Business Considers Open Source on Par with Commercial Software

quad4b writes "At the International Conference on COTS-based Software Systems in Spain last week, representatives from organizations such at the Software Engineering Institute (remember the CMM), National Research Council of Canada and the European Software Institute discussed the inclusion of Open Source Software for the first time on the conference agenda. COTS software includes stuff like commercial operating systems, desktop software, and ERP systems among others. The conference examined best practices for integrating these pre-built components in systems development efforts. They conceded that open source software is essentially no different from commercially built software and that both types have their risks in terms of supportability and security. (what opponents of OSS say is its weakness) Interestingly enough, a senior representative of IBM was present and discussed with some of us, over lunch, how IBM is determined to move to an open desktop based on Linux and OpenOffice within about a year."

Comments

Repetition

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't IBM say that LAST year? Do they mean it this time?

Re:Repetition

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes mom i'll clean up my room tomorrow! Yes I'm going to begin my diet and stop smoking next year!

Re:Repetition

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you have experience migrating >300,000 users from one operating system to another? If you know of a faster way to do it, then by all means lets hear it. Otherwise, STFU.

Re:Repetition

[supremebob]

The point is that they don't even seem to by TRYING to do it right now. Hell, it has been years since IBM started supporting Linux on servers, and they STILL don't have a decent Lotus Notes client for Linux yet.

Re:Repetition

[Anonymous Coward]

"they STILL don't have a decent Lotus Notes client yet."

there, I fixed up your sentence for ya!

Re:Repetition

[Anonymous Coward]

FWIW, Notes runs perfectly under Wine. It's fast and stable. The only drawback is that it uses DOS letters instead of standard unix paths.

Re:Repetition

[Pxtl]

Heheh, they still don't have a decent Notes client for Windows either.

Re:Repetition

[Anonymous Coward]

"they STILL don't have a decent Lotus Notes client yet."

...they don't have a decent Lotus Notes client yet.

There you go.

Yours, Grammar Nazi

Re:Repetition

[codemachine]

There aint yet no good Lotus Notes client.

Same risks?

[null etc.]

Oh my, I guess Bill Gates will have to find another message to preach besides "OSS is unsafe, unsupported, and costs more than Microsoft products."

Re:Same risks?

[KillerDeathRobot]

Why? The truthfulness of those statements hasn't changed, nor has the fact that repeating something enough times will make some people believe you.

Re:Same risks?

[takeya]

not if it's bill gates repeating it so many times. then people just end up hating you more.

Re:Same risks?

[Stephen Samuel]

Oh my, I guess Bill Gates will have to find another message to preach besides "OSS is unsafe, unsupported, and costs more than Microsoft products."

Oh, he's already got messages besides that one. The fact that most of them are untrue, misleading and/or misdirection won't stop him from using those cliches. Nor will it stop him from using this piece of FUD.

That's funny...

[Chordonblue]

I thought I'd read that IBM wasn't interested in OpenOffice - at least for their own use and that they were going down a different path. Go figure. I guess it shows how OOo has really matured lately - 2.0 is indeed really looking good.

At any rate, it's always been my opinion that OSS programs can only get better when people are forced to USE them. When we see IBM forcing their employees to go down that road, I have no doubt that we will see some positive improvements in the way these programs operate.

Years ago, Atari sold a line of personal computers and tried to promote them for business use by porting programs like Visicalc. Later it leaked out that all of Atari's corporate machines were PC's. No doubt this was true. There is a saying for this, it's called, 'Eating your own dog food'.

Re:That's funny...

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenOffice is Sun's dog food, not IBM's.

Re:That's funny...

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenOffice WAS Sun's dog food. Now it's OpenOffice.org's dog food.

Re:That's funny...

[conteXXt]

I wish they would throw SmartSuite (or whatever it's called these days) into the mix.

That would impress me (well that and a native linux Notes client). Me and a quite a few businesses.

