4. Profit!

      Right?

      --
      I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
    4. Re:Good to See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1. Write software
      2. Give software away
      3. Charge up the wazoo for hardware, complete solutions and good support
      4. Profit!

      Apparently noone here does business with IBM. Nothing IBM does is free, they just know that fighting OSS isn't worth it in the long run when they can keep making money in other ways and let the rest of the world help make their software work.

    5. Re:Good to See by smootc-m · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Linux is built for the network more than printing

      I found this point of view a rather interesting, if inaccurate, way to spin Linux versus Windows.

      The author goes on to explain the advantage of a command line interface for creating automated tasks. However, the Unix CLI was not originally built with networking in mind. There was no networking in ancient Unix (unless you count UUCP).

      As for Windows being designed around printers. I do not think that is correct either. I think the argument here is a bit weak.

    6. Re:Good to See by asdf+101 · · Score: 1

      Big blue's move to give MSFT the blues?

  2. IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Am I the only one who gets a tingly feeling deep inside when I read about IBM and linux? It just feels so nice to be backed by a mountain of hard cold cash ^_^

    1. Re:IBM by QuasiCoLtd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nice troll, but IBM has many Open Source Developers on the payroll. IBM isn't just along for the free ride, they're actually chipping in gas money.

    2. Re:IBM by beforewisdom · · Score: 1

      You are not backed by a mountain of cash. IBM's products are. If you are a programmer your livliehood is disposable to them as soon as they find a cheaper country to ship their jobs to.

    3. Re:IBM by Asprin · · Score: 1


      Not only that, but I'm *ALSO* getting that feeling about Novell. They should have done this *years* ago. [smacks head with palm of hand.]

      --
      "Lawyers are for sucks."
      - Doug McKenzie
    4. Re:IBM by MisterBad · · Score: 1

      The reason they have all that money is that they're not in the habit of handing it out to slobs like you and me.

      According to Forbes, IBM made $1 billion on Linux servers in 2003. Hewlett Packard made $2.5 billion. That's billion with a "b".

      $1 billion is a lot of money. Is it going to Free Software developers? I dunno. I keep seeing Free Software projects hustling for nickels and dimes from you and me. Developers like Tom Lord have to go begging for cash to pay their phone bills while the

      Of course, IBM and other big players don't have to pay back the community making the software they're making billions off of with money. They could kick in some code instead. OS/2 would be a welcome piece of Open Source software; the Lotus Office Suite would help too. IBM has a whole hell of a lot of software that would help out a lot.

      I dunno. I guess I'm not all that thrilled to see Fortune 500 companies make tons of cash off of Free Software while the developers of that software go begging. It just seems a little backwards.

      --
      Evan Prodromou | evan@prodromou.name | http://evan.prodromou.name/
    5. Re:IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you dont have a clue who is doing what in
      the Linux world. Handful? ha!

  3. Anti Microsoft bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of course, of course. Whenever you change from Microsoft to anything else it is an "upgrade". Not that I don't agree :)

  4. How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by jopet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Do they answer how to buy IBM computers without being forced to also buy a preinstalled Windows? Do they answer why they still "recommend Windows XP Professional" for their laptops? Do they answer where to get Linux support for their hardware - including wlan, power management etc.?

    1. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by TwinkieStix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think that the majority of the intended audience of this paper is asking those questions. I believe that IBM's support for desktop Linux is minimal while their server support is extremely heavy. They will give support to customers who purchase an IBM Linux server and need to get a RAID card working in it.

      But their opinion, and the opinion of most non-slashdoters, is that Linux isn't ready for the desktop now for home and many coporate users.

      This isn't a flamebait. It's just that the article isn't supposed to answer these questions. XP professional IS what they recommend and for a good reason. Support for wlan isn't IBMs problem. Servers don't need to have a wireless network connection. If you want support for Linux Hardware from IBM, go here.

    2. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by mr.+marbles · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do they answer how to buy IBM computers without being forced to also buy a preinstalled Windows? Do they answer why they still "recommend Windows XP Professional" for their laptops? Do they answer where to get Linux support for their hardware - including wlan, power management etc.?

      Because it will cost them more money providing support than it would make them supporting it?

    3. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by pacman+on+prozac · · Score: 1

      yep, well pretty much. More so than most manufacturors.

      ..submitted by a very happy thinkpad/linux user.

    4. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by jopet · · Score: 1

      I do not think this page and the ones referenced there anywhere tells how to buy a Thinkpad with Linux preinstalled or even just one WITHOUT Windows preinstalled. It just says that the hardware is supported to some extend (mostly by SuSE). Not fully, e.g. for my T40 they say (correctly) that the internal modem and Wlan adapter are not supported. Have you ever tried to get a Thinkpad from IBM or one of their resellers without being forced to pay for MS Windows? It seems they simply do not let you have one.

    5. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by jopet · · Score: 1

      They do not even let me have one of their Thinkpads without Windows, WITHOUT support. If you want to use one of their Thinkpads just to run Linux on it you have still to buy Windows.

    6. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by jopet · · Score: 3, Informative

      The thing is that their laptops are not only extremely good hardware but most of them very usable with Linux. I have been running SuSE on several Thinkpad models without many problems (apart from Wlan and advanced power management). So they ARE ready, usable and practical. And it just sucks when you want to buy their hardware and then get forced to also buy MS Windows. Maybe if companies (not only IBM) would finally start to let people use Linux on the desktop it would get ready pretty fast?

    7. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by TwinkieStix · · Score: 1

      Sure. We all at slashdot wish that. At least it would help Linux and hurt Microsoft. But that's not what the story is about.

    8. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by peeon · · Score: 1

      Who cares if they said recommand for Windows XP professional? Check out www.linux-on-laptops.com/ibm.html, many success stories. I will also add my thinkpad t41 to another success story. The centrino drivers work wonders in linux than windows. Go figure. ACPI works fine in kernel 2.6.3, not stable, but works. echo 3 > /proc/acpi/sleep

    9. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by Frugal · · Score: 2, Informative

      yep, well pretty much. More so than most manufacturors.

      ..submitted by a very happy thinkpad/linux user.

      Let me see... If we drill down to the SuSE page, and then to the certification page for the ThinkPad T41p we get this:

      • Certification only valid with kernelparameter "acpi=off"
      • Graphics: only framebuffer mode supported
      • internal WLAN adapter not supported
      • APM not properly supported
      • Selfcertification by customer

      So, I can use Linux on my Think pad just so long as I do not want to use the Wireless network connection or the power saving functionality. Which are the 2 major reasons for using a laptop...

      And the only reason we know this is because a SuSE customer tried it out. Neither SuSE nor IBM have done any certification

      Until the hardware is supported 100% then there is no point selling them

      --
      The two secrets to success: 1- Don't tell anyone everything.

      -13

    10. Re:How to buy a IBM Thinkpad with Linux? by pacman+on+prozac · · Score: 1

      How exactly do you think this mystical Linux hardware support comes about.

      People buy the laptop and code it themselves then submit it into the kernel. Theres not some huge list of IBM drones coding Linux drivers for every piece of equipment in Thinkpads. Until the machines are released they won't be Linux compatible.

  5. Slightly disingenuous by CdBee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What they are discussing is migration from NTx to *nix

    While I look forward to the day a Linux distro can upgrade an NT system, carrying forward system settings, user passwords, domain logons and applications carried across into WINE, this isn't happening anytime soon.

    I'd be surprised if it doesn't happen eventually, though.

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    1. Re:Slightly disingenuous by Coneasfast · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I look forward to the day a Linux distro can upgrade an NT system, carrying forward system settings, user passwords, domain logons and applications carried across into WINE, this isn't happening anytime soon.

      well all this requires is a program that saves settings from NT and restores them into linux, without neccessarily upgrading your NT partition to linux. although this would be more useful to the corporate world as home users probably wouldn't need this i would imagine.

      --
      Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
    2. Re:Slightly disingenuous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I look forward to the day a Linux distro can upgrade an NT system, carrying forward system settings, user passwords, domain logons and applications carried across into WINE, this isn't happening anytime soon.

      Samba? Windows shops are well used to reinstalling everything for the latest version of Windows, why not just implement the same information from fresh on Linux?

    3. Re:Slightly disingenuous by mattdm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't most big corporations generate desktop systems from images (via Ghost or whatever)? Individual settings are _assumed_ to get wiped back to Corporate Policy periodically anyway. While the suggested feature is a decent idea, it seems most useful to small businesses and for home users....

    4. Re:Slightly disingenuous by mrroach · · Score: 5, Interesting

      At Novell's Brainshare conference this week they demoed a new migration tool which saved all the user's documents and application settings, wiped the drive, installed SuSE, configured all the apps for the user (Outlook settings map to Evolution, IE bookmarks saved in Epiphany etc) all in the space of 5 minutes or so.

      At the moment it looks like a pretty custom job, but I can definitely see a generic tool being in the works.

      -Mark

    5. Re:Slightly disingenuous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually, the user profiles (home directories) would be saved on the server and would not be wiped.

    6. Re:Slightly disingenuous by DroopyStonx · · Score: 1

      When it does, it'll be too late. Hell, you'd figure you could at least get most (if not all) apps that could run in Windows 98 to work in wine.

      Six years and they still can't FULLY emulate a win9x core? What about NT? By the time they get NT fully working, we'll be a few years into Loghorn, hell, possibly even on the release AFTER it.

      Not to burst anyone's bubble, but I don't think there will ever be full windows interoperability to the point where you can use windows apps under Linux.

      --
      We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
    7. Re:Slightly disingenuous by grolschie · · Score: 1

      That's a big ask considering that upgrading from NT Server to Server 2000/2003 cannot be easily done automagically.

  6. That's a training guide, not an upgrade roadmap by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That article is about how to learn Linux, not how to convert your shop to Linux. A conversion guide would have more info about how to convert data, which is the real problem.

    1. Re:That's a training guide, not an upgrade roadmap by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1, Informative

      Which data in particular?

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    2. Re:That's a training guide, not an upgrade roadmap by Lochin+Rabbar · · Score: 1

      Looks like the moderators are on crack again, because when I first read that post my thought was: nonsense exporting data is usually trivial. Even when data is held in undocumented proprietary binary files there is usually an option to export to something that can be manipulated. The hard part is reimplementing databases, spreadsheets and so on, but that's mostly straight implementation as you already have a proven design.

      Of course things may be harder if you use an esoteric 3D design package with its own format, so your question seemed spot on to me.

    3. Re:That's a training guide, not an upgrade roadmap by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yup. He made a blanket statement with nothing to back it up, so I'm calling him on it. Show me the data on a desktop machine that is Windows specific, and needs converting to Linux.

      As far as apps go, office formats are fairly well handled by OpenOffice.org already. Email and web settings are portable, or can be managed by Mozilla import filters. Databases and the like can usually be exported painlessly. But really, anything application specific has nought to do with Linux, and changing platforms when you don't have the software you need is pretty stupid.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    4. Re:That's a training guide, not an upgrade roadmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah -- the real bitch is migrating network share settings, file permissions, and so on.

      Still, having a datamigration guide would not be a bad thing, even though the problems are usually "trivial" -- it never hurts to give IT guys a cookie-cutter plan they can start with.

    5. Re:That's a training guide, not an upgrade roadmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      True enough, but I took a little look around the Linux DevWorks and Redbook sites (haven't been in a while). There's a list of rebooks here.

      Some good stuff there about making business cases, migrating Exchange to Domino etc.

  7. Re:roadmap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Roadmaps" are for sheep anyway, they are for Windows users, NOT GNU Linux users

    ummm... this is for windows users... sure they may want to use Linux, but hey, not everyone can be an expert right off the bat

  8. Suse vs. Blue Linux by $calar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So if IBM is now going to be using Suse, does this mean that the Blue Linux rumor is bogus?

    1. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by tjwhaynes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So if IBM is now going to be using Suse, does this mean that the Blue Linux rumor is bogus?

      Speaking as a Linux user inside IBM, I always took the view that the Blue Linux rumour was bogus, or at least misleading. There is linux software flowing around the internals of IBM - plenty of it. And we do have various packages nicely wrapped up in RPMs that aren't available outside IBM (Lotus Notes 6.51 running on a standard WINE base springs immediately to mind). However, an internal distribution is a far cry from launching an external distro. That's not to say it will never happen. Just it doesn't look likely imminently.

      ... and yes, my sig DOES apply here. I'm not an IBM spokesman reading some approved script.

      Cheers,
      Toby Haynes

      --
      Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
    2. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      ... and yes, my sig DOES apply here.

      I'm assuming you have some kind of disclaimer in your sig. Please be aware that lots of people disable the viewing of sigs in Slashdot, so they won't ever see anything. Sigs aren't the place to put important information.

    3. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by axxackall · · Score: 1
      Lotus Notes 6.51 running on a standard WINE base

      I always wonder, what's wrong for IBM to release Lotus for Linux NATIVELY? If they really want to kick Microsfot ass - release Lotus for Linux for a competitive price and enjoy how it will help to sell Linux support contracts (in addition to Lotus licenses!) in several more F500s.

      --

      Less is more !
    4. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by The+Conductor · · Score: 1

      ...the Blue Linux rumor is bogus?

      You mean the merger rumor? It's true. JAMD & Blue Linux have merged. I installed JAMD..a nice little Red Hat derivative with well-integrated GUI install & login, good for home workstations, sorta like Mandrake I suppose but non-commercial. My father-in-law seems to have taken a liking to it since I put it on his machine as a dual-boot option. I had to switch to Slack myself, though, because I needed to set up a Samba server.

    5. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right -- i didn't see it! What was in it? Did he said he always lies except in signatures???

    6. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1
      So if IBM is now going to be using Suse, does this mean that the Blue Linux rumor is bogus?

      I don't know, but it makes me wonder... IBM has always been Big Blue. Novell always used red (big red N, everything shipped in red, etc.) If you worked for any time in a Netware shop, you know what I mean. That seems destined to change, since Red and Linux is pretty much taken by Red Hat.

      So with IBM throwing money at Novell, and Novell getting into Linux, will we now have a combination, like Purple Linux? Or will Novell stick with SuSE colors, and turn green? Or combine the two for... Yellow Linux? No, wait... that's too confusing with Yellow Dog Linux around.

      Ok, maybe all three... Blue, Red, Green OMG! It's White Linux!!!

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    7. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by tjwhaynes · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Lotus Notes 6.51 running on a standard WINE base

      I always wonder, what's wrong for IBM to release Lotus for Linux NATIVELY? If they really want to kick Microsoft ass - release Lotus for Linux for a competitive price and enjoy how it will help to sell Linux support contracts (in addition to Lotus licenses!) in several more F500s.

