Ask IBM's Linux Marketing Director 254
His name is Scott Handy, and his full title is "Director, Linux Solutions Marketing, IBM Software Group." You want to know how to market Linux? Or how IBM's going about it? Scott ought to know. One question per post, please. We'll send 10 of the highest-moderated ones off tomorrow, and expect Scott's answers back in about a week.
IBM and Mac OS X? (Score:1)
Office support (Score:1)
I run a 40 person development organisation, using Linux as the default desktop. The thing that gives me most grief is lack of good office productivity tools for the platform, and the resulting inability to integrate properly into the windows world (which is what our salesmen and most of our customers inhabit). If the following products were available, natively, on Linux we'd buy them:
I realise there are some fast-evolving tools out there (for example gnumeric) but they are still way behind what is available on Windows.
So, are there plans to provide native implementations of the above (I think Java and web enabled front ends are doomed, since they always lag behind the native versions), preferably (and for bonus points) based on gtk?
Bluebox Linux? (Score:1)
I've worked with IBM software in various different projects that I have been involved with over the years...from Bluebox Novell Netware, AN/ICLAS, to OS/2 and AVC(Audio Visual Connect, aka UltimediaBuilder/2), and I have been very pleased with the level of support IBM has given me...but that support has always been with IBM branded software, for example, Novell. Although it was a third party (outside of IBM), IBM did a good job of making sure that on IBM hardware, all options were supported, and all IBM current hardware was supported. If there was a problem with drivers or such for IBM hardware, then IBM provided the fix...unless Novell already had one.
My question is this...will we see a "Blue Box" version of Linux...ie, a repackaged version of some Distro, and IBM making sure that all of it's hardware is supported...or is IBM going to try and do what is has been doing for Windows, and thus transfering the "blame" when things don't work to the software vender? Or alternately, is IBM just going to support the Linux Kernel for IBM devices, and leave it up to the Distros to support higher level fuctions, except for specific IBM projects like ViaVoice, etc.?
ttyl
Farrell J. McGovern
Re:Simple two-part question. (Score:1)
--
The world is divided in two categories:
those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.
How soon can I buy? (Score:1)
I've got $3500 sitting in the bank waiting for the day when this product comes to market.
PowerPC (Score:2)
DEC Alpha (Score:2)
From what I understand, IBM was manufacturing Alpha processors for DEC/Compaq.
Does IBM have any rights to Alpha technology that would allow it to continue the manufacture of these chips? In the agreement with Cyrix, IBM was allowed to manufacture its own x86 designs based upon Cyrix.
Any possibility that IBM could acquire Alpha Processor, Inc., and provide us with low-cost Alphas?
Or, wonder of wonders, is there any possibility that we could see inexpensive PowerPC motherboards from IBM?
Please, somebody just give me an alternative to IA64!
Peace Love and Proprietary Drivers (Score:2)
A question of image (Score:2)
However, in terms of marketing, none of the corporations I have looked at have made much effort in actually promoting their output to the wider audience. Indeed, a few have never mentioned their work even to those in the Linux community.
Given that IBM has such a massive technical lead, how do you see IBM's Linux marketing efforts evolving with time?
Re:Hypocrisy? Bull***t (Score:2)
Open source and CPRM and SDMI are not linked. I can be a open source bigot, and agree with CPRM and SDMI's goals. They are not contradictory.
If I am for abolishing the death penalty, what has that got to do with de-legalizing drugs?
At least ask a question that makes sense!
Re:Why doesn't IBM use Linux internally like Sun . (Score:2)
Second, I wouldn't have said that Solaris is a desktop option either .... but Sun utilises it for that purpose.
Common and divergent interests (Score:2)
Now the issues that drive my loyalty to Linux have more to do with a fear of MS's power in the industry and what they might do with it. I'm talking about issues like privacy and crippled systems that serve the interests of large intellectual property owners rather than the people who buy the machines.
I've always assumed that IBM's interest in Linux derives from a wariness of MS's power and what they might do with it as well -- although I suspect that IBM is more worried about being muscled financially and technologically.
As a marketing guy, can you tell us if IBM willing to take the issues I'm afraid of to the public? A MS monopoly isn't in anyone's interests but MS's, and I know that issues of privacy are important to the public. People want the machines that they pay for to be working for them, not some big company.
I know companies have to look towards the bottom line, but IBM could do a lot to make the world a better place by stepping up to the plate here and taking on
And a world where MS controls authentication and transactions isn't in IBM's interest either.
We need you to back out of the crippled hardware business (the hard drives), and tell people why IBM and Linux are in the public interest. Cartoon penguins aren't going to do anything to the MS juggernaut.
Tux (Score:2)
Do you see IBM advertising linux with a thinner, perhaps large breasted, penguin? (Hm...needa new name....Tuxi?) It if linux is going to break into the market on a large scale, it will need to market on the same playing field.
Tuxi could team up with Lara Croft in a movie or a video game.
Re:Why doesn't IBM use Linux internally like Sun . (Score:2)
Re:Linux products lag-time (Score:2)
So were is the $1 billion going? We're talking server processing here and not desktops......
VisualAge for Java is WAY behind the other OS's so it appears IBM doesn't want to lead with Linux anywhere.....
LoB
Fighting to keep away from Microsofts claws.
IP portfolio based business vs. Linux investment (Score:2)
Does IBM see Linux merely as a platform that can't be controlled by MS, or do they see it as something more? Is it merely another platform to plug users in to IBM's proprietary software, or is it a venture to try to make software which more closely meets user needs?
I have nothing against proprietary systems. It is just that if the company is going to "Spend One Billion Dollars on Linux", I'd rather PR didn't spin that as some altruistic venture. It's one thing to spend money developing the Linux kernel, gcc, filesystems, gui environments, networking protocols, etc., and releasing them as Open Source. It's a completely different thing to port proprietary programs to Linux, closed source.
What's the projected break down in Open Source development vs. closed source development of that "One Billon Dollars"? Does IBM plan to make money directly from software they develop Open Source, or do they merely see such software as enabling the sales of their proprietary software?
Thank you,
Ryan Warner
Re:Linux vs AIX (Score:2)
D
----
Re:1 billion vs 1 billion (Score:2)
MS To Blow Imaginary $1 billion hyping WinXP to stardom [theregister.co.uk]
The gist is that Microsoft itself is probably spending about $ 200 million, relying on $300 million from Intel and unspecified amounts from resellers and smaller companies to make up the $1 billion total.
So it may not be as hard to counteract as it looks. I predict that Microsoft's genuinely spooky registration process is going to severely limit sales of these products. Consider the poor sap whose copy of XP expired on the plane while he was a thousand-odd miles away from his CD. He wrote a column on Ziff Davis Anchordesk about it, and boy was he pissed - even though a reboot cured the problem.
We'll see, but issues like that seem like ones that will upset "real people", not just geeks.
D
----
Marketing to Corperate (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's in it for you? (Score:2)
---
DB2 on Linux (Score:2)
Dissenter
Linux on the Desktop (Score:2)
With IBM's large stake in Linux, and IBM's large size as a company, it seems that IBM would be in a unique position to help push Linux onto the desktop. If IBM were to adopt Linux as its primary desktop operating system within the company, it would surely and quickly act as a catalyst to boost the credibility of Linux on the desktop within the corporate world and would likely spur more software vendors into considering Linux versions of their corporate desktop software, especially those who have been sitting on the fence, like Adobe, and even IBM itself (with Notes, for example).
Is there any movement within IBM to increase the importance of Linux on the desktop, even perhaps adopting Linux as a significant desktop operating system within IBM?
Re:IBM Marketing Support?!?! (Score:2)
I can particularly remember the Two nuns talking Russian (or something) talking about how "Chicago" is delayed again, and that there is an alternative.
