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?"

Comments

IBM wrote a redbook on the topic

[Dancin_Santa]

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.

How Disappointing

[bigtallmofo]

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.

Re:How Disappointing

[Greyfox]

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.

Re:How Disappointing

[Sloppy]

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.

Re:How Disappointing

[fm6]

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.

having worked for IBM

[HBI]

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.

Re:having worked for IBM

[Amiga Trombone]

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.

IE!!!???

[sensate_mass]

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.

Re:It just won't work.

[tibike77]

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.

People don't fear change

[Kipsaysso]

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?

Re:It just won't work.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Here's the book, read it for yourself

[Dancin_Santa]

http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg246380.htm l

Re:what went wrong?

[Stevyn]

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.

Re:Notes...

[HBI]

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.

We want Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:We want Linux

[Amiga Trombone]

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.

Problems are normal

[Neo-Rio-101]

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.

Re:what went wrong?

[El Gordo Motoneta]

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.

Maybe 'cause they can't read Slashdot

[Pedrito]

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?

Open source community to the rescue

[PCM2]

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.

Internal standards

[tjwhaynes]

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

Re:more than insightful

[novakyu]

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.

Re:more than insightful

[AlanWay]

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 :)

Re:It just won't work.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:It just won't work.

[jdhutchins]

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.

Re:Tried to drink the blue koolaid…

[dedazo]

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.

Re:more than insightful

[Long-EZ]

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.

Re:more than insightful

[Zontar The Mindless]

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.

Re:It just won't work.

[Ogerman]

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.

Re:It just won't work.

[cofaboy]

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