Slashdot Mirror
IBM Desktop Linux Pledge, One Year Later
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?"
I can honestly say that a lot would have to be done with their own internal applications to bring them to Linux. Domino client won't run. Neither is a Sametime client available. Both were in heavy use in IBM Global Services, at least.
I don't understand the unwillingness to port these two desktop pieces (both being on Linux would be handy where I am now), but between that and the web apps, they have a lot of work ahead if they want to fulfill a Linux desktop.
There are alternatives - Wine as depicted in the article. Crossover Office supports the Domino client. Meanwhile, the extension for Gaim, works okay as a Sametime integrator. Still, none of those solutions would lend themselves to correcting the internal issues at IBM. They have control of the apps - porting them natively is logical.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
OMFG. The only thing they use is IE. That's the only thing their help desk is, uh, helpful with. I'm sure that's not where all their problems are coming from, but it speaks of an organization that isn't at all agile.
I love a lot of the things that IBM does and comes up with, but if your organization isn't flexible enough to work with more than one browser, you've got some serious problems.
Sounds like the Microsoft Lifetime Employment Program has deep roots at IBM.
--- Submission is feudal.
The Domino web interface is ungainly and not standard. Furthermore, it's not Section 508 compliant which means US Government sites using it are being converted to other technologies rapidly.
You wouldn't tolerate it on your own web site, I suspect, and users never have liked it.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
The average user doesn't want Linux. THey want the familiar Windows.
I work for IBM. Most of the people in my department who have a preference want Linux on our ThinkPads. Some of us dual boot anyway. I use cygwin on XP for now. Once there's a certified Linux C4EB, I'm switching.
the company's internal use of the open-source Windows operating system emulator did not translate into a ringing endorsement...
In other new, WINE is now an emulator dispite its name.
Have you even read the article?
Do you REALLY believe that a *corporate desktop* computer
needs to "easily install software" or "configure printers"?
I, for one, would cut off your fingers if i caught you installing
crap on one of my company's workstations.
Having seen more than one medium-sized company deploy desktops,
I'm positive that all computers are already configured to run
anything they need to run and print anywhere they need to print
*before* they are presented to the user.
No. The problem is (as you might have learned if you R the FA)
is at the application level. They are running into problem with
web-based applications that were geared towards Internet Explorer.
They are running applications on Wine (which they list as a
temporary workaround themselves).
So, you are right in that there are problems yet to be fixed,
but completely failed to put your finger on what it is that needs
fixing.
When I want to get WORK done, I boot XP.
:-) Others prefer the full Start Button, System Tray thing, good on em. If thats what you need to be productive, go for it.
:)
Depends what work you do, I guess.
I work for a living and use Linux all day, every day. I'm much more productive now than 3 years ago when I was forced to use Windows. (Unix sysadmin for 15 years)
I work in a very Windows oriented office, IIS based Intranet (ntlm auth reqd), Exchange, Windows shared directories etc, but there's NOTHING I cant do on my Linux box.
A GUI should be a personal choice. Personally I use a very minimal FluxBox, because it suits the way I work. (To me a GUI is a way to have lots of command line windows open at once
Oh, and when I want to get WORK done, I don't boot linux. It's alwaysi running. (Barring unfortunate UPS issues
The really sad thing is that ActiveX has only been around about 10 years. It's not like this used to be a good idea that fell out of fashion, but then it was too late because they were trapped in a legacy -- it was always dumb, from day 1. This story isn't about Linux, it's about how IBM fucked themselves by not thinking. It's about how they didn't fire some idiot in time to prevent long-lasting damage.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
that keep big technical corporations from moving. Its the 1000s of little apps written by engineers and departments to do very local, very special little tasks. It takes years to move all of these because the corporate big wigs will never recognize the problem and realize that they need to send 80% of the transition funding to the people that wrote the invisible 80%+ of the applications. If they were a non-technical company where every geek didn't have their own set of apps that needed porting, the transition would actually be easier.
Actually, children are so good at seeing through their parents' bullshit to the underlying behavior that at the same time they are most decidedly NOT learning to floss just because they are told that they should, they ARE internalizing this parenting "technique" to be passed on to their own progeny.
I know, I know, -1 Offtopic.
Palmisano's challenge to the corporation was to be technically capable to switch to all-Linux on the IBM corporate desktop, not to actually do it. That's a big difference.