Re:That's funny...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're misreading the difference between "selling" and "using." IBM plans to sell a linux/open office desktop for businesses to use. That doesn't mean they'll use it internally--in fact, I think history weighs strongly against that,

I recall when IBM finally site-licensed MS Office--this was in 2002. Before that, it was all SmartSuite. We finally dropped it because people were finally enlightened by 2 things:
1.) nobody new in the company had ever used SmartSuite--everyone knew Microsoft. There's a benefit to not making every single person who joins your organization learn a new office suite, and
2.) All IBM's customers used MS Office. So, if you create a document in Lotus WordPro, and then sent it to anyone external, the response would be "er, that's great and all IBM, but how's about sending me a document I can open?"

Basically, even IBM gave up on SmartSuite, not because it was ipso facto worse, but because it was non-standard in the marketplace. So I find it hard to believe they'll go back (of course, I no longer work there...)

Re:That's funny...

[mofochickamo]

There is a saying for this, it's called, 'Eating your own dog food'.

My company is trying to get everyone to switch from saying 'Eating your own dog food.' to 'Drinking your own champange.'

Those yellow bellies in marketing probably spent sleepless nights thinking about how customers would find out we internally compare our software to dog food. Pussies.

Re:That's funny...

[Scott7477]

Why wouldn't IBM open source its already existing office suite known as SmartSuite? I would hope that IBM employees have been using this product inhouse up until this point. My impression was that Smartsuite was a decent product that just got outmaneuvered by Microsoft.

Re:That's funny...

[LWATCDR]

"Years ago, Atari sold a line of personal computers and tried to promote them for business use by porting programs like Visicalc. "

Very unlikly. Visicalc was before the ST line so you would be talking about the Atari 400/800 line. Not really business machines. By the time the STs came out Lotus 123 was the big deal. Frankly the STs Apple Mac, and the Commodore Amiga where much better machines than the PCs of the time. Just goes to show the sad truth. Better does not always win.

Re:That's funny...

[sgtrock]

Well, a nice, simple Google search will fill in the details for ya.

Do accounting firms recognize Compierre?

[winkydink]

Some countries require that one's acounting system (subset of ERP) to be certified. Has Compierre met this requirement anywhere to date? Do the Big 4 in the US recognize that it has the proper controls?

IBM Open desktop still alive?

[damm0]

This was a rumour started by an internal memo that had no followup. Is IBM really going to push this all the way?

The lines are blurrier, now

[SunFan]

With IBM-backed Linux, OpenSolaris on the way, decent open source J2EE along side commercial J2EE, etc. the lines between suitable commercial software and open source software are somewhat blurry. The bar where someone has to start paying for their software is much higher, now, than it ever used to be, that much is certain.

What are these institutes?

[October_30th]

Software Engineering Institute (remember the CMM), National Research Council of Canada and the European Software Institute

Uh... so, at least for us who are not in the software business but are interested in OSS anyway, it would be nice to know how much influence these institutes actually wield. Are they really "the business" as the subject let's us to believe or something else?

Re:What are these institutes?

[SunFan]

Are they really "the business" as the subject let's us to believe or something else?

At least for the Software Engineering Institute, they are clearly "the business." IIRC, even the government has CMM requirements for some contracts. Management salivates over the SEI daily in many companies, at least until they finally understand the CMM provides no process at all but only recommendations.

Re:What are these institutes?

[djmurdoch]

The National Research Council of Canada is a federal government department, very influential in their own minds (but maybe not in anyone else's).

Can't tell you anything about the others.

Re:What are these institutes?

[Mad Hughagi]

National Research Council of Canada:

NRC is composed of over 20 institutes and national programs, spanning a wide variety of disciplines and offering a broad array of services. We are located in every province in Canada and play a major role in stimulating community-based innovation.

NRC institutes and programs are organized into three (3) key areas:

* Physical Sciences and Engineering
* Life Sciences and Information Technology
* Technology and Industry Support

Re:What are these institutes?

[REggert]

FYI, the Software Engineering Institute is Carnegie Mellon University's Department-of-Defense-sponsored research center whose "core purpose is to help others make measured improvements in their software engineering capabilities and to develop the right software, delivered defect free, on time and on cost, every time."

Re:What are these institutes?

