IBM Promotes Linux Partners to Highest Tier

Anonymous Anonmenon writes "Big Blue was at it again today after it promoted the two leading commercial Linux distributions to the highest level tier of its Strategic Alliance Program. From the article: '[The Strategic Alliance Program] is designed to allow independent software vendors (ISV) work through one point of contact within IBM as opposed to navigating through several relationships with representatives from different divisions. The move was billed by executives from all companies as a means to make it simpler for clients to acquire open standards-based Linux hardware, software, and services through integrated sales, distribution and services channels.' The announcement was also heavy on the Java side, with both Red Hat and Novell pledging a 'reinforced commitment' to the Java developer community and J2EE."

Comments

IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[Mostly a lurker]

IBM has been a good friend to those parts of the open source community that fit its overall strategy. However, the emphasis on Java shows the importance it places on trying to protect its WebSphere revenue.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[Poromenos1]

Well, it is a company...

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[temojen]

Java is a buzzword marketroids know. Apache, MySQL (PostgreSQL!! get with the program, hosting providers), and PHP don't have marketing buzz in financial papers or stock analysis magasines.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[Tim C]

Really? You mean they're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts? They're actually trying to make some money? Whod'a thought...

Seriously, I've been saying this since day one - IBM is looking out for IBM. Right now, it sees a way to make money with Linux. If that ever changes, IBM's Linux support will take a back seat to whatever replaces it, or even (eventually) be dropped entire;y.

It's like all things in life - enjoy it while it lasts, hope it lasts forever, but don't get so dependent on it that it's removal would cause serious hardship.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[dnoyeb]

Right. Java support has absolutely nothing to do with Eclipse...Perhaps you mean to say J2EE where you said Java?

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[Schapht]

That might be changing though. One of the directors at my company mentioned to me how he was reading that "PHP could be the next Java" in some sort of business magazine. Granted, the account is hearsay at best, but rumors from upper management are probably a good thing.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[the_rev_matt]

The parent comment is highly overrated, as it's half wrong. IBM distributes a modified version of the Apache web server as the httpd for their application server. And they kick back their changes to the community (or they did last time I bothered to check). Just because they are a big company doesn't make them evil.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[Anonymous Coward]

He must have read that roundly-ridiculed Businessweek article.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[Anonymous Coward]

Apache has been the default web server on the AS400 for years, shipped with the operating system.

So, they like the "LA" but not the "MP".

Either way, they make money off services, and this linux stuff keeps MS from dominating everything, seems like a win-win.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[rve]

PHP support on the AS/400 is in the makes. (It works now, but IBM doesn't install and configure it for you yet)

Obviously they don't like the M part, least of all on the AS/400, because DB2 is part of the operating system, and frankly, if MySQL is good enough for your needs, you shouldn't buy IBM.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[vgaphil]

Agreed, we had a guy from IBM come down and do some WebSphere training for us a few weeks ago. He asked us what we were currently using for our Web solution, I told him MySQL and PHP. His response, "Never heard of it". WebSphere can use Apache to run instead of IBM's HTTP server, so I guess IBM only likes the "LA" in LAMP

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[kaffiene]

Bullshit. Maybe a decade ago Java was a buzzword, it's now an established, proven, effective technology on the server side. I call FUD.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[temojen]

Being an established, proven, effective technology does not make it not a buzzword.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[kaffiene]

Thanks for agreeing with me.

Re:IBM only likes the "L" in LAMP

[Anonymous Coward]

"He asked us what we were currently using for our Web solution, I told him MySQL and PHP. His response, "Never heard of it"."

You better have had it by its own value.

1/ He either was true. Then you were thrasing your money to an incompetent moron. He *should* have heard about MySQL and PHP.

2/ He was a liar (most probable). Then you were thrasing your money to a lier. Once you know he's a liar, how confidence can you be about anything else they told you, even regarding WebSphere?

Fantastic

[The Bungi]

Maybe one of these days I'll see the source to DB2, Websphere, MQ and such. Heck, never mind the source... I'll settle for less draconian licensing. Open source and all that, IBM is now.

