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?"

53 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.

    1. Re:IBM wrote a redbook on the topic by arivanov · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And they will fail.

      There are two main sticking points: Lotus Notes and Web base tools that work only with IE.

      They have not dedicated any resources towards getting the first work natively and the goatse.cx called Wine is not a solution. It is a workaround until the solution is there. At least for an IBM application such as Lotus Notes. And with the investment into LN for an organization of their size switching away from LN (if there was anything to switch to) is not an option.

      They have not dedicated any resources towards making their tools work with multiple browsers.

      Why should they expect that it will just work then?

      To add to that especially as far as the LN is concerned they are being outright idiotic. The abcense of an LN client is what prevents the rollout in many large corps which are not entirely locked into MSFT. If they want to sell Linux they should actually bite the bullet and remove one of the main sticking points to selling it into a large enterprise instead of talking marketing bullshit.

      Basically, they should put their money where their mouth is.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  2. I know I know!! by rainman_bc · · Score: 3, Funny

    IBM Users have been complaining they cannot install those fabulous search toolbars they've come to enjoy on their windowz boxen!

    =D

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  3. 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.
    1. Re:How Disappointing by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not so much right hand not communicating with left hand. The Linux mandate came from the very top, and all hands are supposed to say, "Sir! Yes Sir!" But many hands (this metaphor is out of control, but you know what I mean) resisted, and either managment lacked the will to overcome resistance or (and this is my guess) couldn't face the necessary disruption that a total retooling would cause.

    2. Re:How Disappointing by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Informative
      I never saw any ActiveX components in the company. Mind you, I was a contractor and didn't have to access the assorted things that the regulars had to use. However, the internal development platform seems to be either Lotus Notes or Websphere/JSP. A couple of the more necessary apps were implemented in Java and ran just fine on Linux.

      Lotus Notes seems to be by far the biggest thorn in everyone's side. While it does run(ish) on Wine, most people who would be adopting Linux early prefer to handle their E-Mail themselves, and no one could ever convince IT to enable the imap servers on the Notes servers.

      The thing no one seems to understand about IBM is that they tend to work in 5 year cycles. All the platform planning that's going on now won't be deployed for 4 or 5 more years. That means that the Linux push, which is only a year or two old, still has some time to go before it reaches maturity. Getting a company of 200,000+ people to change course is not a quick process. I would not be surprised to see a huge deployment of Linux company-wide in about 3 years. They'll probably still be running Notes using Wine then, though.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    3. Re:How Disappointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, my personal experience in running Linux exclusively at IBM is different. I haven't had any issues running Firefox for well over a year for all of my internal intranet stuff (POs, boss reviews, web classes, web certification, training, etc.).

      The problem is that as far as I can tell, none (or very few) of the stand-alone apps I use* have been ported to Linux. I run Notes on Wine (which is fine -- it's slower but not enough to be a problem on my work machine, a 1.8 Ghz PC), but occasionally have to run one Java (ironic! should be easy to port, right?) IBM custom application that doesn't have a Linux client. So, I have to boot Windows to run this app, maybe once or twice a month for ten minutes.

      But the web has never been a problem for me. The closest thing is a news service we have from another company that complains about possible problems since I'm not using IE. It was especially ironic once, as I was reading an article posted on the front page of our intranet portal complaing about IE security, urging people to switch to Firefox, and I had to click on that stupid button for the "you're not using IE" warning to go away. The web page, however, has always renderd 100% ok though. I'm annoyed that IBM doesn't slap this vendor around for stupidity -- all the articles are presented in plain text anyways and render fine on non IE browsers.

      * Big company, I guess they haven't gotten to porting the specific stand alone apps *I* use, anyways, to Linux.

    4. Re:How Disappointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      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?

      Is developing? Nope.

      How about legacy apps and small internal projects that grew beyond their original scope? Some of it might be IE-only, but most of the intranet works fine with Firefox -- I use it every day. The only problems I have are with applets and that's because I don't want to install Sun's JVM. When I hit an applet, I just fire up IE. If I didn't have IE, I'd get Java working in Firefox.

      BTW: All of our webapps are required to be cross-browser compatible and fully accessible.

