data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f3b48/f3b48b4970d922fcd52b25806900ded0bba3bd67" alt="IBM IBM"
How IBM (and Open Source) Won eBay 334
DemonBrew wrote to us with a new article in Business2 how IBM beat MSFT, Sun, BEA Systems to win the contract for the new eBay. Cool part is that it's based on Websphere, which has major open source components.
I'll tell ya how... (Score:5, Funny)
Bastards!
Re:I'll tell ya how... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'll tell ya how... (Score:4, Funny)
That disappears after someone places a bid, and since we all know Microsoft is never first at anything, they would have missed that chance. Microsoft always waits for somebody else to go first, so they can see whether it's a good idea.
Re:I'll tell ya how... (Score:2)
Sorry for the nitpick.
Re:I'll tell ya how... (Score:2, Funny)
By the time they got MSN back online the auction had ended.
They thought they already had bought it... (Score:2)
I read this article... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I read this article... (Score:3, Informative)
But really they've already made an internal change. By embracing Linux and opensource. 2-3 years ago I had heard rumors of IBM revamping AIX to be more like Linux. Whether that's actually happened I don't know, but I see plenty of evidence which says they've certainly embraced Linux itself, as well as opensource. They've pushed the 'stick all your linux on our mainframe' for a while. I can only imagine the internal changes that took place to go from closed and proprietary to open. You won't see MS doing that any time soon.
Re:I read this article... (Score:2)
It's called AIX5L (or AIX 5XL)...
You must be new to slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
You'll learn.
Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:3, Flamebait)
Open Standards and open-source are 2 different things, and hell - Java isn't an open standard, nor is it open source in the truest sense. What a bunch of bullshit propaganda. Go Microsoft.
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:5, Informative)
umm, -5(Wrong)
IBM does have a product called IBM HTTP Server, which is a rebrand of Apache Webserver with some configuration tools and (iirc) a different SSL engine. However, WebSphere is a totally different product with different functionality (application server vs. web-server). They are bundled together, but are different.
WebSphere does use Xerces and Xalan which are Apache projects for XML processing. So do most of the Java application servers, though.
FYI, IBM is a major supporter of the Xerces and Xalan sub-projects, and is a major supporter of the Jakarta Apache project, providing developers and code. So maybe they have a better claim on being "more" open source than other Java Application servers. This I leave up to others to decide.
rmjiv
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:5, Informative)
Closed source parts:
Servlet Engine
EJB
JNDI
JDBC pooling
Clustering
Open source parts:
Web server (Apache) assuming they're using Apache.
XML (xerces, xalan)
Kind of funny that anyone is clueless enough to think that WebSphere is open source.
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2, Informative)
JFS [ibm.com] - a filesystem is a pretty major component of a server, don't you think?.
developerWorks: Open Source Projects [ibm.com] - many more toys for development
Meanwhile, other major vendors jump on the bandwagon with comparitively little (Sun, SGI's XFS which is not open but at least the distribute Linux clue, and HP are on the Linux bandwagon) to none (Microsoft). BEA is one of Sun's happy little Sun ONE minions. Meanwhile, Microsoft continues to be a joke for large projects. Go Microsoft indeed.
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2)
yes [sun.com].
Java isn't an open standard, nor is it open source in the truest sense.
How many senses of the words "open-source" are there? Either the code is available to the public, or it isn't? Remember, Open-Source != Free [gnu.org].
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2)
The newer builds of Websphere studio are amazing. I've edited HTML/XML/XSL/CSS/Javascript/Java/XHTML in it and it's great. Unfortunately the price tag is pretty steep at 3000-6000 per seat for the studio package depending on who you talk to. Eclipse is "free" and is the core that Websphere studio is built off of but it doesn't appear to have ALL the features studio has (but hey for editing Java it's excellent compared to some of the other crap out there).
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2)
1. Netbeans is 100% pure java. Eclipse is not. Rather than using swing or awt, eclipse uses a custom Standard Widget Toolkit (SWT) which uses native calls to windows api/motif/gnome2.
