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.

Comments

Uh, I Don't Think That's What the Article Said

[The Ancient Geek]

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.

Life with IBM.

[nevets]

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

Why this is good for Linux, and some MS ramblings

[Imperator]

Yes, it's quite possible that IBM is just generating hype. But this hype, while not the best that IBM could be doing for Linux, certainly isn't doing any harm. IBM is lending legitimacy to Linux in the eyes of the PHBs who don't realize that they might not really want Linux to succeed.

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.