What was lacking for OS/2 (and is also lacking with Linux today) are the commercial "killer" desktop apps. Unfortunately, from then till now, MS Office had just about taken over.
My Wall by Ten Foot Pole (Score:2)
Microsoft, GPL, and business (Score:2)
Microsoft also seems to be favoring *BSD licences (freely available, but allowed to be modified and resold, for example as OS X, with or without a *BSD license). Were there times when IBM found it preferable to work with GPL-licensed product than with product under a *BSD license? Or is the oposite always the case?
-Ben
IBM and RedHat (Score:2)
Given that IBM has traditionally been quite successful at this sort of game (using hardware and software sales as leads for larger services and support contracts), where does IBM stand vis a vis RedHat? IBM takes the high ground, RH takes the low? Direct competitors? Potential acquisition target?
How can we help? (Score:2)
IBM seem to be making a genuine effort to improve
Linux and make it more useful for everyone.
Are there things that someone like IBM cannot
do on this front? Obviously IBM, large as it is,
does not exist in a bubble. Are there some features you'd love Linux to have (to make it more sellable),
but which your corporate parent for some reason
cannot manage itself, which you must rely on
others for?
For love or job? (Score:2)
I guess what I want to know is how you see Linux being appreciated on an employee level at IBM.
Re:Office Suite (Score:2)
Nowadays I prefer LyX, but we've standardised on StarOffice at work (the marketroids still use MS Office, but you know how it is) but if SS were multi-platform, I'm sure a number of companies like mine would at least try it out. We did try out Applix but it was lacking in intuitiveness.
Re:Hypocrisy? (Score:2)
The guy in the interview is a marketing director. IBM is marketing itself as a company that supports Free software and open computing while their actions show that they are willing to take the center-stage in technological movements out to do the exact opposite. If that is not hipocrisy, then what it?
Would you defend an oil company marketing itself as environmentally friendly while in truth not giving a shit about nature on the same grounds?
Re:Hypocrisy? (Score:2)
No doubt there are people at IBM with different opinions on these issues, but I am asking for the position of IBM as a corporate entity. Large as it may be, IBM is still a single corporate entity, and cannot escape from the label of hipocrisy if it practices are inreconciable with what it preaches.
Intentions w/AIX (Score:2)
IBM is certainly pouring a lot money into Linux development recently. Why is this? Is it purely an anti-Microsoft maneuver? Was it ever?
I have noticed very few open-source developers working on IBM sponsored projects for Linux that then help move that work to AIX, which was why Sun tried to work with the community. Is IBM using the Linux developemnt for a testbed for AIX, or are you planning on replacing AIX sometime in the distant future? Let me elaborate on this further. I know the announced plan to have Linux and AIX coexist, but Operating Systems notoriously do not survive in the same market, even with deliberate planning e.g. NT and Win 9X. Has anyone at IBM considered the possibility of losing AIX? What would be the real loss for IBM? The company could still make money doing what it does best by providing support for Linux on their hardware.
Remember that the more two projects overlap the less likely they are both going to come out the other side. With the current speed of development for Linux we do not yet know what types of computing it will spread into but I imagine that not many OSes will be not in competition with it. Afterall Linux is already running on embedded systems, pdas, x86s, sparcs, alphas, macs, s/390s, and more.
Devil Ducky
Re:When will you remove the graffiti? (Score:2)
Re:Hypocrisy? (Score:2)
Because, when I buy a linux solution from IBM, my money is going into the corporate coffers which can support the CPRM division. It's kind of like buying a win2000 license gives money to MS, which allows them to push Passport on people.
If a corporation is doing something you don't agree with, it's important to refuse to support that corporation at all, regardless of whether you like their other products or not. That't the problem with corporate integration: the good parts and the bad parts are tied to one financial future.
---
Profitable? (Score:2)
Linux and PowerPC (Score:2)
Getting back the golden ring from Microsoft (Score:2)
IBM, throughout its history, has emphasized service; especially in it's high-end products. IBM has also become a formidable PC OEM vendor competing in the product-oriented PC paradigm. The last twenty years have kept IBM from showing its true strength, competing in a paradigm where the value of service is misunderstood.
