Potatoes are more intelligent than grass because people can eat them - Gurdjieff
|
|
|
IBM 'might dump Windows for Mac'
IBM HAS BEEN running a little test lately, to see whether its employees would be happier to work on a Mac platform rather than Windows. With the answer so far seemingly pointing to a resounding 'Yes'.
The pilot programme was launched in October 2007, to check out the options and feasibility of moving a few of IBM’s 300,000 employees to the Mac platform. Unsurprisingly, Cupertino is rubbing its hands in glee, and is doing its utmost to step up its level of Mac support for IBM’s business applications.
IBM is apparently fed up of being tied to Windows, and is looking toward a more diverse, pastel-hued and cross-platformed future.
An internal IBM memo outlines several main reasons for staff wanting to free themselves of their Windows shackles and move to Mac, among them, the fact that Macs are supposedly less prone to security issues, more widely used in the academic world (with which IBM has close links), that the development environment on Macs are thought by IBM boffins to be more convenient and the fact that new hires really just want them, dammit!
IBM also mentions the fact that there has been increased acceptance of the Mac as a business oriented platform recently and wants to make significant investments in reaching a Mac platform parity.
Of the, erm, 24 IBM research staff who took part in the original pilot, 82 per cent of them said that the Mac was a "better or best experience" when compared to their Stinkpad running Windows. And 86 per cent asked to keep their Mac, (confusingly, that’s one person more than those who said they liked it).
Microsoft probably doesn't have an awful lot to worry about just yet, as 24 employees hardly constitutes a Mac revolution, and even IBM’s plans to expand the pilot only go as far as another 100 employees by the end of 2008.
It should also be remembered that IBM is a company that thinks Lotus Notes is a good piece of software. µ
L’Inq
Roughly
Drafted Magazine
Share this:
Share
Wow, why is it that every time that someone mentions switching to Macs, the Apple fanboys swarm? Really, if Apple operating systems were as good as people say they are I'm pretty sure that Microsoft would not have completely dominated them as hard as they have back in the days when Microsoft was the little company stealing Apple's ideas. Honestly Apple's operating system cant be considered more than a shiny way to edit your pictures and listen to your mp3s until Apple freely licenses their software to be used on ANY computer and IDE's like Visual Studio have Apple Application alongside Windows application in the new project window.
they'd install parallels and just run all their windows apps in that :) I'd rather have the flexibility of having a decent mac bootcamp'd or similar infront of me than not having the choice of using OS X at all. Until Apple allow OS X to run under virtual instances on a PC we are all a bit locked in if we need the flexibility of both. If more people use Apple hardware might spur on more choice of hardware add-ons etc... We only have so much choice on a Windows based machine because of their profileration, don't forget this brings its own issues, driver compatibility etc... Just my two pence.
Given the fact that yes IBM encountered the debacle of using an end user OS that didn't quite compete with the market share. They moved to Windows 95 roughly around 97 after OS/2 Warp didnt share the same successs. While it is possible that such a large company could again venture into another OS shift I'd say the comfortableness with XP will remain, particularly in the light of the ever disappointing Vista. There are already releases of Linux supported distributions, so given the market it is today, why would an IT leader suffice to 300,000 new licenses to a new OS marketed by another proprietor when they can sample the ever growing alternative of open source operating systems?
IBM will not migrate to another Microsoft (already demented). That's right, get it in your worm-hole-brains Apples! Apple is nothing than a small Microsoft. Tell me, besides the design and usability, the differences! It's closed, they behaving like freaks, software is freaking expensive, slow updates and insecure (YES!). The only reasonable option for such companies to unbound from such 'provider' is to migrate to open ones...yes, the solution reads Linux.
Why shackled by Windoze?

Bring out your OS/2, IBM !!

It's a better Windows than Windoze, right?

RIGHT?????
They'll convert part of some divisions over to Mac/OS X as part of diversifying their client offerings. PowerPC rides again!

My thought as to why, Vista sucks, and Windows 7 might not be any better, so why not fly the OS X kite?
So many people still drinking the MS kool-aid!
You might think that only 100+ people will be officially getting Macs but in reality, more will bring their own Mac laptops (if they have to) from home and configure it for work use. IBM is not a telemarketing company requiring a simple terminal where PC's are the cheapest solution.

BTW, IBM is not the only big enterprise looking at Mac deployment. Big Pharma is also entertaining the migration too following the Mac dominant Genentech. These migrations won't happen overnight but IT WILL. Look at education. It was cool to have a Dell, dude. Not anymore, it's a Mac.

You Windows users, it's 2008, the 90's have been long gone. Use a millenium system like Mac and Linux.
Using a Mac is very liberating. And it's just plain dumb to settle for windows and linux only when you can have a Mac as well, and for less money, in a far better designed package.