      I've asked the same question. I still don't have an answer. The Domino server is on Linux. I view it as a straightforward argument to go to a Linux client to help customers pick the best platform for their business, rather than being tied to Windows on the desktop. But I'm not in the Lotus division and I don't know what is planned for the moment. The iNotes client DOES run on Linux and provides at least the basic functionality for most desktop tasks.

      Speculation alert. Fact free zone follows...

      I also suspect that the full Windows Notes client is heavily tied into the Windows API and can't be easily separated. I therefore suspect that it is more likely that a Notes on Wine package is a more likely market possibility than a full Notes GTK/Qt/wxwindows/Motif (just kidding ;-) ) client package.

      /Speculation alert ends.

      Cheers,
      Toby Haynes

      --
      Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
    8. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the full Windows Notes client is heavily tied into the Windows API

      Rather doubt this, since Notes is obviously drawing all its own widgets and also runs on the Mac (and Unix in earlier versions).

      More likely that IBM is just waiting for $BIG_CUSTOMER to come in and ask/beg/pay for the port to Linux.

    9. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by hughk · · Score: 1

      I'm currently working at a large bank. We even have an 'own' distro of Windows-XP for internal use. We also have one of Linux (a SUSE variant). I would agree that it is common for a large organisation to have its own internal distro.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    10. Re:Suse vs. Blue Linux by chez69 · · Score: 1

      the unix ports of notes used a win32 -> x porting layer.

      --
      PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
  9. Upgrade? by flewp · · Score: 4, Informative

    While some may consider it an upgrade (and pretty much everyone here at least would call it an upgrade), most average joe PC users might not. Afterall, he loses MS Office (and yes, I'm aware of the alternatives, but again, Joe Average might not), a lot of his games (WINE/etc might not be the best option), and everything he is familiar with.

    We're assuming you already have Linux installed.

    While the article does point you to linux.org for choosing a distro and whatnot, any good guide to switching to linux should at least cover the basic installation methods and what you'll need to think about before installing. Since distros have different installers, you don't want to get too indepth or focus on any one installer, but it should at least cover ideas that would be universal or at least common to getting ready to install linux.

    --
    WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    1. Re:Upgrade? by 0racle · · Score: 1
      It's mainly aimed at corporate customers
      Unless the Average Joe is running an entire corporation without any IT staff, either full time, on contract or otherwise, I don't see how his lack of knowledge would be a problem. These points would be covered as a contract is negotiated, presumably with IBM in this case.
      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    2. Re:Upgrade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When IBM would do that, they basically help the user to chose a Linux (OS) distribution. I think they want to be unbiased regarding that and if that's the reason i applaud them for that.

      If some random corporate/home_newbie can't install a Linux right now with all these user-friendly Linux (OS) distributions out there, i suggest they just leave it aside or learn more about computers (excluding bugs). Heck, even Debian is peanuts these days!

      Oh, and i thought: "Why are they only speaking about RPM?" RPM is generally more popular on corporate levels but there are also DEB and Debian related documents on the IBM websites. It wouldn't surprise me if they either directly (documents of their own) or indirectly (links to documents) have information about the installation of Linux (OS) available.

  10. Re:Easy steps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know you are trying to be funny, but what about backing up your pr0...errr... data?

    so step 0 would be burn your data to CD? or what?

  11. Superb by AbstracTus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Information like this has been needed for a long time, there are plenty of HowTo's and Man pages around, but not much information to help with the actual transfer from Windows to Linux. Good job IBM.

    1. Re:Superb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please define "good" with regards to a man page. I have never encountered more useless documentation in my life than man pages, especially on linux. At the very least, a man page should give a few common examples of commands you might wish to issue. They never do! Man pages are not "help", they are pointless. I do not care how the program was made or what libs it calls up, I want to know how to use it quickly, and man pages fail that test.

    2. Re:Superb by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      Historicaly, the man pages have to give you only the exact information that would allow you to duplicate a piece of software. That is, document all the functionality and options, not care about examples. Info pages, I think, are supposed to be more detailed. I also find the man pages very weird and not helpful, but I always find usage examples in the program's documentation or on the www.

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
  12. /grin by 222 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Very elegantly put ;)
    ["If you have been using Windows for a long time, you are accustomed to rebooting the system for many reasons, from software installation to correcting problems with a service. This is a habit you will need to change to start thinking in Linux. Linux tends to be rather Newtonian in nature. Once set in motion, it will tend to stay in motion until it is acted upon by an outside force, such as a hardware failure."]

    1. Re:/grin by barzok · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm not one to defend Microsoft but this "argument" is becoming less and less relevant every year. Sure, there are plenty of Windows boxen that need a regular reboot (my 2K box in my office at work gets rebooted daily because of shit video drivers). But there are just as many that run for weeks or more without a forced reboot. I'm trying to find the last reboot on my XP Pro desktop here at home and it looks like it was at least 22 days ago, at which point I installed a hotfix. Very few software installs I've done lately have required a reboot, and normally restarting a service will clear up most problems for me.

      The Linux community needs to stop hiding behind "we don't have to reboot" - it's just not as compelling an argument as it was 2 years ago. And with clustered servers becoming the norm, (MS AppCenter, etc.), reboots are hardly even noticed by the end-users.

    2. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > that run for weeks

      oooooh, weeks. Well, yeah, this is better than "uptime measured in hours" (attributed to the sales weenies at my last job).

      > with clustered servers

      I'm guessing you (like most others spoon fed from what passes for tech. journalism) don't know the difference between a supercomputer and a rollover device.

    3. Re:/grin by mroch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My Linux box was restarted over 220 days ago (241 days, 13 hours, 18 minutes to be exact), when I upgraded the kernel. All other fixes have not needed a reboot.

      A forced restart because of a hotfix due to all of Microsoft's critical bugs is the same as if it had crashed, as far as I am concerned.

    4. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you are using a CLI, you can expect to frequently reboot with Linux as well. I've lost track of the number of times KDE has had an app or window crash and needed a restart to clear.

    5. Re:/grin by xutopia · · Score: 1

      I have two hard drives on my computer. One is XP on which I play games and another is Slackware. I decided to install the Windows updates one day and since then it takes three minutes after reboot to do anything once I am in Windows. After 8 hours or so of being on my computer starts crawling to a halt and I need to reboot. I've tried defragmenting, having only essential services running but nothing would stop it from slowing down after a day's work. In linux I never have a problem with slow downs. This newtonian argument is still very true for me.

    6. Re:/grin by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      > I've lost track of the number of times KDE has had an app or window crash and needed a restart to clear.

      That doesn't require a reboot, it does require a restart of kde or at times X.

      Does it make a difference? definitely. I have background jobs runnign all the time (things like video compression, compiles of very large sourcetrees (OO.o comes to mind) and so on.
      I can make sure that those simply continue while X gets restarted. A reboot would not allow that.

      But then, I haven't seen KDE or X give up in the last couple of months, and when it did it turned out to be the result of using the development branch of FreeBSD with a development branch of X, and not minding the notes about QT and the nvidia drivers on FreeBSD, so I had myself to blame there.

      Of course I am using FreeBSD and not Linux, but I seriously doubt Linux + X + KDE is that much less stable ;P

    7. Re:/grin by cpeterso · · Score: 4, Insightful


      What Linux version are you running? If it's 241 days old, then it is probably missing quite a few kernel security fixes.

    8. Re:/grin by 222 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Its not that i disagree with the fact that windows hasnt gotten better about uptimes, its simply the fact that certain tasks, even with windows xp, require a reboot. Driver updates, browser updates(WTF), patching services, its all much more than i care for. Given the rate that these patches are released, the fabled long uptimes that MS coders have worked so hard for is completely negated.

    9. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure?
      My computer running XP has been on for the past 8 days... Running games ( Warcraft III, Enemy Territory, Morrowind ), doing development ( Eclipse & Java ), word processing and graphics editing, and its working just fine with no apparent screwup.

      In fact, my last reboot was due to Enemy Territory crashing out and whacking my gamma settings..

      You DEFINITELY probably have a problem with your computer.

    10. Re:/grin by thoth · · Score: 1

      Comparing uptime on your XP Pro desktop isn't the full story.

      Consider a Windows server - basically every security fix, everything off windowsupdate, Exchange fix, IIS fix, SQL Server fix, renaming your computer, joining/leaving a domain (granted these last two aren't common), etc. all require a reboot.

    11. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Linux install:
      Place CD in drive
      install (follow instructions)
      reboot
      done.

      Windows install
      Place CD in drive
      copy files needed for install
      reboot
      detect devices
      reboot
      detect pnp
      reboot
      install networking
      reboot
      configure networking
      reboot

      ( for each application )
      install application
      reboot

      Need I say more

    12. Re:/grin by RdsArts · · Score: 1

      Clusters making reboots 'hardly even noticed' is not good enough. That's the problem. There's no excuse for rebooting in the first place. The fact that you have redundant systems does not negate the fact that you are rebooting.

      In a proper system, the only time one should need to reboot is if the kernel itself needs to be replaced in memory. That's it. Everything else should be a service which can be independantly stoped and started. That they have bundled things so 'tightly' for 'intergration' that they can't even update their web browser without rebooting speaks volumes IMHO.

    13. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Your Windows example has more truth in it than it'd seem at first glance. When installing win2k/XP from dos setup first copies some files to the hard drive (basic setup files I guess), then restarts the PC. Next setup copies more files and then restarts. Next you finally get the graphical install portion of setup where it installs the network stuff, IE, OE, etc and registers components, services, and so on. Then it reboots once again and you're finally into Windows proper (in the case of XP, you're asked to activate, setup users, etc--I forget what 2000 does). If you boot directly from the install cd instead of using dos you can skip the very first step, but that's it. The whole thing seems a bit silly to me. I hear Longhorn is going to "revolutionize" Windows Setup (which probably means it'll finally do a graphical install from the very beginning). About time...

    14. Re:/grin by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

      At work I use 2K on the desktop for Java and C++ development. I don't like to reboot, getting all the folders and applications open again takes a long time. Uptimes of 2-3 weeks are typical.

      I still have to reboot it due to software errors, but I can time it so that it's convenient. Usually what happens is that everything gets too sluggish because the hard drive is trashing. One assumes this is a result of various memory leaks. I haven't seen a blue screen or a reboot I didn't initiate on the thing since I started at that company last year.

      I use all UNIX-ish machines at home (OpenBSD, Linux, MacOS). Uptimes with them aren't much longer because of upgrades and patches. The situation is more or less the same; I need to reboot, but I have a bit of flexibility as to when.

      Behind a professionally maintained firewall, on a computer provided by my employer, I haven't got a problem with Windows. I might even use it at home if didn't cost so much.

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    15. Re:/grin by shadewind · · Score: 1

      But we don't have to reboot, seriously.

      --
      I couldn't come up with any better sign....
    16. Re:/grin by teval · · Score: 1

      I started to beleive this argument, that Windows doesn't crash anymore.

      I haven't used Windows more then 10 minutes in a long while, so hearing all this news almost convinced me.

      That's until a week ago when I started to repair computers again. It is more stable then it used to be, but that argument is just as valid as before.

      I still have people who develop on Windows and just people who use Windows (joe user) looking at my Linux box and saying wow. uptime at over a month now.. and last one was me cleaning and flipping the switch on my powerbar by mistake.

      Drivers for non-mainstream windows software (yes.. those provided by MS) are just as bad as I remember them. Trying my scanner with the newest windows drivers (XP SP1) still crashes everything. Downloading windows updates in certain orders (XP SP1) still leads to horribly unstable systems)

      So yeah.. you might be lucky and it works for you, but it's just as unstable.

      (BTW: It crashes but we'll make a cluster so that noone can see that is the reason why Linux users use this argument. It's not a solution, it's paramount to telling someone to just press the on button again when their computer stops working. )

    17. Re:/grin by HenchmenResources · · Score: 1
      "DEFINITELY probably"

      O_o

      Putting your interesting use of English aside, XP seems be different with every install, I've seen it act differently on three different machines that had the exact same hardware configuration, and the install was done using the same source CD. All three computers were previously running Win2000 and had worked fine, they had their hard drive f-disked and formated before installing XP so the odds of the issues being caused by Win 2000 residual is highly unlikely. Yet all three computers ended up running very differently, one upon install had all of the XP effects turned off, the other two had the effects turned on, one of them takes nearly three times as long to boot, just to cite a couple of examples.

      XP definitely has some interesting uniformity issues, that may just as likely be the cause of the problems in this case, he never said his Linux was having issues. If this is a hardware issue the odds are that the issue is with his hard drive since that is the only piece of hardware that, based on his description, isn't shared between the OS's.

      --
      "Napalm is nature's toothpaste" - Chef Brian
    18. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If this is a hardware issue the odds are that the issue is with his hard drive since that is the only piece of hardware that, based on his description, isn't shared between the OS's.

      It's likely a driver issue. XP loads numerous hidden kernel drivers at boot time. Some of these are not the usual device driver. Sometimes they could be ones for the personal firewall or antivirus. Heck, even Belarc Advisor loads a kernel driver. You can see what's loaded by typing

      sc query type= driver
      at a command prompt.
    19. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if you go and buy a new computer now with the newest version of Windows then it won't crash constantly, but remember, Joe User is probably using an old computer.

    20. Re:/grin by peeon · · Score: 1

      You ever noticed ur limited amount of resources after 22 days? The system will start getting sluggish after that many days. Linux holds the fort for resource management.

    21. Re:/grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SuSE doesn't need that one reboot. Although at some point you will want to do it, to actually get to run the kernel you installed, instead of the one the installer used. And of course to test that it actually CAN boot (otherwise, you will only find out that you forgot to install LILO half a year later, when the power outage lasts longer than the UPS).

    22. Re:/grin by barzok · · Score: 1

      I must have missed that part, my system is as responsive as it was 3 weeks ago. OTOH, the first time I fired up KDE on this box, within 15 minutes all my physical RAM (768MB) and most of my swapfile were filled for no reason at all. It never happened again, but watch out where you are before you start throwing stones.

  13. I have two operating systems on my laptop by Fisher99 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    2000 and linux. I use linux as my everyday general usuage OS. I use 2000 to practice my tech support and problem solving skills. What every needs to get the job done, that is what will see the OS.

  14. Re:Easy steps by Z-MaxX · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Format C:
    2. Insert Linux CD and reboot
    3. Install Linux
    4. ???
    5. Profit!
    item[4] = Get your Windows refund $$$!

