If the folks at Neoseeker are to be believed, then IBM is making a transition to the Linux desktop for their internal computing network. The change is being announced by the lead of IBM's German branch, and it isn't clear whether the company as a whole will be making the switch, or just Germany. (Most likely, it's being used as a pilot program.) If the program expands to include all of IBM, we may be looking at the beginning of the end for the traditional Windows corporate world.
Honestly, I'm surprised at Gates. I've always argued that (although I loathe the man) he has a head for business. If anything, this is precisely what's wrong with windows; it's a better business than it is an OS. So why is Microsoft so dead-paralyzed against making the switch to Linux? There have been rumors in the past of Microsoft agents and employees looking to purchase variants of the Linux kernel, and/or proprietary versions of the Linux core. Is it simply a case of not being able to establish copyright? More likely, it's a question of keeping windows products extremely proprietary. The only reason anyone runs windows in a modern environment is to keep access to those programs which will run on no other OS. Microsoft knows this, and they'll fight kicking and screaming to stop people from migrating to a truly open and cross-compatible computing platform.
It bears pointing out that the Linux version being used is based on the Fedora Core, and therefor licensed through RedHat Inc., thus it's not as if IBM is going to a completely cost-free model here. Nonetheless, it's a step in a very right direction.
Honestly, I'm surprised at Gates. I've always argued that (although I loathe the man) he has a head for business. If anything, this is precisely what's wrong with windows; it's a better business than it is an OS. So why is Microsoft so dead-paralyzed against making the switch to Linux? There have been rumors in the past of Microsoft agents and employees looking to purchase variants of the Linux kernel, and/or proprietary versions of the Linux core. Is it simply a case of not being able to establish copyright? More likely, it's a question of keeping windows products extremely proprietary. The only reason anyone runs windows in a modern environment is to keep access to those programs which will run on no other OS. Microsoft knows this, and they'll fight kicking and screaming to stop people from migrating to a truly open and cross-compatible computing platform.
It bears pointing out that the Linux version being used is based on the Fedora Core, and therefor licensed through RedHat Inc., thus it's not as if IBM is going to a completely cost-free model here. Nonetheless, it's a step in a very right direction.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-08 11:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-30 04:36 pm (UTC)That's because I could've designed a better OS than windows, and because I can only wrap my brain around small portions of Linux at any given time.