this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
344 points (88.1% liked)

Technology

58303 readers
16 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Before IBM made that statement there were essentially no major software vendors that ported and supported their software on Linux.

Yes, one might argue that Linux-Apache-MySql-Php revolutionized things but other than that a clear majority of things were run on solutions that put money in Microsoft's pockets.

Feel free to name drop some major finance systems or similar enterprise systems you could run without Microsoft cashing in on the OS in some way between 1990-2005.

As I wrote before, it took us 20 years to get rid of IE and a lot of proprietary server side junk Microsoft blessed us with. It's not an coincidence. 99% of all companies were stuck in development tools from Microsoft.

It wasn't until the hardware really really caught up with Java requirements that things really changed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I've just found mentions of Linux support by Oracle before that, so there were things before IBM and that statement. Though on that page there's no Linux link, but there are AIX, Solaris etc and an NT one.

Feel free to name drop some major finance systems or similar enterprise systems you could run without Microsoft cashing in on the OS in some way between 1990-2005.

Could you please, on the contrary, name some such systems strongly requiring Microsoft really? IIS and AD are not that.

I mean, OK, for the thick clients for administrators likely it'd be many things.

But everything IBM or commercial Unix-based, like, again, Oracle databases.

I'm born in 1996, so don't really know what I'm talking about. Just seems a bit skewed.

[–] SheeEttin 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Any major finance system ran, and may still run, on AIX or OS/400. Other critical systems like air traffic control, too. It's only been the last few years that they've started to move away from that legacy systems. The problem is that they're just so damn reliable, and tightly integrated with other systems.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

So no Linux based systems at that time? Good.

Of course there were other solutions than PC based ones. I worked for IBM 1996-2001. I have first hand experience from how IBM was panicking over that whatever Microsoft took on, they seemed to turn to great successes.

The point is that thousands and thousands of companies were big enough to greatly benefit from digitizing their financial processes but way too small to afford a IBM based solution.

That was an big market that IBM failed to get a grip on and something that Microsoft just skillfully gobbled up.