    5. Re:How Disappointing by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      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?
      Forget that, what does it say about their overall sanity? Linux isn't the only platform that ActiveX doesn't run on -- it hardly runs on anything at all. They could have been trying to upgrade to MacOS or BSD or (heh) AIX or anything, and they would have trouble. They could have tried to eat their own dog food on hardware, by say, switching to PPC 970 machines or something like that, and even if they got a MS Windows port to that hardware, the ActiveX crap would have given them grief. When you lock yourself into this kind of shit, you're saying No to all possible futures, where Linux is just one little face in the crowd.

      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.
    6. Re:How Disappointing by johnlcallaway · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Writing web pages for specific browsers is asking for problems. Writing simple web pages, and being able to not have to use all the javascript/ active-X/ embedded objects/ flash the marketing department wanted meant the pages loaded fast and always worked. (by flash I don't mean Macromedia, I man snazzle, pop, eye-candy.)

      Our site didn't have flashy menus that rolled down or snazzy Macromedia flash presentations, but they did what they were supposed to do cleanly, efficiently, and with far less user support and maintenance headaches than the fancy ones. All the glitz and glammer was limited to animated gifs and well selected colors schemes. I have seen web pages that were over 100K of text because of all the javascript and css included in them, pages that are more code than content.

      Javascript can be a great tool to help a user (calendar pop-ups, form field validation, etc.), but does one really need all the overhead for roll-over buttons and menus when a well designed navigation scheme would eliminate it? It's one thing to add a few lines of code to a drop-down box to auto-load the next page, it's another to do it at the expense of taking off the submit button (my personal pet peeve).

      My opinion is that using the fancy features is driven by lack of creativity or by marketing types that are focused on sales rather than usage. It's easy to use fancy menus to make navigation easy, it's a lot tougher to design a web site so that the fewest clicks get you to the most used pages. Flash on a movie trailer site?? Go ahead, you want gimmicks there. Flash on a data entry site, I don't think so.

      All the fancy gimmicks and such are cool the first time, but for the users that actually use a web site and come back often, they fade into the background about the third time and they just want to get work done.

      --
      I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
    7. Re:How Disappointing by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Linux isn't the only platform that ActiveX doesn't run on -- it hardly runs on anything at all.
      Except that "hardly anything" is 95% of the users!
      This story isn't about Linux, it's about how IBM fucked themselves by not thinking.
      Sure, they've done stupid shit in the past. Before Gerstner, upper management even refused to use email. But that's kind of beside the point. We're all stuck with an overdependence of Microsoft products. IBM, at least, is trying to make the change. And the difficulty of doing that is what we should focus on, not pointing fingers for past mistakes.
  4. having worked for IBM by HBI · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:having worked for IBM by Amiga+Trombone · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.


      When the original story was posted about a year ago I got into a long discussion with another IBMer about why this just wasn't gonna fly. Not only are there not suitable versions of all of IBM's internal applications available, if you work in Global Services at a customer site, chances are pretty good that the customer is going to be using application that you can't easily replace, either.

      Anyway, things have changed a little since the original initiative. For one, IBM no longer owns a desktop PC company, and has little incentive for pushing Intel-based Linux boxes on the desktop anymore.

      And considering that these days, a Macintosh has more IBM parts in it than most so-called "IBM compatibles", you can't help but wonder if that might be The Next Big Thing they choose to push. It's certainly a friendlier desktop, it's got MS Office (and IBM has a licensing arrangement for the Mac version as well as Windows) and a Notes client available for it, and if worse comes to worse, you can run your Windows software on Virtual PC (which they also have a licensing arrangement for). Considering IBM has nothing to gain by pushing Intel desktops anymore, you can only wonder what might be in the works behind the scenes.

  5. what went wrong? by alizard · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The Open Source development community hasn't solved the usability problems, particularly software and hardware installation.

    Yum and apt-get are largely superior software installation solutions to anything MS has, why isn't the last step in releasing a new software package to put it on the yum / apt-get / urpmi repositories?

    Why hasn't a method for using Windows installation information directly been found for scanners and printers?

    IMHO, this is in part because the community is still in denial that this problem exists.

    While Linux is a superior server solution, IBM's best desktop move would probably be remarketing the Mac-mini, which is a *nix environment on which even end users can install hardware and software NOW, not hopefully next year.

    1. Re:what went wrong? by Stevyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, the article talked about problems of trying to convert people used to IE and Lotus over to a platform that doesn't run that software well.

      What they should have done first is switch everyone over to firefox/mozilla and find an alternative to lotus that runs on windows and linux. Then after people are comfortable with that, try to switch to linux.