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah but we're damn efficient with that $128.95. Maybe we'll find a cure for Americianitus and do the world a favour(note the correct spelling). So STFU and go have another cheeseburger.

Re:What are these institutes?

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Management salivates over the SEI daily in many companies, at least until they finally understand the CMM provides no process at all but only recommendations.

In most cases, management is forced to be "SEI CMM Level II/III/... compliant" by some customer who wants that.

CMM -- as it should be -- doesn't dictate process. It does say that there is a documented process and how it should behave. This allows each project or group to choose how to be compliant. That takes work.

As management often is looking to tick off a check box, they will do just enough to hit the high points outlined in CMM. That's good, though, since it's usually an improvement over the old methods.

That said, there are a multitude of abuses that occur under the name of SEI CMM so it tends to get a bad rep by association. The ideas, though, are simple and correct in most situations where software will be used over years or decades. It's overkill for small groups that require quick turn-around and where the code is not intended to last forever -- in most cases.

SEI CMM is a tool. Ignore it or use it as is appropriate. Not knowing it at all is a problem in itself.

Re:What are these institutes?

[Fr05t]

There are a couple posts here about NRC Canada. What kind of influence you say? I'd say a hell of a lot since they give out loads of grants and loans every year. Much of the work I do for my employeer is funded via tax grants.

What I would like to see is OSS specific tax breaks for companies.

Re:What are these institutes?

[Skye16]

From what I've been able to ascertain, at least through our company, we had to be at least CMMI Level 3 certified before we (continued) to gain new government contracts.

What is this?

[Otter]

OK, I read the CMU COTS site, and their overview and still have no idea what the term means. (Some consolation is that the submitter himself, who seems to have attended the conference, doesn't seem to understand it either, judging from the assertion that there is "COTS software", not just software that can be implemented in a COTS approach.)

Two things, though:

1) This is hardly a declaration that "Business Considers..."

2) There is a complete confusion of licensing ("open-source") with development practice ("commercially built").

Re:What is this?

[flacco]

let the wild-ass guesses begin!

COTS: commercial off-the-shelf?

Re:What is this?

[djmurdoch]

Try Googling:

COTS = Commercial Off-The-Shelf

I think CMM = Capability Maturity Model, but I still have no idea what it means.

ERP = (probably) Enterprise Resource Planning

OSS = Open Source Software (but you probably knew that...)

Re:What is this?

[Otter]

Yup, a few levels down I ran into a definition. I guess the submitter was correct in referring to "COTS software" (I'll let the redundancy police worry about the S in COTS), but his explanation still doesn't inspire much confidence.

Re:What is this?

[SunFan]

COTS is the term people use when they say they are saving money by spending millions of dollars on commercial software and spending more millions customizing it for their business.

Re:What is this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously, I Googled -- do you think I linked to the CMU site through ESP? (Extra Sensory Perception, if you're wondering.) The links that came up, at least with my Google settings, didn't provide a definition. Thanks, though, and yeah, I'm sure they mean Enterprise Resource Planning.

Re:What is this?

[sconeu]

CMM is in fact the Capability Maturity Model, from the SEI.
Here's more info.

There are 5 levels. It's damn near impossible to get a level 5. IBM Federal Systems (later Loral) was certified Level 5. They did shuttle avionics. When I worked for a major defense contractor, it was a huge success when we were certified Level 3.

Re:What is this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Commercial Off The Shelf software.

What redundant S?

Re:What is this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, you're right. That's why I leave the redundancy policing to others.

Re:What is this?

[JeffTL]

Well, when most business or academic administration types talk about open source, what they mean is "OpenOffice and/or Apache running on GNU/Linux systems." So in some publications, if you see "open source," read "Linux."

Re:What is this?

[TheUncleBob]

COTS = Commercial Off The Shelf

eg COTS Software = Commercial Off The Shelf Software

Re:What is this?

[quad4b]

COTS is software that is general purpose, packaged by a third party and generally offered for sale. Windows XP is COTS, SAP is COTS, Siebel is COTS, MS Word is COTS. What's there not to understand?

Perhaps you are confusing this with a system that can be made up of COTS, OSS and custom software.