Then again probably not.

IBM can talk the talk all day but at the end of the day regardless of all the Linux lip service they really don't walk the walk, and probably never will.

Re:Fantastic

[DogDude]

IBM can talk the talk all day but at the end of the day regardless of all the Linux lip service they really don't walk the walk, and probably never will.

I haven't been an IBM employee for several years, but the friends I still have at IBM say that IBM still isn't eating its own food. They're pretty well standardized with Windows 2000/XP across all of their internal desktops and many of their lower end servers. You'd think that a company beating the OSS drum so violently would at least get Linux working on their own desktops. As it is, the people that I know who work at IBM (sysadmins) have never even seen Linux running on any machines at IBM or otherwise. But maybe they really are pushing OSS heavily on the high end and just ignoring OSS for middle and lightweight applications. It's entirely possible.

Re:Fantastic

[bckrispi]

IBM can talk the talk all day but at the end of the day regardless of all the Linux lip service they really don't walk the walk, and probably never will.

Have we forgotten already that the Eclipse foundation started with millions of lines of proprietary code donated by IBM?

Re:Fantastic

[The Bungi]

To stick it to Sun. Or do you think the name "Eclipse" is a coincidence? In any case, US$10M (or whatever) is a drop in the bucket for IBM. It's two weeks of wacky ads on national TV. Four weeks of stationary expenses in Armonk.

In any case, I'm not contesting what they have already done or trying to diminish it. On the contrary. I'm pointing out that it's a litle disingenious to hype "Linux" (which I suppose is what they conceptualize as "open source") so much but still operate essentially the same way - as a commercial software vendor. And not a very nice one at that. Ever seen a UDB enterprise site license/support contract? I'm not kidding when I say "draconian licensing" at all.

Novell is no different in this regard.

Re:Fantastic

[blair1q]

This isn't quite hypocritical.

IBM has a lot of legacy stuff (documents, enterprise apps, specialized business and engineering tools) that wouldn't operate cleanly in a Linux environment. Even if it's a small percentage of their information and tool base, it's an argument for backward compatibility.

They can convince you to buy Linux if they can convince you to loose yourself from your legacy constraints. But they can't convince themselves because it would cost them more than they're willing to spend. You might have a different tolerance for the change.

Re:Fantastic

[rtaylor]

DB2 probably won't ever see daylight (or AIX for that matter). Too many patent agreements and other things that would need to be resolved. I could see them offering PostgreSQL as an alternative for the same reason as Linux is an alternative to AIX.

The big buyers will still get the DB2 / AIX combination but it gives them a chance to sell hardware and support to the little guy.

IBM will (and does) support installations running PostgreSQL already in their managed solutions department.

Re:Fantastic

[bckrispi]

Novell is no different in this regard.

Ok, *now* you're just talking bollocks! Novell is continuously donating code back to the FOSS community. Novell is essentially the "open source steward" that IBM tries to sell itself as. Yeah, they still have their trade secrets, and they're still out to make money. But that doesn't mean that they don't give a fair amount in return.

Re:Fantastic

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen the source to DB2, and believe you me, you don't want it.

Re:Fantastic

[Serpent Mage]

That is not actually true. I have 2 friends that I've known for a many years who work at ibm and there entire department is on linux or freebsd. Don't ask me why or how freebsd got its way onto the desktops but it is probably like how I'm using linux at my office a 2nd machine, wine, or a vm or any other access or means to a windows system (and have had no problems either).

So I'd have to say that your sysadmins are either pampering to the suits (who are all using win2k from what i understood) or a fairly small and narrow chunk of the real developers at IBM :)

Re:Fantastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Have we forgotten already that the Eclipse foundation started with millions of lines of proprietary code donated by IBM?

It's just a hook, stupid fish.

Re:Fantastic

[jsight]

Ok, *now* you're just talking bollocks! Novell is continuously donating code back to the FOSS community. Novell is essentially the "open source steward" that IBM tries to sell itself as. Yeah, they still have their trade secrets, and they're still out to make money. But that doesn't mean that they don't give a fair amount in return.

