Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IBM gets hip with 'cool' Ubuntu PC deal
The Register (UK) ^ | 5th August 2008 19:02 GMT | Gavin Clarke in San Francisco

Posted on 02/10/2009 11:29:23 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

Canonical offers Office 'alternative'

LinuxWorld IBM is today expected to announce expanded backing for Ubuntu in a desktop and collaboration software deal to challenge Microsoft's Windows and Office.

Canonical, Ubuntu's commercial sponsor, has agreed to re-distribute IBM's Lotus Symphony productivity suite with its public Linux repositories. More details are expected later today.

The news follows IBM's decision earlier this year to offer a version of its Open Collaboration Client Solution (OCCS) for Ubuntu.

Ubuntu is, according to the suits at IBM, "a Linux operating system that scores high marks on usability and 'the cool factor.'"

The deal is expected to be announced by IBM at the same time it announces agreements with Ubuntu, Red Hat and SuSE to work with local hardware partners to build and distribute "Microsoft-free" PCs. Systems will feature the Linux distros running IBM's OCCS and other open-source applications.

IBM said products would be tailored to vertical sectors and be branded by the local IT partners.

IBM added that shifting market forces, slow adoption of Windows Vista, and growing demand for alternatives to "costly" Windows and Office-based machines: "Offer a glimpse of the ripe market opportunity for Linux-based desktops to proliferate."

The company will also announce Novell's Linux Enterprise Server 10 as the first Linux distro to be shipped with a new line of self-managing server appliances targeting small businesses. The appliances, Linux Foundations, are designed to promote uptake of IBM's Domino email and collaboration software in SMBs.

Accompanying the news, IBM announced the Lotus Foundations ISV Developer Toolkit, which it said would simplify packaging of Domino applications for appliances.®


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: ibm; linux; servers; ubuntu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

1 posted on 02/10/2009 11:29:24 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I just installed Xubuntu 8.10 onto a 10 year old PC and all things considered I'm more than satisfied.
2 posted on 02/10/2009 11:33:52 AM PST by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
IBM's Ubuntu deal favors the server

**************************EXCERPT********************

Again, with the Linux desktop

By Gavin Clarke in San Francisco •

5th August 2008 21:08 GMT

LinuxWorld Ubuntu is the latest Linux distro to fall under the loving gaze of systems giant IBM, in its endless march to unseat Microsoft from business desktops and servers.

Canonical, the commercial sponsor of the people-friendly Ubuntu, has done a deal with IBM that'll serve Ubuntu well in the enterprise - running business applications.

As reported, Canonical will re-distribute IBM's Lotus Symphony, based on OpenOffice.org, with its Ubuntu repositories. Deconstructing the twisted language IBM used to make this announcement, Canonical told The Reg it would have Lotus Notes install with Symphony using the Ubuntu two-click process.

Canonical expects testing to be done in September and general availability with the release by IBM of a Lotus Notes client for Debian this autumn.

The question is whether Canonical will also provide support for Symphony, a free product from IBM that the systems giant supports. Canonical is likely to turn to a third-party to provide this although it's likely to resell Symphony support, the company said.

Canonical and Ubuntu are finding growing favor with IBM, which wants its applications running on Linux distros against Microsoft's Windows and business applications. So far, for example, IBM's DB2 has been certified on Ubuntu.

IBM's endorsement is great for Ubuntu, which - with Red Hat and Novell both conspicuous by their absence - was the Linux distro that owned this year's LinuxWorld. It re-enforces Canonical's long-term objective of running more business-critical applications.

For IBM, it was the same old story: a search for a new source to power its never-ending battle to unseat Microsoft from the enterprise. No consumer will ever use the Ubuntu work on Notes.

IBM's deal with Canonical, along with Red Hat and Novell, is to partner with local hardware providers - as yet there are none to announce, IBM told press at LinuxWorld - for a "Microsoft-free" PC. The deal is therefore, so far, on software - Open Collaboration Client Solution (OCCS) and Symphony.

We've been here before with IBM partnering around, and talking up, the possibilities of the Linux desktop. Yet it's never really caught on.

This time, though, the director of cross-IBM Linux strategy Inna Kuzetsova believes things are different. Linux on the desktop is "much more user friendly, plus there's the ability to exchange documents and messages," she said.

3 posted on 02/10/2009 11:34:22 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...

4 posted on 02/10/2009 11:34:47 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven
Thanks for the info.

Related thread...

Ubuntu Server Creation Help?

5 posted on 02/10/2009 11:36:08 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I have a new quad 6700 with Windows 7 64 beta and Ubuntu 64 that I am testing out for future installs for clients. Ubuntu is just as slick, performs better and costs less. Going to be a steep hill from here for MS.

In both cases, I think the 32 bit versions run better though. 64 bitters can use more refinement.


6 posted on 02/10/2009 11:36:31 AM PST by Tarpon (If you don't stand on principle, you stand for nothing at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

IBM is a faithless partner.

I know. I have a small company which was an IBM OS/2 Developer Partner.

IBM abandoned us. They surrendered to Microsoft leaving all us OS/2 developers high and dry.

F*ck IBM. I hope their executives rot in hell.


