Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Launching an Open Desktop Solution

Posted by Hemos on from the bridging-the-gap dept.

DJ_Maiko writes "IBM just announced their intent to release an open desktop solution which they're calling "Open Client Offering." The new offering will make it possible for big businesses to present their employees with a choice of running Linux, Macintosh or Windows software on desktop PCs, using the same underlying software code, which will cut the cost of managing Linux or Apple relative to Windows. If this project succeeds, it will make it unnecessary for companies to pay Microsoft for licenses for items that don't rely on Windows-based software. IBM plans to also roll this out in-house to 5% of their 320,000 employees worldwide. This sure seems like a promising endeavor. "

9 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Apple And IBM Should Make A Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Since Apple's marketshare continues to flounder down around three percent and the company appears to be more and more focused on the iPod side of the company, Apple should look for a company like IBM to sell off the useful parts of OS X for something like this.

    Apple gets a big wad of cash and goes off to completely focus on digital media. IBM uses OS X/Aqua as the basis for their common application toolkit, Quicktime gets a full parity port to Linux.

    OS X is going nowhere fast, and Linux application toolkits are a fucking embarrassment.

    Do it Apple and IBM, make everyone happy.

    1. Re:Apple And IBM Should Make A Deal by p0tat03 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      OSX is going nowhere fast? Apple's desktops may be floundering due to the lack of their killer app (i.e., anything made by Adobe) for the Mactels, their laptops are selling like frickin' hotcakes. Apple is pushing more Mac laptops than ever before.

      Not to mention that OSX is the *only* non-Windows OS that is commonly used by average users.

      Macs as desktops are going nowhere fast, mostly because much of the desktop market is now polarizing into enterprise-level hardware or cheap shite Dell boxen. There simply isn't enough demand for a non-enterprise quality home-use desktop. Laptops on the other hand are a different story, demand for the Macbook is huge around where I live, and interest in buying Mac mobiles is higher than I've ever seen it before.

    2. Re:Apple And IBM Should Make A Deal by EvilMonkeySlayer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have a minor niggle with the latter part of your mentioning about Vista and OS X. As I mentioned last year I have now bought a Macbook and owned it for roughly a couple of months.

      I used Vista quite a bit during its beta/rc stages and then a bit when it got released. I'd just like to say that after having used both for a decent while that Vista may be equal in features but those features are poorly implemented. Case in point the control panel, it has been mutated into a monster.. it's nigh on impossible to find the settings you want to change without faffing about. Eventually I just turn on the classic view for control panel and make do with that.
      Then contrast that with system preferences on OS X where it's well thought out without a million and one options in your face or having to go digging for some minor niggle that you want to disable or change.

  2. Late to the party? by BlueStraggler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I switched to Apple so that I could run Mac, Windows, and Linux software on the same computer. It's really the killer feature of the Mac platform, so I'd expect that any computer company with sense would be trying to get on board.

  3. I think MS could survive the death of Windows... by StressGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    but, I don't think they would survive the loss of the dominance of MS Office. They can port Office to Apple, Linux, heck, Solaris if they wanted to....but if ODF takes off, and they now have to compete with Sun and IBM....seem to me that's a much bigger threat.

    my 2 cents anyway

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
  4. Nice Idea But... by eno2001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...completely unworkable. There are definite "must haves" in terms of software that a solution like this will never be able to account for. You have web applications that rely on IE in order to work. This solution will NEVER solve that problem. You have local executable applications that people need to get their work done on a day-to-day basis. If these applications rely on a specific platform, (Windows, Mac or Linux) you will not be able to solve that. Those are two really big issues that IBM will never solve with this solution.

    Personally, I've been able to avoid running Windows at home and at work, but I've also made an investment in time and effort to get things running on Linux the way I like. Some of it was just by moving to the FOSS alternative. Some of it was accomplished with Wine (for some Windows apps). And some of it can only be pulled off in a virtual machine. However, there are still some things even someone like me can't do unless I would actually run Windows. Fortunately I don't have those needs. :) The time invested and the knowledge gained far outweighs the convenience of sticking with a "standard platform". But that's only for me. For others who have needs that can't be met by alternative platforms or don't wish to invest time and energy into adapting, my route doesn't work. IBM's solution likely doesn't apply here either.

    Like I said, nice idea, but...

    --
    -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
  5. Re:Why use something the creators barly use? by jackharrer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Don't forget that rolling it will be a major IT challenge. 5% as a start doesn't sound very well but 16,000 is quite a lot of workstations. And add servers. That's a lot of beta testers, IMHO.

    --

    "an experienced, industrious, ambitious, and often, quite often, picturesque liar" - Mark Twain
  6. IBM *could* make Linux the standard by realmolo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They are probably the only company with the cash and skills to "fix" everything that is wrong with Linux on the desktop. But they don't do it.

    Why isn't IBM throwing money at the Ubuntu guys? Why isn't IBM basically bribing Adobe to port their apps to Linux? Why isn't IBM paying their software guys to write shitloads of GPLs drivers? Why aren't they writing *all kinds* Linux software to fill in the gaps that would make it better than Windows in every way?

    I'm always amused by the companies that want to "beat" Microsoft, but don't seem to really TRY. If Linux is going to displace MS on the desktop, or even be a real competitor, then it's going to take BILLIONS of dollars and at least 5 years of development. IBM could do it. But they don't. Why not?

  7. Re:GNUStep by blankaBrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If the linux world got behind GNUStep, they would have an opensource version of MacOS X that could (potentially) run Mac apps with only a recompile. This could change linux and thrust it into the mainstream. Imagine... apps like photoshop, office and iTunes for Linux. It would be at least possible. It seems to me that the vast majority of GNU/Linux development over the past 8 years has been to make the userland more windows-like. Even the mac-like guis are nothing more than window dressing (pun intended). It's a real shame. The Linux community has a nuke in its OS war arsenal, but continues to fight with sticks and stones.