Slashdot Mirror
IBM Launching an Open Desktop Solution
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. "
Wait. IBM did it. so it's good. TFM also mentions Novell. IT'S A TRAP. It simplifies license compliance. It allows commercial software. wait, what?
Slashdot suffers a mental kernel panic
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.
Lotus Notes, Sametime, Domino... ? It seems like 'Open' has officially been overloaded to the point of being meaningless.
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.
"Open" has been overloaded to the point of meaningless for years, if not decades.
The Open Group, anyone?
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
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
You mean the living hell that is the Lotus Notes user interface is going to take over my entire desktop? *Head asplodes*
IBM has been trying to convince people for years to use 'alternatives' to Windows but they always do a really bad job of saying why anyone should use the alternative and then the alternatives die a horrible drawn-out painful death in the arms of the early adopters. The only real alternatives to Windows are Linux and Apple and both of those will make much better cases to prospective adopters without any 'help' from IBM. IBM does not really want anyone to use Apple because they don't play in that space and IBM has never gone anywhere with Linux even though at one time they said they were going to switch a substantial portion of their worldwide desktops over to it, which they never did.
"They can port Office to Apple, Linux, heck, Solaris if they wanted to...."
Yeah, that would be great if they would just port Office to Apple. I'd probably get a Mac if they did that. Oh and if Macs could read my PC floppy discs, and use my two button mouse, and my LCD monitor. I wish Macs could do all that; dare to dream.
No, it appears to be software that's multi-platform collected into one big corporate-friendly package.
So in the same way that dual-booters have been using Firefox and Opera on both OSes for years, IBM is making it easy for corporations to do the same.
So.. it has come to this
They're planning on calling it "Java"
...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.
:) 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.
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.
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
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
Most IBMers (like me) live with their thinkpads joined to their hips. Do you want to try migrating 320K employees from Windows to Linux in one go? Think about organizational impact. Think about your customer base. Give some thought to the migration challenges that are illustrated in this book (of which I was the project leader)...
Linux Client Migration Cookbook, Version 2
IBM is a solutions company. A lot of us need to live (compute) within the same environments as our clients do. As more companies consider Linux on the desktop, more of our business will head that way, and consequently more IBMers will to.
So you should look at this announcement in context. This offering is a yet another clear indication that Desktop Linux is gaining market momentum, and IBM sees a need (and is making a big investment in internal transformation as well as product offerings) to be able to meet the needs of clients that are increasingly demanding more diversity in client computing solutions.
It's really amazing to see all the opinions about IBM fly by here on Slashdot... you know, how IBM only sells services, but is the second-largest software company (yes, in terms of software revenues) after Microsoft. Or how it doesn't make computers any longer, even though it's the largest server and supercomputer seller, and leading in sales of blade computers.
And that only speaks to sales misconceptions, to say nothing of whether 18 gagillion patents are evil weaponry, a defensive posture, truly valuable, a load of crap, or good for the defense of open standards... Or how it forced customers into proprietary systems in the 1960s, but hasn't End-of-Lifed those ancient architectures, or forced radical change to the systems running applications developed 30 or 40 years ago.
You can pretty much say two opposite things about IBM in any regard and have them both be true. Anyways, back to working for my dying-since-1982 east coast anachronism of a company...
Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
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?
I double-checked your post for any sarcasm or tinfoilhat tags. Frighteningly enough, I didn't see any.
MS has NOT been doing it properly since '95, and XP is no better. I remember the disastrous "Plug 'n' Play" we had force-fed to us; is it any wonder it was quickly renamed "Plug 'n' Pray"? Even worse, many times when at the Windows Update site it'd guess at the wrong drivers to update/install.... We lost a 2k server for a half-day due to just that. MS thought it had a 3Com NIC. It didn't.
Rather than go off on a long rant, I'll just describe the WinXP Pro and Ubuntu 6.10 installs on the very box I'm using.
- XP Pro
Run InstallFind driver for mobo
Find driver for video card
Find driver for NIC
Find driver/app for TV card
Find driver for Audigy.
Find driver for modem.
All hardware recognized; start work FINALLY!
vs:
- Ubuntu
Run installInstall Nvidia drivers
All hardware recognized; start work quickly!
Better hardware detection, my tail-side.
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
While I agree that people aren't upgrading as often, I don't think it's ue to lack of Improved performance, rather just lack of perceived improved performance. You know... when doubling the speed of your computer meant an operation that took 8 seconds, now only takes 4 seconds, you're gonna sit-up and take notice and be motivated to plunk down another $1000 bucks for the latest machine. However, once your going from 1/8 of a second to 1/16 of second or some other insignificant time savings, then the Average Joe, just doesn't care. Of course the fact that we're increasingly working with more complex and larger data, does help push the technology. (i.e. Average Joe who used to play with his 3 Megapixel photos on his 500 MHz machine without a problem may suddenly feel the slow down when he buys that new 8 megapixel camera.) - It seems to me that it the upgrade cycle is now linked with the adoption of other technologies outside of the PC itself, than it has been in the past. Other technologies certainly don't move at the same pace as computers. If a 1 megapizel camera was $200-300 in 1997, and if the pixel count doubled every 18 months... we would be seeing 64 Megapixel cameras in that same price range.
--Aaron Greenberg
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.
Details from the Horse's Mouth (so to speak).
most businesses are better off with linux desktops than windows desktops. staff can run word processors, spreadsheets, email clients, web browsers and other standard applications. without the viruses, trojans, keyloggers, botnets, spamware, spyware and other malware. and the system will be locked down, so that the users can't install games, stupid screensavers and other crap that either make the system unstable or are a vector for virus/trojan infection or both.
there's also gnucash, sql ledger, and other financial applications. or Crossover Office if they really need to run MYOB or Quickbooks (dunno if they run on Wine yet).
then their office computer will be an appliance for actually doing work, rather than a toy for wasting time and fiddling with the settings.
gamers might need windows because of the huge range of games available for windows. office workers don't.