      I think a switch of this magnitude must be done slowly, or else tech support isn't going to know what to do or be able to handle the "where's my icon" problems for tens of thousands of people.

    2. Re:what went wrong? by El+Gordo+Motoneta · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

  6. IE!!!??? by sensate_mass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  7. 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.
  8. People don't fear change by Kipsaysso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People fear loss. What is stopping people from making the switch is the fear of losing the control of their computer that they have taken so very long to cultivate. Not to mention all the internal documents that probably have been created over the last few years using the .doc extention. Who wants to go through years of porting old files?

    --
    This is another way of starting a sig with this and ending it with that.
  9. Complex Problems...... by tdhillman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Complex problems have complex answers- more complex than IBM is going to answer quickly.

    Deployment of open source software is one thing, success at doing so is another. Even for IBM, the challenge is daunting. The number of individuals that just don't get the "why" of open source is simply overwhelming.

    There is too much hype surrounding Linux- we want the answer too fast. Windows dominates, and knocking it off its tower its no small task.

    Only when there is a more facile solution than Windows will the tower be toppled. But topple it will.

    --
    befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
  10. All is not lost! by Wayne247 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    IBM probably just miscalculated the complexity of such a project. Like the article states, a good portion of the problem is not "windows vs linux" itself, it'S that they've written quite a bunch of essential web based apps that run, possibly, as ActiveX components in IE.

    If such is the case, they might want to take a look at the Mozilla ActiveX project, which might help them fix their IE modules to work in Mozilla, while they rewrite it with something better than ActiveX (like, Java possibly).

    Replacing Windows with Linux was a very ambitious idea to begin with; hats off to IBM for having set themselves such a high goal, instead of just trailing with the crowd and keeping windows boxes forever.

    After all, isn't a big part of the reason why corporations keep windows is because it's just less painful than to actually *work* on a migration to anything else? Sure the windows problems are huge, but companies like to see short term. And in the short term, fixing windows is easier. IBM is seeing long-term.

    Let them the time to migrate what they didn't really think of when they called the project, and then we'll see.

  11. Re:It just won't work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They don't care whether it's Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, or whatever. They just want to get work done. If they OS enables them to do so, they'll take it.

    Therefore, it's just the GUI, and you can make it to as close to Explorer as you want.

  12. Here's the book, read it for yourself by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 5, Informative
  13. Re:Notes... by HBI · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  14. We want Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:We want Linux by Amiga+Trombone · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Once there's a certified Linux C4EB, I'm switching.

      The last time I checked, they'd taken the last version of Linux C4EB off of the web site, and left a message that it would be available again after being tweaked based on the feedback they'd received.

      That was a few months ago, and it still hadn't made a re-appearance as of about a week ago.

      I think this is turning out to be more of a challenge than they anticipated. But assuming they're dedicated to working through all the issues, it could be beneficial to desktop Linux in general.

  15. Problems are normal by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, they made a bold push to do this by the end of 2005... so they have 1 year left to beat their own goal.

    I'd say the problems they are experiencing are due course when migrating to a different platform. Sure, IE wrecked browser standards and many people had to play fiddle to Microsoft and write IE compatible pages. That's going to take a while to fix and there will be problems.
    Porting some of their other apps in going to be a long and painful process.

    I can't see any transition to another operating system being a smooth transition. For sure there WILL be DIFFICULT problems for them.

    This is just part and parcel of development, and not a reason to give up on Linux AT ALL.

    Good news is that Linux will be a better platform once their present-day trials are over, and they complete what they set out to do.

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
  16. Emulator by spac3manspiff · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  17. Maybe 'cause they can't read Slashdot by Pedrito · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here I am using Firefox to TRY to read the comments of other posters, but the comments bleed over into the sections list and comment separator bars are partway over the text above and below and I can't tell what people wrote.

    I would think that Slashdot, being such an open-source advocate, would at least make their page render properly with the most popular open source browser.

    But if Slashdot can't be bothered to do it to their page, which is their entire business, how can people expect IBM to do their web-based internal help support which isn't really a source of income for them?