In terms of "Business Considers" I know a bank that uses OSS (not just Linux but Perl, JUnit and other Java stuff) for building production systems. There are many other examples.

Re:What is this?

[irritating environme]

I was in a CMM L3 center in Minneapolis. They got certified at L3 at first review, an impressive accomplishment. My project was the case review for the cert.

Notably, I wrote a lot of code on that project, maybe 25% overall, including much of the hard stuff, and my stuff was pointedly hidden from the reviewers, because I was bypassing paperwork in order to meet our strict deadline. But I eventually backfilled the most important stuff, and I would say that the certification was accurate.

I have to say that any project that wants to work at CMM3 or higher had better have deep pockets. As they say, faster, cheaper, better, pick two (expect one). All of the personnel overhead to do process doubles your headcount, and slows the development time.

CMM's main purpose is to measure the reliablility of the software produced by organizations, so I guess it implicitly selects faster better and chucks cheaper.

Re:What is this?

[qwijibo]

I thought the point of CMM was to chuck cheaper, sacrafice faster, and replace "better" with "reproducible". The part that it does do well is demonstrate that all problems are the customers fault for not providing coherent specifications.

Re:What is this?

[LourensV]

2) There is a complete confusion of licensing ("open-source") with development practice ("commercially built").

Yes, but every time RMS says that we should talk about proprietary versus free software rather than open source versus commercial, he gets laughed off the stage as a communist hippy zealot...

Re:What is this?

[Anonymous Coward]

"COTS is the term people use when they say they are saving money by spending millions of dollars on commercial software and spending more millions customizing it for their business."

• COTS

Are also what you wind up sleeping on while you go through the previously mentioned process. Sometimes they become permanent office furniture!

IBM switching exclusivly to Linux and open office?

[Prophetic_Truth]

I thought IBM was having trouble doing that?

Ouch

[Anonymous Coward]

Software Engineering Institute (remember the CMM)

Ouch

If there's one thing everyone at SEI is tired of if the CMM thing.

If you've ever met someone from SEI you've probably blurted out "Oh, the CMM people", and got a response "We do more than CMM!". I know I've done it, and got the impression that they're sick and tired of it

Just something to keep in mind if you meet one of them. Of course, I still don't know what else they've done :)

Re:Ouch

[REggert]

The same applies to CMU in general. It seems that people think that every person who graduated from CMU spent their entire time as a student hanging out at the SEI building learning about CMM.

Haleluja ...

[Savage-Rabbit]

how IBM is determined to move to an open desktop based on Linux and OpenOffice within about a year.

It's about time IBM took another whack at you know who .....

Now let's hope this gets upgraded from the lowly status of a mere rumor to the lofty status of a fact and results in a flood of out-of-the-box fully Linux capable of Laptops. :-D

Re:Haleluja ...

[SunFan]

With Sun, IBM, Novell, Linspire, Xandros, and others catering from ol' granny to Fortune 100, Linux + OpenOffice.org is a good thing. Microsoft is probably in a delusional fantasy about MS Office, right now. Poor guys...not!

Re:Haleluja ...

[4of12]

how IBM is determined to move to an open desktop based on Linux and OpenOffice within about a year.

IIRC, initiatives like this are occurring at other businesses, like Sun and Novell.

I'd be curious to know how things are going. While things are constantly getting better and better, my memory was that interoperability for Microsoft indoctrinated office workers was enough of hurdle that roll-outs tended to be mostly voluntary, mostly within the ranks of technical staff like programmers, or for dedicated applications (eg, phone banks) where the underlying OS makes little difference.

I'd be interested to see when managers and secretaries can start using Linux with a minimal acceptable transition, i.e., comparable in magnitude to the transitions inherent in Windows OS and Office upgrades.

Re:Haleluja ...

[DiniZuli]

Oh yeah! Give me that CELL based Linux desktop right away! I sure hope that is what they will launch :) - next year :(

High Security Computing & China

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope that the conclusions of this conference in Europe are not published for the entire world to see. High security computing is vital to the West, for that type of computing dominates in Western militaries. We definitely would not want to see China (which includes Taiwan province and Hong Kong) accessing such technology.