And why imply that IBM hasn't? Their involvement varies quite a bit, but it is significant.

Look at Apache Axis, Geronimo, and other projects there for examples. Or Alphaworks for that matter.

Re:Fantastic

[Anonymous Coward]

So what you are saying is that anyone who sells or promotes Linux should also open source all their other software immediately? STFU. Thank god people like you don't speak for the larger community, or Linux would still be a niche OS for insane zealots.

What is significant about this announcement?

[xmas2003]

While it's nice to read good news like this for the Linux community, this seems more like marketing people on both sides coming up with "something" to justify their existance ... is there some "meat" behind this or am I just missing it?

Re:What is significant about this announcement?

[Anonymous Coward]

IBM has promoted these partners to "Super Special Vice-president" of their club. This means they are allowed in the clubhouse without using the secret knock. :)

Re:What is significant about this announcement?

[pimpsoftcom]

AND they took down the "No gurls!" sign.

Java?

[RManning]

The The announcement was also heavy on the Java side, with both Red Hat and Novell pledging a 'reinforced commitment' to the Java developer community and J2EE.

IBM is slipping. Don't they know that Java is so 90's?

Re:Java?

[Askadar]

Can it possibly be that Java -- once the hippest of hip software -- has become a legacy technology, as old and out of style as IBM's (IBM) mainframe computers and SAP's corporate applications?

IBM is slipping. Don't they know that Java is so 90's?

Slipping into the future?

Re:Java?

[Hosiah]

If we're going to be like that, IBM is so 70's.

Re:Java?

[Orgazmus]

Peh, its really just sooo 1880's ;)

Novell and Java

[slashdotnickname]

So Novell wants to reinforce their commitment to the Java community while at the same time funding Mono, a project porting .NET to Linux/etc...

interesting... very interesting... (strokes soul patch)

Re:Novell and Java

[Anonymous Coward]

"So Novell wants to reinforce their commitment to the Java community while at the same time funding Mono"

Outside of Novell, Mono is dead.

This move by IBM has effectively put the final nail in the Mono coffin.

Re:Novell and Java

[grimJester]

The friend of my competitor is not necessarily my enemy. Novell wants both to prosper on _their_ platform.

Re:Novell and Java

[m50d]

Novell devotedly supports whatever their customers want. Which right now means both Java and .Net.

Re:Novell and Java

[segedunum]

So Novell wants to reinforce their commitment to the Java community while at the same time funding Mono, a project porting .NET to Linux/etc...

Novell doesn't know what they're funding nor do they know what they want to be using nor is their any direction from those high up in the company. That's why they're called Novell.

Re:Novell and Java

[int19h]

This isn't very interesting at all.

You can compile a java-program and run it under Mono.
Eclipse runs under Mono.
See: http://www.go-mono.com/images/ikvm-screenshot.png

As the distinction between Java, .NET and Mono seems to be unclear to a few people, I'll throw in my "humble view":

• Mono supports several langauges, that easily interoperate. Java supports one langugage.
  You can write in support for other languages in Java, like Jython, but this is not the point.
  A compiled function written in Boo can easily be called from C#.
  See: http://www.mono-project.com/Languages
  
  
• Mono has a compiler, VM, and a bunch of classes that are all As Free As They Can Be (tm).
  In addition, Mono has re-implemented a few microsoft-specific classes, that can easily be removed, where there supposedely is an incredibly tiny chance that anyone will care. If you're making Linux-only programs, this will never be an issue for you, and you'll have a very nice and powerful tool for making programs with.
  See: http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_General
  
  
• It's easy to call .dll's and .so's from Mono. For what I know, It's not that easy from Java. I tried calling some dlls a few years ago, and it was a mess. For me, at least, the threshold for calling a function from libsomething.so from Java is a lot higher than from Mono. Especially if you're planning on doing this in a crossplattform way, which Mono has support for. You can call the native .so on Linux and the native .dll on windows, with the same program.
  See: http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/8794
  
  
• Python supposedly runs faster under IronPython (which runs on Mono) than normal python (CPython).
  See: http://www.python.org/pycon/dc2004/papers/9/
  

Regardless of my list of points above, I hope you'll see that Novell could very well be "reinforcing their commitment to the Java community, while at the same time funding Mono".