    --
    Dr Superlove 300ml. I use my powers for awesome
  15. IBM Solution to Linux in 3 Easy Steps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    1. Buy any machine equipped with an IBM Travelstar or Deskstar Hard drive.
    2. Install Windows OS and any related applications
    3. After the IBM drive crashes and destroys your data (6 to 8 mos), you can install Linux without worrying about prior data.

    1. Re:IBM Solution to Linux in 3 Easy Steps by UnassumingLocalGuy · · Score: 1

      Heh... IBM Travelstars didn't always suck... my seven-year-old ThinkPad's hard drive is still going strong :)

      --
      "Hu, ho, ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Hu, ho ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Mario Paint! Whoaaa!"
    2. Re:IBM Solution to Linux in 3 Easy Steps by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

      The missing step 0. involves traveling back in time to when IBM was producing said drives with the defects.

      But anyway. Sorry to spoil the humor.

      --
      ---
  16. Re:Easy steps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're using Windows, you're probably not concerned about losing data.

  17. Nice to be backed by IBM ... by squashed · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Am I the only one who gets a tingly feeling deep inside when I read about IBM and linux? It just feels so nice to be backed by a mountain of hard cold cash.

    I get that same warm, tingly feeling inside as did the members of Team OS/2 in the old days.

    1. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was a die-hard 0S/2'er....

      The optimist in me is hoping that IBM will stick to its guns this time.

      There is more support now, and if you remember, it was difficult to get systems with OS/2 preloaded on them.

      Linux has more marketshare, i think, and definetly more mindshare.

      I think Linux will clear the hurdle....

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    2. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Spoing · · Score: 5, Interesting
      1. I was a die-hard 0S/2'er....

      As was I -- scoffing, I tried it for a competitive analysis that marketing wanted and was hooked within 2 months. It was damn nice for the time, and some features in the WPS would be nice in KDE and/or Gnome if not at the window manager and -- better -- file system level.

      1. The optimist in me is hoping that IBM will stick to its guns this time.

      That's the beauty of it. It won't matter in the long run if they do or don't!

      1. There is more support now, and if you remember, it was difficult to get systems with OS/2 preloaded on them.

      Nearly impossible. Dell, Gateway, Compaq, and even IBM never preloaded OS/2. Now, we're getting preloads...and even companies like HP and IBM yelling that they are the biggest Linux supporter. Dell brags too...though I'd like them all to shut up and get the goods out there.

      1. Linux has more marketshare, i think, and definetly more mindshare.

      Linux isn't being laughed at. OS/2 was only taken seriously at the begining, and quickly became the ugly step child (though technically it was quite nice though prone to crash/lock the UI).

      1. I think Linux will clear the hurdle....

      I'm starting to see job listings specifically asking for Linux experience crop up in various places. My OS/2 experience never seemed to be important to anyone.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    3. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by sapbasisnerd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IBM continued to support OS/2 well after most other vendors would have completely canned it. The reality is that "it's about the application software" and there's only so much any OS vendor can do to incent people, especially commercial vendors, to support an OS for which they see a limited market. Linux already has more real world support in the software market, including from some true heavyweights like SAP, Oracle and of course IBM that OS/2 ever did.

    4. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > There is more support now, and if you remember, it was difficult to get systems with OS/2 preloaded on them.

      Actually, I remember there was a period of I think a half to one year, around '94-'95, when many systems here in the Netherlands were sold preloaded with OS/2 Warp. Not Compaqs and HPs but computers from Escom and Vobis (big chains here at the time). The main problem was, most of the systems were only equiped with 4Mb Ram, so OS/2 was pretty slow. Since all the software was for Win 3.1 anyway, people just deleted OS/2 and installed a pirated copy of Dos 6.22 + Win 3.11, which performed much better in 4Mb than the Win-OS/2 subsystem.

    5. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What other choice do they have?
      They stepped on Bill's weener years ago so M$ is NOT an option.

      IBM has put ALL of it's eggs in the Linux basket. It's sink or swim and the ONLY life preserver available to IBM is Linux.

    6. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      IBM has put ALL of it's eggs in the Linux basket

      You are either joking or moronic. IBM has full support for dozens of platforms, including a tons of Windows applications and support. They could easily move on to the Next Big Thing and just put Linux down at the bottom of the list next to OS/2.

    7. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, IBM did stick to their guns back then. The real problem was that they backed it with the a similar attitude that is seen by another company; You will not be fired by picking us. They charged top dollars and delivered an inferior product. As time went on, they tried to keep their prices up, but had to keep propping it up via their other products. In particular, IBM counted on all their hardware sale to push it. They used their hardware monopoly to try and prop it up. All the while, they were being picked apart at hardware by a bunch of small start-ups in the mid-size (unix) and low-end (PCs). Yet, so many in the press backed IBM on OS2 and ignored Dos and the start-up Windows 3.0. In fact, back then, many in the press were supported by IBM and were writting a lot of trash. Many mags and writers from the 80's disappeared as they were ruled wrong all the time.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    8. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      Linux isn't being laughed at. OS/2 was only taken seriously at the begining, and quickly became the ugly step child (though technically it was quite nice though prone to crash/lock the UI). I think Linux will clear the hurdle....

      I'm starting to see job listings specifically asking for Linux experience crop up in various places. My OS/2 experience never seemed to be important to anyone.


      Yeah, but it looks like your OS/2 experience would come in handy when X locks up on you....

    9. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by AstroDrabb · · Score: 5, Informative

      What? That is sooo far from the truth. IBM's core business is based on services. In fact they are a bigger company (by revenue) then MS. In the end, IBM's global services will help you with whatever tasks you want. They will help you with MS solutions, Linux solutions and Unix solutions. IBM is in a great position, because no matter what, they can deliver their services on any platform. I think IBM is pushing Linux because they don't want to have to bend over for MS. I think most of the big companies are starting to get tired of bending over for MS with maybe the exception of Dell. To be able to truly leverage the MS Windows platform, you need to make some "partnership" with MS to be able to get undocumented features, API's, document formats and protocols. And MS drops those "partnerships" at the drop of a hat. And not only that, if MS thinks your core business is a big money maker, that "partnership" is over and they will "embrace and extend" your business out of the market with their own competing product. Look at all the Anti-virus and personal firewall companies now. With MS putting their own AV and personal firewall out, over the next 2-5 years, those companies will need to look for some other way to make cash since the home market will no longer need their software. So much for all those "partnerships". With Linux, all these large companies start on a level playing field and can add on top of that their "special sauce" and services to differentiate their business and we would have some great competition which means great products and technology advancing at a much faster pace.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    10. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by RoLi · · Score: 1
      IBM probably already sold more mainframes preloaded with Linux than they sold PCs preloaded with OS/2....

    11. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The difference is, of course, that while IBM does a lot for Linux, they don't own it, and thus can't shut it down the way they did OS/2.

      That's why I tend to stick with open-source, community-developed OSs now. I've learned my lesson after OS/2.

      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    12. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Type-R · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Yeah, but it looks like your OS/2 experience would come in handy when X locks up on you....

      Yeah, but switching to a VT and typing "killall XFree86" (or "/etc/init.d/xdm restart") is a whole lot easier then rebooting...

    13. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Spoing · · Score: 2, Informative
      1. Yeah, but it looks like your OS/2 experience would come in handy when X locks up on you....

      X -- specifically XFree86 with KWM -- does act goofy at times, no doubt. Not in the same way as OS/2 though. When an app locks or waits on a resource, the rest of the system chugs along...not so under OS/2 WPS. One workaround for OS/2 (if I remember properly) was to use a breakout switch to wake up the WPS. Had something to do with single threading on the shell even though the rest of OS/2 was multithreaded. (In any case, it's history now.)

      For stability, XFree is much nicer; if an app goes down or spins it's wheels looking for a resource, the rest of the system doesn't care one whit.

      As an additional Windows-ish feature to handle these apps, KDE 3.2 added an 'app not responding, kill now?' button -- though I don't see that much (IMNSHO it pops up a little too quickly, but I do know what I'm doing).

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    14. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 1, Insightful

      IBM and M$ have been peeing in each other's lemonade for years now. There's bad blood there.

      Yeah, they sell XP (Xtra Pathetic) but they do so because they are not stupid, they know the market is not primed yet for an all out Linux blitzkrieg but they are rapidly promoting and moving towards that. In the meantime, they sell XP to make money, not because they are in love with it.

    15. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only difference between MS and IBM in the article above is that MS's buzzwords are quoted.

    16. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 4, Informative

      For stability, XFree is much nicer; if an app goes down or spins it's wheels looking for a resource, the rest of the system doesn't care one whit.

      Untrue. It's still fairly easy for a program using XFree86 to freeze or crash the entire Xserver, killing any other process using it.

      It is especially easy for one program to accidently starve all others of input- this will happen, for example, if a Motif program freezes while a menu is pulled down. (In a case like that, a user with an alternative means of access can kill the offending process remotely- but only experts can do that, so this case must still be counted as a severe failure of interprocess protection)

      The only best way to fix this problem would require major changes to the X11 protocol- probably big enough to deserve a major version increase up to R7. It should be possible for applications to survive the shutdown/crash of the display server they are using, and attach to another one later. (Protocols like VNC and RDE allow that to a certain extent, as do some TTY consoles; X11 should too)

    17. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Funny
      IBM and M$ have been peeing in each other's lemonade for years now. There's bad blood there.

      'Jeez man, mix metahpors all you like, but those two make for a nasty visual. :-P
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    18. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      For stability, XFree is much nicer; if an app goes down or spins it's wheels looking for a resource, the rest of the system doesn't care one whit.

      Not in my world. I've seen X clobber a system so hard that not only couldn't you switch to another tty, you couldn't even ssh in. Next steps, power button -> fsck.....

    19. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      Oops, I guess I should have said "pre-2.6 kernels." I haven't taken that plunge yet....

    20. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Spoing · · Score: 1
      1. Next steps, power button -> fsck.....

      No journaled FS?

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    21. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Spoing · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't encounter those problems. Sure, to my shame I've done dumb things that have locked the system (example: using cat on some things in /proc is a BAD idea). I've also had buggy drivers that crash X when running games full screen (fixed drivers seem to work fine). In a few cases (pre-2.6 kernel) I've even had tasks running that swamp the CPU and it takes minutes to regain control by ctrl-alt-F1 and killing the process. X, though, still plugs along once the app is taken out of the picture. The KDE 3.2 app killer seems to work well for those instances.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    22. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you're spewing written diarra. IBM really doesn't care much about desktops (XP). They make big bucks selling Windows server hardware/software, however.

    23. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by yuri+benjamin · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it looks like your OS/2 experience would come in handy when X locks up on you....

      Yeah, but switching to a VT and typing "killall XFree86" (or "/etc/init.d/xdm restart") is a whole lot easier then rebooting...


      How can you <Ctrl> + <Alt> + <F1> to a VT if the keyboard is frozen by X as well?
      Then again, you can ssh into the box and type "killall XFree86" (or "/etc/init.d/xdm restart") ...

      --
      You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
    24. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would just switch to another console. Not VT, but real console. /dev/ttyW0 and ttyW1 are ready for login at any time.

    25. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It is especially easy for one program to accidently starve all others of input- this will happen, for example, if a Motif program freezes while a menu is pulled down.

      Although not very well documented, Ctrl-Alt-Slash (slash on the numeric keypad) will break any XGrabMouse / XGrabKeyboard, allowing you to continue working with other applications. The app that did the grab is not killed, and if it's not completely hung, it will continue working.

    26. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by chthon · · Score: 1

      I've had this too, but that was due to a bad network card where a bit stuck. It completely froze the input system and the network, couldn't get in via ppp either.

    27. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's entirely possible for X11 programs to reattach to another server, or attach to multiple servers, and it doesn't require any modifications on the server side. AFAIK no current client toolkits do this, but it wouldn't be very difficult, especially since X11 already requires clients to keep track of most of the state.

    28. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by juliao · · Score: 1

      Your post made me remember the "interrupt" switch - we used an H-H switch on the serial port and a watchdog to monitor it. The problem was that the OS/2 PM event queue was read by a single thread, yes. At least IBM has courses named "OS/2 Hang and Trap Analysis" - I should known, I attended one.

    29. Re:Nice to be backed by IBM ... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > It's still fairly easy for a program using XFree86 to freeze or crash
      > the entire Xserver

      Indeed, this is substantially my biggest peave with XFree at this time. I'm
      hoping that one of the various projects resulting from the recent license and
      development model arguments and forks will result in a more stable X server.

      I would even be happy if it were done like Gnu screen, so that if the X server
      crashes the apps all sit there happily waiting for the X server to start back
      up again. The crashes would still be annoying, but at least you wouldn't lose
      so much state. As it stands now, if there's an app with a bug that causes an
      X server crash, I'm *afraid* to try to reproduce it, or to use the app at all,
      for fear I'll lose everything in all my windows. (No, saving doesn't solve
      the problem; there's still the matter of what windows are open, what's loaded
      in them, where the cursor is, and so on and so forth. It's like losing your
      whole train of thought; it can take an hour or more to get back in the flow.)

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  18. Re:roadmap?? by Spoing · · Score: 4, Interesting
    1. Why is a roadmap needed anyway? When I want to upgrade my GNU Linux distribution I just go online and download updates. "Roadmaps" are for sheep anyway, they are for Windows users, NOT GNU Linux users.

    The list IBM covers is quite handy for training others who think Windows is the beggining and end of what computers can do.

    (That said, I would be careful using Webmin -- Step 3 -- as it can cause problems, though as an introduction when a more experienced admin is around it is OK.)

    Is this useful for you and me directly? No. Can these texts help us by making conversations with the Windows-obsessed but willing less frustrating? Yes.

    Here's the list from the link;

    1. Step 1. Thinking in Linux

      The first step to success in Linux is learning to think in Linux. Take what you already know and redirect it to doing things the Linux way.

      Step 2. Console crash course Linux provides great power and flexibility through the console. If it has been a while since you've spent much time at the command prompt, take a little time to reacquaint yourself with this environment by reviewing common commands you'll use all the time.

      Step 3. Introduction to Webmin

      While it is important to know the nuts and bolts of administration, it is often more convenient to have a tool. Also, a higher-level application makes complex configurations easier to handle. Webmin provides point-and-click configuration for beginning and experienced administrators.

      Step 4. User administration If a system has no users, is it really a system? Learn about the Linux approach to users.

      Step 5. Linux logging Linux makes extensive use of logging. Nothing is hidden from you. Becoming comfortable and familiar with logs will allow you to monitor the health of your system and track activities.

      Step 6. Working with file systems File systems are at the heart of every server. Linux provides a lot of flexibility in its file systems.

      Step 7. Networking

      Working unconnected is unthinkable in today's world. Linux on the network unleashes its full potential. However, Linux networking looks very different on its face. You'll need to learn some new terminologies and new tools.

