Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Desktop Linux Pledge, One Year Later

Posted by timothy on from the work-in-progress dept.

Blue writes "It's been more than a year since the bold announcement from IBM that they planned on dumping Windows for Linux throughout the company. InfoWorld is reporting that not all is well with IBM's desktop Linux push. What went wrong?"

6 of 589 comments (clear)

  1. IBM wrote a redbook on the topic by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The redbook is about 200 pages, but it talks mostly about the migration of desktops by discussing server administration techniques rather than focusing on enabling users to upgrade painlessly.

    Linux (nay, any OS) migration is tough work for the administrators *and* the users whom it affects.

    It's not a surprise that they weren't able to do it.

  2. How Disappointing by bigtallmofo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If IBM of all companies is developing their internal applications to require Internet-Explorer dependent technologies like ActiveX... What does this say about their commitment to Linux?

    Hopefully this is just a case of a huge company's left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. But still, this is very disappointing.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
  3. Re:It just won't work. by tibike77 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For a "FP attempt", the poster sure hit the right spot (by accident?)

    If you read the article, the main problem is that some frequently used internal IBM applications only run (so far) on IE. So the users end up using Wine or VMWare (heh, sounds like my apartment mate here).

    So, the problem it's not that it won't work at all, it's just that *somebody* lacked the foresight to migrate all day-to-day applications to that "customised Red Hat Linux distribution" IBM uses. And now, the problems finally hit the fan.

    --
    By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
  4. Internal standards by tjwhaynes · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If he wants open standards based computing, then he had better start mandating that all web applications are developed so that all relevant browsers can use them.

    Actually thats precisely what the internal standards do say. I find that waving them under the nose of the respective developer is quite instructive. And occassionally successful - several web apps which used to be IE only work seamlessly under Firefox/Mozilla these days. The number of web apps which are IE-only is shrinking fast.

    Cheers,
    Toby Haynes

    --
    Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
  5. Re:It just won't work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, the problem it's not that it won't work at all, it's just that *somebody* lacked the foresight to migrate all day-to-day applications to that "customised Red Hat Linux distribution" IBM uses.

    The problem started before then. It's that *somebody* lacked the foresight to procure software that didn't lock them into a particular vendor.

  6. Re:It just won't work. by Ogerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    sounds more like somebody took the most cost-effective option available that did the job at hand

    Designing with web standards is the cost effective option. Obviously they hired the wrong people to write their internal apps (or had nobody to give them proper guidance) and now they're paying the price. It is almost always more cost effective long-term to maximize your future options. Flexibility yields efficiency. In the case of web standards, it's cheaper even in the short term to develop with strict conformance because this methodology gives you a way to test the results. "It looks right in IE" works until something breaks or IE gets updated.

    And cut the crap about "zealots." If you don't know what you're talking about, don't even bother posting.