IBM and Who

Attachments:
Message as email (text/plain)

Author: Craig White
Date:
Subject: IBM and Who

--=-vWFpQ5iGldeDGJ/aElEi
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 2002-12-27 at 15:25, George Gambill wrote:

> Got some would be experts pushing an all MS environment to a startup
> company. They (these experts) claim that Linux is not ready for serious
> consideration. Talking to them (at their preliminary presentation) it
> became obvious to me (but only me) that they have no clue as to what Linux
> is capable of today. It seems the only products they know are MS and
> therefore the only products they have to offer are MS based.
>
> As a side bar, I have been talking with IBM concerning Linux and their AS400
> line. IBM thinks Linux is ready. Google found just over 2.5 million web
> pages on IBM and Linux. I have to believe other big players (other than
> IBM) have also embraced Linux.
>
> If any of you (PLUG) can remember such other players, their names would help
> me find them. At the next presentation by these so called experts, I would
> love to present them with a big bite of Linux reality.
>

-------
Clearly linux is ready to do most everything.

The issue always becomes whose opinion counts and whose doesn't.

There are companies with tiers of support for Windows since it proves
their existence and you aren't ever going to change their thinking.

The issue really is even more simplistic than you think. A new company
without any Microsoft investment has a tremendous advantage, they are
free to go any route that they choose. Going the Microsoft route isn't
necessarily a bad route, so many have done that before and so many will
go that route in the future. Since they have no Microsoft investment,
they are free to go linux/open source/free software and all of the
documents that they create, all of the custom adaptaptions that they
create are not impacted whatsoever by any proprietary formats, software
programs, licensing fees or the BSA marching in with the US Marshalls
and pulling the plug on their file/web servers.

No company needs Microsoft Windows/Office/etc.

They may think that they do but the fact is that they don't. The only
software that Microsoft offers that hasn't been duplicated in the open
source world at this point is Exchange Server and few companies use this
to much advantage.

see the article I pointed out a few weeks ago about Ernie Ball.
<http://infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/11/27/021127hnerniball.xml?s=IDGNS>
(sorry about the html - it keeps long url's together

Craig

--=-vWFpQ5iGldeDGJ/aElEi
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/1.0.4">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
On Fri, 2002-12-27 at 15:25, George Gambill wrote:
<PRE>> Got some would be experts pushing an all MS environment to a startup
> company. They (these experts) claim that Linux is not ready for serious
> consideration. Talking to them (at their preliminary presentation) it
> became obvious to me (but only me) that they have no clue as to what Linux
> is capable of today. It seems the only products they know are MS and
> therefore the only products they have to offer are MS based.
> 
> As a side bar, I have been talking with IBM concerning Linux and their AS400
> line. IBM thinks Linux is ready. Google found just over 2.5 million web
> pages on IBM and Linux. I have to believe other big players (other than
> IBM) have also embraced Linux.
> 
> If any of you (PLUG) can remember such other players, their names would help
> me find them. At the next presentation by these so called experts, I would
> love to present them with a big bite of Linux reality. 
> </PRE>
-------
 
Clearly linux is ready to do most everything.
 

 
The issue always becomes whose opinion counts and whose doesn't.
 

 
There are companies with tiers of support for Windows since it proves their existence and you aren't ever going to change their thinking.
 

 
The issue really is even more simplistic than you think. A new company without any Microsoft investment has a tremendous advantage, they are free to go any route that they choose. Going the Microsoft route isn't necessarily a bad route, so many have done that before and so many will go that route in the future. Since they have no Microsoft investment, they are free to go linux/open source/free software and all of the documents that they create, all of the custom adaptaptions that they create are not impacted whatsoever by any proprietary formats, software programs, licensing fees or the BSA marching in with the US Marshalls and pulling the plug on their file/web servers.
 

 
No company needs Microsoft Windows/Office/etc.
 

 
They may think that they do but the fact is that they don't. The only software that Microsoft offers that hasn't been duplicated in the open source world at this point is Exchange Server and few companies use this to much advantage.
 

 
see the article I pointed out a few weeks ago about Ernie Ball.
 
<<A HREF="http://infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/11/27/021127hnerniball.xml?s=IDGNS">http://infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/11/27/021127hnerniball.xml?s=IDGNS</A>>
 
(sorry about the html - it keeps long url's together
 

 
Craig
</BODY>
</HTML>

--=-vWFpQ5iGldeDGJ/aElEi--

This message is part of the following thread:
	the complete thread tree sorted by date
	plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us at
	Lee Einer at