IBM's New Linux Advertising 587
Amit Shah writes "IBM is airing a commercial featuring Linux as reported on Economic Times. This could be the first major way to reach out to normal users and explain the benefits of open source and Linux. The ad says, "Collecting data is only the first step toward wisdom, but sharing data is the first step toward community""
"Makes life simpler". Right. (Score:5, Insightful)
not their first (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would I need Linux??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Until it becomes easier to use, more compatible with hardware and less nerdy, the majority of computer users will just not use it. Look at MAC's. People are reluctant to use MAC's because in their eyes, its something that they are not used to.
Its great that IBM is marketing Linux, I'd certainly love to see my family and friends use it, but they are totally shut off to the idea.
They are comfortable with using Windows because they just dont have the interest in the learning curve Linux presents.
Re:Missing the target (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't think it's that much of a stretch.
Linux. The Future is Open. IBM. (Score:5, Insightful)
The ad closes with the slogan "Linux. The Future is Open. IBM."
My jaw is wide open.
Ok, IBM wants to capitalize on Linux, IBM is a company, in the past IBM has been a corrupt monopoly trying to stranglehold their clients with the proprietary ties after fscking them in the first place.
But the memes passed by this particular advertisement are something radically different than those teached by conventional advertisements and pro-capitalist ethos (consume! consume! don't think about tomorrow! spend now!).
Really, this stuff is jaw-dropping. ;D)
It's not like the cluetrain stopping in front of IBM (now we only need an express train passing in Darl McBride's office like that Athlon vs Pentium III commercial), but it's like someone saying that the time is mature for an economy based on Free Software to be born and TRY to impose herself on a wide-open scale.
Not Eazel Gnome Nautilus and crap like that, not the dotcomboom of 121 different Linux distros, but a wide world collaborating on making better, documented, free, opensource and secure systems with minor tweakings among them just to make sure that they suit individual needs. (2414 different Gnu/Linux distros!!!
Hell, also Microsoft is committed to a large-scale opensource initiative [globus.org].
And I also think that this particular advertisement is what we waited in order to say that GNU and Linux have won.
+ + + + :D (ok, that was a joke)
BSD, on the other hand, is dead...
Quite so! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is valid point; in fact, it's actually oozing validity. If Linux is going to be presented in mass advertising as a device for simplification, it had better damn well live up to that description.
Like as not, many people already consider things plenty simple with Windows, especially XP and Server 2003. If Linux is going to simplify that, there must be some readily demonstrable ways in which it does so. Disillusionment is typically quick to take hold in folks, and once it's settled, it's monolithic to overcome.
A Good Move (Score:3, Insightful)
The general public needs to be informed that there ARE choice. Imagine if Microsoft were to actually start feeling the sting of lost sales. They might: Lower prices, improve customer service, and wow... focus on stablizing their software!
Re:"Makes life simpler". Right. (Score:1, Insightful)
this is a start--even if it's by a huge corporation
Answer me this: Who else can afford to pay for such ads?
Sup with the slogan? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice slogan. Makes me want to put my hand over my heart and stare knowingly toward the horizon.
What's it got to do with Linux though? Data sharing seems to have more to do with databases and web services, neither of which are explicitly Linux oriented traits. It seems to me it's not data, but functionality that's shared in the Linux community.
It's something like this: we both need to build a house. I'm going to need a ladder and a saw, you're going to need a ladder and a saw. If you build the ladder, and share it with me, I'll build the saw and share it with you. It doesn't mean we're going to tell each other what's inside the house, what's going on with the house, etc. No data is shared, just the tools for organizing and arranging it. Sharing the TOOLS makes a community. Sharing data makes, I dunno, an RIAA lawsuit?
I know, I know. The slogan is meant to strike at executives who make snap decisions and watch golf on the weekends. After all, they're the only ones not using OSS already
Re:Missing the target (Score:2, Insightful)
Benefits of Open Source and Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a very tough sell, IMO. I'll also add that lumping the two together--"open source" and "Linux"--maybe isn't a good idea.
With perfect honesty, as someone who has used and programmed various OSes and hardware, the differences between Linux and Windows are few. Both are hugely complex from the user's point of view, and both are arguably incomprehensible on the source level. (Remember, you can't just talk about the Linux kernel, but the entire package including XFree86, drivers, the window manager, KDE, etc.) So it's not like either one is a clear winner in terms of ease-of-use or architectural cleanliness. It used to be that Linux was more stable, but with Windows 2000 that's no longer true. UNIX-alikes are generally more virus resistant than Windows, but that's a tough reason to insist that someone change all of his or her work habits and software. Remember, too, that patches for the recent Windows virii were available before infections started. Proper system administration (sadly!) plays a big role in security.