2. Eclipse is really a framework and set of apis to allow the easy creation of plugins to provide a complete (and not necessarily java) develipment environment. As provided in it's initial release it contained most of the plugins necessary to develop the whole gamut of java applications. Several companies (e.g. Rational) have created their own plugins to provide development environments with a variety of different goals (UML modeling and development). It is my understanding that netbeans is geared specifically towards java.
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2)
Eclipse [eclipse.org], which is supported by IBM [ibm.com], derived from Websphere Studio Workbench, for Java development.
It's java-based application which can be running on many platforms including Linux.
You really need to click few more buttons, the link is near to where you download websphere.
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2)
IBM has contributed some important components to the Apache Jakarta and XML projects. They have also contributed the Eclipse IDE, and considerable code to the Linux kernel effort.
Re:Answer me t his (Score:2, Funny)
Re:eBay Has Crashed... (Score:2)
A message on the site said that its servers began experiencing problems Thursday night. Shortly after midnight, the company said it was rebuilding a "corrupt system disk." [bbc.co.uk]
http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20011207S
<sarcasm>Yep, all due to IIS.</sarcasm> (not that you said that or anything, but minds tend to wander around here...
Re:Websphere, Open Source, WTF? (Score:2)
Good. Now, what does that development environment have to do with the application server other than sharing a name component?
I wonder... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I wonder... (Score:2, Funny)
I'm thinking auctioning it off would be most appropriate.
Re:I wonder... (Score:2)
I wonder if they'll sell it on the new ebay?
Re:I wonder... (Score:2)
Just a piece? Why not pool your money with some pals and buy them all?
Then you'll be able to say
ALL YOUR eBAYS ARE BELONG TO US.
*groan* I'm sorry.
They said "bake-off" (Score:4, Insightful)
I also found this amusing (emphasis mine):
While Java could be called "open," compared with, say, the Windows API, I don't believe Sun has turned control over the language specification to a standards body.
Re:They said "bake-off" (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:They said "bake-off" (Score:3, Informative)
Have you heard of? (Score:5, Informative)
JCP - Java Community Process [jcp.org]
To take right from their website:
The JCP is the way the Java platform evolves. It's an open organization of international Java developers and licensees whose charter is to develop and revise Java technology specifications, reference implementations, and technology compatibility kits. Both Java technology and the JCP were originally created by Sun Microsystems, however, the JCP has evolved from the informal process that Sun used beginning in 1995, to a formalized process overseen by representatives from many organizations across the Java community.
Come on people, do your research before you blab this stuff.
Re:Have you heard of? (Score:2)
Re:Have you heard of? (Score:2)
Re:Have you heard of? (Score:2)
Re:Have you heard of? (Score:2)
Yes [sun.com], for free.
Would they even listen to me, if I could join?
Your votes on which Bug Parade bugs are highest priority would count the same as anyone else's. You would also have access to all the Java source code, if you want it.
Yes. (Score:2)
They also have company memberships, but those of course cost quite a bit more (a few K I think).
What other standards bodies let ANYONE in that easily?
Re:Yes. (Score:2)
Participation in the IETF is free.
Re:You need to read (Score:2)
Re:You need to read (Score:2)
Even the so-called independent standards bodies are not impartial. Every company that sends a representative has an agenda, and it isn't always for the greater good of the community.
Re:They said "bake-off" (Score:2)
Open standard? (Score:1, Redundant)
Open standard? Did I read this wrong?
Nifty Manuevering (Score:1)
(KNOWING what happens when you create proprietary systems), came up with the greatest resolution.
Coupled with their hardware know-how, why is anyone surprised that they won the bid due to eBay's high-load testing?
IBM is heading back towards BIG BLUENESS..even if only one meager step at a time...and to incorporate OpenSource solutions...how novel!
Re:Nifty Manuevering (Score:2)
Methinks you're right. It's a curious mixture. By lowering the bar for competition, it becomes harder to compete with IBM. Of course if IBM gets fat and lazy and sloppy, the competition will appear almost overnight. This makes IBM a very safe choice for big business.
"hardware know-how"
That's one way to put it and I can't think of a better term but there's a lot more than just hardware in there. Basically it needs to work under stress and high-load, without things going screwy on the edges and corners. Open Source tends to be better stress-tested than anything you can do with a completely closed system. If you can get the balance right, everybody gains.
Open Standard and Java (Score:5, Insightful)
There has been a fair number of posts about whether or not Java is really an "Open-Standard". The first thing to remember is where this article originates, Business 2.0.
Taking that into account, Java is an open standard. Are there other compilers for Java? Yes. Are there multiple interpreters for Java? Yes. Is the standard published on how it works? Yes (Addison-Wesely publishes several books on it). So, for the average intended reader of business 2.0, Java is an open standard.
I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but something doesn't have to be controlled by an [kernel.org] international [apache.org] standards [perl.com] organization [netbsd.org] to [freebsd.org] be [apple.com] open [gnu.org].
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go prepare for flames as I've posted something that people are going to have problems with.
Re:Open Standard and Java (Score:2)
Just because there are other compilers and interpreters does not make it an open standard. Does WINE make the Windows API an open standard? Does Samba make SMB/CIFS an open standard? Microsoft is comparable to Sun -- they made this, it's their stuff, they can do whatever they darn well please.
Re:Open Standard and Java (Score:2)
With regards to CIFS it's controlled by SNIA [snia.org]. You can find the spec at http://www.snia.org/English/Work_Groups/NAS/CIFS/i ndex.html [snia.org].
It's Microsoft's extensions that make it a problem. Someone more knowledgeable might want to clear this up a little better than I can.
Re:Open Standard and Java (Score:5, Informative)
Without those calls filesharing should still be possible, but with VERY limited functionality.
The problem is that (in true Microsoft fashion) there's HUNDREDS of calls, and each of those can have LOTS of variants with widely different results. See any network-related MSDN [microsoft.com]-documented
information function call. Often you'll find a parameter which is an "info level" or somesuch. Change that parameter, and you change the type of the returned values and obviously the returned data. See this call [microsoft.com] for an example.
Microsoft's interface design method appears (from the outside) to be something like this:they think in advance, and then they define those interfaces which they MIGHT need five years in the future, and place stubs until then. This has the side-effect that their interfaces have everything AND the kitchen sink, thus the hundreds of calls.
Re:Open Standard and Java (Score:2)
You have a couple of two-ton behemoths to keep each other honest.
Neither of them gets to do what they please.
An 800 pound gorilla trying to mix in becomes Microsquish.
Pipsqueaks like you and me don't really even get to have an opinion.
Eventually it will become an official standard, AFTER it's known exactly what that standard has to be.
No, their readers no the difference (Score:2)
Open != Open Standard (Score:2)
If Java was an open standard, independent and compatible implementations would be possible. That's not currently the case with Java, although it seems to be changing for the better.
Re:Other Java Implementations (Score:2)
Too bad for ebay... (Score:1)
Yeah... (Score:4, Funny)
Closing Quote (Score:4, Interesting)
I really like the closing quote from the article:
Hey, any additional fodder for my efforts to convince my boss to move over to completely open-source technologies is fine with me! It's really heartening to hear a company like IBM say that though. More reinforcement that this paradigm is here to stay, and isn't just some sort of post-modern fad.
Re:Closing Quote (Score:2)
The Lone Ranger.
If that's the definition of an intellectual snob, then what do you call someone who knows the proper spelling of "overture" and condescendingly points it out to people?
Tomorrow's News Headlines: (Score:5, Funny)
Reuters, Inc.
Ebay (www.ebay.com, NSDQ: EBAY), the world's largest online auction site, is reporting that it has been hoodwinked in an internet scam, involving International Business Machines (IBM), Inc.
"They promised us all of these great services, and even showed us pictures and everything", claims Dave Hubnard, Ebay's CTO.
"It looked so, perfect. They responded to all of our emails quickly and professionally. I really don't know what happened. They even sniped in at the last minute with an ultra-low bid."
Shocked and bewildered, Ebay employees are uncertain when, or if, they will ever see the new services promised to them by IBM.
Attempted telephone calls to IBM headquarters were returned with a "disconnected service" answer.
Just hours before the deal was closed, IBM had the address of its corporate headquarters changed to a PO Box address in the sourthern section of Jacksonville, FL.
IBM controlling future of java? (Score:3, Interesting)
What with IBM having the fastest java compiler Jikes [ibm.com],
a Java-base development environment VisualAge [ibm.com],
some stellar java development at DeveloperWorks [ibm.com],
and talks of IBM acquiring Sun [zdnet.com]
Java has no future on Linux? (Score:2)
Well, now I'm conflicted . . . (Score:2, Interesting)
On the other hand, they use Microsoft Passport [microsoft.com], which raises a whole bunch of privacy and security [wired.com] issues.
Are they good or evil? Seems more like a shade of grey to me.
Re:Well, now I'm conflicted . . . (Score:5, Interesting)
Blockquoth the responder:
Ah, now we're getting into philosophy. Here's a hypothetical for you: One day, you look up and see your worst enemy, whom you hate. He is backing over a cliff . . . in your brand-new Porsche. Do you shout a warning to him or not?
If you fail to warn him, most people would agree that you acted evilly. But even if you do warn him, it's still not clearly "good." Did you warn him because that is the right thing to do? Or did you warn him because you didn't want to lose your Porsche? Or maybe you warned him to preserve yourself from legal liability? Is it the action that counts, or the motivation, or a combination thereof? To my mind, action is more important than motivation.
Corporations -- not just Ebay, but all corporations -- perform actions that effect individuals, both those who are employed by the corporation, the investors, the customers, business partners, and sometimes the general public. I contend that corporations can be judged by their actions, every bit as much as any other human organization can be judged by theirs. I speak not merely of legal liability, but moral accountability as well.
Microsoft is a prime example. (Honestly, I am not trying to troll here, nor am I trying to make flamebait. Just bear with me.) Microsoft is extremely good at making good business decisions -- actions whose effect are to increase its market share, its bottom line, and its dominance in the industry. Some of those actions have had negative impact on others, both individuals and companies. The decisions that Microsoft has made regarding their course of action made the "most business sense." Does that absolve them of moral responsibility for the negative consequences of their actions?
As for open source, I would argue that it is morally superior to proprietary source. Open source code promotes the spread of knowledge; because anyone can view the source code, anyone can study real-world examples in order to learn about programming, or even for curiousity's sake. Proprietary technologies seek to restrict the spread of knowledge: figuring out how a closed program works is a thousand times more difficult, and may also be illegal. Which is better -- widespread knowledge, or widespread ignorance?
If open source software is morally superior to proprietary software, then logically embracing an open solution is an action which redounds to the credit of any company which does so. Their motivation for picking the software, be it because of "good business sense," because of approval of open source on general principles, or even because the CEO had indigestion and chose based on which representative had an antacid, is irrelevant. Consequences are derived from action, not motivation for that action.
You are right to point out that the concepts of "good" and "evil" are too narrow to be particularly useful in this context. Nothing human can be fully "good" or "evil." As a child, Saint Augustine stole a crop of pears, destroyed them, and felt guilty about it for most of his adult life. Hitler loved his dogs, trite but true.
Humans are complex, and may be good in some ways but not in others. Corporations are human institutions, and in exactly the same way they have both negative and positive aspects. Deciding what actions you approve or disapprove of in a corporation can help you establish how you, as an individual, will interact with any given corporation, but is basically a subjective decision.
Whew! That was a mouthful. But I think it needed to be said. If I get modded down for it, so be it.
Re:tango (Score:2)
On the other hand, imagine doing something evil simply because it's evil. Almost no one does this. It's hard to even imagine such a situation. People are greedy because they want money. People are unfaithful to their spouses because they want sex. People commit crimes because they want security or freedom or whatever. The closest I can come to imagining doing something evil simply because it's evil is cruelty. But even that is done in the pursuit of pleasure or satisfaction.
But in as far as they go, money, sex, freedom, security, pleasure and satisfaction aren't bad things. Most are neutral things, and some are good things. Pursuing those things isn't bad, but raising the pursuit of those things above other more important principles twists those good or neutral things into evil things. For example, raising my pursuit of money above my respect for your property enables me to steal from you. Pursuit of money isn't evil, but raising it above another, higher principle makes it evil.
