×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

IBM Puts $100M Behind Linux Push

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the big-blue-penguin dept.

Linux Business 302

IainMH writes "Over at the BBC, there is a report that despite the slow build up, IBM is spending $100m (£52m) over the next three years beefing up its commitment to Linux software. It continues: 'The cash injection will be used to help its customers use Linux on every type of device from handheld computers and phones right up to powerful servers.'" Commentary and coverage also available on TechNewsWorld and ZDNet.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

302 comments

But the real question is... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712741)

... if someone wrote a virus for KDE, would it be called "The Klap?"

OLOLOL YUO SAID BEHIND, LINUX AND PUSH!!!!`1 (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712751)

Minix (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712755)

How about putting 1/100th of that funding into reasearching even further diversity OSs such as Minix.

Re:Minix (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712793)

Throwing money at Linux makes business sense for IBM, while throwing money at something like Minix makes no business sense. GET A CLUE YOU FUCKING RETARD!

Re:Minix (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713070)

You must be kidding ... the fact that Minix was so crappy was the reason Linus started out writing Linux in the first place. Go look for "Torvalds Tanenbaum Minix" on Google ...

Why so little. (0, Troll)

FreeLinux (555387) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712767)

For a company that made $2 billion off of Linux in the first year, it would seem that more spending would be appropriate.

How about $250,000,000 per year?

Re:Why so little. (4, Insightful)

PornMaster (749461) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712868)

No, they made $2 billion using and pushing Linux and their products which either run Linux or run on top of it.

You make it sound like they're freeloading by pressing copies of Debian and selling them.

They may have had $2 billion in Linux-related revenues, but the cost of making those $2 billion in sales was significant in terms of engineering, training consultants, sales, cannibalizing other resources which were going elsewhere, etc.

How much did they sell in Windows-related purchases in that time?

Re:Why so little. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712931)

bitch bitch bitch.

and if they would have gave that much you would be with your hand out asking why they didnt give more.

they didnt have to give a dime, they already do a lot for linux, now they are doing more.

quit being a being a greedy little bitch and say thank you every once in a while.

Re:Why so little. (3, Insightful)

ultrabot (200914) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713003)

For a company that made $2 billion off of Linux in the first year, it would seem that more spending would be appropriate.

Companies don't care how much spending would be "appropriate". They are going with spending that they think is going to be profitable, just the way it should be.

A BIG ally like IBM... (4, Insightful)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712769)

Might be just what it takes to get a large chunk of hardware manufacturers and software vendors to start offering Linux-friendly products.

Sure, it might not start out as Linux-friendly games and gaming hardware, but this could be a very good start.

I also hope that, when IBM starts making money with Linux, that some moral compass directs them to give something back.

Re:A BIG ally like IBM... (2, Funny)

HEXAN (790837) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712872)

"I also hope that, when IBM starts making money with Linux, that some moral compass directs them to give something back."


Yea, that seems very realistic. A giant company increasing spending because of a moral committment.

Can I score some of what you are high on?

Re:A BIG ally like IBM... (1, Flamebait)

PornMaster (749461) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712944)

For a bunch of principled Linux fanbois, you're really offputting because you don't even know how much IBM already gives back to the community. You just want to rail on about how information wants to be free, The Man is keeping everything down, etc. Hey, wake up. Linux is in the enterprise. Linux is making people money, and people are contributing back into Linux. The money people are making is largely coming from services provided, which is the model that the FOSS people want... free software, open source, if you want to make money from it, provide services... so IBM does that... but you need to be cynical little pricks about any corporation which is making money.

Pitiful and sickening.

Re:A BIG ally like IBM... (5, Insightful)

DoctorMO (720244) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712971)

I kind of like IBM making money out of Linux, it means they have a stake in what happens to it and will more than likly contribute to it's growth and development. since Linux will remain open source it's really both of us that benifit, the company makes money and Linux gets some of the holes filled in with great wads of cash.

Re:A BIG ally like IBM... (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712896)

I also hope that, when IBM starts making money with Linux, that some moral compass directs them to give something back.


Umm, they are putting 100M into linux software? I think they are expecting "the getting something back" part of the deal.

