[Bush2000]

In other words, folks, Linux ain't ready for prime time. Not by a long shot.

[eclectic]

According to one IBM employee, who asked not to be identified

You cannot be too careful when dealing with linux nutjobs

[eclectic]

Lusers = Linux users

[Petronski]

That's my read. If it were going well, they'd be crowing about it.

[Doohickey]

Morons. Port your OWN software to the OS you want everyone to run. Sheesh!

[Golden Eagle]

As if the hypocrisy couldn't get any deeper.

IBM outsources tech support for Linux clients

Here's another gem from today. ~50% of IBM's customers could dump them over the recent sellouts to the Chicoms. Lucky for IBM the government is holding it up over national security concerns, how ironic is that.

Merrill Lynch: CIOs wary of IBM-Lenovo deal

Can you imagine these guys if Microsoft was being probed by Congress for national security concerns? Yet they act like this deal should actually go through! And according to this, it's not even what their customers wanted. It all adds up to some serious questions, indeed.

[Southack]

"Our chairman has challenged the IT organization, and indeed all of IBM to move to a Linux based desktop by the end of 2005," Greenberg wrote in a November 2003 memo. "This means replacing productivity, Web access, and viewing tools with open standards based equivalents," he said."

For years I've been meeting with IBM, suggesting that they donate OS/2 to open source to achieve precisely what they now want to do with Linux...sans the $1+ Billion that they've pissed away on Linux development, lawsuits, and browser support.

In 1999, OS/2 Warp 4 and Warp 4 Server were light years ahead of Linux...and IBM owned all but a tiny fraction of OS/2 code (5% owned by MicroSoft).

It floors me that IBM put OS/2 on the shelf, refusing to release it to Open Source, yet then "justified" pouring a Billion Dollars (actually, more) into Linux.

It's now 2005. Six years later and IBM still isn't on Open Source Linux corporate-wide...when they were already there in 1999 had they but donated OS/2 to the public.

People, this is why pursuing *fads* at the CEO level makes for bad business policy. Linux grew white hot, and IBM jumped on that anti-MS bandwagon. Six years later it's gotten them nowhere (And that's being kind).

There were two realistic options for IBM in the past few years: embrace MicroSoft or donate OS/2 to Open Source; they chose neither.

Now don't get me wrong, Linux has its place. My little firm has a new Linux product coming out this Summer, in fact. But there are reasons why IBM hasn't been able to make the full switch.

[Knitebane]

Wow, a hit piece from Robert McMillan on Linux. I'm shocked.

In other news, the notorious the Microsoft Fanboy ranted, "Microsoft had nothing to do with SCO, there's nothing wrong with Internet Explorer, and Bill Gates is a great lover...just ask me."

Later, the drooling fool was dragged away in a white coat shouting crazed epithets about how Java was a Sun plot to bring down the greatest company in the history of the world.

[Golden Eagle]

IBM and Oracle may learn to regret their decisions to invite open source software into the US market. Two new articles discuss the obvious dangers, so far ignored, but now becoming unavoidable:

Open Source Database – Will Proprietary Databases Survive?

Like Linux, Databases Going Open Source