OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

Posted Jul 16, 2010 19:03 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954)
In reply to: OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H) by trasz
Parent article: OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

I don't think IBM makes big money on AIX licenses. They're selling hardware.

I'm pretty sure you're right about that. If IBM could get Linux to do everything on IBM's hardware that AIX can (in IBM's opinion), IBM would be happy to dump the AIX development cost and leech off others' Linux development.

OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

Posted Jul 16, 2010 20:33 UTC (Fri) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (4 responses)

It's not as if IBM isn't taking part in Linux (kernel) development. See, e.g., Jon's stats in last week's issue. As companies go they are fairly high up on the list – not anywhere near Red Hat, to be sure, but certainly ahead of most of the others.

If that is »leeching off others' Linux development« then pretty much everybody is doing it (and their dog, too). Even Red Hat, the leader by a wide margin, has contributed only not quite 12% of the changesets in 2.6.35. There's no point in bashing only IBM about this.

OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

Posted Jul 16, 2010 21:12 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link] (3 responses)

It's not as if IBM isn't taking part in Linux (kernel) development.

Right, but I didn't say anything related to IBM's current relationship with Linux. I posed a hypothetical situation where IBM is able to sell its hardware with Linux as developed by others, in order to make a point about whether IBM makes a profit on AIX.

Of course, the hypothetical still works if others do 95% of the development of Linux, which is how it is today.

OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

Posted Jul 17, 2010 0:34 UTC (Sat) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (2 responses)

what amount of contribution to linux changes a company from being a 'leech'

if 88% of the development is done by other companies, is that company a leech? if so Redhat is a leech. If that's the line where they are no longer a leech, then only 8 companies in the world can not be a leech.

OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

Posted Jul 17, 2010 1:55 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link] (1 responses)

what amount of contribution to linux changes a company from being a 'leech'

If you mean "leech" in a morally negative sense, then I have no opinion on that. I don't much care about morality of business and I didn't mean to say anything about IBM's hypothetical morality if it hypothetically decided to start using Linux instead of AIX to sell its hardware.

I was only talking about A taking advantage of work that B did for some purpose other than to serve A. And I do think that's an honorable way to increase the wealth of the world.

OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

Posted Jul 17, 2010 4:55 UTC (Sat) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

you are the first person I have ever seen use the term leech and mean it to be a positive thing :-)

every other time I've seen it used (in most cases with almost the exact same statement you made), it's being used to say that it's not fair that IBM would bet getting so much benefit and they should be punished (if only by preferring the work of some other company that isn't a leech)

the term 'leech' strongly implies (if not outright states) that you are taking something away from the host that it can't use anymore for your own benefit.

OpenSolaris governing board threatens dissolution (The H)

Posted Aug 6, 2010 9:12 UTC (Fri) by trasz (guest, #45786) [Link]

That was the plan few years ago - when you look at IBM's position on Linux shortly after they got involved (2000, IIRC?), the plan was to phase out AIX. They changed their mind few years ago.