Not surprising at all

[scenestar]

Ill assume that with "os" they mean free.

It isnt very surprising that a lot of companies are switching from expensive propietary software to freely distributable OS software.

A good example why, are companies that use photoshop for some basic image editing. They are paying huge license fees for software that isn't even used for its full potental.

For them it doesnt matter that GIMP has "less" features, since most of them aren't needed.

Re:Not surprising at all

[Thud457]

Yeah, but I don't think "Fark GIMP competition" has quite the same cachet!

Re:Not surprising at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, that's not a good example of companies switching from "expensive properietary software" to OSS. For one, Photoshop is not expensive. What is it, $650 per user? That's less than a week's salary for the software's user and the investment will last for at least a year if you aren't committed to the upgrade treadmill.

I also don't buy the argument that companies are buying licenses for everyone who asks for one; people in the art or marketing departments are probably the only ones. I wouldn't want my secretaries or other low-level personnel playing with image editing software, the cost of such activity being much greater than the cost of a few PS licenses; would you?

Makes sense with ERP

[Anonymous Coward]

Most companies will pay multiples more in support than they ever do licensing run-time and source code. In some cases the out-of-the-box functionality is even less important than the support role since most ERP implementations are customized at some level. In many ERP cases, you are buying into a support relationship to run a critical aspect of your business. The actual software/platform is secondary.

IBM?

[kaleco]

IBM moving to open source desktops within a year?

Obviously they're just angling for a discount from Microsoft ;)

Re:IBM?

[Donny Smith]

>Obviously they're just angling for a discount from Microsoft ;)

No, from Sun - for the new Star Office 8! ;-)

EDMS.

[Anonymous Coward]

So were are all the good open source EDMS?

Business Considers Open Source on Par...

[Robber Baron]

What...you mean most open source software is also a buggy resource hog and doesn't live up to the author's exagerated claims?

Re:Business Considers Open Source on Par...

[Ziviyr]

What...you mean most open source software is also a buggy resource hog and doesn't live up to the author's exagerated claims?

And it costs too much! X-P

IBM is a good barometer

[192939495969798999]

IBM has historically been a good barometer for change. Generally, if a company as big as IBM is going for it, a lot of other people will go for it. They adopted MS-DOS for the PC, and look what happened with that!

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[Anita Coney]

And IBM's PC division chose Windows 95 over OS/2 Warp.

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, IBM is a good barometer for change.
They adopted OS/2 and everyone went Windows.

Just make sure you read the barometer properly.

Like in the old Hogan's Heroes episode...

Klink - "Why did you ask me which wire to cut when you didn't take my advice?"
Hogan - "I didn't know which wire was right, but I knew you'd pick the wrong one."

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[MarkRose]

Apple is a far better company to watch for change. They were the first to manufacture a useful PC (the Apple II). They were the first to manufacture a PC with a GUI (the Mac). They were the first to make PCs with a network connection by default (the Mac). They were the first PC company to move to RISC CPUs (the PowerPC). They were the first to remove the floppy. They were the first PC company to ship and OSS-based OS on all their machines.

While IBM may have more clout in the business world, it's Apple that sets trends. Watch what Apple does.

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[Anonymous Coward]

While IBM may have more clout in the business world, it's Apple that sets trends. Watch what Apple does.

How long untill Apple's 2% market share trend catches on?

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[darkstar101]

Actually, the first company to ship a computer with a GUI was Commodore with the Amiga. It was also the first PC with true multitasking, and the first PC with dedicated hardware processors for audio and video. The Mac came shortly after, and magazines at the time rated the Amiga higher then the Mac. Unfortunately Commodore totally sucked at marketing and did not further develop the Amiga much beyond its initial release.

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[ReelOddeeo]

Actually, the first company to ship a computer with a GUI was Commodore with the Amiga.

What year?

Apple shipped the Lisa in January 1983. I am not aware of what year the Amiga was first shipped. I thought it wasn't until at least 1984 (or later?). I would be interested to know if the Amiga truly beat Apple to the GUI.

The Lisa was the predecessor to the Mac. A sophisticated GUI. Actually superior to the original Mac in many ways.

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[sv0f]

What year?

You're dead on. The first Amiga shipped in July 1985.

This is well after Apple shipped the Lisa (arguably not a PC but a workstation), the Lisa 2 (January, 1984), the original 128K Macintosh (January, 1984), the 512K (Fat) Mac (September, 1984), and even the Macintosh XL (January, 1985).

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[Bert64]

No, Apple had the GUI first... Amiga came along a couple of years later with a much better one which offered (as you describe) true multitasking, hardware accelerated video and sound (and dma for floppy access etc)
AmigaOS was always technically superior to MacOS, and had a much larger market share... The problem was, commodore marketted them towards gamers and didn't keep the lead they had.

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[Bert64]

Didn't choose, they were forced into it by their OS/2's division's poor marketting... IBM would always have preferred to sell you OS/2, and until recently all their x86 hardware was available with OS/2 preinstalled. I got my thinkpad with OS/2, i couldn't get it without an os atall, so i figured i'd rather pay for OS/2 than windows.

Re:IBM is a good barometer

[Anita Coney]

Poor marketing?! Are you kidding? I loved those Warp ads with the nuns and the surfing dudes.

The fact that hardly anyone seeing the ads knew what IBM was selling was beside the point. What mattered was that viewers vaguely knew that if you bought Warp nuns could surf the internet and businessmen would have more time for actual water surfing. I strongly commend IBM for brining such pressing concerns into our nation's consciousness.

I can't get this tune out of my head...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Oh, the sun'll come out tomorrow,
So you gotta' hang on till' tomorrow,
Come what may.

Tomorrow tomorrow, I love you tomorrow,
Your'e only a day away!"

It's been in there for like 10 years!! It's driving me nuts!!

For OSS, COTS = Complete-Off-The-Server

[G4from128k]

It may not be "commercial", but OSS is more complete than its proprietary competition. All jokes about self-documenting code aside, I'd rather have access to the source code than to some vendor's documentation of what they think their code does. Seeing inside the box is useful when an API contains undocumented "features."

Linux Desktops @ IBM ?

[gelfling]

There's certainly a few as noted here before, perhaps 10,000 albeit not well supported and still some birthing pains as well you could imagine with VPNs, Wireless, Lotus Notes, net meeting type apps and internal Web apps and Web Java apps. Just like any other large company with a large suite of internal applications.

Moreover you could guess that taking machines out of service before end of lease, to replace the entire suite of software on them, then send them back, train people and staff a help desk for it is not really a rational goal.

I don't think anyone thinks that migrating everyone or a large chunk of everyone from Win to Linux is going to be any easier than the migration from OS/2 to Win several years ago. And that was quite hard.

Another thing to keep in mind is that your most difficult desktop users, the ones with the most complicated and inflexible requirements are the executives and if they have an app on Windows that absolutely must run the way they want it to run then that is what will happen. Period.

Plus you'd be wasting all the monies you invested in desktop tools for AV and spyware if you suddenly didn't need or couldn't use them anymore.

I think it's bravado to claim that there will be nothing but Linux desktops inside of one year.

Re:Linux Desktops @ IBM ?

[CAIMLAS]

If you didn't need AV anymore, it's not a waste of the AV nonsense - it's saving, as you don't need the AV anymore. Use your head here.

Corps pay for AV, often by the month. Why would they want to keep paying for it if they didn't need it anymore?

Re:Linux Desktops @ IBM ?

[gelfling]

Because large companies enter into long term agreements with companies to provide tools and services with payments predicated on the projected useful economic life of that tool or service. What kind of sense would it make to suddenly end a muliyear agreement with a vendor and buy out your own contract just because you didn't need it anymore? Not much, that's what.

Transition costs are enormous, you use your head.

Re:Linux Desktops @ IBM ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why wouldn't they still need AV? You are still going to have people sending files around and there are still going to be Windows machines around no matter what. I'm not sure how the site licensing of AV works but it seems like you would be provided software for whichever platforms you use; in any event, there will be no cost savings because AV is going to be required for network-connected workstations, no exceptions.