      Step 8. Backup and recovery

      The first line of defense against disaster is a backup of the data. Linux provides different options, some of which are very simple to work with.

      Step 9. Installing software

      Linux can use prepackaged binary files, or you can compile programs directly from source code. The tools for installing Linux programs are very useful and provide functionality you might not expect.

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
  19. console by ElGnomo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Step 2. Console crash course I think this is is the fundamental obstacle to the success of linux in the desktop. It is completely unrealistic to expect your avg user ( the type who never even consider changing their homepage because they dont know how ) to work with a console. And lets face it, linux today still requires you to work with a console for alot of things, esp software/hardware installation and system configuration.
    In fact, I just finished installing a wireless card in my linux box. Comprared, to windows, where I pop in a cd and hit install, under linux I had to:
    1: make & make install the software
    2: install some necessary wireless libraries
    3: manually configure the wireless card's config file
    4: set the kernel to intialize ath0 at startup
    now to a techie following a recipie, this is a piece of cake. However, it is quite beyond the capabilities of your avg windows user.

    1. Re:console by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1, Insightful

      bah. another "linux is not ready for the desktop" troll. you leave out which distro you were using. for all i know, it might have been redhat 7 or lfs. maybe it was a current distro like mepis, mandrake, or suse. and maybe there were .debs or rpms already available, so you didn't really have to compile from source. mabe if the vendor gave a shit you could "pop in a cd and hit install" too. who knows...

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    2. Re:console by Welsh+Dwarf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What distro are you using? or more importantly, what planet are you from?

      OK, I use Slackware at home, so I have all the fun you're talking about, but when I install systems for people, I install Mandrake, and I have never had easier hardware installation (and yes, I have delt with XP systems).

      A new printer? plug it in, turn it on, control center, click on printers, wait 30 secs, print a test page just to be sure....

      Netcards are just as easy, turn the machine off (sniff, so long uptime, I new you well :-() plug the card in, turn machine on, the card gets detected at boot up, I'm asked wether to configure it automagically or manually (for static ips etc) and most of the time that's all there is too it.

      I'm afraid your either misinformed, or trolling, because the hardware question has been well and truly delt with.

      Linux still has some technical hurdles to overcome before being a Joe Sixpack desktop machine (some cups quirks come to mind, where if you print to a turned off printer, you can only print to it again, if you reset it in the cups web interface, and I know there are other problems), but this is just 3 year old FUD.

      --
      Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
    3. Re:console by Radical+Rad · · Score: 2, Informative
      now to a techie following a recipie, this is a piece of cake. However, it is quite beyond the capabilities of your avg windows user.

      Installing a printer driver or a new app is beyond the capabilities of your average windows user. This article seems to be written as an introduction for the next wave of people who will be dealing with Linux, average sysadmins who can do some things in Windows but are not experts. If things are done right, average windows users won't have to worry about any of this stuff for at least a few more years. By then they may be more comfortable with it from using it at work and KDE and Gnome will have become almost idiot proof.

    4. Re:console by lkcl · · Score: 1

      dude, you are clearly using the wrong distribution.

      under debian, for example, it is completely unnecessary to compile packages: it is also completely unnecessary for you to track down the dependency libraries. personally, i use apt: i understand that a lot of other people use aptitude, and although i have never felt the urge to look, there is most likely to be a whizzy-graphically-tool about.

      that having been said, you are right: there is a lot more to be done, whilst the geeks like to get on with the next cool bit of functionality.

      so.

      the question becomes: who is going to _pay_ for all this lovely wizzy-graphically-prettiness that makes linux ready for noddy users?

      you?

      me?

      ibm?

    5. Re:console by dema · · Score: 1

      Uh....can you say X? Any number of distros? Try giving a Windows user nothing but a DOS terminal to work with, see if he/she can install a wireless card with that (:

    6. Re:console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to point out that if you don't have the driver CD, it can be a real PAIN to get hardware running in Windows.

    7. Re:console by The+Monster · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Console crash course . . . It is completely unrealistic to expect your avg user . . . to work with a console.
      If you look at the top of the page, you'll see this is subtitled: (emphasis mine)
      A roadmap for developers making the transition to Linux
      A developer had damned well be able to do everything from the command line. Learning to write good install scripts to insulate that user from the ugly details is exactly that a developer should do. I'd even say it's his job to make things work for the average user
      --

      [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
      SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

    8. Re:console by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

      The intended audience for this set of IBM documents is System Administrators not Joe Sixpack Home User. Sysadmins should be no more afraid of a shell than they are of regedit.

      A corporate user of Linux will not be doing any of the things you've mentioned. IT will do that for them. Also distros like Lindows and Mandrake are moving further and further in the "just stick it in" direction every day.

    9. Re:console by ElGnomo · · Score: 1

      for the record, i was using mandrake 9.2, which should be as easy as it gets. And my card uses an atheros based chip, for which you need madwifi - for which there are no precomplied options. No linux CD from vendor either.

    10. Re:console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What? You mean:
      C:\>(D: || E:) && setup.exe
    11. Re:console by mrroach · · Score: 2, Informative

      I call shenanigans. What are you using, Linux From Scratch? Wireless libraries? what wireless libraries? Wireless support is at the kernel level, the only user-space tool you might need is iwconfig which is included in every semi-recent distro. As for the config file, I strongly suspect you are making that up as well.

      I tried SuSE a couple days ago (just to see where the "modern" distros stand compared to my usual Debian install) and after popping in my pcmcia wireless nic, a "New Hardware" window popped up walking me through the steps.

      -Mark

    12. Re:console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, I'd love to see the "average Windows user" have ANY idea how to do that.

    13. Re:console by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      hmm. i'm using mandrake 9.2 right now, and yeh, it's lacking in some of the smoothness of the latest distros. things like flash cards and cameras mount just fine once set up, but it shouldn't be required. Mdk 10 does "just work" with this stuff, and fwiw, i read that madwifi is in the mandrakeclub list of requested rpms. i'd imagine there will be rpms out there somewhere by now.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    14. Re:console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But the user I replied to didn't say "average." Quote:
      Try giving a Windows user nothing but a DOS terminal to work with, see if he/she can install a wireless card with that
    15. Re:console by Jerf · · Score: 1

      Wireless libraries? what wireless libraries? Wireless support is at the kernel level, the only user-space tool you might need is iwconfig which is included in every semi-recent distro. As for the config file, I strongly suspect you are making that up as well.

      Unfortunately, your information is out of date in a bad way. About three months ago, I went to buy a wireless PCMCIA card for my laptop. I bought three of them, each with different chipsets, each entirely unsupported under Linux. After learning my lesson, I paid careful attention to the model numbers, and checked out each and every consumer-grade card from Best Buy, Circuit City, Amazon, CompUSA, and a couple of local retailers. Not a single one of them had cards with Linux drivers.

      I found a couple of Cisco Aeronets (used) online, which have drivers, but they were massively more expensive then anything else, and the average consumer won't be able to find them.

      The landscape is shifting rapidly, but AFAIK it's still wild luck if you walk into a store and buy a wireless card with any sort of Linux support. All of those cards are off the market now.

      I finally ended up going with LinuxAnt's DriverLoader because I figured finding a new Linux-capable wireless card was hopeless. Wireless support for Linux is an absolute disaster zone, and the vendors are well and truly to blame here; I've heard their excuses and they don't ring true. (If you're so worried about FCC signal strength regulations, lock the relevant strengths out at the hardware level; software is always hackable and if you're worried about being liable for Linux drivers, you're equally liable for hacked Windows drivers...)

    16. Re:console by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

      The existence of the X Window System doesn't automatically mean that a full set of configuration tools for the huge hardware base magically appears.

      --
      ---
    17. Re:console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent of user did, so it is obviously implied. And nit-picking is pointless on slash anyway.

    18. Re:console by MrSnivvel · · Score: 1

      From the steps the OP stated, the card appears to be based upon the Atheros 511x chipset, requiring the use of the (IMO very good, but some assembly required) madwifi driver. Madwifi is the only driver that uses the athx designation. FYI, that driver requires that you use the CVS version. Project can be found at Madwifi's project page .

    19. Re:console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And windows works better with cards without drivers?

      My old SBUS graphics card worked fine in Linux, no configuration or tweaking needed, where as getting it to work in windows was so unlikely that I didn't even try.

    20. Re:console by zootman · · Score: 1

      Cripes I think sopme of you guys have missed the point of the argument. I think the author is trying to show how "tough" it can be to get certain things running. It can be a bear - how many weekends have been lost because you were trying to get some POS hardware going ? Granted this can happen in windows, but usually due to good vendor support it isnt as "hard" to get stuff going. I install linux clusters for a living and I can tell you I have had my share of carp from variuos drivers that wont work with a particular version of linux of whatever. Usually get things going in the end though ! :-)

    21. Re:console by caluml · · Score: 1
      Not a single one of them had cards with Linux drivers

      Do what I do - vote with your wallet. Look through the kernel source, or run menuconfig, and see which drivers are supported in the vanilla kernel. Then buy one of those. You can spend years applying patches to kernels from various unmaintained sources, resolving patch errors etc. Save yourself the time, and just get one that you know will work on Redhat, Debian, Gentoo, whatever.

    22. Re:console by Jerf · · Score: 1

      How can I buy a card with Linux support, when my whole point was that none of the cards on sale had Linux support available?

      I emphasize the word "none".

      I don't like buying used, too many times screwed, too little recourse.

  20. faulty windows/printer vs linux/net analogy? by dankelley · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In the first lesson we read that windows systems were designed with printing in mind, thus explaining the pretty gui interfaces, etc. Then we read that linux was designed with the network in mind, so that (quoting) "Since plain text works well across a network, text has always been the base for Linux configuration and data."

    Q: is the quoted idea historically accurate, given the development of unix, which begat linux?

    1. Re:faulty windows/printer vs linux/net analogy? by teval · · Score: 1

      It's very true on the linux side. UNIX was born as a timesharing system and was very extensivly used in dumb clients. That's why everything works using pipes and sockets and why all programs are separate packages (so that you can pick and choose what you need for those clients)

  21. Recognize a good thing when you see it. by BReflection · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Don't forget that IBM is still a corporation and has contractual obligations as well as a business to run. I think that its pretty cool they are publishing this at all, and far from immediately chastising them for everything they're not doing, I believe thanks are in order.

    --
    python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
  22. When is IBM going to offer a Linux Laptop ??? by cyber_rigger · · Score: 0, Interesting



    I would buy one.

  23. Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by scriptguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the first link "Thinking Linux" the "Users and groups" paragraph states the following:

    Both Linux and Windows are multi-user operating systems. Both can be used by many different users, and give each user a separate environment and resources. Security is controlled based on the user's identity. Resource access can also be controlled by group membership, making it easier to work with rights for large numbers of users without having to touch each individual account.

    Other than file/printer sharing I have never seen a Windows system used by more than one person, unless they are talking about Terminal Serving. The majority of Windows installations are just a one user at a time system. That is certainly not multi-user. I was hoping for better from IBM but I guess the person writing the article does not know what a multi-user system actually is. Windows is NOT a multi-user system. I really wish IBM could have written a better article. Oh well more bad research. Next!

    1. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by Foolhardy · · Score: 1, Redundant
      In a general sense, any server can be used by multiple users at one time.

      You just wrote off Windows's terminal services; it IS support for multiple remote users but... you don't care?

      What if I said that the majority of Linux installations were single-user desktops? Would that make it any less multi-user? No: the quantity of computers in that role is not the same thing as its ability to perfrom that role. The fact that Windows multi-user terminal servers can exist is enough.
      Windows NT has had multiple user support since its first release; that support improved with NT4 TSE (terminal server edition), with native support for remote users.
      (from the article)
      Both Linux and Windows are multi-user operating systems. Both can be used by many different users, and give each user a separate environment and resources. Security is controlled based on the user's identity. Resource access can also be controlled by group membership, making it easier to work with rights for large numbers of users without having to touch each individual account.
      All that is true of both Windows(NT) and Linux.
    2. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, Go install windows XP, make sure Terminal Services and Fast User Switching are on. Then log in, and turn some stuff on, oh lets try AIM. Then click start -> Logoff USER -> Gets you a menu with 2 options, Switch Users, or Logoff. Click Switch Users. Now login as someone else, and start up AIM under another name. Now AIM the first SN. OMG it works?!?!? OMG two people logged in at once? This must be a crime..or or or..something! *smirks*

    3. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It barely qualifies as a multiuser system. The problem is that so many apps do not take advantage of it, they wind up sharing preferences between users and it screws it up.

      ya, ya, I know this is an app problem, but if 90% of the apps do it, then what fucking good is the multi-user feature of the OS?

      Give MS a few more years before they have a truly useful multi-user system.

    4. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by Tatarize · · Score: 1

      To be fair, he most likely hasn't seen windows in a couple years. Windows 2000, isn't what I would describe as multi-user. It was just multi-account, and when somebody else logged in at the screen saver password, all my crap was gone. Its a fairly new feature on microsoft's part, and with XP is pretty hack and slash. I wouldn't go SSH'ing in from home but, its still describable as multi-user now.

      --

      It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    5. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by Gauchito · · Score: 1

      Him not knowing it, fair enough. He knows now, this is how you learn. What's more disturbing is that enough moderators didn't know or didn't care how true a Windows slamming was for him to get modded Interesting.

    6. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by thx2001r · · Score: 1

      Windows 2000, isn't what I would describe as multi-user

      That is simply not true. Windows NT (be it 4.0, 5.0 (Windows 2000), 5.1 (XP), 5.2 (Windows 2003)) is a multi-user operating system. What you are describing is logging into multiple accounts through a GUI. Fast user switching, what you are referring to being in Windows XP and being hack and slash, is actually opening a Graphical Terminal Windows to connect to a locally running Terminal Services as another user in Windows (both (or more) users are simultaneously logged on as different users running with different credentials, permissions, groups, etc.)

      This is great for a desktop computer, but is just one of the characteristics of "multi-user" operating systems IMHO. Another characteristic of "multi-user" operating systems present in Windows NT, is that you can run services (somewhat equivalent in concept and practice to *nix daemons) as users. You can run, for instance, Apache for Windows as a service under any username you want (you can create a user and Apache's documentation explains this in detail) with little to no system privileges and run Apache's service explicitly as that user. What happens is that, depending on how little access the user has to the machine, Apache, likewise, has little to no privilege to files, folders, reading, writing, executing, etc. on that machine.

      Clearly versions of Windows running the Windows NT kernel, love it or hate it, are "multi-user" operating systems as IBM indicates in their article.

