Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
IBM Caldera Software Linux

The OS Community Embraces IBM 305

Posted by michael from the we-don't-need-another-hero dept.
Joel Dutt writes "IBM... 'the corporation known as Big Blue has seen its reputation in the global open-source community shift from suspect sugar daddy to knight in shining armor.' Newsweek has an interesting article in its latest issue, discussing the relationship between the open-source community and the corporate giant."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The OS Community Embraces IBM More

The OS Community Embraces IBM

Comments Filter:

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:01PM (#10286367)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:I swear I'm not trolling, but (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AvantLegion ( 595806 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:04PM (#10286393) Journal
      So what's the problem?

      There isn't a problem. It's more of an "odd couple" pairing sort of thing.

    • Re:I swear I'm not trolling, but (Score:4, Funny)

      by ValiantSoul ( 801152 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:14PM (#10286456)
      "They make solid machines"

      Not to mention heavy as hell
    • So what's the problem?

      AIX. BTW, we have a large AIX server in our test lab, and I told the IBM guy that years ago IBM was "the Evil Empire" but I thought they were redeeming themselves by supporting Linux. I think he thought I was a nutcase. He may be right, in any case.

    • Re:I swear I'm not trolling, but (Score:4, Interesting)

      by DrSkwid ( 118965 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:53PM (#10286679) Journal
      no dork I've ever met didn't like IBM

      You should try some of us history dorks.

      <quote

      IBM and the Holocaust [ibmandtheholocaust.com] is the stunning story of IBM's strategic alliance with Nazi Germany -- beginning in 1933 in the first weeks that Hitler came to power and continuing well into World War II. As the Third Reich embarked upon its plan of conquest and genocide, IBM and its subsidiaries helped create enabling technologies, step-by-step, from the identification and cataloging programs of the 1930s to the selections of the 1940s.

      </quote

      The book is a treatise on why we should be concerned with electronic privacy and data retention. You might trust your current government but who's going to be reading *your* census forms in 50 years.

      • I wouldn't overestimate the impact IBM machinery had on Holocaust. I live in Poland, where most of the Jews perished (in Aushwitz and Treblinka and other places). The Nazis didn't use sofisticated techniques to hunt Jews. They simply ordered them first to gather in ghettos, put bounty on them, threatened death to anyone offering them any kind of help and then killed everybody in ghettos, and anybody in the street who looked Jewish to them (killed, or sent to a death camp). All of this could be done with pen

        • Re:I swear I'm not trolling, but (Score:5, Informative)

          by b17bmbr ( 608864 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:45PM (#10286980)
          the final solution was finalized in 1942 at the Wanssee conference. The man who devised the plan was Reinhardt Heydrich. He was at the time #3 in the Nazi party, a fanatical hitler supporter, a deputy reichsfuhrer, and in charge of bohmeia and moravia (sudetenland). He was later killed by czech resistance members who flew in from england. he was killed by a bomb on a corner in prague. hitler responded by razing the city of lidice (http://www.lidice-memorial.cz/index_uk.htm).

          as for pencil/paper accounting, yes, it can and was done. keep in mind german fanaticalness regarding order. it was possible also because most of the prisoners went into ghettos, then later, to a final camp. (sorry to be so objective and analytical). the records were kept at each place. the germans checked in and checked out everyone who came and went. it wasn't like they let them leave or anything. now, did the nazis use ibm adding machines and stuff. hell, at that time, who wasn't?

    • Re:I swear I'm not trolling, but (Score:4, Insightful)

      by tonywong ( 96839 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:02PM (#10286728) Homepage
      As someone who has worked with and against Big Blue (note, not for), it appears that most of IBM's margins now come from offering services on top of their products, whereas in the past their profit came from hardware and products.

      This inversion means that IBM likes to vend their hardware and software in order to make a lot more money on the upsell of services in the guise of business integration.

      Now I know this can be perceived negatively, but Linux, from IBM's point of view, is a product that is offered for free, without any tier 1 service provider to make an upsell.

      Their existing marketing still relies on the adage that 'no one ever got fired for going with IBM.' And it's worked well against other Tier 1 vendors, let alone smaller shops.

      Now, they've got an open playing field by using free software, with free updates, and they get to profit from it for literally nothing.

      This is a bargain as even their in-house products require money to be invested for support and development, let alone production and packaging.

      The bottom line is as long as IBM can make $$$ from linux without any real competition they will stand behind Linux, and it looks like this situation will be a mutually beneficial one for a while.
      • As someone who has worked with and against Big Blue (note, not for), it appears that most of IBM's margins now come from offering services on top of their products, whereas in the past their profit came from hardware and products.