Microsoft copied Apple (several times) for a reason. IBM PC was only a weak copy of Apple II. IBM didn't want to 'do' microcomputing at all. Apple kinda forced their hand on that. 

Windows? It's always been a half arsed copy of Mac. We know you told your Mom and your girlfriend it would go away. But it didn't, so get over it. Mac is the only system that was strong enough to survive the monopoly power of the PC. It did this because it has always been BETTER than the PC. Wake up, your Windows Vista 'solutions' are DOG SLOW compared to Mac. Why WOULDN'T IBM want to go Mac?
http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=JGFLAKNUFHQ5IQSNDLOSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=181502065&_requestid=237136

Yawns..
You'd think that a company like IBM, who made its reputation 35 years ago by hosing its customer base with closed, proprietary main frames would know better than to sign on to getting hosed by closed, proprietary PC's.

ScottJ

I bet some at IBM are still bitter at Gates for taking Windows away from them. This transition to the Mac might be a way for them to give the middle finger to Gates for past injustices.
Beleive it or not, Unix is At&t codebase & more complex than C++, More instructions.

Yet IBM can run C++, Unix or Foster Grants. Even Fortran. Why? IBM puts shell of imitation software around its own code. NOBODY Knows whats inside IBM. Magical Secret Formula is Only Clue.

Its Fun for those whom insist on impossible, Yet if you look closely in market place, those browsers are NOT anything Public is familar with. Why? Its IBM. After all, if You had say mil to spend everyyear on Computing, would You Rent Atari Team or IBM. IBM dosn't Care, They Do Them All.
Thomas Stewart von DRASHEK
Why? Uh, you don't want to hear about it, apparently. 

Shackles? Absolutely. What rock have you been living under. Microsoft is even keeping your systems SLOOOOOOW with old tech such as BIOS. Apple doesn't need it.

Get a Mac and run anything you want. Get a PC and run, well, windows and Linux if you just want to pretend that is a viable alternative (or perhaps you are the type to pretend there is no alternative to windows)...

Wake up, Macs have always been better, this is why MS has copied them relentlessly, but nowadays, there is no comparison.

Windows is no longer the OS, it's just a layer on your Mac (which you can use or ignore altogether).
Given where IBM's investments have been over the past several years, OS-wise, do people really think IBM would want to shell out big bucks to broadly deploy and support yet another proprietary operating system owned by another company?
IBM is just trying to get better prices from Micro$oft. IBM says 'cut your proce or we'll buy 100 Macs and tell the world about it, and you'll get crap publicity'. They put out a press release to show MS that they mean business. Way to go, IBM!
PCs are just simple "front ends" to IBM these days. Their attention is all on the other side of the ethernet connection. Why not use iMacs as user friendly, low "hassle factor," terminals? Macs are UNIX boxes that have a great user interface/experience and run a multitude of "off the shelf" applications. The only downside is expense and I'm sure IBM won't be buying their Macs at the Apple store.
is not going to happen. I enjoyed the story today in internal blue pages. Every now and then there will be some crazy ideea about moving to...Apple. Two years ago there was an internal initiative to dump WIndows and move to open sauce :). Guess what! never happened, never will.

good luck.
And the solution is to get tied up to MacOS ?

What a brilliant idea ! Here, to stop your smoking addiction, have a bit of weed instead.

Doesn't IBM promote Linux/*nix ? Couldn't they have announced a massive shift to whatever flavor-of-the-month distro it is this month ?
Wouldn't that have been a bit better as far as the services part is concerned ? Oh sorry, I forgot we're talking about the company that buried OS/2 because they didn't have the balls to go against MS when it was a tenth of what it is now.
So yeah, Mac sounds just right for them now.
*start your flamers*
IBM still does the best research in advanced technology. Period. They sold their consumer PC division yet are still turning a decent profit on servers and service. Might I remind you that PCs went from costing 2K($USD) and making a hefty profit to selling for a few hundred with a slight markup? IBM was not in a postilion to run their business like that so they spun it off to concentrate on what fit with their management style. And those PCs were outsourcing their chips from Intel.
Not to mention a company that thinks selling all its assets worth while i.e pc division, hard drive ect. Its a wonder there are still around i expect them to be outsourcing their chips from intel soon.
I'd say there are tighter shackles on the Mac platform... at least with Windows you can install it on any hardware you like, not just on the hardware Messiah Steve tells you you can.
Erm, so lotus notes is a P.O.S. is it eh??
We just got rid of frickin' Citrix here at work, thank the manufacturer. Unfortunately it was replaced with a little piece of software called "terminal services".