RE: LINUX is the "one" ? .... Comments???

From: "Wills, Mike N. (TC)" <MNWills@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 

>That is because you are getting a bunch of "punk kids" (like me) who know
>this stuff coming in and wanting it. I don't see how you think all of these
>changes are bad. Apache was a good business move by IBM, they now only have
>to port the changes, they don't have to do lots of maintenance on an "Old"
>web server (which does work fine). The Ops Nav, I agree, it sucks (to put it
>nicely). It is slow and painful to use. I do use it occasionally (I like the
>SPLF nav), but other than that it is all command line baby!

>IBM is like a 50+ year old trying to look and act more like a teenager.
>Unfortunately, they look strange and don't quite "get it".

>I can see OS/400 lasting because of its solid design. Linux most likely will
>(somehow) become a key player in the whole scheme of things, but not take
>over. But only IBM knows what their future plans are.

This implies that IBM has a "unified vision" of how it's proceeding.  I
remember talking to one of the Linux project managers at an IBM thingy in
Rochester last year.  I couldn't resist asking him one question-- IBM is
investing a tremendous amount of money in Linux.  They issued a press release
where they outlined spending four squidjillion dollars and putting its own
grandmother into hawk just so they could enable all of their server platforms
to run Linux, donate source code, support their Linux extensions, etc.  But
why?  Did they have a bit of paper that had a cost-benefit analysis?  Did they
have a document that said "If we invest n dollars, we'll get back the following
benefits..."

He just kinda smiled and looked at me and said, "No."  In fact, the whole push
to Linux had met with a considerable resistance from several quarters.  Was
still meeting with considerable reistance, in fact.  He went on to tell me that
there was considerable division within IBM regarding language choices, hardware
choices, OS choices.  He made it sound as if it was a wonder they got anything
done at all.

I have no idea what this means.  But I think it does indicate that IBM is as
confused about the 400 as we are.  We all want to make it "better".  But what
is "better"?  Linux?  Dumping DB/2?  Forcing everyone to migrate to a
POSIX-compliant file system?  Ditching green screen?  Keeping green screen? 
Reducing the price of the system?  Keeping everything the same?  Nobody knows,
really.

However, as long as people continue to buy and use the machines, I suspect IBM
will keep making them.

Just my befuddled .02

-Doc




__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com