      --

      -Joe
      If we're all god's children, what's so special about Jesus? - Jimmy Carr

    7. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      Windows XP (both Home and Pro) ARE multi user operaitng systems. You can use the Switch user feature which brings back the login screen where you can pick what username you want to use and the other users' environments are unharmed.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    8. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by drsmithy · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Other than file/printer sharing I have never seen a Windows system used by more than one person, unless they are talking about Terminal Serving.

      This has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not an OS is multiuser.

      The majority of Windows installations are just a one user at a time system.

      So if I'm the only person logged into one of my linux machines it's magically not a multiuser OS anymore ?

      That is certainly not multi-user. I was hoping for better from IBM but I guess the person writing the article does not know what a multi-user system actually is.

      Yes, they do. You, however, do not.

      Windows is NOT a multi-user system.

      Every version of Windows NT is a multiuser system. Always has been.

      I really wish IBM could have written a better article. Oh well more bad research. Next!

      You are clueless and ignorant. Next !

    9. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by KingJoshi · · Score: 1

      I don't know if they've fixed it, but one thing I hated was when using Remote Desktop Connection with XP (much better than VNC for windows) it would do a "switch user" but basically log off the person using the computer. So while my brother was logged on to my computer, if I connected remotely from the comptuer lab, he wouldn't be able to use the computer until I logged off.

      So while one can say it's multi-user, that certainly wasn't multi-user for me. And I don't know if Terminal services is provides on Windows XP Home or other methods for supporting multiple users simultaneously. The feature is significant enough that it's a deal breaker in terms of whether I truely call it "multi-user system".

      While on Linux, assuming XDMCP is enabled, even if my brother is using the computer, I can remotely log in and get a full graphical user interface. Even without XDMCP, you can still remotely log in and then display back to the remote computer the applications. And if you mainly use Xvnc, you don't have to ever log out, just close the window.

      I don't know if MS Windows is there yet, or you need to buy special software to do that. Maybe I'm just ignorant of how to use features it already came with, but to me, it's not there yet on multi-user support.

      --
      In times like these, it is helpful to remember that there have always been times like these. - Paul Harvey
    10. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      I don't know if they've fixed it, but one thing I hated was when using Remote Desktop Connection with XP (much better than VNC for windows) it would do a "switch user" but basically log off the person using the computer. So while my brother was logged on to my computer, if I connected remotely from the comptuer lab, he wouldn't be able to use the computer until I logged off.

      This is because that version of Windows isn't licensed for simultaneous GUI users. Although, apparently, service pack 2 is going to allow it.

      So while one can say it's multi-user, that certainly wasn't multi-user for me. And I don't know if Terminal services is provides on Windows XP Home or other methods for supporting multiple users simultaneously. The feature is significant enough that it's a deal breaker in terms of whether I truely call it "multi-user system".

      A multiuser system is one in which processes can run in different user contexts. That's it. That's the hard part. Everything else is just semantics and gravy building on this fundamental aspect of the OS's design.

      While on Linux, assuming XDMCP is enabled, even if my brother is using the computer, I can remotely log in and get a full graphical user interface. Even without XDMCP, you can still remotely log in and then display back to the remote computer the applications. And if you mainly use Xvnc, you don't have to ever log out, just close the window.

      And, similarly, if disable interactive logins on a unix machine for more than one user at a time, that's doesn't stop unix from being multiuser. It can still run processes as different users. Heck, an OS doesn't even need to allow interactive logons _at all_ to qualify as multiuser.

      I don't know if MS Windows is there yet, or you need to buy special software to do that. Maybe I'm just ignorant of how to use features it already came with, but to me, it's not there yet on multi-user support.

      Windows (NT) is multiuser. Non-server versions do not, out of the box, allow simultaneous GUI logins (because outside of a server environment it's a niche market at best). However, that doesn't change the fact that it is capable of running processes under different user contexts - and that is what defines an OS as single user or multiuser.

      You can throw telnet servers, BBSes or probably even a port of X11 onto DOS if you want, but that won't ever make it a multiuser OS.

    11. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by KingJoshi · · Score: 1

      I understand what you're saying.

      My point was that what "multi-user" means to a user has changed or varies in different circumstances. Definitions change or expand all the time. Hell, OS is hard enough to define since it's beyond kernel but not to the point different distributions are different OSes.

      While you are right technically and theoretically, practically, defining MS Windows as "multiuser" doesn't mean much if two people can't use it simultaneously. And if a particular version of Windows can do it while mine can't, then that doesn't have much significance to me either.

      --
      In times like these, it is helpful to remember that there have always been times like these. - Paul Harvey
    12. Re:Windows is a multi-user system.. WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to work at a company where "multiple people working" means that only one is doing anything at a time.

  24. Re:Easy steps by petabyte · · Score: 1

    The first step is a waste of time as you're going to repartition the drive and destroy whatever formating was on that (presumably vfat/ntfs) partition.

    Although if you do actually get the windows refund in part 4 you're not really profiting - just recollecting money taken from you. (I guess that's really a glass half-empty half-full thing. I think its half-empty.)

  25. Not An Upgrade Guide by Brian+Puccio · · Score: 3, Insightful

    More of a linux primer than an upgrade guide. An upgrade guide would tell you how to dual boot to see if things work, move all your applications over to the Linux equivilant, and than, if you like it, show you how to remove the Windows portion.

  26. What about AIX to Linux? by toesate · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When(If) they come out with a roadmap from AIX to Linux, THAT will really mean something, and will be a victorious day for both IBM and Linux I will look forward to.

    It is not easy and takes a lot of will power to shed old baggages.

    --
    Hey, that's my password you are typing
    1. Re:What about AIX to Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Well...

      Firstly, AIX is still superior to Linux in many ways (e.g. device management, LVM). Linux is catching up fast but has a way to go yet.

      Secondly, IBM is doing this. For example, AIX is being made more and more compatible with Linux; Linux runs on every new server that AIX runs on and with LPARs, customers can run both side by side on the same server if they want to. I also know that IBM will help customers migrate from AIX to Linux if they want to.

    2. Re:What about AIX to Linux? by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

      There isn't a version of Linux for my IBM PowerStation 320H. It runs AIX 4.2 very nicely, though. It's fricking ancient. The CPU is about five different chip packages.

      Why will it be a victorious day when IBM ends AIX? It's a nice OS with a lot of good features.

      --
      ---
  27. nt domains upgrade is easy. by lkcl · · Score: 5, Interesting

    almost every time someone mentions nt to linux data migration, i mention that if someone pays me money, i'll do the work.

    the migration tools for nt 4 style domains would take about 2 to 3 weeks to do: most of the work has already been done, it's a matter of documenting it, checking it and making it easier to use.

    the open source migration tools for nt 5 (aka w2k) style domains would take a bit longer: a few months, at most, though, as various efforts (e.g. heimdal) are already underway.

    the open source migration tools for exchange, now _that's_ a challenge, requiring about twelve to eighteen man-months of work to get somewhere.

    i know someone who has done most of the work already, in his spare time: it's proprietary but if an open source exchange project was to seriously take off, i know he'd consider releasing some of his code to 1) help out 2) make sure _his_ copyright notices are at the top of the files, because in open source just as in the proprietary world, the _first_ person to release is the one that tends to take off, not the best.

    ironically, just ONE company with more than one hundred employees that will be looking to pay microsoft's next set of exorbitant upgrade-because-everyone-else-has-and-oh-look-ever yone-we-send-documents-to-can't-read-them fees could instead pay me to do the development work on exchange and nt domains compatibility - and then NEVER HAVE TO PAY THEM AGAIN.

    1. Re:nt domains upgrade is easy. by Bombcar · · Score: 1

      net rpc vampire

  28. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's not only a good read, but most importantly, it allways helps to point people to a resource provided by a big company to convince them, that linux is something worth considering and not just a geek toy.

    Even if they don't listen to me, they might just listen to IBM.

  29. Re:roadmap?? by JaxWeb · · Score: 1

    I'm confused. Only the other day a reliable source told me that Open Source didn't have roadmaps....

    --
    - Jax
  30. Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by blair1q · · Score: 3, Funny

    Upgrading from WinNT to WinXPPro:

    1. Insert disk. Answer questions.
    2. The usual ???
    3. Profit.

    Upgrading from WinNT to Linux:

    1. Delegate to line manager to hire transition team.
    2. Study IBM's 9-part series on upgrading systems.
    3. Days into weeks into months of unusual ???
    4. Hold post mortem on cost overruns and continuing bugs.
    5. Fire transition team and manager.
    6. Hire consulting firm to manage systems.
    7. Look for ways to cut costs elsewhere to cover P&L ass.
    8. Hope nobody asks ???
    9. Loss.

  31. Things that make you say Hmmm. by Kihaji · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1. This is an upgrade roadmap, yet they assume you have Linux installed. Hmmmm. 2. This is a developer upgrade roadmap, yet they say nothing of development tools or compilers available. Hmmm 3. They pimp Webmin like its the 2nd coming of jebus, and Caldera(SCO) is one of the largest supporters and the first company to use Webmin. Hmmm

  32. Re:roadmap?? by Spoing · · Score: 1
    1. I'm confused. Only the other day a reliable source told me that Open Source didn't have roadmaps....

    It didn't. Now it does. In a few hours, it won't again. It's that dynamic! :)

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
  33. Wrong ScriptIdiot! by bwoodring · · Score: 2, Redundant

    1. Windows computers can have multiple user accounts, each of which having a seperate profile.

    2. Windows servers can have multiple users logged in simultaneously, each with their own user interface. This capability is included in all Windows Server operating systems.

    So how is Windows not a multi-user operating system? Just because you haven't seen Windows servers with concurrent logins doesn't mean that it isn't common, it just means that you are very ignorant.

    1. Re:Wrong ScriptIdiot! by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      no 2 is only valid if you have the profesional edition of 2k/xp and a floating licence server. But it becomes valid with any linux instalation with X and LTSP.

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
    2. Re:Wrong ScriptIdiot! by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

      He was talking about his Mom's Win98 system. (which he sneaks and runs a copy of Linux on, with a loopback filesystem)

      --
      ---
    3. Re:Wrong ScriptIdiot! by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      2. Windows servers can have multiple users logged in simultaneously, each with their own user interface. This capability is included in all Windows Server operating systems.

      That is an invalid generalization. Windows Server operating systems are a subset of all Windows operating systems. A characteristic of the subset does not apply to the superset, so your comment doesn't reinforce the claim that "Windows is multiuser". If it were possible to get simultaneously logins with all current versions of Windows, then that would be significant.

      (In reality, any OS can be considered multiuser if you install multiuser applications on it. Even MS-DOS had multiuser apps available.)

    4. Re:Wrong ScriptIdiot! by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      That is an invalid generalization.

      It's also incorrect. It's any NT-based version of Windows that is multiuser.

      Windows Server operating systems are a subset of all Windows operating systems. A characteristic of the subset does not apply to the superset, so your comment doesn't reinforce the claim that "Windows is multiuser".

      "Windows" these days typically refers to a version of Windows based on NT. It is clear in the context the article writer was referring to Windows NT and derivatives.

      If it were possible to get simultaneously logins with all current versions of Windows, then that would be significant.

      All versions of Windows NT are multiuser by the definition used in OS design and theory.

      In reality, any OS can be considered multiuser if you install multiuser applications on it.

      No. Multiuser OSes are OSes that can have processes running and separated into differennt user contexts. No version of DOS can do that.

      This has been the accepted definition of multiuser for *decades*, and every version of Windows NT meets it.

    5. Re:Wrong ScriptIdiot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Windows" these days typically refers to a version of Windows based on NT.

      Oh, and how would you refer to the versions that mortals refer to as "Windows"? Usually Windows 98, because 95 was bad, and ME was even worse. In some rare cases (people with too much money to spend on hardware) XP Home edition, unless running a pirated XP Pro.

  34. Ultimate Killer App by ksp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If someone feels like spending a lot of time in court, start writing an app for the following specs:

    0) Install spare HD and set BIOS to boot from CD, restart.
    1) Knoppix-based CD boots the server
    2) VMWare installation on CD boots the Windows OS from the HD on top of Linux.
    3) Various scripts portscan the VMWare-running server and scans the filesystem for info, creates a Linux installation on the empty disk and copies all services and shared files to this new installation. Creates Samba server to host login/password info if needed (PDC). Copies Exchange server, IIS, DNS etc. etc. Shutdown when finished.
    4) Swap the old intact primary HD with the brand new disk and restart, booting the new Linux clone. Test and apply any manual changes if needed.
    5) Sell these scripts as Linux Migration Kit.
    6) Get sued.

    --
    What is the sound of one hand clapping?
    cat /dev/null > /dev/audio
    1. Re:Ultimate Killer App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think rather than boot-and-scan with VMWare you should just run a bunch of perl scripts that interrogate the mounted NTFS partition and apply heuristics to guess how it is set up. People who are informed enough to set up their windows in odd ways will not be satisfied unless they custom config their linux also, so the most common windows configurations are all you need to handle.

  35. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by tomstdenis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah unfortunately this requires something Americans and most modern business-types don't have...

    It's called long term planning. Sure right this instant it may cost more to move to Linux from WinNT. However, what about when license renewal day comes around? What happens when WinNT is no longer supported [e.g. no patches for the day-to-day exploits?] etc, etc, etc...

    In the long run the average linux distro [say Gentoo] will cost a hell of a lot less.

    And hey, if it requires the users to learn a bit about computers is that really such a bad thing? I mean for the most part people can just use KDE and be happy for it. For other things they can learn the fun way, google for it.

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  36. Re:Easy steps by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

    ehmmm, keep it on D: or E: or one of the other drives?

    --

    People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
  37. My view by lazypenguingirl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have been using linux and BSD at home for many of my own projects for years. I always kept a windows partition for school-related things. Finally, one day, I realized how completely sick of windows I was and wanted to drop it altogether. Mind you, I had all my school work and research under windows because that's what my advisors, professors and collaborators used too. I didn't really have a problem dropping Windows. Later versions of Open Office treated my old Word files rather kindly, even Impress has been wonderful, and all my data was just fine being opened and saved in Calc. I installed Matlab for Linux instead of for Windows, and my projects of course had no problem being moved over. I try to send most of my files to people at .pdf, but even in the instances I've saved files for Windows or Mac (I interact with people who use both), it hasn't been a problem at all. In fact, the formatting problems I've seen sending them files is no different than I've seen with Windows users swapping files. So, now I'm as productive as ever at work, and not feeling like a whore every time I turn on my laptop! (And if anything, everyone is rather amazed when I go to a group meeting and I have no problem connecting my laptop to the projector, while for everyone else, doing so is a 15 minute showstopper requiring about 10 reboots of windows). I don't know what your particular needs are, but as for myself and some of my friends who switched, it wasn't as painful as anticipated.