  18. Open source community to the rescue by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ah, but a community is more than any one organization. Thus, while Slashdot itself may be unwilling to address this problem, other members of the community may already have solved it for you. Try the SlashFix extension for Firefox.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  19. Sametime by tjwhaynes · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

    There are several linux Sametime clients available, ranging from Java to the Gaim meanwhile plugin. So that is not a problem (I run a different internal client which I find is superior to the Windows client).

    The Windows Lotus Notes client runs fine on standard WINE (as in available from www.winehq.com) and internally packaged versions are available for employees. That is not a problem either - indeed I believe that the almost flawless execution of the windows client running on WINE has removed any immediate need to port the client to Linux natively.

    As I still work for IBM, I see active communities of employees moving to Linux. I don't believe that the original pledge said that everyone would instantaneously move to Linux - for the most part, its a quiet revolution for us developers. I can't speak for other parts of the company. I do know that DB2 UDB continues to spread to more and more Linux platforms (x86, x86_64, IA64, PPC, z/OS) and that is clearly an area where IBM is pushing hard for complete coverage. Both my key productivity machines are 100% linux and I do not have to use Windows unless I am debugging Windows problems.

    Cheers,
    Toby Haynes

    --
    Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
  20. 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.
  21. Re:more than insightful by novakyu · · Score: 5, Informative
    Case in point: I just wasted three days trying to make Debian work on a BRAND-NEW Dell. I gave up.

    Well, if you are trying to do something with a BRAND-NEW computer, about which you know nothing (most likely, you don't know by heart what video card it has, what ethernet card (if not integrated into motherboard, and in that case, the drivers for motherboard) or what sound card it has---and these are basic things), you are going to struggle. For me, the first-time formatting my computers was always a pain (and yes, I was installing "user-friendly" Windows), because I never knew what hardware I had until then...

    Actually, do you know what I do when I can't figure out what video card, etc. I have and I don't really want to open up the computer to look up the serial number? I boot up my computer with Knoppix---except for that one time when I was booting my roommate's computer with a gigabit ethernet card ("cutting edge" so to speak), it found all the hardwares correctly, and I just look at the system message (which, as it happens, is more informative than Windows system messages are) so that I can figure out what to do.

  22. Re:more than insightful by AlanWay · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I want to get WORK done, I boot XP.

    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 :-) Others prefer the full Start Button, System Tray thing, good on em. If thats what you need to be productive, go for it.

    Oh, and when I want to get WORK done, I don't boot linux. It's alwaysi running. (Barring unfortunate UPS issues :)

  23. Re:more than insightful by burySCO · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It took me 35m to put slackware on this machine and then about another hour to tweak it & get the applications I need on it that don't come with the distro. This was after struggling for 3 weeks putting Windows on /dev/hda1, and I never did get XP to work; finally settled with 98. I know Windows usually ain't that bad, it's just luck of the draw. But it can happen to any OS. Please don't assume that Linux sucks just from one bad experience.

  24. 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.

  25. Re:It just won't work. by jdhutchins · · Score: 4, Informative

    A troll, but I'll bite:
    You've either never used linux, used it a *long* time ago, or expected it to be exactly like your favorite windows machine so you wouldn't have to relearn anything.

    1.) Remove all file extensions- Most linux programs use file extensions, and with a graphical file manager, you can double-click files to get them to open with the "right" application.


    2.) Export registry into 40374 files and scatter them around hard drive for no reason.
    - They're not scattered around the file system, they're in /etc. The registry is a horrible idea- editing it is not simple, and if you screw it up, there goes your system. Files are easy to edit.

    3.) Remember to name those files random things, like trontabs- No one said you had to use the commands, if you don't like a cli, you can use gui programs to do the same time.

    4.) Use a program to then scrable those letters,
    4.1) Remember to make all folders in the root only 3 characters long with no thought to human organization what-so-ever
    - Root directories are well-organized, and what goes into them each is well-definied.

    5.) Downgrade to Windows 3.1 to get that box window feel (and jaggy-font feel)- Or use KDE or Gnome, which is probably the default on your distro.

    6.) Get rid of your printer driver and use the standard linux one. All your ~ are now @'s- Use the basic CUPS install interface, difficult to screw up.

    7.) Remember to type in lowercase- If you don't like the cli, don't use it.
    8.) Create batch commands JUST to copy a file!- Or use one of the many graphical file managers that exist.

