IBM puts cash behind Linux push

edesignuk

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Mar 25, 2002
19,077
1
London, England
IBM is spending $100m (£52m) over the next three years beefing up its commitment to Linux software.

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.

IBM said the money will fund a variety of technical, research and marketing initiatives to boost Linux use.

IBM said it had taken the step in response to greater customer demand for the open source software.
Full article.

All I can say is with Linux getting this kind of backing from such a high profile player, MS had better make Longhorn decent.
 

Platform

macrumors 68030
Dec 30, 2004
2,881
0
iGAV said:
Yeah like that's going to happen. :eek: :p :p
Agree

But at least now maby at least M$ will give it a go, and try to make it good even since it is not going to happen.
Just hope that it is WAY better than XP but will still be behind OS X a long way :D
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
We can only hope they fail like they did with OS/2. Fortunately, IBM has always been pretty inept with software. They can throw all the money they want at Linux, but that doesn't change the fact that it, designwise, is Unix: a relic from the days before most of us were born when "everything is a file" actually made sense as a "philosophy." Unless IBM can break some *major* ground, it will be pushing one of the most scatterbrained, user-unfriendly operating systems ever onto people's computers.
 

Platform

macrumors 68030
Dec 30, 2004
2,881
0
broken_keyboard said:
Linux isn't proper.
Yes I read an article about "living with Linux"
The article clearly stated that Linux had become a lot better than what it used to be, but it still could not match OS X and Windows in userbility on a daily level.
Some of the bad things that they mentioned was that there were so many drivers for hardware that does not exist for Linux yet :eek:
 

broken_keyboard

macrumors 65816
Apr 19, 2004
1,144
0
Secret Moon base
Platform said:
Yes I read an article about "living with Linux"
The article clearly stated that Linux had become a lot better than what it used to be, but it still could not match OS X and Windows in userbility on a daily level.
Some of the bad things that they mentioned was that there were so many drivers for hardware that does not exist for Linux yet :eek:
I think Linux is not for everyone (me included). I used to enjoy hacking around with low level operating system stuff, but nowadays I want it to just work, so I can get on with whatever I'm supposed to be doing. I think it's main advantage over other OSs is that it is so configurable, but that is a mixed blessing.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,518
2,554
Sod off
I dunno, it seems to me that Linux truly is the OS of the future, though it is still in an unfinished state. I expect to see more work done with blending the Linux OS with various proprietary GUIs a la OS X. Or maybe people will just become increasingly computer savy and learn how to use Linux better.

Linux has great speed and stability - two items that are in doubt with Longhorn.
 

Loki.Mephisto

macrumors 6502a
alex_ant said:
We can only hope they fail like they did with OS/2. Fortunately, IBM has always been pretty inept with software. They can throw all the money they want at Linux, but that doesn't change the fact that it, designwise, is Unix: a relic from the days before most of us were born when "everything is a file" actually made sense as a "philosophy." Unless IBM can break some *major* ground, it will be pushing one of the most scatterbrained, user-unfriendly operating systems ever onto people's computers.
Don´t forget MacOS is based on BSD - Unix. Furthermore, Linux is not user - unfriendly. It´s just a kernel and everyone is free to set up a systen based on the Linux - kernel to his desires. The latest KDE - Desktop is more user - friendly than the product out of Redmont. Also Apple did appreciate KDE´s efforts by basing Safari on khtml.