Under the current paradigm, no OEM can offer complete business solutions: hardware, software, and service. The impediment has been the dependence on a closed-source operating system and applications that can be integrated by the OEM, but in the end, can only be supported by scattered vendors (with different approaches and levels of commitment to service).
Mixing Open Source with IBM software and hardware and experience in a service driven approach uniquely positions the company to offer complete, "soup-to-nuts", office solutions, and be a prime mover in the paradigm shift.
Using this approach, you can get that golden ring back from Microsoft.
What are you waiting for?
Desktop (Score:2)
There can only be one? (Score:2)
To put the question a slightly different way, are there any features in IBM operating systems that IBM is not planning to port to Linux?
steveha
Community Relations (Score:2)
Re:Linux vs AIX (Score:2)
Much better if they make sure that all important user-space OSS packages can be natively and smootly compiled on their platform.
Control of the Kernel (Score:2)
Licensing, technology and IP (Score:2)
What concerns does IBM have about Open Source Licenses like GPL, Netscape's, etc and close sourced projects?
Who needs peace and love? (Score:2)
Free patent licenses for Open Source Software (Score:2)
Mystified by Moderation (Score:2)
I posted the above comment originally at 2. A little while afterwards, it had been moderated up +1 to 3, Insightful.
Around 10 minutes later (around 3:03), the moderation attached to my comment was down to 2, Insightful.
However, there was no evidence any change in moderation had actually occured: i.e., my total karma didn't decrease by one, and I didn't see any -1 overated/troll/flamebait, etc. attached to the comment, which is usually the case when a comment is moderated down.
What gives? I've been using /. for a while, and I've never seen anything like this phenomona before.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Will IBM support the Audio/Multimedia on Linux ? (Score:2)
I hope not to hear the usual "linux has no future on the desktop".
I think hat Linux has a great future as a high-performance multimedia platform, but corporate world still seems to ignore it completely (audio even more than video)
Check out what the Linux Audio Developers are currently doing at www.linuxaudiodev.org [linuxaudiodev.org], The Home of Linux Audio Development
Benno.
Re:When will you remove the graffiti? (Score:2)
How is this effecting IBM's AIX plans (Score:2)
If this is the case are you planning to eventually replace AIX or donate AIX to the linux community and drive the development cost of the operating system to near zero?
I will tell you why.... (Score:2)
OS/2 had a major drawback: the lack of applications and drivers (I remember buying drivers for OS/2 for a certain device...). This was a really serious issue. Back in the day, I ran mostly DOS stuff and Win 3.11 stuff on it. The advantage was simple: app goes down, system stays up. I even used the office package (very usable!) that came with the bonus pack with OS/2 Warp to write papers. Needless to say that I can't read those docs nowadays. (not that I need to, mind...) For the rest: nope...nothing available for reasonable prices. This lack kept back a lot of WfW3.11 users to jump over to the sleeker OS/2.
Linux doesn't have this disadvantage: most things do exist....not always completely usable by the "normal user" but usable nevertheless. The backing of a big company could for instance make the support/implementation better for existing appications.
As for marketing campaings: back in the days OS/2 was "hot" there were numerous full-page ads in business magazines (mouse talking to an elephant comes to mind, so does a ferrari with bike pedals which made a bit of a derision of Windows without naming it). The ads were not targeted to the general public as for Windows 95 (no TV ads, no hype) but they were there. Don't forget that OS/2 was thought back then for the business customer...I think that was the major mistake, but IBM can learn from mistakes, I hope. Besides, did you ever see a mainstream ad for Windows NT4? I don't think so.
grafiti (Score:2)
Question (Score:2)
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
Re:IBM's edge (Score:2)
Compaq and Redhat are newcomers. Redhat particularly. The boost for Linux is that IBM is backing it enough to put their own name and services behind it. If Linux fails to impress enough business buyers that IBM backs away from it, it's a sure bet that other vendors will follow suit, and Linux will be quickly dismissed as a serious contender for any project and would be relegated to the hobby bin.
