IBM to Fully Support Ubuntu

[WatchingThePain]

http://linuxfud.wordpress.com/2008/01/27/ibm-to-fully-support-ubuntu-with-lotus-death-of-ubuntu/

Seems Good to me.

[albandy]

Hope do the same with websphere and rational architect, now it's a bit complicated to install it in ubuntu (but it's possible, I'm running it)

[cb951303]

do they mean technical support? I don't get it, symphony already had DEB packages?

also why in the world would it be the death of ubuntu??

[WatchingThePain]

Don't worry..there's no Death for Ubuntu.
They know that loads of people are using Ubuntu so they now support it and yes that would include technical support.

[odda]

3rd party support, whether Ubuntu will take it onboard is another question

[miegiel]

do they mean technical support? I don't get it, symphony already had DEB packages?

also why in the world would it be the death of ubuntu??

Put "the death of ubuntu" in the title and people will read it. I can't see any other reason atm.

[Naiki Muliaina]

also why in the world would it be the death of ubuntu??

The articles on an FUD page, read from the 2nd comment on slashdot and theres the 'death of ubuntu' bit. Though its still FUD ^^

[Tibuda]

Lotus notes... this may spell the end of Ubuntu being considered "User Friendly" as Lotus Notes drags it kicking and screaming to the ground.This is the comment in Slashdot. It only says that Lotus Notes is not user friendly.

[orethrius]

I'm sorry, and I know I should keep such negativity to myself, but that kind of comment just really angers me.

Shall we drop OpenOffice because it's not user-friendly enough to be 100% compatible with Office formats? How about Java or Mono, should those be dropped in favor of the MS .NET framework? What's being proposed here already exists, and it ISN'T LINUX.

[Ioky]

More and More people using Ubuntu can only lead Ubuntu into two direction.

ONE: A distro for every one. That also meant perfect to no one, at least not out of the box.

TWO: Become another "Windows". If company is relesing software only for ubuntu, and not Open Sources. Ubuntu will be the only distro people use if they need that software. Just like windows. eg: AutoCAD. People who need AutoCAD will have to use Windows.

But the good thing is, it is Open Sources itself, so there will be many favor of ubuntu for us when the time come. Just like debian, and red hat.

[davidryder]

This is amazing to me to see how much momentum Linux is gaining!!! Rather, astounding! Holy crap... it's not uncommon anymore for people to know what Linux is. The US Govt is talking about supporting OSS, Dell & Wal-Mart sell PC's loaded with Linux, IBM is talking about officially supporting Linux (and Ubuntu for that matter), manufacturers are beginning to release Linux drivers for their hardware, and companies are being founded around OSS.

It is no longer simply a dream. It is becoming a reality.

Regarding the death to Ubuntu comment: does not compute.

[WatchingThePain]

This is amazing to me to see how much momentum Linux is gaining!!!

True, that was really the point I was making.

[albandy]

also HP is start to support Ubuntu Server on it's ProLiant server line.
See this:
http://www.detector-pro.com/2009/02/hp-support-ubuntu-server-on-their.html

[k2t0f12d]

I tried Symphony ages ago. Might be a bigger hit in Europe then it was with me.

[Erik Trybom]

This isn't news. The article is more than a year old.

[JackieChan]

I really don't see why more support is a bad thing. Unless of course, they don't end up liking Ubuntu...

[orethrius]

TWO: Become another "Windows". If company is relesing software only for ubuntu, and not Open Sources. Ubuntu will be the only distro people use if they need that software. Just like windows. eg: AutoCAD. People who need AutoCAD will have to use Windows.

With due respect, unless Canonial pulls a RedHat and starts bundling proprietary applications with the potential to identify the system, that's not possible. Not every specification used to determine whether a system is running Windows is available on MSDN; on the other hand, every file containing such a note on Ubuntu is (currently) capable of being altered. For instance, if I wanted my system to IDENT as Fedora Core 5000, I could do that - never mind that it doesn't exist yet.

[cb951303]

With due respect, unless Canonial pulls a RedHat and starts bundling proprietary applications with the potential to identify the system, that's not possible. Not every specification used to determine whether a system is running Windows is available on MSDN; on the other hand, every file containing such a note on Ubuntu is (currently) capable of being altered. For instance, if I wanted my system to IDENT as Fedora Core 5000, I could do that - never mind that it doesn't exist yet.

with all due respect, comparing redhat to windows is just plain wrong. you know how many open source projects has fedora initiated (I'm not even counting the contributions). more than ubuntu, that's for sure.

[orethrius]

with all due respect, comparing redhat to windows is just plain wrong. you know how many open source projects has fedora initiated (I'm not even counting the contributions). more than ubuntu, that's for sure.

Okay okay. Slow down, go back, re-read what I said. It's a simple fact that RedHat is bundling applications of a proprietary nature in their Enterprise systems. I'm not denouncing their contributions to open-source software, and particularly not Fedora Core. I'm merely stating that it's even more far-fetched that Canonical would pull from Microsoft's bag of tricks than RedHat, if only because the infrastructure to lock down a distro's identity isn't currently implementable on a Debian base. If that's to be perceived as an insult to the originator of the "Truth Happens" commercial, then I deeply and sincerely apologize. :)

[cb951303]

TWO: Become another "Windows".


With due respect, unless Canonial pulls a RedHat and starts bundling proprietary applications with the potential to identify the system, that's not possible.

from these senteces, it just seemed like pulling a redhat = becoming windows. sorry if I misunderstood you..

[orethrius]

from these senteces, it just seemed like pulling a redhat = becoming windows. sorry if I misunderstood you..

Well, I imagine it's my fault as well. From re-reading what I posted, I can see where one might get that impression; rather, what I meant is that it's more technically possible for RedHat to become Windows than Ubuntu (it is), not that it is becoming Windows (it's not).

[cb951303]

Well, I imagine it's my fault as well. From re-reading what I posted, I can see where one might get that impression; rather, what I meant is that it's more technically possible for RedHat to become Windows than Ubuntu (it is), not that it is becoming Windows (it's not).

thanks for clarification :popcorn:

[orethrius]

thanks for clarification :popcorn:

I don't mean to marginalize the contributions of RedHat to the open source technical structure of Linux, but I find some of their decisions along that path somewhat more disturbing than the direction Debian decided to take.