MacOS still rulez
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
alex_ant said:
We can only hope they fail like they did with OS/2. Fortunately, IBM has always been pretty inept with software. They can throw all the money they want at Linux, but that doesn't change the fact that it, designwise, is Unix: a relic from the days before most of us were born when "everything is a file" actually made sense as a "philosophy." Unless IBM can break some *major* ground, it will be pushing one of the most scatterbrained, user-unfriendly operating systems ever onto people's computers.
Hello ... OS X is Unix (FreeBSD/ Mach kernel). What are you saying? XP is a modern OS and everything else is crap? I say that because, other than OS400 and OS390, everything on the planet is *nix based, other then XP.
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
daveL said:
Hello ... OS X is Unix (FreeBSD/ Mach kernel). What are you saying? XP is a modern OS and everything else is crap? I say that because, other than OS400 and OS390, everything on the planet is *nix based, other then XP.
All I said was what I said: Unix is ancient and braindead. No, not everything on the planet is Unix based besides Windows and OS400 and OS390, not by far - you just think it is because Unix is all you know, because Unix is what everybody always ascribes the buzzwords to and says is the best. "Powerful!" "Stable!" "Flexible!" "Standard!" Historically these statements have never been any more true for Unix than any other OS. Its success has been extremely Microsoftian: the inferior, commercially-acceptable Goliath winning out over the less well-known, less well-funded, technologically superior Davids. And I can give plenty of examples if you want them...

Unix is a way of doing easy things the hard way. It's a way of putting the computer above the user and guarding sacred knowledge. It is anti-democratic, anti-progress, elitist, technocratic at its very core.

Apple and Unix are one of the most curious synergies because, philosophically, Unix is the most anti-Mac OS in existence. OS X is overall a good OS *despite* its Unix underpinnings. My pet theory is that Apple/Jobs use Unix in order to 1) play it safe; 2) play off the "powerful/stable/flexible/standard" myths; and 3) get labor from ideological geek developers who will work for free on Darwin.
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Loki.Mephisto said:
Don´t forget MacOS is based on BSD - Unix. Furthermore, Linux is not user - unfriendly. It´s just a kernel and everyone is free to set up a systen based on the Linux - kernel to his desires.
That is the very epitomy of user-unfriendly.
The latest KDE - Desktop is more user - friendly than the product out of Redmont.
No it isn't, I guarantee you it isn't, because it can't be more user-friendly if you need to know that there is such a thing as "Linux," but Linux is not an OS, it's just a kernel, and there are many different distributions of Linux which use various different graphical interfaces, one of which is called KDE, which is a desktop environment, unlike some other distributions which do not use complete desktop environments, but rather only window managers, but anyway back to KDE, there is a fair amount of software for it, but some isn't *for* it per se, but will work in it anyway, but won't look the same because it's written for a competing desktop called GNOME, which by the way is also on your computer and which you can invoke at any time, because two desktop environments is actually better than one, because it gives you a choice between the obscure irrelevant software ideology *you* prefer!!!

Also Apple did appreciate KDE´s efforts by basing Safari on khtml.
This is all well and good, rah rah khtml etc., my point was that Unix is a dinosaur and it is.
 

Mechcozmo

macrumors 603
Jul 17, 2004
5,215
2
edesignuk said:
All I can say is with Linux getting this kind of backing from such a high profile player, MS had better make Longhorn decent.
Longhorn? Oh, right, that. You mean, the "It is so good you can't have it" operating system?

Linux is only free in your time is worthless.

:D
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
alex_ant said:
All I said was what I said: Unix is ancient and braindead. No, not everything on the planet is Unix based besides Windows and OS400 and OS390, not by far - you just think it is because Unix is all you know, because Unix is what everybody always ascribes the buzzwords to and says is the best. "Powerful!" "Stable!" "Flexible!" "Standard!" Historically these statements have never been any more true for Unix than any other OS. Its success has been extremely Microsoftian: the inferior, commercially-acceptable Goliath winning out over the less well-known, less well-funded, technologically superior Davids. And I can give plenty of examples if you want them...

Unix is a way of doing easy things the hard way. It's a way of putting the computer above the user and guarding sacred knowledge. It is anti-democratic, anti-progress, elitist, technocratic at its very core.

Apple and Unix are one of the most curious synergies because, philosophically, Unix is the most anti-Mac OS in existence. OS X is overall a good OS *despite* its Unix underpinnings. My pet theory is that Apple/Jobs use Unix in order to 1) play it safe; 2) play off the "powerful/stable/flexible/standard" myths; and 3) get labor from ideological geek developers who will work for free on Darwin.
Sorry, I've been in this business for over 30 years, and you have no idea what you're talking about.