Most likely the failure of Linux is what Microsoft would love to see, hence their bad-mouthing Open Source and GPL. That they have chosen to throw stones is a sure indication that Linux is a serious threat. IBM + Linux, moreso.
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
here's a question (Score:2)
1) extremely easy to use, especially older folks who can't or don't want to learn complicated systems.
2) very pretty. General society likes buying things that are colorful, and simply look nice.
However, it (Linux) was designed with the programmer/hardcore user in mind, to offer power and stability at the expense of ease of use and beauty.
Even though XWindows is easy to use and looks nice, going as far as being able to appease the mainstream will most likely turn off us geeks from using it.
How do you intend on making the interface easy to use and "colorful" while still maintaining a powerful command-line, and have each not interfere with the other.
Why is IBM so terrible at marketing? (Score:2)
Why is IBM so terrible at marketing?
It seems to me that IBM has never been successful selling software for small systems. For example, OS/2 was a good operating system, but was terribly marketed. IBM called it Warp, as in bent out of shape.
IBM bought Lotus, and the Lotus desktop products continued dying.
Right now, IBM is trying to market web software using two men in funny-looking space suits. The woman who put the campaign together obviously is ignorant about technical products and technical people.
Is the involvement with Linux a way to ally IBM with a successful software product, so that it can concentrate on hardware and support? Why is IBM so terrible at marketing?
AS/400? (Score:2)
Space Suit Question (Score:2)
Graffiti... (Score:2)
Was the San Francisco Linux "Graffiti" part of a bigger, broader conspiracy to take over the world or was it just marketing-gone-wrong(tm)?
--Volrath50
Enterprise Solutions (Score:2)
How much effort is IBM putting towards improving the VisualAge support for Linux? I think that if there was a strong push to get VisualAge for C/C++ and foundation libraries out to developers, there would be a chance to improve corporate/government willingness to move desktops and internal developed applications to GNULinux.
I think the server market is going well, but the workstation market needs help like this.
It's easy to write songs, you just sit down and write them.
Re:MS Office Filters and Lotus Notes for Linux (Score:2)
Re:Enterprise Solutions (Score:2)
IBM recently released a preview version of VisualAge Smalltalk for Linux, so maybe you have hope.
3 words: (Score:2)
Re:Linux for the 400... (Score:3)
D
----
JFS and other Open Source projects... (Score:3)
Question (Score:3)
Would it help create a "critical mass" of Linux Desktops if a multi-vendor consensus desiged a quickly installable, common "first boot" Linux Desktop?
Is there value, in market building terms, of bringing to desktop Linux "The Familiar Windows Experience" of allowing a low-to-medium skilled user to sit down at a new-to-them "Standard" machine where they have a reasonable expection of knowing where resources can be found?
- By "Common Desktop Install", I mean a single CD which would after 3-8 clicks, auto install a fairly well tuned desktop version of the OS with a single GUI showing, plus several major productivity packages like Star Office, Netscape etc. Under the hood stuff would still be unique to each vendor, but what the lightweight user saw would be highly consistent.
I do not suggest removing the customizing capabilities of the OS, only the creation of a common first boot desktop for the masses.Re:Hypocrisy? (Score:3)
I strongly disagree. As an organization gets bigger it tends to be less monolithic and more factional. We don't (or shouldn't) label the United States Government as hypocritical when Congress and the President have different opinions on the issues and try to implement different plans. We don't (or shouldn't) lable the EU as hypocritical because the French and Germans have different policies on some issues. Why should IBM be labeled as hypocritical because two of its branches take different views about the importance of user freedom vs. restriction?
Beating Windows (Score:3)
---
DOOR!!
Companies and Software (Score:3)
IBM Marketing Support?!?! (Score:3)
community service? (Score:4)
--
Why doesn't IBM use Linux internally like Sun ... (Score:4)
Sun puts it's money where it's mouth is by ensuring that everyone from CEO to secretary uses a Sun box running Solaris as their workstation. They don't use Microsoft Office, they use Sun Star Office instead.
So if IBM has such faith in Linux, why aren't they using Linux on their workstation internally. Even if that is too big a step for the entire company, the tech staff would be able to cope if you made the move.
IBM's edge (Score:4)
Defacement and Microsoft (Score:4)
How does Microsoft's current campaign against Open Source in general (and the GPL and Linux) affect thinking and plans in the marketing arm? Is this something to worry about, or just Microsoft redirection? Do you have any plans to get anyone to attend the discussion hosted by O'Reilly? What is the best way for the average person (essentially, non-CIO's) to influence platform shifts?
Linux and AIX (Score:4)
--
Workstation replacement (Score:4)
IBM and Software Patents (Score:4)
Now, I'm a happy consumer of several IBM products. I'm not seeking to question the validity of the Big Blue intellectual property vault, nor am I doubting IBM's ability to develop innovative products.
I've looked at several [cptech.org] of your corporation's software patents. In my humble, uneducated opinion, patents such as these (and others) owned by IBM might conceivably either be enforced against, or hinder (just by their existence, prima facie validity and the implied, interpreted threat of an infringement suit)the work of a free-software developer.
We've heard what Bruce Perens has to say about software patents. I'd like to ask you just how far is IBM willing to go in embracing Linux and/or the free-software movement? Specifically, is IBM willing to take a hard look at its patent practices, and potentially committ to sharing its intellectual property with free software developers?
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Whither Network Computing? (Score:4)
Can Network Computing be considered something of a 'Holy Grail' for the business software environment? And is it IBM strategy to leverage Linux to support an alternative NC architecture based on OS concepts, tools, and products; one that could possibly usurp the MS monopoly on the business software environment?
Please say Yes.
Reaction... (Score:4)
Could you please tell us what the most common variation on the "Why should we use Linux instead of (what we already have)" question you receive is? What is your general response?
Thanks in advance.
Embracing Linux Philosophy? (Score:5)
As a PR person, you try to encourage a certain viewpoint. During meetings, is the Linux philosophy presented as a tool to be used against us, or as a way of changing people's concepts of software-- that is, do you try to sell the Linux philosophy as well as Linux, or are you selling Linux by using the philosophy?
MS Office Filters and Lotus Notes for Linux (Score:5)
In my opinion Linux has a long way to go before it can make it to the home desktop. Ease of use is one of the greatest inhibitors. However, the corporate desktop has very different requirements. Security, remote management, reliablility, simple license management and at the same time, a corporate desktop requires only a handful of very clearly defined employee responsabilities.
As I see it, the greatest limitation Linux experiences on the corporate desktop is interfacing with customers running MS Office, and secondly, Linux lacks a corporate email package. That requirement could be filled quite perfectly by Lotus Notes.
Is IBM taking steps to sell Linux on the corporate desktop as a simple and secure alternative to Microsoft's mindboggleingly complex Licensing and questionable security? If so, what is being done to address the lack of MS Office document compatability, and the lack of a client email/database package such as Lotus Notes?
1 billion vs 1 billion (Score:5)
Now: for as long as I can remember, IBM has been synonymous with "good technology, bad marketing". OS/2 stands out as a particular example.
Do you think that a cool (Dr. Evil style) 1 billion of MS's marketing dollars can match the same amount of IBM's best and brightest cranking on Linux? Do you see this as a marketing battle, a technology battle, or both (I doubt its neither, although philosophical issues factor in too)?
Linux vs AIX (Score:5)
IBM and OSS (Score:5)
I've been generally impressed at the level of support IBM has given to various open source project such as Apache. Other areas however have obviuously been neglected, for example the opening of drivers. Witness this recent thread [zork.net] on the linux kernel mailing list in which one Dan Streetman from IBM states plainly:
But management doesn't listen to me when I say it will never get accepted so I had to make a token effort of submitting it to prove it won't get accepted. And I did try hard to convince them to release the actual driver but it didn't work.