        So the move to support Linux implies that IBM sees more service revenue coming from the Linux model. If so, and assuming that IBM wishes to maximize revenue, does this mean that Linux sales represent more volume, and/or does IBM see Linux as requiring more service than its other
        • In case you haven't really noticed, IBM's big thing (except for a small abbaration known as the PC *wink*) has never been PCs, but large-scale systems, like the zSeries today. And large server class systems have never been and will never be "point-and-click" easy. In addition, just about every large corporate buyer, likes support contracts. If something seriously borks, you can expect IBM to fix it ASAP. The closest analogy a support contract can be made to (for an organization with an already well-seas
      • Open source isn't profitable for IBM by a long shot at this time. It is costing them a fortune.
        What their contributions have done, is make selling linux servers a credible option for their competitors HP, dell and even Sun.
        Their Linux strategy does not seem to be harming IBM terribly either, (not as much as for example apache tomcat seems to be harming websphere) so is their current support for Linux a public relations investment? Or perhaps it was meant to prevent the not entirely unrealistic scenario of a
    • Try getting the sound or the built-in modem to work on a two-year-old thinkpad:-) MWave wasn't just a winmodem, it was a win-modem/sound combo, so neither one worked.

    • Rubicon of Open Source: IBM Supporting Linux (Score:5, Insightful)

      by reporter ( 666905 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:31PM (#10286892) Homepage
      The key point in the history of open source is IBM embracing Linux. Without the support of IBM, most commercial companies simply saw Linux as interesting software with reliability approaching a toy. Regardless of whether this perception is true, once IBM supported Linux and shipped mainframes with it installed, commercial companies were willing to entertain the idea of running Linux in their datacenters. These companies have faith that even if any problem with Linux arise, then IBM would surely fix the problem within 24 hours. Even if Linux were initially unreliable, IBM would ensure that it has 6 sigma reliability. Such is the reputation and commitment of IBM.

      The rest is open-source history.

      Interestingly, IBM's embracing Linux is one of the factors eliminating Sun as a viable competitor in the market for highend servers. 6-sigma Linux, backed by an army of free programmers and advice-givers, versus closed proprietary Solaris is tantamount to a battle between a F-22 (stealth fighter) and a Mig 17. No contest.

    • I attempted to get the parts needed to fix one of the PS machines. I was met with scorn by the people I called at IBM and by the authorized dealer I was sent to. I loved the machines but that was intolerable to me. I was trying to fix an older PS machine that had the integrated monitor. A chip was bad causing the 'red screen of death'.

      I managed to hack the computer to use another monitor and pulled the customers data off of it and put it all in a nice clone.

      It's been nearly 20 years since that time and on

    • Re:I swear I'm not trolling, but (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hugesmile ( 587771 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @05:35PM (#10287268)
      Not to mention, no dork I've ever met didn't like IBM.

      I disagree. Way back in the early 80's when I was graduating from college, IBM was thought of by the "smart" tech crowd in VERY much the same way as Microsoft is thought of today. If there were a slashdot crowd in 1981, they would have bashed IBM left and right for monopolistic behaviors.

      The geeks were enthusiastic about Dec, HP, and later Sun.

      I remember my college interview with IBM. Our college had a bidding system to land the coveted job interviews with the campus recruiters. MANY Seniors bid ALL their points for the year to get an interview with IBM. (I wouldn't necessarily call these people the "smart" crowd.)

      I scooped up an interview slot for no bid-points when there was an interview candidate who didn't show. Even though I had deep-seated negative feelings toward Big Blue, I knew it could be a great job out of school. Toward the beginning of the interview, I asked the guy about the position he was interviewing for. "Oh, there's no position available. We just do these interviews for the P.R." I ended the interview, politely telling him what I thought of that! No sense in wasting my time. The 25 students that wasted all their interview bid points were furious when I walked out and told them!

      Of course, I got a "ding letter" a couple weeks later.

    • If IBM wants to help open source, then offer some of the developers access to their patent filling system. If they were fully behind open source for the reasons they state, there isn't any problem with them offing to fully cover the costs associated with getting 100 or so patents. The open source community can't protect its self without a patent portfolio and IBM knows that.

      Don't forget, IBM was the MSFT of the 1980's in so many ways.

    • Re:I swear I'm not trolling, but (Score:4, Insightful)

      by catwh0re ( 540371 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @09:02PM (#10288281)
      Yeah they're better now, but in the 80's they were notorious for going around bullying other companies with their massive patent portfolio, something which many suspect MS is planning.(With MS patenting sorting images by date for example.)

      Since then however IBM have found much better ways to stay in business, one of them is by being a good IT global citizen. Simply selling products in growing fields, rather than trying to use the american justice system to stamp out a new innovation & a new way of thinking.
      By using the american justice system to get what you want (rather than competing for it) will only foster the growth in countries outside of the USA, and ultimately put USA behind these other countries. (An example is RIAA vs P2P, imagine what would happen if the RIAA got their way.)