7 posted on 02/10/2009 11:40:49 AM PST by FroggyTheGremlim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon
In both cases, I think the 32 bit versions run better though. 64 bitters can use more refinement.

I've been running Ubuntu 64-bit on my desktop for about a year now with few problems.

But then I chose my hardware carefully. If you build a box using hardware that relies on manufacturers to provide your drivers then you can have issues with 64-bit. People with wireless cards with the Atheros chips have had lots of problems. I use cards with the fully documented RALink chips and haven't had any problem at all.

The last stumbling blocks were 64-bit flash and a 64-bit java plugin for Firefox. Both of those finally showed up late last year.

8 posted on 02/10/2009 11:43:25 AM PST by Knitebane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

OpenSolaris is MUCH COOLER than Ubuntu.


9 posted on 02/10/2009 11:44:07 AM PST by Astronaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eCSMaster
I have a small company which was an IBM OS/2 Developer Partner.

I had only my REXX test left to take before I got my OS/2CE. I had an interview scheduled in Boca Raton when they pulled the plug. I'm still miffed about that.

IBM is a big company. And big companies, like countries, don't have friends. They have interests. Fortunately IBM is just another company in the Linux market. They don't dominate it so they don't get to pull stupid stunts. Users know they have other choices and will bail in a heartbeat.

10 posted on 02/10/2009 11:47:41 AM PST by Knitebane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: eCSMaster

I remember those days...IBM was cutting everything...for quite awhile...


11 posted on 02/10/2009 11:56:22 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

KEWL!


12 posted on 02/10/2009 12:19:04 PM PST by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Knitebane
Yeah, I have been running 64 bit for a while now, but the 64 bit versions of Windows 7, Ubuntu and XP, while not showing any real show stoppers, seem less peppy regardless what I happen to do. I think it's definitely a software tuning issue. It also uses more memory, over twice what the 32 bit uses.

I just built this 6700 as a test box to see how a faster machine worked out. Wanted to test out VMs and RAID to see if there was any real advantage to the user. So far, inconclusive.

Yes, flash is the big problem right now, but using the wrapper works acceptably.

I have stuck with wired cards for now, but you are right about tested wireless cards and driver problems have been dogging the 64 bit switch.

I still see 64 bits as not ready ‘yet’ for prime time, and for most people, probably not needed either.

I have put Ubuntu on many systems and so far, no security problems at all. I recommend people do their banking online with a separate Ubuntu account they use only for banking and other security site issues, to keep down the possible problems that may develop with daily use.

13 posted on 02/10/2009 12:20:16 PM PST by Tarpon (If you don't stand on principle, you stand for nothing at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: eCSMaster
IBM abandoned us. They surrendered to Microsoft leaving all us OS/2 developers high and dry.

F*ck IBM. I hope their executives rot in hell.

You still living in the past? Those exec's are long since gone.

14 posted on 02/10/2009 12:25:40 PM PST by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon
I still see 64 bits as not ready ‘yet’ for prime time, and for most people, probably not needed either.

The reality is that the only reason you need 64-bits is if you actually need more than 4GB of RAM.

32-bit computing can address up to 4GB. Anything more than that requires some kernel tricks or a move to 64-bit.

64-bit uses more memory than 32-bit. The trade off is that you can stuff a lot more memory in a 64-bit machine and use it.

So, bottom line, if you don't have an application requirement for more than 4GB of RAM, you don't need a 64-bit OS.

15 posted on 02/10/2009 12:27:37 PM PST by Knitebane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Knitebane

Yep, that’s my conclusion as well. I was hoping for some 64 bit speed up, but nope. If software folks don’t get this squared away, they could queer the market for 64 bit.

I was trying to explore the security implications of VMs used as banking, stocks and other online stuff that is secure. I just started oput with a couple of GB, so I will order up 4 more.

That’s what testing is for.

You using Windows 7 beta?


16 posted on 02/10/2009 12:50:30 PM PST by Tarpon (If you don't stand on principle, you stand for nothing at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon
I was hoping for some 64 bit speed up, but nope.

64-bit was never about more speed. It's a new architecture to deal with greater amounts of memory.

If software folks don’t get this squared away, they could queer the market for 64 bit.

With applications getting larger all the time eventually 64-bit will be the default because accessing more than 4GB of RAM on 32-bit is just too costly. (Processorily speaking)

You using Windows 7 beta?

Didya read my tagline? ;)

17 posted on 02/10/2009 1:08:56 PM PST by Knitebane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Knitebane; Tarpon
Didya read my tagline? ;)

Heh. I guess you didn't. FR ate my tagline.

All fixed now.

18 posted on 02/10/2009 1:11:04 PM PST by Knitebane (Happily Microsoft free since 1999.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Knitebane

Do you know which manufacturers us the RALink chips?
The intel-based wireless in my dell work laptop also works pretty good.


19 posted on 02/10/2009 1:11:08 PM PST by zeugma (Will it be nukes or aliens? Time will tell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
Do you know which manufacturers us the RALink chips?

Ralink chipsets based wireless devices

The intel-based wireless in my dell work laptop also works pretty good.

Yep. Intel and nVidia have some of the best device support for Linux.

20 posted on 02/10/2009 1:16:58 PM PST by Knitebane (Happily Microsoft free since 1999.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson