Posted on 03/08/2006 10:00:30 AM PST by zeugma
IBM switching to Linux destops in Germany according to a Linux Forum 2006 presentation by their head of open source and Linux sales in Germany.
Interesting news from LinuxForum 2006
During a presentation on IBM's involvement with Open Source, Andreas Pleschek from IBM in Stuttgart, Germany, who heads open source and Linux technical sales across North East Europe for IBM made a very interesting statement...
"Andreas Pleschek also told that IBM has cancelled their contract with Microsoft as of October this year. That means that IBM will not use Windows Vista for their desktops. Beginning from July, IBM employees will begin using IBM Workplace on their new, Red Hat-based platform. Not all at once - some will keep using their present Windows versions for a while. But none will upgrade to Vista."
The question is, does this only apply to IBM in Germany, or IBM world wide?
If ALL of IBM switches to Linux desktops and OpenOffice... that would be a very significant loss to Microsoft; not only in direct licensing revenues, but also in speeding adoption of Linux by other companies. After all, if IBM can run on Linux desktops...
This is the second (or third?) time IBM has tried this. *yawn* Their ABM strategy usually workout like everyone else's.
No, but most companies manage it in months rather than years.
Aren't they YEARS behind schedule on that?
Again no, the stategy is to release a new OS every five years. That's in response to customer complaints that the release cycle was too fast. A 2006 release for Vista is in line with that since XP released in 2001. Either way, you'd complain.
As I pointed out after this post, Vista has been pushed back because customers asked Microsoft to.
I call bull, if that was the case MS would still not be floundering and cutting all together the featerus that seperated Vista from just a version of XP with more eye candy (eg WinFS)
Okay, I can see that discussing this is going to be pointless. Take care!
Well gee, I guess they're gonna keep running W2K then (with no more security upgrades?), cause they aren't buying vista. And open office runs on winders as well as linux and mac... so no office sales to go with the no vista sales to IBM. Lets see over 300K seats... thats some some heavy change your master isn't going to see.
And the example set by IBM WILL BE noticed by others.
Lets see, since you're in a position to know; is bill's butt puckering??
Really? I seem to remember a major push by Microsoft in 1991 to get folks to sign up for a program called "software assurance", designed as a way to amortize the costs of future software and OS upgrades, which was based largely on the premise of a 3 year replacement cycle.
The prime feature of this program is the elimination of software upgrades, in favor of something Microsoft calls "Software Assurance." Under Software Assurance, you can pay about twice as much as the normal cost of a license, to buy the right to install any upgrades for the next two to three calendar years.
From a July 23,2002 article linked here.
So, I guess when they are 3 years behind schedule, they just claim that it was a 5 year schedul all along?
Since I don't own any Microsoft products, you can consider my "complaining" to be a public service for all the poor bastards who've been suckered into them because they don't know any better.
LMAO, sure you do!
You can still purchase SA, but you're purposely missing the point. How much of your day do you spend roiling in anger against a company that employs about 60,000 Americans? I hope you're not losing much sleep.
Huh? I guess you were convinced by n3wbi3's lies that they cut off security upgrades for W2K, and missed my many corrections that those security upgrades will continue till 2010. I'd be more careful who you listen to from here on.
It sure will! I'm sure not going to recommend any of my customers buy Windows software, or hire Windows consultants, from a company that won't run Windows.
I wish IBM better luck in their second attempt than they had in their first. I awhile back AOL tried this same thing after they bought Netscape. Didn't work out for them, either.
is bill's butt puckering??
Probably. Since a goodly portion of IBM's bottom line is from services, I'm sure he's glad that IBM is cutting off its nose to spite its face.
Latest news that blows more holes in your BS. Could you have been any more wrong? I don't think so!
http://www.techweb.com/headlines_week/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=181502037
(IBM) denied reports that it's planning to dump Microsoft Corp.'s Windows, a company spokeswoman said Wednesday.
The number of Linux users within the Armonk, N.Y., company is about 5 percent of IBM's 329,000 employees, spokeswoman Nancy Kaplan said.
"We have not made Linux available to the general employee population and there are no plans to do that."
As to whether IBM would upgrade to Vista, the company was in the process of evaluating the OS and had not made a decision, Kaplan said.
Why don't you do something useful, and post something a little more factual next time. Like this:
IBM To Move All Solutions Development Operations To India
http://www.channelweb.com/sections/allnews/article.jhtml?articleId=181502030&cid=ChannelWebNews
IBM disclosed Wednesday that it is moving all of the design and development of its vaunted business consulting offerings to the fast-growing country.
O.K. folks. This is what I mean by his trollish behavior. Microsoft's "Software Assurance" program and its history is a part of the public record. His inane dismissial of the point of discussion with the above comment is exactly what I've been talking about.
"Golden_Eagle" is such an incredibly worthless embarassment to everyone who is a supporter of whatever cause he champions, that I'm suprised he's not shouted down by Microsofties as well.
This place is much more pleasant without his trollish shilling.
I rather enjoy GE's remarks, he is proof that reincarnation is true.
NOBODY can get that dumb in one lifetime!!!
Prove it started in 1991, as you claimed. Then admit this thread you created his since been debunked as the obvious BS it is, as well. Else, remain full of it, and reply with nothing but your tired, ineffective, personal attacks, being all you ever seem to have left.
That was my first thought, too.
Well, it was my first thought after the fact that this will almost certainly drop IBM's sales.
I am not trying to be abrasive but I just don't see this switch being a good thing for IBM. I might be wrong ... we'll see.
Again no, the stategy is to release a new OS every five years.
Factually, provably incorrect. Longhorn was scheduled for a 2005 release at the latest, but XP SP2 took too many resources, and the scope of Longhorn proved to be too much so they had to rip out some features (including WinFS and MSH) just to make a 2005 beta and late 2006 release. Microsoft was saying in 2004 that the release of Longhorn would be delayed to 1H 2006, and they're going to miss that.
I'm actually happy about this. One major problem with proprietary software is the desire to rush it out the door too soon in order to meet financial expectations. Microsoft actually sucked it up and said they wouldn't release it until it's ready. Admirable, really.
I gather IBM hasn't ported Notes to Linux.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.