On the "open source" angle, I think that too much of an association with Linux is hurting the term. The Linux kernel is open source, yes, but we need to stop acting like you have to have one in order to have the other. There is a lot of open source software for Windows, for example. The "Chandler" email program, which is attempting to replace Outlook and Exchange, is going to run under Windows. Heck, Emacs and gcc both run under Windows. So do all of the GNU utilities. And Perl. And Python. And Tk.
As much as we all like to think we have the inside track on the superior OS--and, indeed, it may still be slightly superior--it's a case of it not being so far and away superior that it's clearly so.
Re:"Makes life simpler". Right. (Score:5, Insightful)
It ain't that great. The ad doesn't even say what Linux is.
Call me cynical but an 'ad' that doesn't tell you what it's advertising isn't an ad. The people who already know about Linux are the only ones who are going to get anything from it.
(Note: I'd agree with your point if simply the commercial was better at getting the idea across.)
Re:A Good Move (Score:1, Insightful)
The average computer user seems to think that Microsoft is all there is...
IBM is way cool in its support for Linux, but don't imagine that they care one bit about the average computer user. Linux is a pure server play for IBM. They don't object to Linux on the desktop, but they won't be bothered to do much to help there.
IBM sees server-side Linux as a great business move (after all, they are a hardware company) and are pouring money into it. (Yeah!) They couldn't care less about the desktop.
Re:"Makes life simpler". Right. (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't the 1950s. Big businesses use commercials nowadays to build brands, not sell products. Consider the most well-known commercials, like Apple's "1984" ad and Coca-Cola's "Mean Joe Green" spot from the '70s. Memorable campaigns don't drill product data into your head.
Re:"Makes life simpler". Right. (Score:3, Insightful)
This advert is just the 'seeder'. It lays the foundation on which the other adverts with more information are going to rely on.
No one can explain the entire 'linux' thing in 30 seconds, however, a series of 30 second adverts, with a new one each successive month - all of a sudden every person and their pet turns into an 'expert.
Regards.
UUGGGHHH..... (Score:1, Insightful)
GUI
The majority of people - read: every person outside of the Programming, Development, and IT fields who use a computer for Accounting, Business, Graphics, Presentations, Email, Web Browsing, etc... want to be able to click and drag and NEVER use a command line. Although KDE/Gnome/Etc... allows people some of these features, they don't allow the installation of hardware (ok Mandrake has the Hard Drake thing, but when I tried it didnt work worth shit and I was still stuck dloading and installing Alsa drivers via the command line)
THE MASSES DO NOT WANT TO TYPE IN SHIT LIKE THIS:
bzip2 -d -c alsa-driver-0.5.10b.tar.bz2 | tar -xvf -
Take this example of me and my friend. My friend whos going to school for programming created a program called UrlToys. It's free, written in Pearl and can run on Linux, Windows, and OS X. It's a great program. BUT it runs out of a command prompt ONLY. Therefore I have to "type" commands in for it work.
There is me who likes to test out his programs. The first thing that comes ot mind is i'd rather use a software like Packrat because I can copy and paste into the desired field and then click a couple buttons and it does the same thing.
As someone who comes from a graphic design background, I like pretty shit and want my computer to make things EASIER for me. I dont want to feel like i'm writing a program just so I can grab some porn picks off a site. I want someone else to program shit for me and let me get back to work, whcih in MY case is making pretty shit - NOT fucking with a command prompt.
Re:not their first (Score:2, Insightful)
Well if you're running Linux then why would they be advertising to you? You've already switched.
Re:Sup with the slogan? (Score:3, Insightful)
Collecting knowledge is only the first step toward wisdom, but sharing knowledge is the first step toward community.
Sounds better to me.
Win2000 as stable as Linux? *cough* (Score:5, Insightful)
With perfect honesty, as someone who has used and programmed various OSes and hardware, the differences between Linux and Windows are few. Both are hugely complex from the user's point of view, and both are arguably incomprehensible on the source level. (Remember, you can't just talk about the Linux kernel, but the entire package including XFree86, drivers, the window manager, KDE, etc.) So it's not like either one is a clear winner in terms of ease-of-use or architectural cleanliness. It used to be that Linux was more stable, but with Windows 2000 that's no longer true.