    9.) Run only text games because your graphics card doesn't have a driver for Linux
    - Very few graphics cards don't work in linux. Not all games run in linux, but that's a completely different issue

    10.) Oops! You can't use the backspace key without editing a file in VI, which you dont know how to use anyway- If you don't know how to use VI, don't use it. There are plenty of graphical text editors that work like you think it will

    11.) Realize Windows is easier and get your XP cd from trash.- Or realize that linux is different form windows, and things are usually set up to help you get started on the right foot.

    It seems like you installed Linux because you wanted it to work exactly like Windows. Just becuase you were a Windows power user, doesn't mean you automatically know everything about linux. If you had used the graphical configuration tools, you wouldn't have had any of those problems, and you could eventually learn to use a command-line interface if you wanted to.

  26. Some truths... by agraupe · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This may seem like a troll, but it is truly not intended as such.

    First of all, I'm a Linux user and have been for some time. I run a Gentoo box, and am fairly comfortable with all system administration tasks. I have tried out many Linux distros, as well as the BSDs. I also have a full time Windows box (I use "second-generation" hardware for my linux box) for running games. I like Linux, and I use it as my main system. But even I, a vocal supporter of Linux, cannot overlook that there are some flaws. I know that when I attach a new piece of hardware, there will likely be some googling for a howto or drivers, or a kernel recompile. I know that a lot of programs that Windows users can take for granted (like Skype) can be a day's work to have working correctly on Linux. Now, I put up with it because it is free, stable, and has an excellent variety of software. I am sure that the more user-friendly distros, like suse and mandrake, or fedora, have many problems solved. In my mind, these distros are giving up some of what I like about Linux. I guess it all boils down to what level of control do you want, and what kind of user-friendliness do you need. Maybe I'm missing something, but no OS or distro has both on the desktop.

  27. Re:Tried to drink the blue koolaid… by dedazo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    We recently had one of our in-house developers set up a Linux workstation (Debian unstable) to test a PHP/MySQL application that was primarily developed for Windows. He was gung-ho at first, and then as the weeks passed and no updates to the bug tracker were made I went to talk to him. He was frustrated beyond belief. He couldn't get Apache to work quite right and he was having a lot of problems getting MySQL to behave, never mind the fact that he had to use a plain text editor to work. CVS (running locally in his box) was a mess.

    Instead of fixing things for him I showed him what the problems were to the best of my ability - I'm a 6-year Linux "power user" if you will but far from an expert, so the rest of the stuff we just Googled. Eventually he got to the point where he was coding, doing his daily check-in and builds and demoing the app, which is working pretty well now. His changes are then backported to the main Windows trunk to ensure everything works. We're thinking of also supporting BSD at this point.

    It just takes time. Even the most savvy PC users will have problems. I can't believe IBM would be that different, especially when trying to move their less technical folks to a brand new environment. Just give them time.

    --
    Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
  28. Re:more than insightful by Long-EZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    parent should have said more ... I like Linux, but, I don't USE it, I play with it.

    Not even close. I've been running my small business with Xandros Linux for over two years. I was more productive in year one than I ever was with previous versions of Windows. I just installed Xandros 3.0, and it just keeps getting better.

    The Linux learning curve and occasional issues are less hassle than maintaining Windows anti-virus software and still getting the occasional brand new virus. This happened to an IT friend at work (several hundred employees). Or maintaining anti-spyware software and still having all the jacking around to the registry result in an unstable system every 6-12 months, requiring a fresh installation of Windows and all applications. If your OS is secure, you don't need a bunch of crappy bandaid solutions layered on top.

    The fact is, there are excellent versions of Linux available right now that are beating Windows in stability, security AND usability, which is quite feat considering hardware and software is Windows compatible by definition. Make your life easier and check for Linux compatibiliy before buying new hardware. When I do that, it's usually easier and faster to install new hardware on Linux. No plug-n-pray, no reboot.

    Most PC users only want a browser, email, and maybe word processing and spreadsheet. Most are VERY happy with Mozilla and OpenOffice.

    The only issue I've had in using Linux in a very PC-intensive engineering business is QuickBooks. It runs well under CrossOver (Windows emulation), but the user interface is a bit ugly. A native Linux version or better CrossOver support for QuickBooks would be nice.

    About the only PC users who can't use Linux are serious gamers. I think they should be playing dedicated game consoles instead of Windows games, but they're free to do what they want. However, we'll all be a lot better off when people stop using Windows and we can finally get away from the nonstop Outlook worms and spam spewed from zombied Windows machines. Owned Windows boxes send over 80% of all spam.