Re:A BIG ally like IBM... (1, Redundant)

Donny Smith (567043) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713002)

> I also hope that, when IBM starts making money with Linux, that some moral compass directs them to give something back.

They won't make money (or recover those $100 m) out of vacuum - most likely you'll pay an extra X bucks for something from IBM along the way.

Talk about free lunch....

Look at their share price, for Christ's - do they look like some poor bastards who give everything away and survive on bare essentials? I don't think so.

Do you think their CEO said "Let's burn $100m and we'll get some great feedback on Slashdot?". Or "Let's spend $100m and make $300m!" is more likely?

A practical person would say "I hope they spend all that money on porting everything they can to GNU Linux and then I'll buy it pre-installed from DELL" (as DELL didn't spend those $100m their cost and price will more likey be lower than IBM's).

Re:A BIG ally like IBM... (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713063)

I also hope that, when IBM starts making money with Linux, that some moral compass directs them to give something back.

I think you're missing the point. They don't need to have a "moral compass" directing them to give something back. IBM and Novell are both betting their business plans on the success of Linux, so the desire to make their business succeed and the desire to profit will direct them to use their time/money/resources to make Linux a success.

Or, more properly speaking, we should not be using the future tense. IBM and Novell are making money with Linux, and they have been "giving back". The good news is not "IBM is being nice and making a large charitable contribution towards Linux development". The story here is, "IBM views Linux as a necessary component for their success, and they are [currently] putting a lot of resources into helping Linux grow."

Re:A BIG ally like IBM... (2, Insightful)

Ingolfke (515826) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713303)

The parent post is absolutely correct. IBM is giving back now by investing in Linux. The other, less obvious, contribution is that by actually recognizing the market for Linux and investing in it, IBM is expanding that market, which is expanding the total # of individuals who use and can in turn contribute back to Linux and it's related apps.

cool (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712771)

where do i sign up for the handout?

Your friendly Linux Hacker.

Put your money where your mouth is... (5, Interesting)

MrAnnoyanceToYou (654053) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712773)

And develop an easy-install linux that works on virtually every big-vendor box with a good GUI. Something like OSX but free and for that weird instruction set everyone else uses. *flamebait, kill my karma*

Re:Put your money where your mouth is... (3, Insightful)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712934)

Forget the graphic part - the whole UI needs work. Package management is balkanized and bad in general, KDE/Gnome are becoming so heavy that you need a P4 just to run them, 'etc. You want to know the best way to use this money? Forget about handhelds and embedded systems - drop the whole $100 million into developing a good UI for desktop users.

Re:Put your money where your mouth is... (2)

DoctorMO (720244) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713052)

Your right that KDE/Gnome are becoming too heavy, they have big problems when it comes to modularity and I'm sure there working to redress them.

There are also problems with the lack of development on Xfree which is only now being addressed by xorg, but that will take time to get to anything like Mac/NextStep/Cocca

There are problems with hardware information standards, i.e there are none, it's all higled pigldy even if a module exists in the kernel for my dodar the connection between device information, hardware information and driver isn't as standard or compleat as would make it powerfull.

I say invest in Linux ground projects to better the information flow and standards in the core, look at what proper standards did for html, I would like to see that in Linux.

Re:Put your money where your mouth is... (1)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713068)

i cant speak for gnome, but kde runs just fine (about the same as windows 98, faster than xp) on a Pentium-MMX 233mhz, with most of the fancy things turned off. This was on slackware 10 on my gf's PC.

Re:Put your money where your mouth is... (1)

MrAnnoyanceToYou (654053) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713069)

Err... good point. Enlightenment is prettier than Windows ever wuz. UI really means package management and installability combined with enough support that I could get my F*ing Linux box up and running again despite being an idiot. I just want a CD or 5 that I can throw into my parents' crap old Compaq computer, no matter the vendor, walk away from, and never have to touch again. I'd buy 5 IBM's if I knew that the second I pulled them out of the box, plugged them in, and threw in some passwords, I was done. An office setup, (openoffice) a web browser, (firefox) and a box locked up so tight that the only possible changes that could be made to the OS were user interface. Sounds easy to me, really, knowing the UNIX security setup... But every time I install a linux setup, I have to go to command line for SOMETHING, which leads me to MAN pages which leads me to frustration and contempt for my own slow and forgetful mind.

"Options? I have options? Cool! Wait.... they're not checkboxes? Uh."

Re:Put your money where your mouth is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713243)

>>KDE/Gnome are becoming so heavy that you need a P4 just to run them>>

Uh... I run kernel 2.6.10 and Gnome 2.8 (and Openoffice, Firefox, Thunderbird open simultaneously) on two PIII Thinkpads... one 700Mhz and the other 1.2Ghz though I run it at 800Mhz to save power. I also have the same setup on a Duron 1.2G and Athlon 1.3G though I stopped using them because they are noisy and hot.

RAM is the key here, not CPU speed. Beef up to 256MB min or half a gig and things are sweet.

Don't FUD.

Re:Put your money where your mouth is... (2, Insightful)

Cyhawkalewagee (854711) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713061)

mmm an easy to install Linux and a decent GUI.

Heres a point we as a community could learn from microsoft.

Think about the Windows 9x/XP installation process.

Step 1: Put cd in, start computer

Step 2: Read welcome screen, hit 'agree'

Step 3: Wait, reboot machine

Step 4: Create user, and BAM your done.

Seriously, the common person really doesnt give two craps about Partitions, package installation, what a 'resoultion' or 'bit depth' is, or any of the normal basic *nix installation process we are all familar with.

Another part they could work on is some sort of 'auto-play' for cds. Alot of people dont know how to access a cd without it being auto-runed. So we need that sort of function in there as well.

There are plenty of very basic things that need to be done on the most basic levels before your auntie jenna will be using Linux to check her email. This is a good step, but more does need to be done.

Get yourself an Ubuntu CD. (2, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713179)

Everything works just like you say it should.

And "auntie jenna" will never install an OS on her computer. She will use whatever came with it when she bought it or whatever someone sets up on it.

Re:Put your money where your mouth is... (1)

thomasweber (757387) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713216)

> Step 3: Wait, reboot machine
> Step 4: Create user, and BAM your done.

You forgot to mention that
a) You need to repeat step 3 for almost every installation of software (including printer drivers)

b) The time you save during installation is nothing compared to keep this system free of any sort of virus.

linux installs are easy (1)

spacepimp (664856) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713193)

by easy install do you mean apps afterwards, or to install as an os on the hd? i ask this because i dont think youve tried many different linux installs, they are every bit as easy as windows, if not easier. as for mac, i think macs idea of reducing things to the lowest common denominator relieves the end user/power user of configurabilty or micromanagment. and they are far from (working on virtually every big-vendor box)

Re:linux installs are easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713300)

for installing apps, I use Synaptic (Debian Gnome)

Click to refresh available apps
Look through catalogue
Click on app want
Install

Wheee! No trip to the store. No wandering websites and chancing on spyware. No money to be paid. Free updates. Oh it's soooo difficult!

So why does my non-techie wife proselytize Linux on her trips? I certainly don't do it. I just enjoy it.

What's the big deal? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712776)

$100M over three years is half my company's coffee budget.

Start at home! (3, Insightful)

tmasssey (546878) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712781)

I love it: IBM's putting $100 Million into Linux software, and their premier desktop groupware appliacation [lotus.com] still doesn't have a Linux client. And the server still lags behind Windows and AIX for feature-completeness...

Note to IBM: MAKE YOUR OWN SOFTWARE WORK FIRST!!!

MOD PARENT UP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712847)

So true, I was just on IBM's website trying to find a Lotus Notes client for Linux... there is none.

I have the an older version R5 running under wine but wasn't able to install 6.5.1

IBM supports Notes on WINE (4, Informative)

swillden (191260) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713360)

I have the an older version R5 running under wine but wasn't able to install 6.5.1

I'm running 6.5.2 under WINE; works just fine.

Also, until IBM releases a native Linux client, Notes will continue running under WINE. The development team actually tests on WINE and if Notes doesn't run, they track down why and fix it in Notes.

Actually porting Notes to Linux will take a while; in the meantime, IBM makes sure that it runs on Linux via WINE.

(Note: I work for IBM, but I don't speak for IBM, or have any connection to the Notes teams.)