  • IBM... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:01PM (#10286374)
    10. I've Been Moved
    9. Idiots Become Managers
    8. Idiots Buy More
    7. Impossible to Buy Machine
    6. Incredibly Big Machine
    5. Industry's Biggest Mistake
    4. International Brotherhood of Mercenaries
    3. It Boggles the Mind
    2. It's Better Manually
    1. Itty-Bitty Monopoly

  • Fighting evil everyday... (Score:5, Funny)

    by chrispyman ( 710460 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:02PM (#10286384)
    Well ofcourse they're well liked, I mean they fight off the evil SCOmonsters that try and terrorize the city everyday.

  • Not to be a troll (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Stevyn ( 691306 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:04PM (#10286394)
    But IBM is still a company. They may stand behind open source and believe in it's potential and power. However, they are still a company with shareholders and responsibilities. If something unforseeable happened in the near future and open source software didn't have the potential for them to make billions a year on it, wouldn't they adapt too?
    • That's the point. IBM has seen the power of OSS, and has embraced it. It's simply one of the companies that understands what the rest of us have known for years.

      And if something unforeseeable happens and open source for some reason couldn't be a potential of money, well it is open, and they could just change the source so that it was a potential for money. Obviously the base is good, and from here on out they can control their own destiny with it, just like every open source programmer out there.

    • Re:Not to be a troll (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The_Mystic_For_Real ( 766020 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:13PM (#10286447)
      Open Source is not a panacea, requirement for life, or any sort of deity. Therefore, it seems foolish to treat it like one.

      Of course they are a company, with shareholders and the the desire to make a profit. So are Red Hat, VA Linux, and Mandrake.

      There is nothing wrong with a company supporting Linux, that's exactly what Linux needs to bring it to the attention of the general public. IBM has essentially been advertising Linux for a while now. They've put more money into Linux than pretty much anyone else has. This is what Linux has lacked: big money supporting Linux.

    • Re:Not to be a troll (Score:5, Insightful)

      by stevesliva ( 648202 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:14PM (#10286460) Journal
      Interestingly enough, this Newsweek article hints at a material impact to IBM's bottom line that I haven't heard mentioned elsewhere. IBM's support of Linux plus IT professionals' and CS students' love of Linux creates goodwill that translates into some tangible gain when the IBM, HP, Dell and Sun sales reps come calling.

      Everywhere else, the press hacks mention IBM's billions of dollars in Linux-related revenue, but they don't mention that an IT staffer told to buy Windoze servers from either HP or IBM might inexplicably favor IBM because they're a Groklaw reader.

    • Nothing troll-like about your post. It's strikes me as good common sense.

      My impression of IBM is that they would prefer not to be in the operating system business. They would rather that there exist some external, highly portable, highly popular OS that they can base their systems on, and perhaps enhance when they have to. They don't seem to want to push AIX everywhere, and they certainly do not want to be at the mercy of MicroSoft (even if they helped create that monster).

      And then along comes Linux.

      T

      • My impression of IBM is that they would prefer not to be in the operating system business.

        Even more, it is my impression that IBM would also be out of the software market as well, and comoditize it instead. The most profitable part of a solution is in professional services.

    • about the open source movement is its capacity to leverage human greed for a productive end. Yeah, IBM's going to look out for its own interests, not ours. But for the moment our interests coincide, so that's a good thing. And the positive things IBM does for us while it's in IBM's interests to do so won't go away once IBM's interests change-- the GPL means that once IBM splits with the OSS community the OSS community, unentangled, can just take its code and run.
    • I have to laugh at this IBM lovefest because I remember when IBM was considered every bit the nemesis that Microsoft is considered today, by the same sorts of people.

      Since I've now seen it with my own eyes, I have proof that it's possible that the next generation will astound many of you by embracing Microsoft as their hero.

      It doesn't pay to get too carried away in your caricatures of heroes and villains.

      You were warned....

      • I have to laugh at this IBM lovefest because I remember when IBM was considered every bit the nemesis that Microsoft is considered today, by the same sorts of people.

        Oh yes, and I can remember when I started in the industry, at the start of the 90s, that a lot of people saw Microsoft as the "white knight" who was going to save us from big bad IBM...

        • They did (Score:4, Insightful)

          by jbolden ( 176878 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @06:10PM (#10287446) Homepage
          Microsoft did save us from the hardware lock-in single vendor world that IBM was trying to create. The result is that "PC" hardware sells at just above cost and is available from a widge range of vendors offering an even wider range of possible products.

          Now we just have to do the same thing at the OS and office suite levels and...

