IBM Threatens To Leave ISO Over OOXML Brouhaha 200
barnackle writes "In addition to threatening to leave certain standards organizations over the OOXML shenanigans, IBM created new guidelines for its own participation in those organizations in an attempt to pressure the ISO and ECMA to be more fair in their approval procedures."
Re:Quick Question (Score:4, Informative)
Uh, you mean Lenovo ? That ain't the IBM
"Hardware Division" by a long shot
Re:Quick Question (Score:4, Informative)
That was only their desktop hardware division, which they sold to Lenovo, presumably as the margins are not very good. Their server and mainframe hardware divisions are alive and well.
Re:Great, but does it really matter? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Quick Question (Score:2, Informative)
What are you talking about? This is in regards to a software standard. Lenovo is IBM's old "PC Company"... Quite different from either Systems and Technology Group or Software Group.
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Informative)
Brought to you by.....IBM! Makers of bloated slow shit! OS/2, DB2, Websphere, and everything else they've ever did!
Er, you do know what IBM stands for, don't you? The "M" stands for "machines" and the "IB" doesn't stand for "Itty Bitty". IBM is primarily a hardware company. They make and have always made what's known as "big iron", i.e. mainframes, although they do and have made such diverse stuff as typewriters (their selectric was the king of the office at one time) and calculators.
Without actually googling I'd hazard a guess they made one of the top ten fastest computers in existance, and I'd bet money they're still in the top one hundred.
BTW it isn't an IBM app but it runs on their mainframes, my favorite database language is NOMAD.
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Informative)
"Without actually googling I'd hazard a guess they made one of the top ten fastest computers in existance, and I'd bet money they're still in the top one hundred."
Actually, IBM made 5/10 of fastest supercomputers according to top500... including first three positions...
Actually, it is more Software and Services now (Score:4, Informative)
While IBM certainly still does make enough servers to put it at the top of the quarterly lists of server vendors, they make even more selling software and services.
SirWired
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Informative)
#s 1,2, and 3 as of June of this year according to http://www.top500.org/list/2008/06/100 [top500.org] [top500.org]
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Informative)
Please... IBM's 32-bit OS/2 ran circles around Windows NT in its day (as a fine example, search for YouTube video of David Barnes demonstrating OS/2 versus NT back in the early 1990's), and I'm sure the Warp 4.5x kernel will run runs around XP, Vista, and probably also Linux and *BSD kernels on similar hardware even today. The OS/2 kernel used rings 0, 2, and 3 which was very usual for x86 code, but it also was extremely good at juggling multiple tasks and threads under load and at dynamically adjusting process/thread priorities to make the entire system smooth.
I remember some magazine doing a test of OS/2 Warp Server versus NT server sometime in the 1994/1995 timeframe, and a single-CPU Warp box trashed a 4-CPU NT box running the exact same benchmarks.
Notes is a bloated hog, yes, but OS/2? The evidence suggests otherwise.
Re:Quick Question (Score:3, Informative)
They appear to be ditching those in favour of their bladecentre stuff, as they're stopping sales of them at the start of next year.
Re:Actually, it is more Software and Services now (Score:4, Informative)
IBM's Software and Services is the legacy of CEO Lou Gerstner, who in the 90's started concentrating less on moving servers out of the warehouse and more on moving money into the bank. I'd say it worked.
IBM can't "leave ISO" (Score:2, Informative)
Re:ISO? (Score:5, Informative)
For one simple reason. Gov't procurement procedures still require to purchase standard compliant ware. If there is a national (e.g. ANSI, depending on your nationality) standard, then it is must be ANSI standard compliant. If there is no national standard - then ISO standards must be checked.
We all shouldn't forget why M$ got into the standards game at all. I'm sure it was discussed before here too: one US agency said it can not renew office suit licensing deal with M$ because there is not international standard (guess which *grin* *grin*) for document formats and M$Office isn't compatible with it. M$ partner was more than just surprised and reported to Redmond to pull some strings. IIRC scandal actually erupted when they singed deal anyway without even doing proper public tender, later making up excuses that they were not aware that there are other suppliers.
Re:Great, but does it really matter? (Score:5, Informative)
IBM and other raised serious objections to OOXML but OOXML was pushed forward, in violation of ISO's rules. IBM, with all it's clout, could not stop it.