This just in...

[ninja_assault_kitten]

The titantic that is software arm of IBM is sinking. They will do anything to stay afloat. Pushing Linux is their best option as it keeps their mainframe market alive.

Re:This just in...

[Jerry Coffin]

The titantic that is software arm of IBM is sinking.

Hmm...I'm not quite sure how you'd decide that. According to IBM's latest 10-Q report, in the quarter ending 30 Sept. 2005, their software division had revenues of a little over 3.8 billion US dollars, and costs of 483 million US dollars. By contrast, their hardware division had revenues of 5.12 billion dollars, but costs of 3.2 billion dollars. IOW, they're showing a gross quarterly profit of about 3.3 billion dollars from software, and only about 1.9 billion from hardware. Looked at on a percentage basis, software looks even better for them: it constitutes almost 18% of their revenues, but only about 3% of their costs.

Their highest revenue division is services -- but even with the largest revenues, this still has slightly lower profits than their software (about 300 million less per quarter than software).

As far as sinking goes: their revenue from software is up about 200 million dollars per quarter from a year ago, while their costs are up only about 20 million dollars a quarter. IOW, their total sales are growing, and they're getting better profit margins too!

Just for comparison, Microsoft's latest 10-Q [warning: Word format, of course] shows they have about 9.6 billion in quarterly revenues (total) and costs of about 6.3 billion, for a gross profit of a bit under 2.6 billion. IOW, IBM's software division produces more profit than Microsoft!

In fairness, that comparison probably isn't entirely accurate: in Microsoft's case, it's taking essentially all expenses into account, including things like R&D (1.5 billion dollars a quarter!) which probably aren't accounted for on a divisional basis at IBM (though I didn't dig through things enough to be sure about that).

Re:This just in...

[cerelib]

I am not trying to discredit your numbers, but take this into note. Most of the hardware they sell probably also generates software revenue, but software can be sold completely separate of hardware.

Re:This just in...

[Jerry Coffin]

I am not trying to discredit your numbers, but take this into note. Most of the hardware they sell probably also generates software revenue, but software can be sold completely separate of hardware.

Oh, no problem at all -- I don't really care a whole lot whether the numbers are given a lot of credence at all -- after all, they're IBM's numbers, not mine. I simply looked, and didn't quite see where the parent comment seemed to fit with reality. In all honesty, it's still possible that it might though -- just for an obvious example, as you've noted, it may be that most of their software sales are really tied to hardware sales. When I said I didn't really understand the parent comment, I was being honest -- I'm not sure it's wrong, but based on the financial data I'm not quite sure what makes it obviously right either. These are supplied to prospective investors, so I'm sure they try to put the best face on things they can, so these numbers should probably be taken with a grain of salt. Nonetheless, at least to somebody like me who's not a financial analyst, it's not particularly obvious that their future is anywhere close to all doom and gloom by any means.

Article Summary

[olddotter]

Basiclly this sounds like a defence against LAMP marketing statement. I belive that Java will remain popular in older large corporations. (Where I work they only recognize Java and ASP for web development. Everthing else is discouraged.)

But I think Perl/PHP/etc. will continue to gain popularity ammoung smaller companies and pure web companies. (Ie. Companies that are more progressive in nature.)

Re:Article Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

As has been spelt out every time a Java vs Ruby/Python/PHP/Perl story comes up, Java is for more than just web sites, whereas the AMP in LAMP (and their alternatives) are not.

To a companys way of thinking, if more than LAMP is needed (Yes the much vaunted LAMP solution is sometimes inadequate), then Java is the way to go. And if they are already going down the Java path, why would they forgo what web technologies Java has for non Java tech where that can't leverage the work they need to do in Java anyway?

In summary, Java has good enough web technologies (Better than most in my opinion) so the penalty in mixing technologies is prohibitive.

Re:Article Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Apples and Oranges.

If you knew what functions were typically performed with Java programming in Enterprise applications, you would not make the mistake of comparing AMP with Java.