    1. Re:My view by LordK3nn3th · · Score: 1

      I use windows for games, like many others. But when I finally got NWN working (quite smoothly, too!) and UT2003, I decided to shrink my windows partition by 1/2.

      Linux is really picking up speed, it seems. I'm converting two people right now, as well. I also converted my stepsister, who knows little about computers (well, she can probably install a CDROM but knows nothing about software-- she's 13 years old, and learned that stuff thanks to some classes at our high school). She likes linux better than Windows. She even claims a speed increase on Linux.

      --

      ---
      Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
    2. Re:My view by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I call bullshit on the projector comment.

      every laptop I have seen sends a signal out the VGA in the back by pushing function-Fx

      where the F key varies by model/brand

      granted this is on a small selection of dells/compaqs but still, I have never neaded to reboot of install anything.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:My view by lazypenguingirl · · Score: 1

      I'm not joking, I've seen this on many occasions, usually with WinXP despite it's ability to recognize anything short of a toaster plugged into it. I've seen this happen at research group meetings and while TAing for a class in which the last 10 days of class had term presentations. Several days out of those we had to swap laptops with other groups because another's wouldn't work, and in some cases, I'd even have to run to the next building to check out a departmental laptop for the presentations. This was after they tried the windows fix-all of rebooting repeatedly. No, I'm not BSing. Running in icy rain at 8am to get a spare laptop with the professor breathing fire about not getting started on time is something I wish my little lazy TA ass could BS about. I don't know exactly why it works smoothly for some laptops but not others, but it is something I've seen happen repeatedly.

  38. Webmin by LordK3nn3th · · Score: 2, Informative

    I see they mentioned Webmin. Goodies.

    I downloaded it with Mandrake's urpmi tool. It IS pretty nice.

    It lets you do everything from set up cron jobs easily, from looking at and closing running processes, to setting up apache and other servers. All through http or it seems with older versions some https thing, so you don't even need an SSH client, just a web browser. (Webmin also includes an SSH java client)

    --

    ---
    Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
    1. Re:Webmin by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      Right, Webmin is pretty much the end-all of administration tools, mainly because it isn't specifically taylored to one operating system. I am now using it on my newest production Slackware-based file server, and it has incredible utility, and even recognizes that it is running on Slack (with special care given to BSD-style init scripts).

      IMHO, the two greatest features (as if there were only two):
      1. It comes with a Java filemanager application. Although it's not much to look at, it is the only tool I've seen so far that allows for easy editing of extended attributes and also ACLs on my Samba shares. I'm planning on splitting up my administration duties with other folks, now I have a tool that doesn't require a login via VNC or X, or using the root account via SSH to 'setfacl' on files and folders.

      2. The ACLs for the Webmin modules. Talk about finely-grained security. I can give my lesser admins root-like power, but severly restrict it to only areas that they need. It's like the Webmin developers read my mind! For example, my under-admins will need to add and delete user accounts. This requires superuser privileges. Webmin allows me to hide a whole chunk of standard system accounts so that I never have to worry about someone inadvertently deleting them.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
  39. Misleading title by j.leidner · · Score: 4, Informative

    The title of this post is a bit misleading--the series doesn't really tell you how to upgrade your system landscape from NT to Linux at all, it's merely a Linux tutorial for Windows users. I can see no corporate aspects discussed.

  40. We need more of this! by ErichTheWebGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have used things like this in the past from companies like RedHat abd Mandrake to convince people that Linux is not "only for nerds" and "too hard". Now that IBM has this, it is perceived as having come from a third party, as IBM still is not thought of as a "Linux Company". This will likely help in my fight to get Linux on my corporate desktops. Go IBM!

    --
    bash: rtfm: command not found
  41. Re:Easy steps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but what about my pr0n collection and illegally downloaded MP3s?
    I would not want to go thru the trouble of downloading my 40GB of data again ;)

  42. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by Kneht · · Score: 5, Informative
    Let's see. As a former head of a department transitioning from NT to XP and as a current member of a much larger organization attempting the same transistion, I can assure you that NT to XP is no simple process.

    To start with, because the interface is so similar, plus "Hey it's just Windows!" comments from superiors means that few are taking the time to learn the intricate differences. (such as permissions and account handling)

    Then you get the broken programs.

    Then you get the boss who has [what he calls] critical data in an older version of Access that you must now move to [new] Access, which seems to be impossible in certain (read many) cases.

    Or, I can implement an IBM-driven Linux-based solution that would force superiors to treat it differently, plus I would have more control over whether or not to continue on the upgrade path to future versions. Microsoft doesn't give me that. To stay secure, even using their loose definition, means continually upgrading, breaking software, data, and perceptions all the while sending them more money.

    Oh, how I wanted to get out of that cycle at my last job. Now, I might be stuck implementing it, but at least I'm not responsible for the mess my superiors make trying to fall in line behind Microsoft.

    Kudos to IBM for making it reasonably easy to know what's in store for those trying to get away from Microsoft.

    --
    "Are you on some kind of medication?"
    "No"
    "Well, you should be."

    --Bean

  43. Step 4 by sstory · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "Step 4: Call up SCO and laugh and hang up. They got nothing."

    1. Re:Step 4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Step 5:
      -Clear your schedule for the next few months.
      -Wait by the mail box for your subpoena.
      -Laugh at SCO in person while in court. They still got nothing.

  44. Wrong. by NineNine · · Score: 3, Informative

    Windows is NOT a multi-user system.

    So then my machine at home, at which both myself and my girlfriend are logged in, both with completely different environments, both running programs at the same time, is NOT multi-user? Pray tell, what defines a multi-user system then, oh guru of all things computer?

    1. Re:Wrong. by Wyzard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A fully multi-user system would be one where both you and your girlfriend can be using the computer at the same time. Letting several users have sessions open is a step in the right direction, but it's not really multi-user if one of you has to stop what you're doing when the other wants to use the computer.

      That's not to say the technology isn't there, though. Terminal Services (and 2003's "remote desktop for administration") is properly multi-user. However, that's a separate feature which you have to buy a separate license for, and then manually turn on. With Linux systems, it's there out-of-the-box.

    2. Re:Wrong. by natmsincome.com · · Score: 1

      Windows 98 wasn't multi-user (neither was Mac OS 9) but Windows 2000 + and and OS X are. That being said what most people mean when they say windows isn't a multi-user system is:

      Windows is desinged to runs a few applications whereas Linux/Unix is designed to run lots of applications (it has to do with low level locking). That isn't to say windows can't run lots of applications it just doesn't work as well as it should. That's why in the Unix world you get a bigger machine and run more stuff on it where as in the windows world you buy a machine for each application.

      The other thing people are often talking about is that Windows doesn't do a verfy good job of seperating applications from the OS. If you're computer is the same as mine you'll have noticed that IE can crash the WHOLE copmuter. An operating system is supposed to stop that from happening but since IE is intergrated with the OS it can kill it. On linux everything is alot more seperated. So while X crashs sometimes which on a single user machine looks like the OS has crashed (and it may as well have) on a multi-user system X crashing only affects one user or one service (a big one sure) but it doesn't take down all 100 users or all 20 service.

      On a home computer with a couple of users it doesn't matter that much if a single user causes the machine to crash but it does when they're are 50+ users getting paid by the hour.

      So while Windows can have multiple users people often says that it isn't a multi-user system. This is similar to the argument that Linux is an enterprise OS because it can't run well on 64 CPUs. To a home user or a small company it makes no difference but as you scale up it becomes more obvious.

    3. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > A fully multi-user system would be one where both you and your girlfriend can be using the computer at the same time.

      What part of "So then my machine at home, at which both myself and my girlfriend are logged in, both with completely different environments, both running programs at the same time, is NOT multi-user?" did you not understand?..

    4. Re:Wrong. by Wyzard · · Score: 2, Informative
      What part of "So then my machine at home, at which both myself and my girlfriend are logged in, both with completely different environments, both running programs at the same time, is NOT multi-user?" did you not understand?

      The part where both people are using the computer at the same time. As opposed to having one person sitting at the computer, while the other person's programs keep running but are unable to interact with the human who started them. As I said, you can have multiple login sessions, but only one human can actually be using their session at a time.

    5. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who has the (mis-)fortune to use Citrix on a daily basis (we started with Terminal Services, and then upgraded to something that let us access our Unix systems as well), I can tell you that even those systems pale in comparison to what a standard Unix system can do. Not to mention all of the software which the vendors tell us "isn't supported" under Citrix. And don't even get me started about software that assumes it is running on a one-user system...

    6. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That's not to say the technology isn't there, though. Terminal Services (and 2003's "remote desktop for administration") is properly multi-user. However, that's a separate feature which you have to buy a separate license for, and then manually turn on. With Linux systems, it's there out-of-the-box.

      Windows XP and 2003 Server both come with Remote Desktop Sharing "out of the box".

    7. Re:Wrong. by joshuaobrien · · Score: 1

      As I said, you can have multiple login sessions, but only one human can actually be using their session at a time.

      My family runs Linux and MacOSX but we can all use remote desktop to run Windows programs on our Windows Server 2003 machine. We can all be mousing around on the server simultaneously. We usually don't even log out, so there are up to five desktops active at the same time. That means you can click on dialog boxes, start applications and whatever else you can normally do while another user is doing the same thing.

      only one human can actually be using their session at a time

      All five can use their sessions at the same time.
    8. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows 2003 can do it. 2000 server can too. But most people are still stuck with XP Pro or even Home.

    9. Re:Wrong. by Wyzard · · Score: 1

      However, XP's Remote Desktop is mutually exclusive with the console. If someone connects via RD, the console user is asked for confirmation and then taken to the Welcome screen, as if they'd selected "switch user". If someone then logs in at the console, the RD user is immediately disconnected.

      2003's Remote Desktop for Administration, on the other hand, does allow up to four (I think) simulataneous active sessions. To allow more than four people to use the server at a time, you have to buy a Terminal Services license.

    10. Re:Wrong. by Wyzard · · Score: 1

      That's a feature that's unique to 2003, a combination of XP's Remote Desktop and 2000's Terminal Services Administration Mode, called "Remote Desktop for Administration". It's another step in the right direction; the next step would be to do away with the separate licensing for more than four users.

  45. Cant Wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I Cant Wait!

  46. Re:roadmap?? by bj8rn · · Score: 4, Funny
    "Roadmaps" are for sheep anyway

    Yeah! Roadmaps are for sheep! Real Men pretend to know where they're going!

    --
    Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
  47. wrong business model by hak1du · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The current business model using Windows is:

    1. Do stuff
    2. Report plenty of bugs, RFEs to MS for free
    3. Pay annual licensing fees to MS
    3a. Hope that Microsoft won't screw you by making changes to their s/w that help their bottom line but hurt you
    4. Hope enough money is left over from your core business

    With OSS s/w, this becomes

    1. Do stuff
    2. Report plenty of bugs, RFEs to OSS project (occasionally fix/implement one) for free
    3. Make profit from your core business

    In both cases, you do free work for other people, but with OSS, all the free work is aggregated and you don't pay for it over and over again. With MS, you end up paying for the same piece of software and for the volunteer work of others and yourself not just once, but over and over again. Furthermore, with MS and other commercial s/w vendors, you constantly run the risk that they will screw you by discontinuing or changing products you depend on, and you have no recourse.

    The business case for OSS is easy to make: OSS greatly reduces risks and cost of ownership. OSS isn't without any costs, but it is cheaper on balance.

    Note that OSS is a business model and money saver for the actual end users, comapnies whose business is not the creation of the OSS itself, but something else. Founding a s/w company that creates OSS and makes money from it is, as you yourself observe, a long shot and only works rarely. And that's OK.

    1. Re:wrong business model by Endive4Ever · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With OSS the model is.

      1. Do stuff.
      2. Find problems and bugs.
      3. Hope somebody out there at random fixes it.
      4. Wait some more.
      5. Hopefully still make profit.

      The notion of treating your business computers like 'information appliances,' meanwhile, has vaporized. And that's what a lot of businesses are after. Companies don't hire mechanical engineers to build them special-purpose cogs for the copying machine that will make it produce copies 20% faster. They won't hire programmers, either.

      Commercial vendors are in a drive toward standaridzation, and working to turn computer software, and the support needed to administer it, into a commodity. The notion of returning to the 1980's method of hiring 'consultants' to engage in special code tweaks on their equipment is antiquated and it's exactly what businesses do NOT want any longer.

      Now, if IBM can hide all that activity beneath a 'shroud' called IBM, and certify their team of people to engage in said support activities, they'll get somewhere.

      Gonna work as a drone for IBM sometime in the near future? You're not gonna get the contract to work on IBM deployments as an independent contractor.

      --
      ---
    2. Re:wrong business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      1. Do stuff
      2. Report plenty of bugs, RFEs to MS for free
      3. Pay annual licensing fees to MS
      3a. Hope that Microsoft won't screw you by making changes to their s/w that help their bottom line but hurt you
      4. Hope enough money is left over from your core business


      Nope. It is:

      1. Do Stuff
      2. Report bugs, etc to MS for free
      3. Download patches to make OS more secure
      4. Pay for the peace of mind that when something is reported, it will be fixed ASAP.
      5. PROFIT

    3. Re:wrong business model by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Commercial vendors are in a drive toward
      > standaridzation, and working to turn computer
      > software, and the support needed to administer
      > it, into a commodity. The notion of returning to > the 1980's method of hiring 'consultants' to
      > engage in special code tweaks on their equipment
      > is antiquated

      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

      I'm sure the massive amount of money being made by Oracle's services division and IBM's and HP's and... Well, you get the picture.

      Consultants are NOT going anywhere anytime soon - especially not to India.

      Have a nice day.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    4. Re:wrong business model by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

      That sounded like nervous laughter.

      'First they laugh at you.....'

      --
      ---
    5. Re:wrong business model by pacman+on+prozac · · Score: 1

      Erm, as someone who has submitted a bug to Microsoft and Cert that is getting very close to the 45 day rule without any sign of an update of fix or even response beyond 1st line customer support I can tell you that #3,

      "3. Hope somebody out there at random fixes it."

      applies just as much to closed source as open.

    6. Re:wrong business model by hak1du · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With OSS the model is.

      1. Do stuff.
      2. Find problems and bugs.
      3. Hope somebody out there at random fixes it.
      4. Wait some more.
      5. Hopefully still make profit.


      You got points 3. and 4. wrong: if you need it, you don't wait, you fix it yourself and return the fixes.