    Xandros is based on Debian, but it's very easy to use. You should try it. I couldn't believe how much better it felt to use open source applications. Xandros Networks is an online repository of popular open source software, and most RPM and DEB packages can also be installed. No crappy licensing agreements, copy protection, registration hassles, EULAs, or product key codes. Pretty much, click the install button and a minute later you're running the new application. It's much easier than Windows software installation, and removing software is MUCH MUCH easier than Windows. The Xandros package manager tracks all library dependencies. Compare that with Windows, where uninstalling works right about 30% of the time, and usually leaves a lot of crap in the registry. Besides, how should I know if another application might be using a shared DLL? Can't Windows keep track of that?

    Bottom line: If you can't install one of the new GUI Linux desktop operating systems, you should give up on reading Slashdot and go back to something better suited to your skilzs.

    --
    >> My ultraviolent Linux switch video.
  29. Its not the corporate apps by RhettLivingston · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  30. Re:more than insightful by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I had my current desktop system built for me in November. Came with Windows XP, which I promptly got rid of in favour of Windows 2000 Pro. In spite of the fact that all the hardware is commodity stuff, and the integrator had thoughtfully supplied me with nearly all the necessary drivers for Win9x/NT/2K/XP, it took me about a full day to install Win2K from scratch, run Windows Update, install drivers, configure hardware, *reboot about 35 times*, install software, etc.

    This past weekend, I ditched Windows for SuSE 9.2. The installation itself, including time for running the SuSE Online Update to get their latest patches, was somewhere between 90 minutes and two hours. Number of reboots: *1*. (Yes, that's a "one".) At the end of this time I had a completely functional system, and all hardware had been autodetected and configured correctly. Number of drivers I had to load manually: *zero*. Number of trips to vendor websites to obtain drivers: *zero*. Number of apps I had to install separately before I could get any useful work done: *one* (BitKeeper). Number of apps that came with the distribution whose Windows equivalents either cost bucketloads or simply don't exist: *dozens*.

    In fact, it wasn't until a day or two later that I printed out something, then realised that I'd not ever installed the printer. It was just there and ready to use. On Windows, installing that same printer took about an hour of loading drivers and fussing with the configuration to get it working properly.

    I had/have exactly three issues:

    1. KsCD didn't produce audible output until I told it to use direct access mode.

    2. I had to change permissions on a bunch of email and other working files that I copied over from the Windows partition before Mozilla Mail and other apps could access them properly.

    3. BitKeeper's not sending commit emails to our developer list. I'll probably have to get a bit of help configuring it and/or sendmail.

    Executive summary:

    1. "Everything just worked" rating >= 99%.

    2. Anybody who says that Linux isn't ready for the desktop is misinformed, or a liar.

    BTW, I still have two Windows boxes on my LAN (at least one of them will be getting converted to Linux as soon as I have time for it). When something goes wrong with one of them, I drop in a Knoppix CD to find out what's wrong and fix it. And when I use one of them remotely, the interface already seems clunky and counterintuitive, in spite of the fact that my reflexes aren't yet properly trained for the Linux desktop.

    How much do I miss Windows? Well... I'll probably finish copying some miscellaneous files over from the the Windows partition and reformat it this weekend.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  31. Re:Dogfood, man. Dogfood. by Oswald · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "Do as I say, not as I do" works for parents...

    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.

  32. troll? by sum.zero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the article asserts that ibm is failing to live up to a strategic shift to linux. the shift is still under way. ibm is a large and complex operation. it will take a few years. no story there.

    the timeframe the article is using to suggest that they are late is misleading. sam p's challenge was exactly that, a challenge. not an order or threat. it was not the deadline.

    further, the issues plaguing ibm in escaping ie highlight the dangers in using non-open/non-standards compliant software quite nicely. ibm should learn from this.

    finally, the article is long on innuendo, but short on fact. that is telling in an article on a subject as technical as this one.

    call me a troll if you like, but i stand by my intuition.

    sum.zero

  33. Re:Dogfood, man. Dogfood. by Anthony+Liguori · · Score: 3, Informative

    Until IBM ports Lotus Notes to Linux and starts using it, anything they say about the Linux desktop should be absolutely ignored.

    It's called iNotes. It is officially supported under Linux too. Check out the spec page. Retargeting large pieces of software is not something that happens over night. This is the direction that Lotus is supposedly heading though.