  • It still seems so strange. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bersl2 ( 689221 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:09PM (#10286428) Journal
    IBM---the mega-corporation to end all technological mega-corporations---seeing ANY benefit in Linux?

    Then Sun, when they're not against us, is with us.

    Finally, Novell sees positives in what we do.

    We've all shown the belief that Free software can be profitable. But seeing it in action is something entirely weird and unusual, but in a very satisfying way.
    • All they've shown is that free software cuts licensing costs.

      It isn't profitable by itself. Customers pay less to Microsoft and more to IBM (and a bit to SuSE and Red Hat) for extra services they render.

      There's nothing to this - IBM replaces a generic packaged service (Microsoft's installable files) with more customized labor-intensive service (IBM's Linux services). I'm not saying Linux is same expensive or Windows is better, I'm just saying there's nothing sustainable to it.

      Yeah, they are doing fine no
      • And what will happen when there is ONLY free software left?

        I doubt it will ever happen. I think that there will always be applications specialised enough, and costly enough to make (like some specialist program with lots of chemical data in it), that OS volunteers would fail --- say, because they lack the laboratory equipment necessary --- to recreate such piece of software. Of course, separating free software from proprietary data needed to run that software (like with quake clients --- free --- and ID

      • Yeah, they are doing fine now migrating people to Linux; once they're done and people want to upgrade from kernel 2.4 to kernel 2.6, will they still need IBM? I would say 50% will do it on their own, 20% will choose other vendors (HP, local guys, etc.) and 30% will go back to IBM asking low-cost service.

        You're not making any sense. You seem to be saying customers will abandon IBM for cheaper support. Well, that depends entirely on how good IBM's support is doesn't it?

        IBM is a *services* company, that

  • Really, I don't see anything really "interesting" about the article other than the fact it is in Newsweek. I don't think any slashdotter should be surprised by anything said in the article, other than the fact that Newsweek made many mistakes they had to correct at the end of the article. Even this isn't really interesting, as well hey, people make mistakes.

    We learned:
    a) Open Source People think SCO is evil
    b) IBM sells hardware and support
    c) SCO is going after IBM
    d) Absolutly Nothing

    So can we somehow mo
    • Not only is it in a "mainstream" publication, it notes "SCO's case looks as if it's close to collapse." It's hard to find tech publications that see the case so clearly.

    • I don't see anything really "interesting" about the article other than the fact it is in Newsweek.

      The fact that the story has reached a major mainstream press outlet means that the stock market will now take notice of what they have seemingly been unaware of this whole time while investing in SCO. I know MS is allegedly behind SCO financially, but the mainstream non-techie stock market traders probably didn't have a clue and thought SCO was just another stock market investment. This article will make th

    • Sorry, pal, it's like this:
      1. Slashdot is the official mountpiece of OSDN and must act as such
      2. Since 50% of stories are crap, they can't allow moderation of stories because that would cause significant negative publicity

      P.S. I can't believe this - I created "michael filter" not to see any of his bullshit trol/FUD postings and this one still got displayed.

  • IBM has something to gain though. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mind21_98 ( 18647 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:12PM (#10286444) Homepage Journal
    They really have done some great things for the open-source community. Howerver, by being affilated with the open-source community, they ultimately get more buyers of their products. This helps erase the market share of its competitors. Just something to think about.

  • The enemy of my enemy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jhylkema ( 545853 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:15PM (#10286463)
    is my friend.

    Linux and IBM, strange bedfellows indeed. IBM is every bit the big, evil, monopolist corporation that RMS and the rest of the Linux zealots rail against. IIRC, IBM, too, is a "convicted monopolist" just as M$ is and Apple tried to be. The only difference is, IBM succeeded where Apple failed - they had the hardware *and* the software lock-in. What was the saying? Oh yeah, "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM." Today, replace IBM with Microsoft. By the way, how many American jobs has IBM shipped to India or replaced with H1Bs under the pretext of a labor shortage? And how much of the same has IBM helped others do under the same pretext through their consultancy, IBM Global Services? But since they've chosen to embrace Linux because it's in their short-term self-interest to do so, all of their many sins are forgiven.

    Make no mistake about it, IBM doesn't give a ripshit about "the community" or anyone/thing else other than the Almighty Dollar. The only reason they're fighting SCO is because they're heavily invested in Linux as a way to compete with Microsoft. If IBM felt that it was in their short-term best interest to wipe Linux off of the face of the Earth, they would.
    • IBM doesn't give a ripshit about "the community" or anyone/thing else other than the Almighty Dollar...If IBM felt that it was in their short-term best interest to wipe Linux off of the face of the Earth, they would.

      You've got it right.

      In spite of what the participants in this OSS-IBM fantasy lovefest would like to believe, the "enemy of my enemy"-logic works out in the long term only if you're approximately in the same league as your temporary ally.

      IBM can - and will - devour open source when it prof

      • Quoth the insightful poster:

        In spite of what the participants in this OSS-IBM fantasy lovefest would like to believe, the "enemy of my enemy"-logic works out in the long term only if you're approximately in the same league as your temporary ally.

        Right, to do otherwise is simply to embrace your corrupter. Ask Socrates about that one.

        Nevermind, they don't teach that in public schools anymore. Many, if not most, public school graduates can't read their damn diplomas, much less Plato.
      • Amerigo Bonasera:Linux community::IBM:Don Corleone.

        Godfather fans out there will get that one.

    • Re:The enemy of my enemy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AvantLegion ( 595806 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:55PM (#10286687) Journal
      Make no mistake about it, IBM doesn't give a ripshit about "the community" or anyone/thing else other than the Almighty Dollar.

      You're right, but you completely miss the point.

      Free software has never been about "it's free but you must pay your way by worshipping the software ideals and community", no matter how much some may with that to be true. Free software has been about "use it, but keep it free" (and sometimes, "share your changes" as well).

      IBM is using free software as it has always envisioned to be used. Commercial use is not merely tolerated, but has always been a GOAL. The free software ideals want corporations to rely (and play by the rules of) free software, instead of creating their own non-free solutions for people to become dependent of.

      IBM is playing by the rules - not by being forced or threatened, but in good faith to the ideals and rules of free software.

      • Free software has never been about "it's free but you must pay your way by worshipping the software ideals and community", no matter how much some may with that to be true.

        Reading /. you'd be hard pressed to think otherwise.

        Actually, I think the best thing that would happen for Linux and the software industry in general is that the whole cult mentality with its "bring me the head of Darl McBride"-attitude went the way of the dodo-bird.

        The people who actually make useful OSS should not have their imag

  • Flashbacks (Score:5, Funny)

    by aelbric ( 145391 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:17PM (#10286481)
    Why do I half expect to hear one day soon:

    IBM: Linus, I am your father!
    (Queue Imperial March)

  • Sun Jealousy towards IBM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gmajor ( 514414 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:19PM (#10286489) Journal
    I am a frequent reader of Jonathan Schwartz' blog [slashdot.org], and one of his constant themes/rants is that the open source community respects IBM more than it deserves.

    In my opinion, other companies (i.e. Sun) are jealous of IBM's unique position and would like nothing more than to ruin that relationship.

    IBM, while not entirely faultless, has taken a huge risk in tying some of its business and marketing campaigns to the success of Linux. Even while having AIX. I wish the same could be said for Sun. Glad to see it's paying of for IBM, in the form of profits and community goodwill.

    • Re:Sun Jealousy towards IBM (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Brian Blessed ( 258910 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:43PM (#10286613)
      I think this could be a good thing; Schwartz' jealousy of IBM's reputation could bring out some competitiveness.

      The Open Source community will benefit greatly from two companies vying to outdo each other in a quest for our affections by seeing who can contribute the most.

      - Brian.

    • Re:Sun Jealousy towards IBM (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I am a frequent reader of Jonathan Schwartz' blog, and one of his constant themes/rants is that the open source community respects IBM more than it deserves. ... In my opinion, other companies (i.e. Sun) are jealous of IBM's unique position and would like nothing more than to ruin that relationship.

      The funny thing is, this is exactly WHY the open source community respects IBM and not Sun. Rather than fixating on "how can I make Sun positive to the open source community" Schwartz is fixating on "how can I
    • And IBM is the rich strong hubby. However Sun is the geek thats in love with this girl..

      So Sun and IBM can hate each other, but Linux measures IBM's sincerity against his $$$

      However Linux is no simple girl and really shes planning to have a kid from both, and to take both IBM and Sun away from their children from previous marriage, AIX and Solaris. This way Linux's children will inherit the fortunes from both companies.

      In the end Linux is a tramp. Shes already had SGI's XFS in her, toyed with HP, and now

  • Show me the money (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sql*kitten ( 1359 ) * on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:22PM (#10286505)
    IBM, last time I checked, made something like 45% of its revenue from hardware and 35% from consulting. Software accounts for a paltry 15% (the rest they make from finance). IBM is not in the software business, really. They make AIX so they can sell RS/6000s. They make VisualAge so people can write desktop applications for DB/2 databases, and they make DB/2 so people will buy mainframes. The consulting part of IBM is fairly vendor-neutral; I've worked with them to implement BEA WebLogic on Solaris instead of WebSphere on AIX for example.