Re:Article Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Where I work Java is used only in web tech. And there most of it is non-enterprise in nature. Meaning it doesn't use J2EE, but J2SE functionality. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but that covers more than 80% of web applications at a company with 130,000 employees (1000's of applications). Enterprise Java is not needed to post the lunch menu...

One step forward...

[Spy der Mann]

is better than none.

what it really means

[patcito]

The announcement was also heavy on the Java side, with both Red Hat and Novell pledging a 'reinforced commitment' to the Java developer community and J2EE.

The only conclusion one can draw out of that article is that Novel and REdHat obviously don't read slashdot and therefore aren't real nerd and we shouldn't pay attention to them. Seriously.

Re:what it really means

[Anonymous Coward]

The only conclusion one can draw out of that article is that Novel and REdHat obviously don't read slashdot and therefore aren't real nerd and we shouldn't pay attention to them. Seriously.

Yes, because anyone who settles with old, stable and trustable technology surely isnt worth our attention since they don't live on the cutting edge. Corporations should all migrate to Gentoo now.

Re:what it really means

[pembo13]

I'm sure Redhat won't mind you as an end user not paying attention to them since they don't sell desktop software. But I am not sure how you can dismiss them as non-nerds they do have alot of good programmers over there.

Business

[Council]

This has far less to do with Linux business usefulness, per se, as it does with IBM's continued attempts to publicize Linux to the larger world (see their Super Bowl ads).

Which is a noble goal, certainly.

TLA HEL!

[greg_barton]

With these ISV's in the SAP at IBM, what TLA's will they TON?

Typography tip of the day

[Anonymous Coward]

WRONG: Right:They're after us! Run!

RIGHT: Right: They’re after us! Run!

If you need Java compatibility use Jython

[Samurai Crow]

Read the subject line. Python is faster to develop for than Java yet Python is able to produce Java compatible class files using the Jython utility.

Re:If you need Java compatibility use Jython

[zootm]

To be fair, although Python is quicker to develop, it's harder to verify due to having a less rigorous type system. I know this is part of the reason it is not used at my company. I quite like the approach taken by Boo in these terms, actually.

Re:If you need Java compatibility use Jython

[abigor]

You can type check at compile time with a utility called pychecker. It works very well. So, you can have the advantages of dynamic typing with the safety of static typing by taking this step. The best thing is to automate it, so it runs with your unit tests.

Re:If you need Java compatibility use Jython

[zootm]

Nice one, thanks for that. I think that the Python typesystem is still a little less inherently checkable, though, is it not?

Re:If you need Java compatibility use Jython

[abigor]

Probably, although pychecker certainly mitigates some of the risk. We are using it, with great success, along with rigorous unit testing.

Re:If you need Java compatibility use Jython

[zootm]

Nice one. If the topic comes up again I'll make sure to mention that, at least. :)

Some change may be needed within IBM.

[sethstorm]

Sure, it's fine to have that kind of software level support, but with their apparent lack of documentation (let alone support) of anything more powerful than a Matrox G450 (which is lowend for that kind of machine).

There isnt even binary level support, which makes things very odd that they cripple their own hardware (see that there is no option for anything but a lowend GXT135P, a G450 PCI card) - given that it'd be fine to have enough documentation to run their highend GXT3xxx/4x00/6x00 video hardware.

It's fine to have that software well-supported, but if the hardware isnt there...

Re:Some change may be needed within IBM.

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been curious about who makes the graphics cards in IBM's POWER workstations for awhile. Certainly they have the ability to produce it themselves, but it's just easier to use an established player it seems. Are all of their cards from Matrox nowadays, or are they using oem solutions from 3DLabs like Sun is doing? Matrox's tech isn't exactly top of the line anymore, and if they were using solutions from nVidia or ATi, I imagine they wouldn't be rebranded with IBM's specific model numbers.