Well, my system uptimes tell a different story. But you don't have to trust my figures - take a look at Netcraft uptimes [netcraft.com]. These aren't the highest uptimes of all - almost without exception, the best uptimes are held by BSD derivatives (around 5 years). For the most popular sites, Linux tends to knock in around 100+ days. Windows 2000 knocks around in the high-20's, low 30's.
Have a nice day.
Toby Haynes
Re:Quite so! (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you ever tried logging into a Windows server and upgrading the operating system over a modem line? It's pretty easy with Linux.
Re:Quite so! (Score:2, Insightful)
No, Linux has the Lion, Adore, Ramen, and Slapper worms. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Linux is definitely NOT secure by default by any stretch of the imagination. If you were to go take a vanilla fresh installed Red Hat 7.3 machine and stick it on the Internet it'd be hacked in under an hour. The only thing all this proves is that operating systems have bugs... ALL of them do, including OpenBSD and a major OpenSSH root exploit in the default install last year. Any OS should be administered by a competent system admin who patches and/or disables services as necessary to avoid exploitation.
All right (Score:3, Insightful)
no linux visual basic for applications cracks
no trains, planes or automobiles stopped by linux viruses, worms or trojans
no linux DRM media players
no linux license fees
no linux authorization codes when you change hardware
no forced upgrade cycle
no having to hunt down 50 cds when trying to rebuild a machine
Fine. Get the masses to understand, and, more importantly, care about all that and then there's a shot.
Re:Just to address a few (Score:4, Insightful)
To reply to each of your points:
Any competent sysadmin already had their systems patched against that one. :-)
So, according to you, then, most MS sysadmins aren't competent, because a shitload of businesses were brought down by msblaster (CNX, Air Canada, DMV in several states, etc.) Mind you,we already knew that
When was the last new threat that was directly a result of Visual Basic scripting? By "new" I mean within the last three months or so.
today here [newscientist.com] To quote:
Who says you have to use WMP if you use Windows?
Most of the Windows-based players will have to contend w. any DRM that's integrated at the OS level.
Gross exaggeration, obviously. And like in #1, any competent sysadmin should always know where their original discs are.
So that's why so many companies had to repurchase licenses (because administering licenses is a major headache for them, and staff changes make it harder), and it doesn't negate my point, which is that it can take dozens (or on developer machines, 50 or more) disk swaps to set everything up under Windows.
Come on, that was TOO easy.
Re:Quite so! (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm so sick and tired of seeing this crap ass argument. There are less worms affecting Linux becaues NO ONE USES IT. I'm not saying that thats a bad thing. But if Linux on the Desktop had 98% market saturation and Windows had 1%, it would have been linuxblaster and the MS fanboys would be laughing and saying "see, no msblaster worms".
no linux visual basic for applications cracks
Oh, so there has never been a java exploit?
Or python, or PHP, or any interpreted language?
no linux license fees
Thats because, with linux, they're ingeniously called support fee's.
no linux authorization codes when you change hardware
Thats interesting, considering I change my hardware left and right and I've never had to enter an auth code on an XP box.
no forced upgrade cycle
Right, only if you don't want support, in which case you never have to upgrade windoze either. But in the probable case that you do want support you're forced to upgrade with linux in many cases. Call RedHat and ask if they're still supporting RedHat 6.
no having to hunt down 50 cds when trying to rebuild a machine
Yeah, instead you have to hunt down and download 50 patches/packages. Unless you have a custom CD already made, in which case you could have the same CD made for Windows.
Re:I was promised flying cars... (Score:3, Insightful)
The same way that a Ferrari is a copy of a Ford. Linux used parts of Minix for development, but only loosely "copied" Unix (definitely not Minix).
Joe
The latin teacher says: Res publica non dominetur (Score:3, Insightful)
Thing belonging to the common public, no one person may rule over it.
Re:Sup with the slogan? (Score:3, Insightful)
What's it got to do with Linux though? Data sharing seems to have more to do with databases and web services, neither of which are explicitly Linux oriented traits. It seems to me it's not data, but functionality that's shared in the Linux community.
Depends what you define as data. MP3s? Major Applications? Utilities? Protocols? File formats? Expertise? Source Code?
All of those I consider to be types of data. I think it goes without saying that it won't be buisness data but to the fact that a lot of them may be frustrated with money being spent re-inventing the wheel. In this case the tools and associated community are the data.