This obviously makes linux developers doubtful about the real motivations behind IBMs open source efforts:
I find it very odd indeed with IBM's big voice of open source praise, yada yada, and what Lou has said in the past, that there would be any question at all of wether it would be open source or not. Isn't big blue behind open source? Or is it just for publicity? Makes me wonder now... -- Mike A. Harris
My question is the following:
Will IBMs open source effort in the future be limited to the obvious areas (net/web related stuff, linux ports to IBM hardware) or are there any plans to educate other IBM departments about the benefits of opening the development process? If yes, are there any practical examples (winmodem drivers for thinkpad laptops, etc.)?
Thanks in advance
Hypocrisy? (Score:5)
How can IBM reconcile it's spoken commitment to Linux and Free software software with it's center-stage activity in projects like CPRM on harddisks and SDMI for music?
Even if IBM does not recognize that these user hostile technologies are at 180 degrees to the ethics and values on which the society in which they wish to parktake are based, how do they believe that these technologies, which rely on laws to keep the user from working around them, can possibly made compatible with an open software model?
Does IBM believe that they continue to use the Linux and Free software message of Freedom and cooperation ("Peace, love, linux") as a corporate image while working on technologies whose only purpose is the control users and take away their natural freedoms?
How does IBM as a corporation stand in regard to the American DMCA and similiar acts internationally within the WIPO treaties, which many Free software developers consider a threat to our movement?
&& Oskar Sandberg
Hard Numbers for Soft Heads (Score:5)
Several other like-minded folks across many of the daughter business have recently begun trying to formulate a plan of attack viz. Linux acceptance.
I assume when IBM pitches Linux to corporations you have some sort of metric that gauges linux against other os's and shows various strengths and weaknesses.
Are these metrics/comparisons available to the general public? Preferebly in management friendly
IBM Linux distro? (Score:5)
So, will IBM create a Linux distribution (or multiple distributions)?
If not, why? And what distributions will/has IBM choose to support/market?
If so, why? And will that/those distribution(s) compete with other distributions (i.e. be directly available) or only (or at least primarily) available as part of an IBM 'solution'?
Re:IBM and OSS (Score:5)
Mmm..ouch! Didn't think that would make it onto /.!
As I replied to Mike, keep in mind that IBM is huge and there has not been a mandate from Lou stating "everything is Open!". There still has to be a business reason to Open code, especially if that code has been closed for a long time and is now getting 'ported'. I tried to provide a business reason, but it didn't work.
After having said that, I do wish IBM educated their employees on the benefits of Open Source, and encouraged more internal software to be Open. From what I've seen so far, the primary focus is on what Open software is already out there, and available. In fact the process of getting internal Open Source approval is not simple.
And (in case my manager is reading this ;-) getting approval to work on Open Source in your 'personal time' is a long process too.
This obviously makes linux developers doubtful about the real motivations behind IBMs open source efforts
No, no, no - IBM does have an interest and good motivation in Open Source software. I won't speculate on (i.e. don't know) the actual motivation of the real decision makers, but I know that there are a lot of people internally that are very pro-OSS, for the right reasons; and that's what really matters. Keep in mind that IBM is allowing internally created code to be Open Sourced! There are plenty of projects at DW [ibm.com], and any IBMer can get approval to release certain code as Open Source. It might be a little more difficult than if you were doing it on your own, but hey - IBM is paying people to write Open Source software! Just because there are some cases were employees couldn't get approval to Open certain code, doesn't mean that IBM has bad intentions or motivations.
Simple two-part question. (Score:5)
2. Any plans to open ANY of the technologies in OS/2 to the linux/open source world? Since it is not a currently supported product (although that seems to change from year to year), it shouldnt hurt the bottom line too much. Any technology you can offer from previous OS efforts are going to be helpful.