Which is to say that the evil acts depend on neutral/good things. In fact, if you want to be effectively evil, you need to be smart, patient, charming, logical, etc. Again, none of those things are bad things. They're all good things that have been twisted.
It is this line of thinking that leads me to believe that good and evil are not on equal footing. IMHO, evil is dependant on, and suborinate to good.
Now we can only imagine (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Now we can only imagine (Score:2)
naw... they'll just steal it.
Bidding on the contract (Score:5, Funny)
Item # 4886798269
Category: Computers: Contracts
Currently: $12,378,462
Quantity: 1
First bid: US $10
# of bids: 3
Seller (Rating): Ebay (999999999)
High bid: IBM (10)
Description
You are bidding on a contract for providing software and hardware to power the next generation of e-bidding monstrosi-sites...
They also offered to sell PCs on EBay (Score:2)
I suspect this is not a coincidence.
Neat link? You decide. (Score:2)
This is IBM's store at eBay. The cool part is that you can get some really great deals on IBM equipment here. I have already bought from here twice. I work for IBM, and I can tell you that the deals here are better than the employee discount!
eBAY has the worst IT guys... (Score:2, Interesting)
IBM Has the Right Ingredients (Score:2)
IBM is doing the Right Thing in capitalizing on the open standards, high reliability, free beer, community-developed software floating around.
All the other vendors give you a single unmistakeable route into a closed box of their design. If I was buying a solution, a vendor that didn't insist they had the One True Way® (and that it cost money) would get more of my trust. I would feel I had a backdoor alternative with a rack of Linux machines and open source software.
IBM acknowledges that you might want to run part of your business on extremely low cost tools.
Then, if you want tools that are a step up in sophistication, then they are there to fill in the gap.
However, in all fairness, IBM's been able to do this because of the huge reputation as ultra conservative banking mainframe vendor types and the foot in the door that they consequently have. That's why small random open source companies would have a harder time replicating IBM's kind of success.
Re:IBM Has the Right Ingredients (Score:2)
So... (Score:2, Funny)
... will eBay use PayPal for this one?
It's such a pain waiting while your check clears...
- DDT
Websphere sucks (Score:2)
Open source or not Websphere is not a usable product. Big, slow and out of date. What do suits see in Websphere besides the IBM logo on the box?
Re:Websphere sucks (Score:2)
Last time I worked with IBM Global Services, on a project for a major airline, they preferred WebLogic to their own WebSphere product - and because GS are relatively independant, that's what we used! WebSphere is really a bunch of obsolete IBM middleware products hacked together and made buzzword compliant - avoid like the plague!
Re:Websphere sucks (Score:3, Insightful)
Does jboss and orionserver come with the service arm that IBM can provide? I was sitting in one of the talks at JavaOne, and this company was telling why they choice IBM/WebSphere. They found all the app servers to be comparable, BUT IBM could offer guaranteed uptime service (meaning anything goes wrong, and IBM will have someone out at the company within 24 hours).
To them, the appserver itself had become commodity, because of the standard, and it was more about who could provide the best service that mattered.
Ebay downtime with IIS 5.0 on Windows 2000 (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ebay downtime with IIS 5.0 on Windows 2000 (Score:2)
Re:Ebay downtime with IIS 5.0 on Windows 2000 (Score:2)
Why can't I? Ebay isn't a MS shop - the front end is IIS, the search pages are Zeus webserver, the database is Oracle on Sun and the middleware is God know's what. Now think about the relative complexity here. Which is going to need more scheduled maintenance? A terabyte size DB with high turnover and billions of searches and updates a month or the cosmetic IIS installation serving mostly static pages? I'd bet that IIS has nothing to do with the downtime.
eBay's existing hardware (Score:3, Informative)
Here's a brief summary of what eBay are currently running....