Re:Quite so! (Score:3, Insightful)
Closed Source Rebuttals? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Don't use mplayer (Score:5, Insightful)
In the Halloween Document [opensource.org], a Microsoft strategist wrote:
> OSS projects have been able to gain a foothold in many server applications because of the wide utility of highly commoditized, simple protocols. By extending these protocols and developing new protocols, we can deny OSS projects entry into the market.
Or consider this evidence in the Java case [sun.com]:
> Microsoft's Executive Vice President, Paul Maritz, outlined Microsoft's strategy to win the browser war with Netscape and simultaneously "neutralize Java" by "tying" the "user interface" and "APIs" "back to Windows,"
This quote also shows us how Microsoft operates:
> at this point its [sic] not good to create MORE noise around our win32 java classes. Instead we should just quietly grow j++ share and assume that people will take advantage of our classes without ever realizing they are building win32-only java apps."
And then there's this little gem [wired.com]:
> "Subversion has always been our best tactic," John Ludwig, Microsoft's vice president in charge of Java development, wrote. "It leaves the competition confused, and they don't know what to shoot at anymore."
Perhaps this quote [com.com] sums it up the best:
> "This is really the core of Microsoft's business," Gartner Research Director Chris LeTocq said. "Microsoft is in business to leverage APIs. That's a key element of the successful market share it has."
If you haven't understood the point, then here it is...
If you continue to accept the ASF format, then you are encouraging websites to use it.
But it's still a protocol that is controlled by Microsoft.
In the future, Microsoft will:
1. Upgrade ASF to an incompatible format.
2. Start enforcing their ownership of ASF by restricting its use to Microsoft platforms (as GIFs started to be enforced).
3. Lock up ASF using Microsoft
And the websites that are using ASF will go along blindly. Why? Because no one has been complaining to them about their use of ASF, so they have no reason to avoid Microsoft's "improvements."
And at that point, the content of those websites will become unavailable to you unless you are running Windows XP.
It really annoys me when people fail to protect themselves, and everyone else, because they are too lazy or short-sighted to put up with a little temporary inconvenience. Are you hoping that someone else will do the work of protecting your freedom? Well, don't.
It's up to you. If you want the Internet to remain free, then stop supporting Microsoft protocols.
It ain't gonna happen. (Score:3, Insightful)
Riiight! Like that's ever going to happen.
When most people buy a computer, they are buying an appliance. They couldn't care less about administering it. It should just "work". Plug in the power, plug in the internet, and away we go. So, until we have machines that are self adminning out of the box, we are going to have problems.
Re:Quite so! (Score:1, Insightful)
1. Cannot connect to server 0:0 no screens found
2. Alarm Monitor Error, can't load docking tray icon
3. connecting to eth0 failed, unknown error.
4. all of the above with no support
and that was just the last 2 hours...
Bill Gates is pissing his pants (Score:1, Insightful)
Seriously. Think about it. This is against everything M$ stands for.
Collecting data is only the first step toward wisdom, but sharing data is the first step toward community kinda puts the damper on M$'s attempts to own the whole damn community, now doesn't it.
Re:"Makes life simpler". Right. (Score:1, Insightful)
What IBM has done is to put word into people's heads.
"Linux. The future is open."
If I didn't know what it was and was intrigued by the ad, I'd look it up just like I've done for other things:
- Who's that guy that played in that movie with that other guy?
- How does that CVT on the new Honda Civic Hybrid work?
- What other recipes are there for making jello shots?
Most people seem to know this nowdays and IBM knows people know they can look it up on the net. Their approach was to make you want to know more, "What is this Linux thing?" Maybe it doesn't work for everyone, but I'm pretty sure it will work for a lot of people.Re:Quite so! (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd also like to scrutinize your "ingeniously called support fee's (sic)" comment. Of course, this only applies to those of us with "legal" copies of all software, but last I checked, the support fees for Linux are completely voluntary, while license fees for any commercial software are not.
I expect the "forced upgrade cycle" argument is a fallacy on both sides: MS and their ilk push to 'force' upgrades, because they need the revenue. While you're right that Redhat doesn't support verion 6, I'm sure you could find
Finally, most modern distributions require no hunting down of patches. Apt for debian and others, up2date (or even apt) for RedHat.
You're right: The points can be argued, can't they?
Re:Quite so! (Score:5, Insightful)
Programs are data (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it is clear that data is used in a broad sense, where it includes information, knowledge and skills, a lot of which is embedded in the Linux kernal.