So, tell us, oh enlightened one, which OS should we bow to? BeOS (the OS with no apps)? Are we worthy of your knowledge (since you offer no alternatives)?
 

broken_keyboard

macrumors 65816
Apr 19, 2004
1,144
0
Secret Moon base
alex_ant said:
You said in 3 words what I could not in 1,000,000. Thank you!!!!!!!!
Ja... but you seem to hate all Unix, I was just talking about Linux.

I actually think some of the Unix ideas are really good. The hierarchical filesystem is so simple and yet lets you model many common data situations without a database. The idea of piping commands together in the shell is very powerful. Also the idea the everything is a file serves to give you a simple interface (open, seek etc.) to a great variety of devices.
C'mon, it's not all bad :)
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
daveL said:
Sorry, I've been in this business for over 30 years, and you have no idea what you're talking about.

So, tell us, oh enlightened one, which OS should we bow to? BeOS (the OS with no apps)? Are we worthy of your knowledge (since you offer no alternatives)?
Look, when I say that Unix/Linux sucks, I am not saying that I think everything else is oh so great. I'm saying just that Unix/Linux sucks. I understand that I sound negative, but I think I'm actually positive because I want computers to be more advanced than they are today, and I think Unix/Linux are a philosophical and technical retreat to the dark ages. There is no single system that gets it all right. What there have been, is a lot of systems that have furthered progress in operating systems and computer science in general only to be snuffed out by more popular, politically acceptable systems from companies like IBM, Sun, HP, and Microsoft.

If you want to talk about BeOS: Of course BeOS had no apps. What it did have were things like an innovative and advanced implementation of pervasive multithreading, a robust and useful database filesystem, and a highly optimized core for low-latency I/O. Do you want to ignore all this because it had no apps? Let's talk about Multics, let's talk about VMS, let's talk about NeWS, TOPS-20, the Lisp Machine, NeXT (Unix core I know, but they got the graphical part right), Cedar-Mesa, ITS... Mac OS!!!! I'm not saying any of these are necessarily great by themselves, I'm saying they all had at least several great ideas that were smooshed under Unix's foot. If you take a stroll down the path through history of OSes killed by one factor or another, you will find *a lot* of innovation that has been either ignored or directly attacked by the Unix vendor hegemony. Unix doesn't care about any of this. It lives inside its own world, where everything it does, it does the "correct" way, because "that's the way it has always been done." It *never advances.* That is the way I see it kind sir.
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
broken_keyboard said:
Ja... but you seem to hate all Unix, I was just talking about Linux.

I actually think some of the Unix ideas are really good. The hierarchical filesystem is so simple and yet lets you model many common data situations without a database.
It's like saying counting on your fingers lets you model many common math situations without math. A database filesystem is SO much more powerful and can even facilitate hierarchy if you want it to, but it will never gain popularity in Unix because Unix's proponents will say "Why would you need that? We have SYMLINKS!!!!!!" (*puts head in hands*)

(Unix, btw, didn't invent the hierarchical filesystem, although I will give it credit for attempting one in a few instances)

The idea of piping commands together in the shell is very powerful.
"Unix pipes = powerful" is a popular myth. What they certainly are though is highly fragile and unflexible and unportable and prone to catastrophic consequences as a result of programmer error and a lot harder to learn and manage than higher-level solutions.
Also the idea the everything is a file serves to give you a simple interface (open, seek etc.) to a great variety of devices.
Everything is a file works fine when you need to communicate in ASCII, like in earlier decades when devices were simple and could be controlled by simple byte streams. It was even really cool then. But we don't use line printers anymore - we use laser or inkjet printers that require complex control languages, we use sound cards that have multiple channels and advanced mixers and DSPs onboard, we use advanced scanners and video capture cards with hardware compressors and software modems. Unix/Linux are still struggling to cope with all of this, and where they do succeed, it is almost always with a nonstandard, hack-job implementation for which user-level software needs to be custom-tailored. This is not good design. Unix is being dragged into the 21st century kicking and screaming.

(And this is only how "everything is a file" breaks down with devices. Unfortunately it applies to more than devices - it applies to everything!)
 