    Software is an overhead for IBM. It's a distraction from hardware and services. Open Source allows IBM to sell hardware and services without having to pay to develop the software to run on it and/or implement on behalf of customers. That's the reason, and the only reason, IBM is into Linux.
    • Software is an overhead for IBM.

      Interesting: 'shrinkwrap' software is becoming a commodity, while 'custom' (integration, customer/vertical-specific software) software will remain high-margin. Services (or at least a large and profitable part of 'services') is just another name for custom software, which requires smart, creative people and provides higher margins than commodityware.

      I don't think IBM will get out of the overall 'software' business anytime soon, though they will probably get out of the co

    • Re:Show me the money (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:54PM (#10286684)
      And they make Lotus Notes to irritate people all around the globe.
    • Its sort of like Apple. Mac OS X is developed so they can sell hardware.
    • Software is an overhead for IBM. It's a distraction from hardware and services. Open Source allows IBM to sell hardware and services without having to pay to develop the software to run on it and/or implement on behalf of customers. That's the reason, and the only reason, IBM is into Linux.

      In other words, IBM's business model is exactly the way open source advocates want the entire industry to be. And that's a good thing. Hardware and services are things with tangible value. Software is just a bunch of

  • Who else to go to? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ShatteredDream ( 636520 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:26PM (#10286522) Homepage
    Sun: we build and get you to contribute to open source products to use as the foundation for our for-profit products and then let the "Evil Empire" get said open source project firmly in its sights. Sometimes we are going super hardcore for open source, othertimes we are terrified of it and attack it with wild-eyed zeal.

    HP: When we're not whoring to Microsoft, we'll be more than happy to sell Linux to our cutomsters, but then we'll go right back to our buddies in Redmond.

    Dell: We are such corporatist tools that if it is remotely risky we won't touch it with less than a 10 foot pole. We'll sell a few Linux boxes, but claim the way most families claim a gay cousin.

    Microsoft: I really hope no one has to explain this one to you.

    IBM: Linux lets us standardize and save money. We build on Linux a little, we save tons of money, thrash our competition and make tons of money. Invest over $1B today, and we make many times more than that. Not only that, but Linux is a great stick to beat Microsoft with.

    I wonder why IBM looks like such a good ally. Maybe it has to do with them seeing the growth of a robust Linux platform and community as the fastest way to them not only getting revenge, but being the preeminent IT company in the world.

    No company will actually side with OSS for altruistic reasons, but it isn't hard to guage motives. IBM's motives are the most sympathetic of all of the big IT companies to Linux. IBM sees guiding Linux into the big time as the best way to become a massive force unto itself. Most other companies like to ride the fence and only occassionally flirt with Linux which is the enemy of their ally, Microsoft.

    The problem with most OEMs IMO is that Microsoft is more than just a supplier to them. They don't have the business sense to see that dependence on Microsoft Windows means that they cannot act in their own interests if Microsoft makes the XBox2 essentially a real computer for John Q. Citizen. It makes them like a cheap fuck buddy, and when Microsoft is through with Dell, HP, etc they will be discarded as quickly.

    The only thing I personally wish that an OEM had the foresight to do, was for Apple to give a few million dollars to the OSI with a tacit purpose of working on the OSX port of open office and general open office improvement beyond that.

    • Re:Who else to go to? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DF5JT ( 589002 )
      "I wonder why IBM looks like such a good ally."

      That's because Linux is no threat and never has been one. Neither did it threaten AIX as their Unix-OS due to the many hardware specific improvements and development tools of AIX, nor did they have to kow-tow before Microsoft to sell their hardware.

      Linux adds the kind of flexibilty they have tried to go after with project Monterey, with the big advantage that Linux already offers a variety of platforms that are interesting for IBM as a hardware vendor: Power-

  • IBM is in the service industry (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:33PM (#10286564)
    Sure, they make hardware and sure, they sell software. However, they have legions of consultants that make money providing SERVICE to their clientele. Supporting software and tools that are both inexpensive/free and easily (freely?) maintained only helps their consulting business which is probably where their highest margins are. You have to sell LOTS of computers and peripherals to make the same profit you make by parking a dozen consultants at a customer location for 6 months.

    Cheers,
  • ... as-yet-untested open-source-community agreement, the General Public License (GPL), negates SCO's claims of code ownership

    Interesting way to mention GPL.

    Even more interesting is the fact that this article's on msnbc that is owned by microsoft.

    Good to see an article that doesn't take any side in particular

  • vested interest (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Hellasboy ( 120979 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:42PM (#10286604)
    Maybe someone else has the exact quote, but didn't Bill Gates say that he sees the future of computers as when people will pay for the OS (subscription of course) and the hardware will be free?

    IBM is pushing the opposite. The OS is free and people have to pay for the hardware.
    • The OS is free and people have to pay for the hardware.