Speaking of nVidia and ATi, has anyone else noticed that despite the fact that nVidia toots its horn about its superior OpenGL implementation, it's ATi's FireGL cards that end up in Unix workstations from vendors such as SGI and HP? (Heck, HP's final generation Alpha workstations come with a Radeon 7500.) I believe that the only time an nVidia card was in a non-X86 system is when it's in a Mac or a specialty chip for a videogame console, but I'd like to know if any high end RISC or Itanium workstations have ever had a Quadro or Geforce as an option.

The The editors still don't know how to edit.

[Caspian]

I I wonder how they they keep letting things things like repeated repeated words words pass pass unnoticed unnoticed.

Re:The The editors still don't know how to edit.

[Lostie]

Oh come on, why the the offtopic mod? The the parent is commenting on a LEGITIMATE part of the the story, intentional or otherwise - that's NOT offtopic! :P

Parent is anti-IBM troll.

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell your "friend" (if he is real) to visit this intranet URL (https://lifeboat.ibm.com/lifeboat/stats/lifeboat/ stathome.php) for the latest statistics on Linux (6792 since April 2004) and Windows (867 since April 2004) installations inside the company. Keep in mind that this site only counts installs of the "official" IBM client images (both of which are installed via a custom made Debian boot cd, btw). Before April 2004, there were many thousands more installs of the older Linux image. And all this was before the availability of a Linux native version of Notes (which has just come out internally, non-IBMers wont be seeing it for a few more months though) and sametime! For Windows, most people use the IBM client image that was installed when they got their machine. And for Linux, many people (like me, for example) replace Windows with a free version of Linux like Debian, Ubuntu or Fedora. If you friends inside IBM have never seen a Linux box inside IBM, then they are either lying or are blind.

One thing that is not advertised as heavily as our gradual migration to Linux is our much quicker migration to Firefox. It is the IBM standard browser and most of the people I work with day to day use only Firefox, whether they use Linux, Windows or even OS X. There is (last I checked) only a single intranet site that still requires IE, and according to their notes, they will be supporting Firefox by the end of the year.

Re:Parent is anti-IBM troll.

[dominux]

I shouldn't really listen to rumours from an AC on Slashdot, but would you mind telling us if there is a Linux native Domino Designer client on the way or if it is just the Notes client embedded in Workplace? i.e. can I as a developer finally switch off Windows?

Cool

[Trogre]

The The announcement was also heavy on the Java side, with both Red Hat and Novell pledging a 'reinforced commitment' to the Java developer community and J2EE."

So does this mean we might be seeing a working Java implentation soon that isn't controlled by Sun?

Re:Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it means RH and Novell will continue to improve their respective J2EE servers.

Re:Cool

[sr180]

There already is. IBM have their own Java Implementation.

mo3 up

[Anonymous Coward]

downward spiral. In is the worst off a super-organised RAM) fo]r about 20 continues in a use4rs all over the already aware, *BSD been the best,

IBM also pays for most of its development!

[Anonymous Coward]

Because, most of the committers actively working on Eclipse development are IBM employees. Improving Eclipse is their full-time job.

Many other companies are involved to some extent or other with Eclipse, but IBM has a huge commitment to its success and pays dozens of full-time developers to work on it.

But, wait!

[CPNABEND]

If SCO beats IBM in court, or beats Novell in court, or... Oh, never mind

The mouths of gift horses

[rinks]

Don't look into 'em.

Python bites!

[Anonymous Coward]

Any language that uses indentation as part of its syntax should be taken out to the back side of the barn and beaten mercilessly. End of discussion.

Big Deal

[Lobo_Man]

IBM talks about supporting Linux a lot. But try to buy a thinkpad with Linux installed on it. Can't do it.

Re:Big Deal

[paulatz]

Or at least they should sell a thiunkpad without MS Window for a lower price (I guess 60$/50E less would be right).

Re:Big Deal

[Anonymous Coward]

Get with the program! IBM doesn't make Thinkpads anymore - they sold their PC business to Lenovo just over a year ago.

Re:Big Deal

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, they don't sell thinkpads anymore. They sold the business to Lenovo

IBM to sponsor SCALE 4x

[Anonymous Coward]

IBM will be at SCALE 4x this year for its 4rth year as a sponsor and exhibitor.