Loki.Mephisto

macrumors 6502a
alex_ant said:
Look, when I say that Unix/Linux sucks, I am not saying that I think everything else is oh so great. I'm saying just that Unix/Linux sucks.
Ok, i understand, you don´t like it. All right.

But please, if you don´t like it, state just that. Do not post any factoids. You apparently have your personal dispute with *nixes, what is, however, no reason to be dishonest.

alex_ant said:
Unix is a way of doing easy things the hard way. It's a way of putting the computer above the user...
Correct in some way. Usually *nices are made for servers. They don´t have to be user friendly. They have to be stable, secure. There´s no need for a sophisticated, hyper-userfriendly GUI on a web-server. It just has to serve web - content 24/7
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
alex_ant said:
Look, when I say that Unix/Linux sucks, I am not saying that I think everything else is oh so great. I'm saying just that Unix/Linux sucks. I understand that I sound negative, but I think I'm actually positive because I want computers to be more advanced than they are today, and I think Unix/Linux are a philosophical and technical retreat to the dark ages. There is no single system that gets it all right. What there have been, is a lot of systems that have furthered progress in operating systems and computer science in general only to be snuffed out by more popular, politically acceptable systems from companies like IBM, Sun, HP, and Microsoft.

If you want to talk about BeOS: Of course BeOS had no apps. What it did have were things like an innovative and advanced implementation of pervasive multithreading, a robust and useful database filesystem, and a highly optimized core for low-latency I/O. Do you want to ignore all this because it had no apps? Let's talk about Multics, let's talk about VMS, let's talk about NeWS, TOPS-20, the Lisp Machine, NeXT (Unix core I know, but they got the graphical part right), Cedar-Mesa, ITS... Mac OS!!!! I'm not saying any of these are necessarily great by themselves, I'm saying they all had at least several great ideas that were smooshed under Unix's foot. If you take a stroll down the path through history of OSes killed by one factor or another, you will find *a lot* of innovation that has been either ignored or directly attacked by the Unix vendor hegemony. Unix doesn't care about any of this. It lives inside its own world, where everything it does, it does the "correct" way, because "that's the way it has always been done." It *never advances.* That is the way I see it kind sir.
Gee, you forgot Plan 9.

So there's no single OS in existence, with applications (yes, the are a requirement) that people can use to get work done, that satisfies you as being a "modern" OS. OK. Now stop wasting my time.
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
daveL said:
Gee, you forgot Plan 9.

So there's no single OS in existence, with applications (yes, the are a requirement) that people can use to get work done, that satisfies you as being a "modern" OS. OK. Now stop wasting my time.
Read a single word that I said and then get back to me. Thanks
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Loki.Mephisto said:
Ok, i understand, you don´t like it. All right.

But please, if you don´t like it, state just that. Do not post any factoids. You apparently have your personal dispute with *nixes, what is, however, no reason to be dishonest.
"Do not post any factoids" ??? I'm only trying to make a point, do I have to stop using facts now? Of course this is only my opinion, and the reason I'm presenting all this evidence is to try to sway people who will read it into agreeing with me. That's how argument works....
Correct in some way. Usually *nices are made for servers. They don´t have to be user friendly. They have to be stable, secure. There´s no need for a sophisticated, hyper-userfriendly GUI on a web-server. It just has to serve web - content 24/7
The article said:
IBM is spending $100m (£52m) over the next three years beefing up its commitment to Linux software. 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'm not asking for world peace and an end to global poverty here... I just wish people would expect more from their software. Mediocrity is so entrenched, most people don't know it doesn't have to be that way. This is the fight Mac advocates fight every day. We know we have a superior system. We need to make sure we keep in mind what, ideologically, *makes* our system superior, and keep up the fight to spread these ideals.

It's not Unix that makes the Mac better!!
 

Mechcozmo

macrumors 603
Jul 17, 2004
5,215
2
alex_ant said:
It's not Unix that makes the Mac better!!
Its the fact that I don't have a registry to explode every twenty seconds. :D

And I think that we should all take a breath here... its obvious that this is turning into a battleground.