For the middle-tier and back-end they've got a couple of Sun Starfire E10K servers (with a third on standby for hot-swap fail-over). The back-end db is Oracle, most of the other software is by Veritas. This all uses a 400 disk RAID array (also made by Sun), which is also mirrored in real-time.
They're using seven Sun Enterprise ES450s to provide the iron for searching, and the web front end is served by sixty-or-so Compaq servers.
It seems impressive! ....but it's worth noting that some of the above may be a bit out-of-date, as it's based on the info in these articles, which are quite old now:-
Article on Internet Week about eBay's steps to ensure performance [internetweek.com]Sun's page on what-they-do-for-eBay [sun.com] part way down the page, an article entitled: An Integrated, High Availability Cluster Solution)
I like the last line: (Score:4, Insightful)
Such things make me happy for the entire day
The new grammar (Score:1, Funny)
And BTW, it's "bested" (past tense), not "best"
Re:The new grammar (Score:2)
Re:great news for online shoppers (Score:3, Informative)
The ebay software/business logic is highly proprietary and difficult to understand. The story is how IBM sold ebay to use their software which is based on open source technology including apache, linux. Then of course there is java which isnt open source, but "open standard" (ymmv).
Anyways, peer review of complex business logic by people who don't understand it won't help nothing.
Re:great news for online shoppers (Score:2)
Hi...kettle...this is the pot, you're black.
Ummm...Java *is* open source. The source is available at Sun's site. I've downloaded the source to all the JDK's since 1.1 (the code is often the best documentation).
Re:great news for online shoppers (Score:2)
What color is the sky on the little world you live on?
Re:Cowards.... (Score:2)
Re:Cowards.... (Score:2)
MYSQL isn't even a relational DB. How is it going to run Ebay?
Re:Cowards.... (Score:2)
Codd's "12 Rules" for a 'Fully Relational DBMS' are pretty grueling:
http://newton.uor.edu/FacultyFolder/CK
By those definitions, there are few, if any 'fully' relational RDBMS. MySQL is just really, really 'less' Relational than Oracle, MS SQL, Sybase, etc.
Re:I've Said It Before... (Score:2)
My first thought was that it was a shot at Java and country music, but that would be "Java:code::country:music". Then I thought, well, maybe the reference to "country" is really to "country music", indicating that Java is a superset of code just as music is a superset of country music. Or maybe Java is patriotic...
I give up. Not 'nuff said, apparently.
Re:I've Said It Before... (Score:2, Flamebait)
On the other hand, I think one can make a very good objective argument as to why Java is a much worse language than say C++. So, while I'd be inclined to agree with your analogy (if you actually said it right, since I hate both Java and country music), it doesn't really work as an analogy.
Perhaps:
Java is to programming as N'Sync is to rock.
Re:I've Said It Before... (Score:2)
On the other hand, I think one can make a very good objective argument as to why Java is a much worse language than say C++.
Nope. There are 100 OO languages you could have picked to compare Java against, and you picked one of the few that is "objectively" worse. And I'd be hard pressed to call either musical in any way.
Re:I've Said It Before... (Score:2)
Country music is certainly not the most popular form of music, it's one of the LEAST popular forms of music.
maru
Re:I've Said It Before... (Score:2)
That depends on whether or not the guy's statement is an objective statement or an expression of his/her opinion. Stick "I think" in front of the analogy and it's much more difficult to argue with. I don't think there's enough content in the guy's post to know either way, whether he was trying to make an objective or subjective statement.
I'm having a difficult time understanding how music can be anything but entirely subjective. As opposed to "for the most part" as you say. Music is good or bad based on a scale of how it moves the listener. So it's entirely possible that, for one listener country music is best, classical is second best, and rock is worst. How can you come to the statement that it might be possible to objectively argue that classical is "better" than either rock or country? Objectively judging something that's entirely subjective seems like nonsense to me. So your first statement (that one couldn't objectively state that country music is better than rock) is something that I can easily agree with, but not your parenthetical statement.
Re:'Down for maintainance' (Score:2)
Re:java - .NET (Score:2)
Re:Say what? (Score:2)
Re:Patents Abound (Score:2)
Actually more than any other company in the world. $5 billion a year with labs bloody everywhere.