More importantly the procedure that ISO had in place failed everyone. ISO violated its' own rules!
No discussions, no debates, no desents. People either approved OOXML or were forced to be silent.
ISO has been rendered usless as several countries have stated that are withdrawing from ISO and setting up their own standards body.
Re:no. (Score:3, Informative)
Ha!
IBM invented FUD. I've seen them playing hardball, and they were once so good at it that they used to manipulate the outcome of the World Series of Manipulation. IBM has simply learned that FUD could get you so far and no further, and now there's more to be gained by being honest (or at least more honest than Microsoft.)
Not any longer (Score:3, Informative)
While the "M" in "IBM" stands for machines, the company (of which I'm an employee) has been moving away from hardware as a core product toward high-margin software & services, which now comprise 54% of the company's business. The hardware is important, because the different parts of the business feed each other. For instance, Microelectronics exists to ensure state-of-the-art chip access for server products which allows complete turnkey service solutions for many customers and provides a platform for new software sales. However, the revenue is now more than half from software and services and this will continue to grow.
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Informative)
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. OS/2 was an *excellent* operating system. I admit that the 1.x versions were lacking, but that is common for a new OS. Versions 2.1 and later were certainly not bloated, nor slow. This was a preemtive multitasking operating system with a full graphical shell that ran decently in 8MB of RAM, and ran *very* well in 16MB of RAM. It ran Windows 3.1 applications in a better environment than Windows 3.1 itself (3.1 ran on top of DOS). Yes, the OS was bigger than the Windows/DOS combo. Yes, it did require more resources than Windows/DOS, but that alone does not make it bloated. Windows/DOS was nothing more than a task switching OS. The cooperative multitasking it provided was completely useless. I used OS/2 from 1993 to around 1997 (Warp 4 being the last version). It was an extremely stable OS, and was a pleasure to use. If market share had been decided on technical merits alone, Windows of all flavors would have been many notches below OS/2 on the list. Alas, IBM didn't make a ton of deals with hardware manufacturers to practically give them OS/2 in exchange for not allowing any other OS to be sold on the PCs they sold (for obvious reasons--they were competitors to those manufacturers). Microsoft built its monopoly via those type of agreements with hardware vendors, and that is why we are where we are today.
BTW, there is no need to "educate" me by pointing out that in the old days IBM was just as bad as Microsoft in this regard. I am aware of the anticompetetive practices IBM has done in the past, and would not be surprised to hear about current things they might be doing in that regard. They are a large corporation, after all. And big money provides many people in a business with opportunity to misuse the power it provides. My point was that OS/2 did not "enjoy" the marketshare provided to Windows that was due to this kind of shady bundling deal.
Also, DB2 is no slouch in the database market. It performs quite well in comparison to other RDBMs. All RDBMs are fairly complicated, but I don't think calling DB2 "bloated" is an accurate statement.
I have no experience with Websphere, so I won't comment on that. I also won't argue that IBM never produced any slow or bloated software -- because they have. But to say "OS/2, DB2, Websphere, and everything else they've ever did" were slow and bloated is just making an ignorant statement.
Re:Quick Question (Score:3, Informative)
it is true they dumped their printer and computer divisions to china.
Maybe their PCs went to Lenovo, but they got rid of their printer division LONG ago....
You might know it better by its current name, Lexmark... [wikipedia.org]
An American company, btw...
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Informative)
PDF Warning: ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/annualreport/2007/2007_ibm_annual.pdf [ibm.com]
Re:Not all as it seems (Score:2, Informative)
Er, I was responding to prockcore's comment, not yours!
Unless of course you have just inadvertently outed yourself as also being behind the sockpuppet prockcore, in which case your posts turn into an ironic "hoist by your own petard" take on the reliability of going by apparent names as the deciding factor of what is trustworthy information online.
Re:Quick Question (Score:4, Informative)
What are you talking about? This is in regards to a software standard. Lenovo is IBM's old "PC Company"...
Mr Anonymous Coward comment was replying to a question about outsourcing hardware divisions, it wasn't intended to be related to a software standard.
Re:Ha! (Score:3, Informative)
IBM is pushing their Symphony office suite, which is ODF compatible.