Re:Linux Desktops @ IBM ?

[codemachine]

Yes, but the cost of sticking with the platform can also be quite large. People just don't notice it because it is status quo. They just see this huge new transition cost and get scared away, without really realizing that it could save them some money.

In IBM's case, maybe it wouldn't even save them any money (their transition costs would be enormous as you say, and they have a lot of in-house Windows expertise built up over the years). But if IBM wants to get serious about moving their customers to Linux, they will need to do so themselves to be taken seriously. So even though some parts of the company would lose a lot of money paying for the switch to Linux, other divisions would later make more money in sales.

it depends on your needs

[m2bord]

sometimes open source software works better than a commercial product...ie...the gimp, apache, open office.

and sometimes non-open software is better...i.e. macromedia's flash.

and until someone creates a non-open or open equivilent.

Re:Summary

[rpozz]

Yes, you got a Troll mod.

I don't think there will, as such be a "year of Linux on the desktop". It will slowly crawl its way in. Firstly, to corporate desktops running nothing other than a word processor and spreadsheet, and then it'll make its way to the 'average' home user who uses it at work.

That's how Microsoft took over, anyway. Would be nice if they got screwed in exactly the same way. However, hopefully it doesn't totally take over, so we're all left with a choice of OS.

gimp is a bad example...

[Run4yourlives]

I'm not sure what you're comparing to, but very few designers would say that the gimp is better than photoshop.

Same goes with open office.

Apache though, won't get a complaint from me.

Re:gimp is a VERY bad example...

[Anonymous Coward]

not a patch on PS. OOO still quirky. Apache rox.

What will IBM do instead of M$ Project and M$ Visio? The 'comparable' applications are still not at the races.

Commercial versus open source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Open source software IS (or can be) commercial software. The dichotomy is open source vs proprietary.

Get it right next time please.

And on that note, free software is (or can be) commercial software. If you don't believe me ask Redhat, Novell and Sun. They have been selling free software for years.

Re:Commercial versus open source?

[cyber_rigger]

Open source software IS (or can be) commercial software. The dichotomy is open source vs proprietary.

Proprietary means it is owned. OSS is still owned. The license is different.

I prefer the distinction as free licensed vs pay licensed.

Good Open Source Dev Software

[boeserjavamann]

Netbeans, JBoss, JUnit, Jonas, Stuff from Apache, codehaus.org,... I don't know where to start or to end. Nowadays, one can build, deploy and run an entire Enterprise App with OS Software.

Re:Good Open Source Dev Software

[carabela]

However much I would like it like that, please name one enterprise that has done it. No, not only implementing Linux, but actually run the entire enterprise with FOSS.

I for one, don't believe that an enterprise (that typically want profit) has a strategy to buy/build/blend FOSS. They want stability, performance and even security(!) in their systems, not FOSS for FOSS sake.

If a certain FOSS application/system fits the picture, fine, but it appears that it still doesn't apply for an entire enterprise suit.

and why not consider open source == cots?

[museumpeace]

in planing sw dev for a defense project, the build vs buy criteria for systems that will be put to life and death use includes a "trust" criterium. Leaving aside Microsoft bashing, the rationale used in assessing that criteria is "how could there be malicious features in code that is already in use by millions of people?...it must be ok". Whether you consider that a valid yardstick is beside the point: OSS is only the more trustworthy because you can and hundreds have examine[d] the code.

Re:and why not consider open source == cots?

[museumpeace]

In case you are wondering why one would bring DOD software acquisition practices into the comments here:

1. COTS is DOD-speak for "boy are we ever glad we don't have to pay Raytheon's salary scales just to get a damn editor and OS". ...they invented the term.
2. Guess who ulitmately puts up most of the money for and pays the most attention to guidelines promulgated by the SEI?

"Open Sores"..

[newr00tic]

-

I think it's meant to spell "Open Sores"-software, which is Microsoft..

.

IBM is not a barometer...

[zarr]

a barometer doesn't create pressure, it just measures it.

Re:IBM is not a barometer...