Re:Start at home! (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713038)

I love it: IBM's putting $100 Million into Linux software, and their premier desktop groupware appliacation still doesn't have a Linux client. And the server still lags behind Windows and AIX for feature-completeness...

Note to IBM: MAKE YOUR OWN SOFTWARE WORK FIRST!!!


Kind of like Sony making mp3 devices and suing people for copyright infringement ...

I tried to run Domino 6 on a Linux server and ran into a few snags. I find it really frustrating that they don't make all their servers equal.

Another thing I've found that seems a "no brainer" to me would be to distribute Domino on a CD with the Linux install included. It's not like it costs them money. The installer CD could boot the machine and give the same simple options that the Domino installer does - application, mail, or database server. Then it would configure and install the Linux OS tuned for Domino and install Domino. How hard can this possibly be?

I think there are LOTS of instances where this could be the case. Companies that produce server applications that require a dedicated machine generally require Windows. Some of them support Linux. None of them make a single install disk that takes a fresh machine and fully configures it. That is what we need.

Re:Start at home! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713044)

So you want them to withhold $100 Million until they get their software to work first?

Re:Start at home! (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713138)

Except Lotus isn't nearly as important for IBM's long-term strategic goals as Linux is. IBM's big cash cows are hardware (big iron) and services (not software, but setting up software, building custom apps, etc). Truth is, it might be just as good or better for IBM to have a FOSS groupware package that they can be paid to set up and configure on their systems than to actually sell the software.

In fact, I wouldn't be totally surprised if in 5 years, IBM isn't really selling Lotus anymore, but pushes some open-sourced groupware package from Novel or something (Hula?).

Re:Start at home! (1)

joschm0 (858723) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713170)

My pet peeve is that they abandoned Via Voice right after I bought it and it only runs using an old version of Blackdown java.

Re:Start at home! (2, Insightful)

enoyls (729779) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713249)

I believe that is where a large portion of the $100,000,000 will be spent. You have to read between the lines a little, but it's alluded to in CNet's coverage. http://news.com.com/IBM+plays+up+Workplace+suite/2 110-1012_3-5548304.html?tag=nl/ [com.com] http://news.com.com/IBM+to+invest+100+million+in+L inux+push/2100-1012_3-5580976.html?tag=nefd.top/ [com.com] Sooner or later IBM is going to bite the bullet and move its 300,000 employees to Linux, and at that time they had better have a better solution than using wine. Workplace Collaborative Service appears to be their first step in that direction.

Re:Start at home! (1)

Ford Prefect (8777) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713260)

I love it: IBM's putting $100 Million into Linux software, and their premier desktop groupware appliacation [Lotus Notes] still doesn't have a Linux client.

To which I say - hooray!

It's awful, and while I don't actually use it myself, I pity those who do... ;-)

IBM you BM we all BM for IBM - David Gerrold (5, Funny)

Stanistani (808333) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712786)

Why do I get the feeling that in five years you will ask the man-in-the-street what Linux is and they will reply, "That's that IBM stuff, right? Runs on all the 'puters!"

Re:IBM you BM we all BM for IBM - David Gerrold (2, Funny)

Otter (3800) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712888)

If this is anything like the last campaign, the man in the street will point down and say "Linux! They're the idiots who spray painted these penguins on my sidewalk!"

I'm in. (5, Funny)

Doesn't_Comment_Code (692510) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712796)

The cash injection will be used to help its customers use Linux on every type of device from handheld computers and phones right up to powerful servers.

I pledge to install Linux on at least one PC, one laptop, and one handheld. How much of the $100M do I get?

Re:I'm in. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712841)

you were already paid in full that was your $00.02

Re:I'm in. (1)

heritage727 (693099) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713320)

I pledge to install Linux on at least one PC, one laptop, and one handheld. How much of the $100M do I get?
I'm going to be installing Linux on an IBM mainframe soon, so you don't get as much as I do.

Time for Eclipse based Office (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712810)

Now create a great customizable multi-platform Office package based on Eclipse please.

desktop Linux (3, Interesting)

Mantorp (142371) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712818)

The cash injection will be used to help its customers use Linux on every type of device from handheld computers and phones right up to powerful servers.

I know it fits inbetween handhelds and servers somewhere, but it seems there's more Linux growth on those two ends (handhelds and servers) than in the middle, on desktops of Joe user.

Re:desktop Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713085)

I had eye surgery once. Best thing that ever happened to me. Without knowing anything about your particular situation, or even if you have eyes, I can unequivocally recommend it to you.

Shouldn't we be calling it Gnu-Linux? (-1, Troll)

jonbeckett73 (847732) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712819)

Why does everybody refer to the platform as "Linux", when that is only the kernel?

Re:Shouldn't we be calling it Gnu-Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712854)

Sheesh Richard, calm down...

Re:Shouldn't we be calling it Gnu-Linux? (5, Funny)

Anita Coney (648748) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712875)

Question: Why do we commonly call aspirin "aspirin" when it's really acetylsalicylic acid?

Answer: Because it's easier you fucking moron!

Re:Shouldn't we be calling it Gnu-Linux? (2, Insightful)

Cyhawkalewagee (854711) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712925)

Its simple really. There needs to be an umbrella of sorts to combine all aspects of Linux(kernal) and Software together. Because explaining to Auntie Jenna WHAT a kernel is, its much easier to just called it 'linux'. The common person understands somewhat, what 'linux' is. (btw, pronounced Lee-nooks) Personaly, I belive we should all get past trying to retain the geekness of Linux, and focus on getting the common man/woman to use it by making the system easier to use, and increase general knowledge of the system. If were ever going to beat microsoft, we'll need to combine forces, fighting over what to CALL the damned thing gets us no where :P So uh, yeah, just call it linux, know your right and move on ;)

IBM Linux Push Haiku (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712821)


IBM spends dough.
Pushing Linux for all apps.
Why do they hate Bill?

Re:IBM Linux Push Haiku (1)

cduffy (652) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712904)

Should be obvious
Why their hatred for Bill Gates
Look at OS/2.

Re:IBM Linux Push Haiku (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712939)


OS/2, how true.
Gates will never live that down.
He is filled with shame.

Re:IBM Linux Push Haiku (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713043)

They hate him becasue his is a shrewd business man who forced them into a licensing deal for DOS many years ago and becasue of this it enabled him to create windows thus driving then out of the desktop OS market becasue OS/2 could not gain enough market share against to compete.

Did that answer your question.

Re:IBM Linux Push Haiku (4, Funny)

k3v0 (592611) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713220)

they do not hate bill
hate is not as strong as love
they would love more bills!

"Linux software" (0, Offtopic)

rpsoucy (93944) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712822)

Now "Linux" is its own classification of software? Come on, it's bad enough you people call it an operating system... ;-)

Re:"Linux software" (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712963)

Linux has grown far from its humble beginings of an OS Kernel. I refer to my computer as a Linux computer. At our company the Windows team is called the Intel Team yet my Intel based Linux systems don't belong to their group. They are called "Linux servers"

The desktop (3, Interesting)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712840)

Let IBM slap any flavor of Linux on the desktop or pay some group to do it. Then I will really be happy with them. I know that my wishes do not determine IBM's strategy whatsoever, but this does not prevent me from wishing.

Right now Ubuntu looks OK for the Gnomers and XandrOS is just fine for the KDErs [IMHO]. The most important thing here is to have a desktop that works out-of-the-box.

Businesses and Linux (5, Insightful)

oprahwinfree (466659) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712851)

With companies like IBM putting a lot of effort into pushing Linux, it may make businesses that are reluctant to adopt an OS that has a perceived lack of support behind it more willing to try it out.

This is good news and certainly a major push for Linux.

IBM is on the right track. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712895)

"Workplace is a suite of programs and tools that allow workers to get at core business applications no matter what device they use to connect to corporate networks. One of the main focuses of the initiative will be to make it easier to use Linux-based desktop computers and mobile devices with Workplace."

Clearly IBM sees how usefull small portable devices can be and their future in the work place. This is great for serious developers of small proprietary aps for hand-helds.

If you consider the fact that by focusing on interoperability and flexability OSS and Linux is light years ahead of MS and other closed coded corps. Of course the ability to keep your small sub aps proprietary is important, but as both Linus and Richard have stated this is the key to technological innovation. If you do not like the crap being sold you change it.