      The way it should be. The tangibles that require substantial physical resources to manufacture are sold to us, and we own actual, tangible property. The information required to use that property is free.

      Imagine if Sears gave out free tools but you had to pay a subscription to use them. I know some will take issue with this comparison, but I think it's a good one. If we let them shift the paradigm, we as consumers will lose alot of our power and r

    • Maybe someone else has the exact quote, but didn't Bill Gates say that he sees the future of computers as when people will pay for the OS (subscription of course) and the hardware will be free?

      I recall seeing something on television where he was quoted as saying something like his vision was that their software would drive all computers. I think they even had a plaque of it somewhere on some MS building. I thought it was really creepy because the documentary was portraying him as some kind of hero when

    • Sounds great! I'll just get my hardware from Microsoft and my software from IBM.

  • Compared to HP (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:42PM (#10286608)
    ... compared to those companies, IBM is wonderful in their respect for open source licenses.

    Since HP killed thier Open Source strategy [newsforge.com] thanks to signing "new patent cross license with Microsoft that protects HP in the sort term", they've been nothing but a mouthpiece for MSFT fud.

    Remember, HP are the guys who saw the SCO opportunity as a way of trying to scare people into paying HP more for "indemnification from SCO" than SCO was even asking for! And they had the gall to claim that this extortion fee was "support" of linux and accused IBM of not doing the same.

    IBM certainly won my respect, thanks to their respect of the GPL.

  • IBM is not your friend (Score:5, Interesting)

    by consumer ( 9588 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:45PM (#10286626)
    I worked at a large publishing company where IBM was pitching a new e-commerce system. They succeeded in concvincing our gullible CTO to buys their whole package, including proprietary hardware and AIX to run on it. When I suggested that Linux on Intel systems would be a better choice for a relatively low-traffic web service like this, they immediately starting running down Linux. They had nothing good to say about open source software in general, implying that the apache server they bundle is somehow a different species from the one anyone can download. In short, they like Linux when they can make money off it, and will rip it to shreds if they think they can sell you something more expensive.

    • Re:IBM is not your friend (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Blastrogath ( 579992 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:04PM (#10286747)
      >In short, they like Linux when they can make money off it, and will rip it to shreds if they think they can sell you something more expensive.

      To be fair, you were talking to sales people. There are few sales people who don't have this kind of attitude.
    • implying that the apache server they bundle is somehow a different species from the one anyone can download.

      Their Apache scores over the regular, more pedestrian work in two important respects.
      First, it slightly more expensive; and secondly it has the words IBM inscribed in large friendly letters on its cover.

  • Typical major media take on linux (Score:4, Insightful)

    by QCompson ( 675963 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @03:56PM (#10286698)
    "Open-source geeks are devout in their belief that software should be free to all..."

    "...and what the open-source community sees as a Microsoft front company bent on destroying their free paradise."

    Once again, the linux community is portrayed as a bunch of geeks pinching pennies, not worried so much about free software but rather free (as in healthy beer) software.

  • Kudos to IBM for vision (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cpu_fusion ( 705735 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:03PM (#10286736)
    It's not often that a large company or organization manages to read the writing on the wall and adjust a business model accordingly. Just look at the RIAA, MPAA, Microsoft, etc.

    IBM realized that the software industry would change the most from the era of the Internet, unlike hardware and consulting services. A company expecting to make its bread and butter from software will be in a constant rush to stay one step ahead of thousands, if not millions, of unpaid software developers who write software for no other purpose than to have it the way they want. The Internet made it possible for those legions of volunteers to congregate internationally, as well as publicize and distribute for free.

    If only other companies had the vision to look that far ahead and make the hard decisions necessary to evolve.

  • IBM and OSS (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pfriedma ( 725399 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:06PM (#10286753) Homepage
    What many people have failed to notice is that IBM provides more to the OSS community than just a corporate image. For the most part, the OSS community little way of inforcing the GPL or for that matter has very little force of it's own (both of these need to change) to protect itself from larger companies (MSFT, SCO, etc). IBM (and it's legal team, money, etc) provide an incubational service to the OSS community by offering a bit of corporate [legal/monitary/etc] power while we build some of our own.
  • '...Big Blue has seen its reputation in the global open-source community shift from suspect sugar daddy to knight in shining armor.'

    Knight in shining armor ... Shark in a blue (pinstripe) suite ... it's all the same.

    Natty
    [who worked for Big Blue once upon a time ... back in its bul...err, glory days]

  • The Mainstreaming of Open Source Geekery (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cryofan ( 194126 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:12PM (#10286780) Journal
    Wow. You really know that OS geekery has gone mainstream when big players like Newsweeks are writing articles that start off like this:

    Open-source geeks are devout in their belief that software should be free to all, and hold as their icon the Linux alternative to the Microsoft commercial empire. As unpaid volunteers who collaborate to develop open source code, they tend to be anti-corporate types.