    There are internal deployments of iNotes too. However, notes under wine works so well for me that I doubt I'd switch anytime soon...

  34. 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.

  35. Re:It just won't work. by cofaboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can't help it have to bite sorry folks.

    How many different desktop distributions would you use across an enterprise? Oh just the ONE, oh look that means all the apps that you need will just work!

    Retraining for the desktop is not that big an issue, a quick class with every body in that building section and hey presto one week later they'll have forgotten about that, sorry whats that other office suite called?

    Retraining costs = done once.
    License costs = forEVER

    --
    In the end, It's all bovine dung you know
  36. It was not a pledge... by rdean400 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  37. Re:Have been recently at IBM by ninthwave · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And at a conference every machine I saw had the Linux Client on it. Is that the difference between the technical departments and the Sales team?

    --
    I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
  38. Re:more than insightful by Mmm+coffee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    LINUX IS NOT GNU NUMBNUTS!!! ARE YOU MENTALLY FUCKING RETARDED? Linux was inspired by Minix and is a kernel. The programs you are referring to is the GNU Operating System (coreutils, m4, bash, binutils, gcc, etc.), a Free Software OS that cloned UNIX with many additional improvements. (Do you enjoy --long-flags? I hope you do, POSIX states that all commands should be only one letter ala -w. That's a GNU improvement.) This operating system predates the Linux kernel by just shy of ten years, and runs on top of a little kernel called Linux.

    Side note - GNU/Linux is far from a time waster. A couple of months back me and another guy had to fix up a few hundred images for a site we're working on. He's the hardcore Windows user who says that "Linux is faster because you don't run as much stuff as you do in Windows"... well duh. And he doesn't see why this is a good thing.

    Meanwhile, I'm a hardcore GNU nut who lives and dies at his commandline. We divided the images up in half and started getting to work, him figuring it would take several days to get it all done. Within two hours I had all the images cropped, and twenty minutes (and a short shell script invoking ImageMagick later) I had everything done. Mr. hardcore Windows point-n-click man had a little less than 75 done.

    Never mess with a geek who sits behind a halfway decent shell.

  39. Re:It just won't work. by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's not what I see at all. What I see 40,000 to 60,000 employees. I see politics. I see personal agendas. I see a lot of people that do not get along well, and a lot that do. I see a lot of people that do not want or welcome change, or are afraid of anything that makes their enivironment different, and then I see a lot of people that DO want change and are not afraid of it. Is any of this starting to sound familiar? Can you relate? When you have that many people involved, simply changing the brand of asswipe in the loo is going to make some people freeeek the f#ck out. With this many people involved, not much ever gets done efficiently or quickly.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  40. Re:It just won't work. by Taladar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Judging by my experiences with users as a sysadmin training when switching from one version of windows to another would be necessary as well. The people having to decide wether they do this just don't train the people because inefficient work is not a hard number while training costs are. Training for Linux would at least be necessary only once because you don't have to change to a new Windowmanager (differences between Windows versions are like two different window managers) every few years.

  41. Business inertia and expertise by blugeoned · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I deal with a number of areas within IBM as a customer of theirs. I see two things working against their moving platforms internally.

    First, I work in a Microsoft shop. IBM suplies a good deal of software to us (3270 emulator, Rational Robot, PC migration tools, etc.) and I expect IBM to support them and be experts in those areas. It would be difficult for them to provide the level of service we require while their people are trying to do their primary functions on a linux box. As an administrator, I have tried switching to a linux desktop to administer a Windows environment. With the help of Citrix, I was able to perform a great deal of my job function, but no where near all of it. I have no doubt that they are in the same boat.

    In a slightly related situation, I know a few of their subject experts who have taken years to get where they are. I am sure they would not like to see all of their hard work washed away and being returned to a novice status by having their support area replaced.

    Second, I see this as simple matter of time and money. Sure a mainframe support person could switch his desktop from Windows to Linux if all of his tools were available, but who has time for that? He has critical tickets to remediate. Something as trivial as switching desktops is probably not very high on his priority list. It does not matter that a high ranking offical stated that they would like to see him switch platforms. What manager wants to pay for the down-time it is going to take to make the cut-over and re-educate the user? As long as his job performance is based on other metrics, he is going to ignore the directive until it is convenient for him to follow it.