100m: Poof (1)

pkcs11 (529230) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712906)

What a total waste of cash!
I can't fathom how the CTO bamboozled the IBM board into agreeing to spending that kind of money. IBM is going the way of Wang.

how about a IBM distro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11712948)

maybe IBM should buy Slackware, or build a Debian clone (as if there aren't enough deb/clones out there already)...

but serously, with PatV getting older and possibly becoming too ill to continue development of Slackware i would like to see Slackware maintained by competent Linux developers that will preserve Pat's philosophy of Slackware being a stable and secure no-nonsence kind of distro...

Re:how about a IBM distro (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713090)

IBM already has a good relationship with RH and SuSE. Why would they need to take over Slackware no matter how good it is? And why does Slack bother with SPARC and Alpha ports? Can't they leave all the 'I got this kernel to compile on my fucking sundial' shit to the BSD heads?

Re:how about a IBM distro (1)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713115)

I think IBM would prefer a more friendly distro like SuSE or Red Hat (im not saying i dont like slackware - i used to love slackware until i found gentoo)

Yea, crm (1)

sammyo (166904) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712950)

They had a huge booth at LinuxWorld Boston, but the hot displays were CRM and retail point of sale solutions. ;-) Beware of any open source labeled a "Solution".

I had this visual fantasy of rms charging through the commercial side of the event like Carrie Nation with her ax [kshs.org] .

Cough Cough (0, Troll)

Kn0xy (792482) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712956)

"The enterprise division is interested in promoting PowerPC, which is the hardware architecture, and Linux. Now that it doesn't have the PC division as an inhibitor, it can pursue those goals without conflict."

*Cough Cough*Mac Mini*Cough Cough* -> Linux on the Mac Mini [sowerbutts.com]

Re:Cough Cough (3, Informative)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713168)

The "G4" or PPC 7xxx chips are made by "Freescale Semiconductor". IBM makes the "G3" (PPC 7x0) (which isn't used by Apple anymore), the "G5" (PPC 9x0), and the POWERx chips.

Not your desktop, you dolts. The servers. (4, Insightful)

gelfling (6534) | more than 9 years ago | (#11712974)

Clearly this is almost entirely focused on the server side aka Workplace which is a huge complex assembly of AIX, Linux, Python, Java and RDBMSs. This is aimed at business space that wants to use Linux for things like CRM, Peoplesoft, SAP, Oracle, Seibel and custom made apps.

Re:Not your desktop, you dolts. The servers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713207)

You forgot the ROUSes too.

smart move (1)

dogfull (819023) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713048)

for (ibm; linux == future; ++money)
++kernel-development

In other words, the 100M USD will probably be spend on kernel development. IBM sees bussiness in linux. IBM makes money out of linux. They would be stupid not to invest in it.

Credibility (4, Insightful)

Billy the Mountain (225541) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713056)

This might seem obvious, but having IBM endorse Linux (by money infusions and advertising) really helps the OS community spread the software into mainstream business. My supervisor is so old-school and tends to favor MS products, but with this kind of support from IBM, I can now at least get a couple of Linux servers up and running without complaints and my supervisor can see the reliability that exceeds Windows in these instances first-hand.

BTM

I thought linux was free... (4, Funny)

GatesGhost (850912) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713062)

they'll just end up having one guy go around installing red hat all day and blow the rest of the money on coke and whores.

Selling Their PC Division... (1)

Jameth (664111) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713072)

I think whoever said that IBM was selling their PC division as a way to combat their vulnerability to Microsoft was correct. Otherwise, this sort of activity would leave them rather vulnerable.

I don't get it... (1, Insightful)

mtrupe (156137) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713094)

Slashdot is all about open source, and most readers of slashdot believe in open source, and free software, and in its success. Why then does IBM *need* to invest so much money in it?

This is intriguing. IBM seems to get it. A bunch of people create free software, which IBM then takes and sells.

1. Do nothing.
2. Take software written for free by enthusiasts.
3. Profit! ...Here come the moderators!
http://fromthemorning.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

Re:I don't get it... (2, Insightful)

superskippy (772852) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713229)

Software still needs to be paid for- programmers gotta eat. In fact the amount of open source that is written for money is quite significant- much of the kernel and mozilla/firefox/thunderbird etc. IBM have put much development into the kernel- hence nearly getting sued by SCO. Most of the money worldwide in computing is in hiring people to solve your problem, not buying a lot of software- this is what IBM's huge consultancy arm does. These people are best served by great software being available for low prices, so IBM has a vested interest in free software being good.