Thanks for answering these questions, as I have been wondering about them for months.
Open Source and Patents (Score:5)
It's great to see that IBM is committing to an open approach, both in their specific funding of Linux development, but also in their more general push to use open, standard technologies like XML and Java, and to participate in the standards process. On the other hand, IBM holds more patents than any other business in the world, by a fair majority, and what's more, are quite proud of this standing. Now I am not at all knocking IBMs desire to produce patentable technology, and I do think it is indicative of their technological leadership that they have acquired them,
but...
I'm wondering how IBM's dedication to openness will interact with their commitment to producing patentable technology. Will IBM's contributions to open source projects include these patentable ideas, and will open source projects in which IBM participates be licensed to employ said ideas, even to freely distribute software based on them? If IBM is willing to do this, how will they ensure that their patented IP is not picked up and incorporated into competing products? If not, could you give us some insight into the decision making process as regards these patents, and why IBM's openness strategy does not extend to them?
Johnath
Is there a Linux Group in IBM? (Score:5)
Ooh. I've got another. Given how Gung-Ho IBM is about the whole Open Source thing, why do they insist on basing the entire internal business on a proprietary mail system (Lotus Notes) and proprietary word processor formats (Mostly Lotus Word Pro, though I occassionally get a MS Word .DOC file.) This makes it hard for the previously mentioned techies to live the Windows-Free existence that they so fervently desire. Can someone give the Lotus people the stunningly effective Al Capone teamwork speech and get them to document their file formats or at least release specs for them?
OS/2 (Score:5)
Linux vs AIX (Score:5)
In the past few months, the question has come up more than once as to whether AIX or Linux is a more appropriate solution to whatever problem my company is current facing...and often times we've installed Linux on commodity hardware instead of buying a fancy RS/6000 machine and buying another copy of AIX.
My question is that as Linux grows in stability and wider corporate-level acceptance, what's IBM going to do about it? IBM has invested a good deal in the AIX system and I'm sure that they generate a fairly hefty revenue stream from it. Do you forsee any of the IBM Linux initiatives losing funding if they encroach on AIX market share?
Office Suite (Score:5)
On a side note, how 'bout a JFS install disk like the XFS one?
IBM + Linux = PPC? (Score:5)
IBM makes PowerPCs. Linux runs on PowerPCs. Does IBM's commitment to Linux imply that they will take the logical step and we will finally see a commodity (non-Apple) PPC motherboard?
This project always seems to generate so much enthusiasm when presented here or in other forums that its continued non-existence is shocking. Particularly since the PPC's superior electrical characteristics have made it all the more intriguing in the current energy climate.
buying linux desktops for the home? (Score:5)
with linux pre-installed or, at least, with
no OS. A few of the big companies (IBM, Dell)
had just made some statements about how cozy
they were with linux, so I called IBM to see
how serious this was.
I told the salesperson that I wanted to buy
an Aptiva with linux. She told me IBM sells
(and I swear I'm not making this up)
"Wintel Solutions".
I told her that's an oxymoron.
She started explaining to me: " yes, it stands
for Windows and Intel".
So, two questions really, do your sales training
manuals now explain the difference between an
acronym and an oxymoron, and can I buy an Aptiva
(or whatever they are called now) with linux
installed or with no OS? One single Aptiva, not
an officefull? And... the price will be less than if I
got it with Win (right? no OS license fee).
To me this is the litmus test of a company's
commitment to linux. I'm sick of hearing that
to get linux I need to buy a server or that
I can't be sold a compuer without an OS because
that means I'm pirating my OS.
PR (Score:5)
Does IBM plan on investing more in the image of Linux and open source? Will there be strong defensive marketing against MS statements? Do you think a closer balance can be made between pro-Microsoft and pro-Linux marketing?
---
Linux roles (Score:5)
Linux for the 400... (Score:5)
With the recent support IBM has been giving to the Linux community are there any plans to start devoting resources to the Linux on the as/400 project?
DocWatson