      Commercial vendors are in a drive toward standaridzation, and working to turn computer software, and the support needed to administer it, into a commodity.

      Yes, and nothing about what I said contradicts that. If you outsource your support and administration, then the company you outsource it to becomes the participant in the OSS projects. That's actually the most common form of OSS usage, where companies like RedHat, SuSE, etc. get paid for easy-to-install (but still OSS) solutions, but they sponsor projects to fix specific bugs and add specific enhancements that many of their customers want. If anything, OSS works better in that kind of world than something like Microsoft.

      The notion of treating your business computers like 'information appliances,' meanwhile, has vaporized.

      No matter how you handle the low-level maintenance of your software, and no matter whether you go with commercial or OSS, for many businesses, that is suicide anyway. Business software encodes how businesses run; it basically is the business.
      You can treat it like an "information appliance" about as much as you can treat the CEO like an "information appliance".

    7. Re:wrong business model by EugeneK · · Score: 1

      In soviet india, first they laugh at YOU!

    8. Re:wrong business model by Endive4Ever · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The Soviets had a lot of interest in India, and in fact had good relations with the Indian government. It was never part of the Soviet empire, however.

      It was sweet what IBM did to India, though. I wish Microsoft would do the same to the EU.

      --
      ---
    9. Re:wrong business model by swillden · · Score: 1

      You're not gonna get the contract to work on IBM deployments as an independent contractor.

      Actually, IBM frequently hires contractors as subs on Global Services projects.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    10. Re:wrong business model by Zak3056 · · Score: 1

      Companies don't hire mechanical engineers to build them special-purpose cogs for the copying machine that will make it produce copies 20% faster. They won't hire programmers, either.

      I think that's a bad comparison. Almost every company that has more than a couple of dozen employees has at least one or two pieces of software that they've either developed in house, or contracted out.

      Case in point, the company I work for--and we're NOT a large company, having maybe 500 employees worldwide--has developed a custom CAD/design app for use by our engineers, and our customers. We DO hire programmers, and we use those programmers for more than maintaining the above app--including writing patches for and rebuilding open source applications when needed.

      Our German site (where the bulk of our employees are) doesn't have a single server running an MS product. Everything is SuSE (well, one server running RH8) except the desktops, and I believe there are plans in the works to move large numbers of those desktops to Linux over the next few years, now that our ERP vendor supports Linux clients and integrates with OpenOffice.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    11. Re:wrong business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is precisely the part about "risk" that OSS does not appear to diminish. Many companies are concerned that there is no "indemnification" with OSS. That is, no contract/license to protect the user from things like IP lawsuits, etc. Note: I did say "appears" because we all know how little the EULA protects the consumer.
      It is a very real concern to these companies.

  48. Not funny by pytsun · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Based on Linux and within two years, we'll see a product from IBM called OS/3. Then it won't sell, so they call it OS/3 Warp. That won't sell either, so they wrap it up and throw it away.

  49. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *takes a picture*

    Hey look it's a windows employee on /.

    *phone rings*

    yah hello? ...
    Oh, hey Satan, what's up? ...
    Blizzard in hell you say? Some diablo kid run amok again? ...
    Oh you mean literally, cool. ...
    Kill Bill you say? So swords and stuff like in the movie? ...
    No, I guess BBQing him like a freakin' marshmallow will work too. ...
    Well good luck with that.

    *hangs up*

    Well there you have it people, hell has frozen over and Bill will have to look out for scouts who has run out of marshmallows.

  50. Funny how times change. by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can still clearly remember the days when IBM was the enemy, up in their ivory white towers. ( 20 + years ago )

    All the 'little' people wanted them to be taken down to size, releasing the hardware to the people.. 'freedom'...

    Now we root for them as they may just save the OSS movement from the giant beast...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Funny how times change. by ctid · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Another way of looking at it is to say that times haven't changed at all. Back when IBM was the "enemy", they had an effective monopoly in minicomputers and mainframe computing. They would use this monopoly in HW to drive out competition from the market - their strategy was often to "pre-announce" new HW whenever a competitor was about to introduce a new machine. Eventually IBM were investigated for this behaviour, and this investigation let (indirectly maybe) to them making the specification of their new PC open. Anyone could introduce competing machines; anyone could create expansion cards. This has led to the very competitive market for PC hardware. Since that time, Microsoft has established an effective OS monopoly on the PC platform. And they have used their monopoly to drive out competition from the market. It's not Microsoft which is the enemy it is their monopoly.


      So nothing has really changed; monopolies are the enemies of everyone who is involved in a market. Nowadays of course, we have rather better tools with which to fight monopolists. Balanced against that, unfortunately, is an unwillingness for governments to fight monopolies effectively.

      --
      Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
    2. Re:Funny how times change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of these comments pops up now everytime IBM is mentioned.

      I have a question.

      Is it wrong to hope that 'our side' wins?

      So then, is it wrong to cheer for someone on 'our side'?

    3. Re:Funny how times change. by felipeal · · Score: 1

      I can still clearly remember the days when IBM was the enemy, up in their ivory white towers. ( 20 + years ago )

      Interesting, that's about the same time the Soviets were the enemy and Afghans the allies...

    4. Re:Funny how times change. by Strudelkugel · · Score: 1

      Eventually IBM were investigated for this behaviour, and this investigation let (indirectly maybe) to them making the specification of their new PC open

      From what I have read, and what some retired IBM people told me, the IBM PC was "open" because they didn't want to develop hardware for it. IBM was freaked out by the success of the competitors, and had to get a product out there. Even so, they didn't think they would sell very many of them. Turned out they sold as many in the first few months as they had projected to sell in a year.

      Once they realized the "error" of their ways, they came up with the proprietary MCA PCs. (Anyone remember those?)

      I suppose IBM is good thing for Linux so far... But I don't trust IBM at all. When they figure out how use Linux to get customer lock in, they will certainly do it. Not that they shouldn't; they are in business to make money. Who knows, it may be their undocumented grand dream to get sued for anti-trust again. Bet they settle faster, though.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
  51. Forget the cold cash by fm6 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It's the huge marketing, sales, and support organizations that make me feel tingly!

    But before you get too enthusiastic, remember that they're treating Linux strictly as a server OS. Go to their web site and try to find a single desktop, workstation, or laptop that does not come bundled with Windows. You don't even have the option of buying the system witout an OS!

    1. Re:Forget the cold cash by AstroDrabb · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But before you get too enthusiastic, remember that they're treating Linux strictly as a server OS.
      Does that really matter for _now_? Look at how MS got into the server business? They had a desktop product and used that to get into the server market. Linux can do the same thing, only in reverse. Get a strong hold on the server market and then leverage its way into the desktop market. A large server market for Linux means more money going into Linux development which will inderectly help Linux on the desktop.
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    2. Re:Forget the cold cash by AetherBurner · · Score: 2, Informative

      No kidding! I am looking at buying a new laptop and IBM is winning in terms of performance/cost. I asked a rep if I could get Linux on the box instead of M$ and I was told that it comes with M$ only. If Big Blue wants to go do this right...offer SUSE on the desktops/laptops. Heck, they just put $50M of investment in Novell. I guess that I will just get the laptop, run Knoppix and strip off the goodies (docs and stuff) then bless the hard drive with a proper load of "The Penguin". I guess their marketing department really does not have their act together.

    3. Re:Forget the cold cash by Nurseman · · Score: 3, Insightful
      A large server market for Linux means more money going into Linux development which will inderectly help Linux on the desktop.

      This is where I agree. Linux developers should be concentrating on the server market. This is where they have the most going for it now. Fast, Stable, Secure should be the motto. Desktops will come soon enough.

      --
      Save a Life. Donate Blood. Please.
    4. Re:Forget the cold cash by fm6 · · Score: 1
      And if were just a matter of getting Linux in front of people and convincing them that they should try it, there'd be some chance of that. But that's not what you need to challenge MS on the desktop. You need to deal with all the interoperability and retraining issues. That's why you see so few Macs in corporate offices, even though it's widely acknowledged that Macs are easier to use.

      Linux enthusiasts seem to have trouble grasping how conservative the desktop marketplace is. If simply presenting people with a reasonable alternative were all you needed to do, MS would have lost its dominance long ago. Linux is by no means the first challenger.

    5. Re:Forget the cold cash by fm6 · · Score: 1
      Heck, they just put $50M of investment in Novell.
      So what? IBM's wants Novell's (or rather SuSE's) Linux expertise, so they bought in. Doesn't mean they have to use every product that Novell sells.

      When I pointed out that IBM wasn't doing desktop Linux, I was just trying to caution people that their Linux push is not beginning of the TuxMillenum. It would be nice if IBM made a real push to challenge Microsoft on the desktop, but it's not like they have some kind of obligation.

      It does bother me that you can't buy an IBM personal system wihtout paying MS a license fee. I was under the impression that MS was no longer allowed to force vendors to do that.

    6. Re:Forget the cold cash by MsGeek · · Score: 1

      According to some IBM-ers I spoke to at SCALE last year all you need to do is wait a few more months and SuSE will be an option. Their roadmap does indeed include Linux on ThinkPads. At least that's what I heard anyway.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    7. Re:Forget the cold cash by fm6 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I get conflicting signals myself. My guess is that there are pro- and anti-Linux factions. Perhaps IBM'ss hassles with Red Hat were giving ammunition to the ALs, and the new deal with SuSE/Novell will make all the difference.

      Here's when you should get excited: when you see one those characters in the cute IBM commercials starts having nighmares about a nerd with glasses!

  52. Changing from Windows... by Badanov · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The article is about the roadmap once you've made the decision to migrate.

    It says nothing about getting customers to actually come to that conclusion.

    Not an easy thing to do, and I want to sell Linux solutions to small business.

    --
    Dawn of the Dead
  53. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1

    I call bullshit on this, Chumley. Permissions and account handling didn't change at all from NT to XP. So either you're lying or you confused the changes in the domain forest structure when you moved to AD from the NT domain auth model.

    I wish I could believe the latter was more likely, but I regret to say that I consider the former more probable. You see, you confuse an Office major vesion migration with an NT major version migration, and any sysadmin worth his or her salt would know that those are very different beasts. Thus, I conclude that you're making your story up.

  54. Which guns? by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The optimist in me is hoping that IBM will stick to its guns this time.
    Really, they never manned the guns in the first place. The IBM sales organization found it easier to sell Windows-based systems than ones based on Windows, and was never made to toe the line.

    Another reason OS/2 was doomed from the start: people don't like to buy technology from their competitors. That's why AT&T finally had to spin off its manufacturing arm, so it could sell stuff to competing phone companies. I don't know how hard IBM tried to get Compaq or Dell to bundle OS/2, but it would have been a hard sell.

    As for Linux, IBM hasn't yet manned all the guns there either. They're selling it strictly as a server OS. You hear noises about them moving to Linux as a standard desktop, but so far these are just noises -- every IBM laptop, desktop, and workstation still comes with Windows pre-loaded!

    1. Re:Which guns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The IBM sales organization found it easier to sell Windows-based systems than ones based on Windows, and was never made to toe the line."

      Windows-based vs based on Windows?

      WTF?

    2. Re:Which guns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > every IBM laptop, desktop, and workstation still comes with Windows pre-loaded!

      Oh yes, sure..
      What about (only for ThinkPads):
      2647-L1G, 2647-L7G, 2647-LCG, 2628-4LG, 2628-GLG, and so on?

      If I'm right, they come with a pre-load Linux.
      Maybe I'm wrong.. who knows..

  55. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by Kneht · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I call bullshit on this, Chumley. Permissions and account handling didn't change at all from NT to XP. So either you're lying or you confused the changes in the domain forest structure when you moved to AD from the NT domain auth model.

    Nice of you to put it so politely, but the permissions did change, subtly. Enough so that permission handling scripts are now broken for XP in my department. And my current level of permission is insufficient to fix it. And my superiors (?) can't figure out how because of this mistaken notion that XP has the exact same permissions that NT does.

    Anyway, nice of you to let me know that these dificulties are my imagination. This job is only a temporary one that I will be leaving soon.

    Oh, and by the way, it is my superiors that seem to confuse upgrading MS Office with that of the OS. "It's easier that way." they claim. Well, whatever.

    Thus, I conclude that you're making your story up.

    If only that were so . . .

    --
    "Are you on some kind of medication?"
    "No"
    "Well, you should be."

    --Bean

  56. Webmin = roadmap by zakezuke · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Step 3. Introduction to Webmin

    While it is important to know the nuts and bolts of administration, it is often more convenient to have a tool. Also, a higher-level application makes complex configurations easier to handle. Webmin provides point-and-click configuration for beginning and experienced administrators.


    It's important to know where the hell all those trivial configeration files are. Rather then waiting for "find" to find that damn file, you can use webmin's edit manualy feature, or hit module config. Very useful when you ask your self "where the hell did apache get moved to in redhat x.xx". Better yet, you can print off where the hell everything is at so you are not scratching your head if webmin failes and you don't remember the specific name of some specific file which might vary from distro to distro.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  57. Remember.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you need support for your IBM PS/2 microchannel, we still honor our unlimited support... just dial 1-800-GET-BENT

  58. Re:roadmap?? by StarfishOne · · Score: 0

    Somehow this posts reminds me of a certain ST:TNG episode: Picard> Engage! Unkown cadet that will probably not survive this season> What heading, Sir? Picard> - points towards space- That way! :D

  59. Interesting by HangingChad · · Score: 1
    How when a story like this runs the MBMers pop up and start blasting Linux for all the things that aren't right, that it doesn't do, blah, blah, blah.

    Sometimes it seems like a few them might have taken out a second mortgage to pay for their .NET classes and are trying to protect their investment.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  60. Can we truly call it an Upgrade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The title of the Slashdot post is "IBM's Linux Upgrade Roadmap." It moving to Linux truly an upgrade? In economic terms, maybe. Yes Linux is free (minus SCO issues). Technically speaking, Windows probably has a lot more features than Linux today. With that said, can we truly call it an upgrade?

    I'd personally (and anonymously) like to thank Slashdot for providing a link to this article. The dos/windows to Linux guide linked to in IBM's roadmap will help me out quite a bit. I'm a Windows/Novell professional and Linux beginner. I cant wait to learn more about Linux.

    1. Re:Can we truly call it an Upgrade? by petrus4 · · Score: 1
      >I'd personally (and anonymously) like to thank
      >Slashdot for providing a link to this article.
      >The dos/windows to Linux guide linked to in
      >IBM's roadmap will help me out quite a bit. I'm
      >a Windows/Novell professional and Linux
      >beginner. I cant wait to learn more about Linux.