IBM are the do-everything company (3, Interesting)

superskippy (772852) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713099)

The thing to remember about IBM is that the are the do-everything company. Where Sun, or Microsoft, or Apple etc. try and sell you one vision of the future, IBM invest in everything, and let you decide what you want.

Want to run Linux sir? No problem! Or Windows? No problem too. Proprietary UNIX? We've got it. Have we got some bizarre other operating systems? Have we ever!

We'll sell you an Intel server, a RISC based unix server, an AMD server, any bizarre server you like. Stuck in the 80s and can't decide whether you want fat clients or thin clients and a mainframe? No problem, we've got mainframes, we've got PCs (until recently, of course).

My point is that IBM may be investing $100m in Linux, but chances are, they are also investing $100m in everything else too. That's the IBM way- because they never stick all of their chips on one technology, they never win big (like Wintel has done), but they never lose their shirts either (like Sun looks like doing, and HP looks like doing with Itanic)

Re:IBM are the do-everything company (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713199)

Never lose their shirts? Tell me IBM fan-boi, were you still in your fantasy bubble during the mid-90s..or were you just born yesterday? IBM was knock knock knockin on death's door just 10 short years ago.

Desktop? Are you mad??? (2)

gelfling (6534) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713143)

There are people here who still have emotional scars from OS/2. Trust me, IBM will never ever ever ever try to take the lead in end user desktop OS's ever again. They may very well follow others into the Linux desktop world but they will never ever ever butt heads with MS again for out-front dominance.

And if they wanted to, then they should just buy any all of the following:

Xandros
Lycoris
ELX

Which are built as commerical Linux replacements of Windows desktops and not for the Krispy Kreme & Black T-shirts crowd.

cheap pc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11713148)

I didn't see the "M" in the headline at first... "IBM Puts $100 Behind Linux Push"... I thought they'd bought into that whole sub-$100 PC issue being bandied about here on /.

Watched the flash demo of IBM Workspace (2, Interesting)

Danathar (267989) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713183)

From what I've read it seems that IBM is going to commit to making sure that there is a LINUX (Mac too?) client for IBM workspace.

I watched the demo and it looks interesting enough. The question is, do you trust IBM not to lock you into their "all encompassing" back-office infrastructure with no-interoperability? Or Do you just want to swallow the pill and drink MS's cool aid?

What I would like to see is some sort of reasonably easy to program middleware that is cross-platform (XUL for example) to take the place of platform specific proprietary clients. This way the user's PC is not weighed down.

I suppose some people might point out that you can already kind of do this with X terminals, but it seems that using the browser as the way to do everything, either through XUL or HTML/J2EE..ect is the direction people WANT to move in.

IBM and Linux (5, Interesting)

_LORAX_ (4790) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713189)

Let me just say that I run Linux on IBM hardware and for the most part it's ok. The hardware is managed to within an inch of it's life and there are a number of propriatary componients to this hardware that just down not play well with "FLOSS" deployments. Ie keeping up to date often means loosing propriatary functionality or control for a while.

I see they are finally making progress on integrating more of the hardware into the software ( IE partitioning is kindof working ). But for the most part I spend 3x the time managing the IBM hardware then real commodity hardware like dell's. With commodity hardware I can find better documentation, better written toolchains ( free toolclains that can be altered ). With IBM's I have to reverse engeneer how the software works just to figure out why it stoped working.

Overall it's just an odd fit. IBM is trying to commodidize the OS so they don't have to worry about it, but the problem with that is it leads to the result that commodity hardware is better supported, not what IBM is selling! So the more they push Linux the more we are moving away from IBM hardware and moving to true commodity hardware like Dell's ( at less than half the price per CPU ). IBM hardware may be reliable, but st some point it's just not worth 2x or more of the price.

If you want to do something useful for Linux... (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 9 years ago | (#11713226)

If you want to do something useful for Linux...

...Then port it to the Cell processor ASAP.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...