  • foil my head (Score:4, Insightful)

    by scottking ( 674292 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:24PM (#10286840) Homepage


    "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

    - Verbal, The Usual Suspects

  • I beg to differ (Score:3, Interesting)

    by intx13 ( 808988 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @04:41PM (#10286944) Homepage

    says free-software guru Eric Raymond. "Folks like me have an ingrained hatred for lawyers. But at that point hackers will lift IBM's lawyers on their shoulders."

    they tend to be anti-corporate types

    I would suggest that only a small number of the free software advocates are anti-corporation, anti-business, anti-everything-not-free. It may appear so when you look at Linux distros like Debian, who makes such a big deal out of the idea and purpose behind the software, but I believe that the average FLOSSer is just you're average joe. Well maybe not average...

    From looking at the comments posted on slashdot, it seems that most of us are reasonable people, able to understand the benefits of an open market. The only thing is that we believe that free software can be part of this market. From TFA, you'd think we're all living in communes!

    Therefore I don't find it that unbelievable that the OSS community would accept IBM as our knight. The only thing we object to is a company taking advantage of the freedoms that our software and the GPL provide. We don't hate the idea of a big company (after all, many of us get our paychecks from one!), we just don't like being abused by them.

    On a slightly different tact, I would also suggest that Novell has been a strong defender, perhaps taking bigger risks than IBM. Novell is in direct competition with Microsoft, and has been so for years! And more to the point, they still pull a profit! IBM has a different focus than Microsoft, but Novell is right in the line of fire. Despite that, Novell manages to completely embrace SUSE and Ximian and turn it into a corporate backed project with a real future. Now there's a hero!

    Either way, seeing the media begin to accept FLOSS as a viable business method is a good step. We've known it for years, and clearly some corporations (IBM, Novell) knew it as well. The only real hurdle left is the media and the public. When these are overcome, we'll start to see real competition between the proprietary and the open source camps.

  • Yeah, IBM loves us alright - on the server. On the client they are still pushing Windows. Every relevant IT corp except Microsoft is pushing Linux on the server, but who is pushing/selling Linux on the desktop? Our strongest ally in that department is probably Novell [novell.com], but so far, the collective marketing strategy for Linux on the desktop has been very poor. What do I mean by that? Well, in some ways I'm guilty of the same mistake: I write "Linux on the desktop". But it's about more than Linux - it's about t
  • Bottom Line is that IBM is one of many and various types of supporters of FOSS.

    Lets say IBM loses against SCO (yeah, we all know better, but for the sake of arguement).... Will tying the OS community to be followers of IBM.... bring Linux down?

    Sorry but FOSS is simple stronger in foundation than even the largest and longest standing of companies, for it is of people not legally created and defined enities.

  • Always the usual responses (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kbahey ( 102895 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @10:21PM (#10288667) Homepage

    Every time someone mentions Company X as a FLOSS friendly, or Company Y as the evil enemy of FLOSS, the same type of responses come. Some are for, some are against, and the various reasons are listed and debates ensue ...

    Think about these points:

    • Companies are Pragmatic. They will do whatever suits them best in the market for their own benefit and their shareholders benefit. If this be with open source, then so be it. If it is against open source, then so be it as well. Companies are not driven by 'code of conduct' or ethics. It is pure pragmatism that drives them. They are not our enemies nor our friends.
    • Technologies change over time. Whatever is hot today will not be hot tomorrow. Whatever is nascent today may be tomorrow hot technology. Ask Sun about NFS for example.
    • Companies change over time. Much like individuals, societies and countries, companies change over time. The enemy of today may be the friend of tomorrow, and vice versa. Eric S. Raymond was seen favorably by the /. crowd when he wrote the Cathedral and the Bazaar and the Halloween Documents. Now he is not seen with favor here (whatever the reasons are, whatever they are real or not is not the point, perception of him is the point). The same goes for IBM. They were the company who invented FUD, and were very aggressive in the market, often ruining other companies and pushing customers aside arrogantly. Sun was the darling of geeks for a long time. Even Microsoft was seen as a counterculture to IBM in the 1980s. Same for Red Hat, they were our darlings, and now they are not seen as open source friendly anymore (after they ended the shrink wrapped and consumer markets). The USA was seen favorably in most of the world prior to the fall of the USSR, and it has been down hill since then for their image. These things happen. Google may be the enemy of tomorrow, or Yahoo, or whomever. Such is life.

    So let us get over this bickering and know that this is happening and is going to happen for the forseable future.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware the new TTY code!

Close