Slashdot Mirror
IBM Promises Even More Linux Support
Jacek Fedorynski writes "This CNN article titled "IBM putting a Big Blue stamp on Linux" confirms that IBM will support Linux in both the hardware and software areas. " Sort of position piece from IBM - recognizing the importance of open standards, and staking much of their future with Linux.
Seriously, though, if Jikes and IBM's jdk for Linux are good indicators, their support for Linux should ensure it a long and robust future.
I have started using Linux consistenly for the past year or so and I love it. Just like everyone else, I get so excited to hear about a large company throwing money and respect at Linux, but something always bothers me... In the back of my mind I can't help but wonder... Will Open Source and the love of freeware stand up against all those big dollars? More and more I am starting to see shareware apps and trial versions of Linux software popping up everywhere. I used to tell my friends that everything for Linux was free... not any more. What about in a year or two? Will companies like IBM who are "hedging their bets with Linux" start demanding money for their risks? I just love free Linux apps so much that I get nervous when I see too much $$$ around Linux. Just my 2 cents.
Need ecommerce that doesn't suck? FoxyCart is for you.
The last time IBM threw it's sales force behind a new technology, it brought on the PC revolution of the 80s. Now, refocused (and restricted from antitrust practices), IBM is taking on an open source deved OS and will make a strong push for a good position in the networking revolution of the 21st century.
I for one welcome IBM to the fold, and hope they eventually give back to open dev comunity that has given so much.
Welcome to the next century, IBM (IttyBittyMachines)
> Of course, IBM is just finally recognizing that
> ANY *nix is better than forcing customers to use
> AIX
I see you've never used a SCO flavor.
You'll pine for smitty if you ever do...
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
There is plenty of "winning" IBM technology here.. :-)
cpeterso
IBM was (and is) a big supporter of Java.
So much for the Midas touch. Not saying that IBM supporting Linux isn't a good thing, but I think it's too early for the champaign.
-- Slashdot sucks.
I could easily see IBM coming out with its own distro in the near future. Think about it. Most of their code is for UNIX boxes anyway so it wouldn't be that hard to port.
All they have to do is sell an IBM custom distro, and add some of their own comercial applications software on top of it to make some extra cash.
This is their chance to pick up where they left off when Windows took over the business market. Linux is their chance to dominate the PC market again, and they are about the only company that has the manpower to make a good profit off making comercial linux applications.
IBM wants linux because it is going to give them back their market share. If you can't beat microsoft, quit and play a game that is a whole lot better.
bash-2.04$
bash-2.04$yes "Don't you hate dialup connections?"| write USERNAME
I don't mean this as flamebait, but I think everybody is misreading the CNN article.
The article does not say that IBM is endorsing Linux, or embracing Linux, or even suggesting Linux. What the article does say is that some analyst from Giga thinks that IBM is going to promote Linux.
Now--how credible is the analyst? He suggests that IBM is going to be OS-neutral in selling Linux vs. AIX, OS/400, or OS/390. He states that IBM will be superior to Dell because they'll support all "the major flavors."
Right.
IBM is going to offer Linux on an equal footing with OS/390 and OS/400? Whoever believes that hasn't ordered an upgrade of OS/400--the money IBM charges is unbelievable. "Want to update your disk drives? Sorry--the update only comes with an update to the OS. And that's a mere thousand bucks." IBM may pay lip service to Linux (their "support" may only amount to offering to preload it)--but they make a bunch of money off of operating system sales, and they're not going to just write that revenue off.
A 300-person IBM group is little more than a market study. When IBM decided to launch the Aptiva PCs (trying to compete with Dell) they had more than 1200 people--and Aptiva lasted less than 2 years.
If IBM were to truly back Linux, that would certainly be newsworthy. But this article is simply regurgitating a not-very-up-to-speed analyst's opinion, and I don't think his assertions pass the smell test.
The term 'FUD' originated at IBM.
Growing up in the birth place of IBM (Endicott NY), and having both parents work (and one still works) for IBM (My father was even a manager) and then (after college) working for IBM (Federal Systems which was bought by Loral, and then by Lockheed Martin). I have had the opportunity to watch the life of IBM from a very close perspective.
Back in the 80's IBM was the one on top (everyone knows this). But they became blind. In the early 80's my father came home complaining that IBM is about to go down. He said that the top managers were ignoring advice from outsiders with the attitude that "We're IBM, and we know more than you".
In the early 90's the s**t hit the fan, and the layoffs started. My town almost became a ghost town. After selling us (Federal Systems) off, we were able to look elsewhere for products. One of my co-workers, whose been with IBM for a while, was shocked to see what was out there. He stated to me "We have just been patting each other on the back because we are IBM we never saw what was going on".
Well, IBM woke up. Now being leveled by MS, it has learned a lesson, and will not do the same again. IBM is constantly watching what is going on, and is now trying to give what the customer wants. Yes, there is major resentment towards Microsoft, and a hint of personal disgust towards Mr. Gates himself, but the attitude is different. I never cared for IBM (even when I went to work for them!) but now I see things are different. They use to cater to the employees, and now its trying to stay ahead by catering to customers (and stock holders)
I don't see IBM as a threat to Linux. The other posts are correct, they are more focusing on hardware. Yes they supply a lot of support, and software, but they want the IBM logo on you machines. If Linux can help them, that's what they will support. I cant see IBM trying to bring down Linux, but I can see them dropping it if it will no longer help them.
Just my $0.02
Steven Rostedt
Steven Rostedt
-- Nevermind
IBM? Sure, they want the hype, but they also are afraid of being left behind. If Linux is a commercial success, the established companies (Redhat, Caldera, SuSe, etc.) are going to be rolling in profits. The intelligent suits in IBM want to catch the wave; to marketing, perception is reality, so it's hard for us to tell for sure whether IBM is serious.
Microsoft, on the other hand, doesn't even want the public to know that they consider Linux to be a serious competitor, so they dismiss it as a toy and FUD it heavily in the hope that they can defeat it. This isn't going to happen, because if ever you could say that Microsoft is out of its league, this is the time.
In terms of revenue, Microsoft is tiny compared to IBM. Microsoft's power lies in its dominance. When that power is removed (at some point in the not-too-distant future), Microsoft will be forced to stop growing and to focus, becoming more like IBM or Sun is today. There will be no single company to succeed Microsoft in dominating the industry. Simply put, the success of Linux and other Free Software and Open Source Software will make it very difficult for a single company to dominate even one field, never mind several dozen (i.e. Microsoft). So long as we remain vigilant, we will never have another IBM or Microsoft.
Sorry, I'm rambling, so I'll stop.
Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
Hmm...As far as I know, Monterey is 90% AIX. SCO figures into it in that they are bringing their application base and marketing.
Besides, AIX is really a good operating system. Traditional UNIX people say that it isn't but when they talk about filesytems they tout UNIX's journalled filesystems without recognizing that AIX had JFS since 1990. They talk about HP/UX's logical volume manager and Solaris' (actually Vertitas') disksuite and volume manager, little recognizing that AIX had it since 1990 (in fact, HP licensed theirs from IBM). They bemoan AIX's non-standard management with the ODM being used for LPP's (package management) and device managment, but since when is Solaris' package system "true UNIX", and look at how we tout systems like RPM or Debian's dpkg/apt, when the package mgmt. has been in AIX since 1990.
IBM brought some good technology from their mainframe experience. The brought a credibility to UNIX in the business community's eyes when they rolled out their own UNIX in 1990/1. Look at how sales of HP/UX systems grew only after IBM launched AIX.
'Nuf said.
This is not the same IBM that we all grew up with. You know the lumbering giant stuck in the mud. I think we all owe MS a big thanks for knocking IBm on its ass. I believe that IBM even by acknowledging Linux exists does more for its legitimacy than all the FUD being heaved at it by MS. According to an IBM guy I talked to the company is still really steamed about OS/2. They and everyone else knew that OS/2 was better, like BetaMax, but MS hamstrung them with licenses. IBM sees this a simple way to get some back. Rather than fight with MS, IBM fighres they will just take their balls and play with someone else. This really gets IBM out of some really nasty agreements and has several beneficial effects. The first is that IBM no longer has to pay royalties to MS and they can lower prices to compete in the market. Second it gives IBM a great deal of credibility in emerging technologies. This leaves MS with the unhappy position of having to buy their way in. Since IBM is mostly a hardware company, they do not have any problems with changing to support new software, unlike MS whose sole claim to fame is Windows. IBM is correct to not endorse one distro. To do so would lock them into the same agreements that they had with MS. Not gonna do it, would not be prudent at this time.
IBM's still reviewing their business plan for providing Linux support. They requested that a number of faculty and students in the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department here at Northwestern University review their business plan. They should be sending us their plan summary (a document reportedly about 25 pages long) in two weeks. I'm really excited to see what they have to offer.
IBM recognises that linux is a defacto standard in emerging markets. Witness the mexican school system's choice of linux as their OS of choice.
Point 1:
It's *nix. Any market built on it *guarantees* computer literate user base, and student bodies; unlike here, (US) where we're sliding backwards, thanks to M$.
Point 2:
It's free! Perfect for economies who to wish to later integrate into the larger global market. No licensing issues.
Point 3:
Eager and enthusiastic user community! We make mac advocates look like pussies.
Point 4:
Vendor loyalty! We've shown ourselves as the most competent bunch of idiots ever to support an OS. We respect those that at least tolerate us. We support *them*.
Point 5:
IBM has a rich hacker history, even if it's only within its own organisation. I've talked to a few of these guys. They're compsci thru and thru.
To survive, they must come alive as a youthful and vital organism again. Looks like somebody in corporate has acquired a clue or two about that...
Be charitable here. Those IBM'ers toiling away in the guts of the colossus would probably appreciate it a lot.
Brak: What's THAT?
Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
The way I remember it, Unigraphics was developed by McDonnell Douglas, and the division was later sold EDS.
:)
You are correct. My bad.
My journal has hot