      No problem. *grin* Welcome aboard, BTW. If you want more help, check out The LinuxDocumentation Project at some point as well, which has an enormous amount of good information about Linux. I would also thoroughly recommend the first Halloween document which has a comparitive analysis of Windows and Linux, written by a man who at the time worked for Microsoft, with commentary from the Open Source Initiative. This document contains a lot of information about Linux's strengths in comparison to Windows, and why Microsoft view it seriously as a competitive threat.

      Another very good source of information are Eric Raymond's The Cathedral and The Bazaar, which explains the open source philosophy.

      One other source of information which I've found very interesting is the GNU Philosophy pages. As you most probably know, GNU software is a major part of a Linux distribution, and these pages talk about the underlying philosophy of the GNU project. I hope this helps, and if you benefit from using Linux yourself, remember to tell some friends about it...We need to keep spreading the word.

  61. Oblig. Simpsons Reference by Karadryel · · Score: 1
    Linux tends to be rather Newtonian in nature. Once set in motion, it will tend to stay in motion until it is acted upon by an outside force, such as a hardware failure.

    Yes, but at Microsoft we obey the Second Law of Thermodynamics!

  62. don't take IBM seriously about Linux until ... by axxackall · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ... until they sell their computers with Linux AND with any decent office suite for Linux.

    I guess Sun is a bad competitor, so I understand why StarOffice is not in IBM plans. But what's happened to Lotus? When my company can buy IBM laptops, IBM workstations and IBM servers ALL runing Lotus clientor server applications?

    P.S. I heard about OOo. In fact I am using it on a daily basis. But the other fact that my boss hates the fact tha I am using it as he doesn't and we both hate to see our document screwed up after sharing with each other. Besides, you still have to substitute Outlook+Exchange with something that works THE SAME convinient way when it comes to calendaring and tasks.

    --

    Less is more !
  63. SuSe 9 by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

    When I installed SuSe 9, every bit of the configuration and installation was in a GUI and required zero compilation.

    SuSe 9 had drivers automatically installed for every bit of hardware on my machine except for the 3D accelerator feature, 2D was fine.

  64. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

    Most end users aren't in the IT business. To them, IT is a money-sink, and not something they're prepared to spend a lot of money 'investing' in. It's something they consider like the copying machines. They're not going to hire engineers to maintain and rebuild the copying machines. They're not going to hire engineers to write code for the network.

    And hey, if it requires the users to learn a bit about computers is that really such a bad thing?

    Yes. It's a bad thing. It's not what they are paying people to do.

    --
    ---
  65. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > I call bullshit on this, Chumley. Permissions and account handling didn't change at all from NT to XP.

    Incorrect. Do a Google search on NT vs Win2K permissions, choosing a Microsoft website for your info, and you'll see that there were significant changes.

  66. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by blair1q · · Score: 2, Funny

    Your mistake:

    Relying on the intricate parts of an operating system in the first place.

  67. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this is very on topic. If IBM is to be the linux leader they should at least offer a linux notebook. What better way to get people using linux than to sell preinstall handy portable machines. IBM is being a hypocrite for not doing this.

  68. Re:roadmap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Somehow this posts reminds me of a certain ST:TNG episode

    No, it doesn't.
  69. Re:Mmmm. Nine-Part-Series by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

    Good for them. they can keep paying high license fees, keep getting low quality products and whine when they get rooted and all their data "misappropriated".

    As for "write code for the network" that's a bit misleading. In about a week I can get a small office of computers setup with gentoo, configured with office tools, network printing, web server and cron jobs to automatically update the thing and email about troubles to the dude taking up the cto slack ;-)

    If a "HugeMegaCorp (tm)" decided to use Windows and wants to stick with it... good for them. As for the thousands upon thousands of small businesses the cost to move isn't as outrageous as MSFT would like people to think...

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  70. Notes on Linux!!!! by B5_geek · · Score: 1

    Can you comment on if/when those Notes packages will ever be made available to the public? (or even warez group)

    Notes is the only thing that keeps me dual-booting XP at work. (I have tried the wine route both with no luck )

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
  71. training and FUD clearing are the first step. by twitter · · Score: 0
    That article is about how to learn Linux, not how to convert your shop to Linux. A conversion guide would have more info about how to convert data, which is the real problem.

    Ah, but once you realize that LINUX IS NOT HARD, you might try it out and not be afraid. Once you try it out and learn to get around you realize how many tools there are and how all of the ISSUES WERE PURE BULLSHIT. It is impossible to detail each and every solution in nine points. Each vendor will find the solutions they are looking for on their own. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when and that time comes closer each time a M$ partner realizes how dishonest their parnter has been.

    The trickle has become a flood. The developers have long gone. Dell, HP, Intel and IBM have all openly thumbed their noses at M$. The monoploly power is really broken and the move is on because it makes such finacial sense to everyone but Microsoft. IBM will finish its internal conversion by 2005. With all the corporate support, VARs are comming and they will bring the majority of users with them.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:training and FUD clearing are the first step. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Moderators: Please note that "twitter" is a known fanatical psycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft bashing. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, twitter is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

      I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Mepis or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

      If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

      For example, in this recent post twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

      More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own.

      More? Bad spelling in astounding conspiracy theories, more offtopic FUD and uninformed "I'm right, look at me" rants, promptly proven wrong. Worse even, twitter wants to be RMS, apparently (that first one is a winner). I mean, really. You think?

      FUD, FUD, FUD, FUD, offtopic FUD, and more FUD. This guy is like the Monty Python SPAM skit, but with FUD and more FUD instead of canned meat. Amazed

    2. Re:training and FUD clearing are the first step. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I wonder if you really believe your own lies or you're just pushing your very exclusive kind of FUD.

      "The developers have long gone"? Do you base your "facts" on the baseless shit you read here, by any chance? Or are you just making believe?

      "parnter"? "monoploly"? "finacial"? "comming"? I suggest you at least try your hand at proper spelling and grammar. Surely it will be easier than "getting around" in Linux, which regardless of your evaluation that is is NOT HARD even though people like ESR (which I assume is one of your heroes, though you sound more like RMS) have made the case that it is indeed a nightmare for the average user. Why don't you post in those stories as well, twitter? Where the deficiencies of your OS are pointed out? Oh, because those are lies. PURE BULLSHIT, as you say. Of course.

  72. What Linux Does Best by Craig+Milo+Rogers · · Score: 2, Funny

    Section 7, Networking, includes the statement, "In fact, networking is one of the things that Linux does best." I expected Tigger to leap out of the page at me!

    --
    Craig Milo Rogers
  73. Re:Notes on Linux!!!! by tjwhaynes · · Score: 2, Informative
    Can you comment on if/when those Notes packages will ever be made available to the public? (or even warez group)

    The short answer is "No - I can't comment". Especially about that latter part - I like my job, thanks for asking. :-)

    I strongly doubt that the RPM packages I use will be made available to the public - but then again, the market can change and you never know what effect that will have. However, that doesn't mean that I can't tell you how to get Notes to run on a WINE install.

    First, get a nice recent version of WINE, at least as recent as December 2003. Before that, you need a small mountain of tweaks and patches to WINE to make Notes behave.

    Now you need to find a friend with a version of Notes installed on Windows. And you'd better have a license for the Notes Client (and fonts) as well or the boys in blue will be on their way. You want the entire Lotus directory which contains all the Notes.ini all the way down to the Data directory and it's contents. Grabbing the fonts off that machine and installing them in your distro for general availability is also a good start. Also grab all the Microsoft web fonts that were available on the MS website under a nice permissive license at one point (and which are now missing from their website - thanks Microsoft).

    Notes 5.x runs pretty much flawlessly. Notes 6.0 is a non-starter (don't ask me why, I've beaten the front of my monitor in trying it). Notes 6.51 runs pretty much perfectly - only save all attachments silently fails for some bizarre reason. Go figure. It's pretty stable - I run it for days on end without it dying on me.

    The magic part of any wine install is the config file. Or more specifically, knowing which DLLs to use from a standard Windows machine and which libraries (*.so) to use from the WINE RPMS. This is from a former Notes 5 install.

    # <wineconf>
    [DllOverrides]
    "oleaut32" = "builtin, native"
    "ole32" = "builtin, native"
    "commdlg" = "builtin, native"
    "comdlg32" = "builtin, native"
    "shell" = "builtin, native"
    "shell32" = "builtin, native"
    "shfolder" = "builtin, native"
    "shlwapi" = "builtin, native"
    "shdocvw" = "builtin, native"
    "advapi32" = "builtin, native"
    "msvcrt" = "native, builtin"
    "mciavi.drv" = "native, builtin"
    "mcianim.drv" = "native, builtin"
    "*notepad.exe" = "native, builtin"
    "C:\\windows\\regedit.exe" = "native, builtin"
    "*" = "builtin, native"

    I don't have my Notes6 setup on this system. I'll try and check out the differences tomorrow.

    If you are absolutely desperate to get this to run, you can email me. Now the question is: how many jokers are going to email me if I just type it in here? Probably hundreds. But my email address is public knowledge (dammit!). There is an IBM employee directory. I'm the only employee with this name. If you need help, drop me an email. I make no guarantees on any responses (I'm not in tech support...). And I work on the DB2 internals. I just use Lotus Notes. So I can't work miracles (and I don't have access to the Notes source code, so don't ask).

    Cheers,

    Toby Haynes

    --
    Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
  74. drivers...? by Dave_bsr · · Score: 1

    I've had bad nvidia drivers do that occasionally. Usually it is the NVIDIA drivers not handling what X gives it. W/O an NVIDIA card, my systems have been pretty much rock-solid. But with those stupid nvidia closed drivers...WHAM! dead systems every coule of weeks.

    It's funny, talking about uptime being bad at a couple of weeks. back in the Microsoft world, I never would even think of leaving my systems up that long, for fear of viruses and just assuming that something would break in the meantime....

    --


    Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
  75. SunRay anyone? by hughk · · Score: 1
    What about Sun's SunRay appliance platform. Not only can the appliance crash but you walk around taking your sessions with you.

    As for freezes, it depnds upon the server. A server restart under Xfree is easy (Ctrl-Alt Backspace) and I don't think you need to be so much of an expert to kill a process.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
  76. X under WIndows? by hughk · · Score: 1

    I can run multiuser on Windows anytime. I just install Cygwin, and ssh across to it. I ssh to it, point DISPLAY at my Linux box and fire up a window manager under Cygwin.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
    1. Re:X under WIndows? by Wyzard · · Score: 1

      Are you talking about running X apps on a Windows display, or running Windows apps on an X display? The former is taking advantage of the multiuser capability of Linux, not of Windows, but I've never heard of anyone doing the latter.

    2. Re:X under WIndows? by hughk · · Score: 1
      No, you can quite nicely run the X server under Linux (or even under Windows) and talk to multiple users logged in under Windows 2000. Of course, they need to be X clients or Cygwin command-line apps - but it does work.

      I'm no Windows fan, but my main issue is with the GUI not the kernel itself.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
  77. Wrong !! by Ed+Almos · · Score: 1

    'every IBM laptop, desktop, and workstation still comes with Windows pre-loaded!'

    Check your facts please. This message is being typed on an IBM Thinkpad which came with Red Hat 9 pre-loaded. I had a choice of Windows 2000, Windows XP, SuSE Linux and Red Hat Linux when I came to purchase.

    Ed Almos
    Budapest, Hungary

    --
    The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacitus, 56-120 A.D.
    1. Re:Wrong !! by fm6 · · Score: 1
      I did check my facts -- by going to the IBM US web site and examining the purchase options for various products.

      Did you buy direct from IBM or though a reseller? Nothing to prevent a reseller from substituting OSs. But you're still paying for the license fee for that copy of Windows you didn't want. Plus you have no hope of getting technical support for your configuration.

      I just looked at the web sites for IBM UK and IBM Hungary. Both seem to say that they only support Windows on Thinkpads. I notice that they don't sell over the web -- more emphasis on resellers in Europe?

  78. RoadMaps by DrYak · · Score: 1

    Normal conception of OpenSource :
    1: Do stuff.
    2: Give it away for free.
    3: Profite from service you offer to people using your free sutt.

    SCO's conception of OpenSource :
    1: Small company do stuff.
    2: Small company Give it away for free.
    3: SCO buys small company
    4: SCO plans to profit from suits, arging that open-source stole technology developped by SCO.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  79. IT Professional Info Plz by bolix · · Score: 1

    I'd much prefer info on migrating an NT infrastructure to IBM supported platforms. As yet, there is no offical IBM guide to ditching Active Directory or an NT Domain and a move to Samba or IBM DS.

    The myriad of Tivoli and e-Directory offerings are rather confusing. Worse again, sales support are often even more confused.

  80. Re:Notes on Linux!!!! by B5_geek · · Score: 1

    Well, thank-you.

    I was not implying any kind of `warez` help. (Our Corporation uses Notes v5 throughout our enterprise.) I am hoping to build and show-off a complete Linux-based solution so I can say: Look, we spent over $2,000,000.00 CDN to MS last year for licenses; this (new) solution is free.

    I can't tell you how gratefull I am for this detailed of a reply. Thanks.

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
  81. Easiest Migration Route by rastin · · Score: 1

    I'm still concider myself a Linux noobie which is great because that means that Linux still manages to amaze me. One of the collest tricks that I learned for migrating from windows is to repartition the drive so that you can pull off a dual boot.

    I've struggled with windows dual boot for years and after enduring enough pain settled on having 2 master hdds that boot with either choice of OS by me swapping the data cable over. The flip side is that I cannot close the chasis to my box and my wife says I am destroying the estheics of my office, humph.

    Well dual boot with linux using lilo absolutly rocks (grub is probably cool as well but as I said, I'm still a noob). I have my Win 98 box loaded with Mandrake 10 beta and the best part about it is that Linux automatically mounts my Windows partitions under mnt. Rather than copying files back and forth to keep my important docs I just left everything where it was. When I need something I just go and get it. This greatly simplifies zipping everything up and moving it to some obscure location, then looking for it later.

    Not only that but if I am still using windows and I find a package that I want for Linux I might as well just download it in windows. It will just be waiting there for me when I am next in Linux.

  82. IBM is in for less trouble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...upgrading from various incarnations of Windows (NT in particular)...

    I can't blame them. Do you know how much trouble it is to maintain a Windows NT server? Especially with Microsoft's tech support being no help. Their idea of a bugfix or an uninstall of a service pack, etc. is to format your hard disk and reload NT along with everything else on that hard disk. This can make for some long nights when you're troubleshooting an NT based system.

    I think that IBM made the right choice using Linux. It sure won't make Microsoft happy, but it will make for (hopefully) less headaches for admins and more uptime for customers, and greater profits all around.