[The Cisco Kid]

Yes, he is saying that watching what IBM does is a good barometer of the industry as a whole. If IBM makes a change, it is likely the rest of industry will too. So not only is IBM a barometer, its a barometer that may be able to see slightly into the future.

Who's dog food is it really?

[Chordonblue]

"OpenOffice is Sun's dog food, not IBM's."

Perhaps, but being the huge promoter of open source software that they are, OOo might as well be IBM's if they mandate and deploy it in their company.

After all, any changes they need to make to the code are strictly their own deal.

Re:Who's dog food is it really?

[4of12]

"OpenOffice is Sun's dog food, not IBM's."

So when IBM pushes way too hard for full, open and standardized Java then it's eating Sun's lunch?

IBM Has A Lot of Work to Do

[Leghkster]

I'm running a Linux desktop at work (I'm allowed some freedom - nobody else is doing this) and it's mostly IBM tools that force me to include VMWare in the setup.

Particularly annoying examples in our ERP's iSeries (AS/400) environment are the iSeries Navigator tool, and Websphere Dev Studio for iSeries. More and more OS/400 functions are only managable through Nav, and the CODE/400 components of WDSCi make source patching for the ERP a breeze. But the only discussions I've seen of integrating RPG editing into Eclipse (or the WDSC client's version) basically just end with "why bother?" CODE is a stand-alone Windows program is my answer to "why?". If the webfacing tools were all integrated in WDSCi it'd help people undertaking those efforts as well.

Uhhh, thanks?

[Mannerism]

I believe this one should be from the "damning with faint praise" department.

Equality

[Lord Kano]

So, businesses understand that OSS is just as good as commercial software and we didn't even have to sell out to do it.

LK

That, or you get the 'Carnegie What?' response

[phish]

When I was a student there (early-mid-nineties) there used to be a shirt that said "MIT: the CMU of Massachusets".... aah, pre-slashdot nerd humor...

Thought IBM was hush hush ashamed of Linux Rollout

[OSXexpert]

Last time I read something about IBM and Linux was they had effectively become ashamed of their lack of effective rollout with Linux in house... I find it interesting that some are still selling the notion of Linux on IBM yet abroad now rather than in the states. What gives, are we getting two-speak from IBM?

Open Office sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

"Interestingly enough, a senior representative of IBM was present and discussed with some of us, over lunch, how IBM is determined to move to an open desktop based on Linux and OpenOffice within about a year."

They said that last year, and they'll say it again next year. If IBM is anything like our company, anyone who's not an OS zealot is bitching about how lame open office is.

Ha

[Anonymous Coward]

"the inclusion of Open Source Software for the first time on the conference agenda"

Which pretty much sums up how relevant this IT conference is.

COTS = Community off the Shelf.

[anon mouse-cow-aard]

Open source is COTS. the important part of the COTS formula is that it be off-the-shelf, that is, easily obtainable through myriad government regulations and purchasing standards. download and go is the ultimate in cutting through red tape. Many commercial off the shelf systems end up as completely un-intergrable black boxes, that need specialist care and feeding. Far better to use Open source and have a fighting chance of integrating disparate applications together (a better form of server consolidation.)

Re:Thought IBM was hush hush ashamed of Linux Roll

[codemachine]

The problem is that most of IBM's coders are Windows guys. Many of their configuration utilities will be written only for Win32. For example, if you want to use their rack configuration utitlity, you need Windows.

Much of their in house stuff was written for Windows, and some of it for IE only. I think IBM is ashamed of this, but wouldn't it be intersting if they instead used their own bad experience to sell Linux. Something along the lines of "You see, this is what happens when you lock yourselves to one platform." Use it as an argument to free yourself from the MS platform, and write anything new to be cross platform. It is not like it is that hard nowadays, with XUL, Java, QT, and many other tools available to developers (heck even compiling against Cygwin or Wine libraries would be better than not trying).

Re:Thought IBM was hush hush ashamed of Linux Roll

[OSXexpert]

IBM Pitfalls in Linux migration strategies... I can hear it now being pitched as a successful rollout next year... :) or was it a dream?