What a wonderful time being an IBM rep selling to / consulting with Enterprise IT ... (nobody ever got fired for buying IBM) ...
Now, you IT dudes & dudas (hay dudas) ... if you're not careful, we'll convince top management that, to be effective, you all need Macs & iPads, iPhones and Apple Watches!
The IBM/Apple partnership may benefit IBM most of all. They were reported becoming less and less relevant in enterprise, to the point that layoffs were being considered if there was truth to the rumors. Partnering with Apple brought them new attention.
The IBM/Apple partnership may benefit IBM most of all. They were reported becoming less and less relevant in enterprise, to the point that layoffs were being considered if there was truth to the rumors. Partnering with Apple brought them new attention.
Here's an article from Forbes written just prior to the news of an Apple tie-in, discussing IBM's problems in the new order.
Forbes has had a recent history of overstating the problems at IBM, and there are many to pick on ..... IBM is going through a big transition recently where they have sold off parts of their business to focus on new business.... and the newer business has not risen fast enough to offset the slide in the other side. Yes, there have been significant downsizing as well. You also have to understand that "the cloud" like AWS and google cloud have had massive growth with companies which failure is not as much of an issue as it is with the older businesses (i.e. cloud business vs hosting for financial companies, retail etc.) which have driven the growth and profit for cheaper infrastructure (to a certain extent it has even affected Oracle).... IBM has been transitioned from a hardware company to a 50/50 hardware /services company and now is transitioning to be primarily services. Most of the company's customers for the company I contract with.... have their companies running on IBM serviced infrastructure (even though our application uses Oracle RDBMS with Websphere). IBM Global Services still brings in over 50Billion / year in revenue and thus you can figure out their customer base is fairly significant. Yes it is beneficial to IBM, but it is likely as beneficial to Apple which has been almost locked out of most enterprises.... to get their foot in the door of so many new potential customers. It really is a win-win situation.
Methinks IBM is capable of bringing a substantial Mac server and backend infrastructure on the market and make it a success. I hope they will go that way eventually.
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
The IBM/Mac initiative is about IBM finding new services to expand their business into.... it is not just about iPad apps. They have seen potential in iPad apps first (since it is the newer of the markets and more open to growing), but with the general excitement of employees when given a chance to chose their workstation.... it was only natural that they would expand into the Mac service market as well.... lots of potential.... less competition.... IMHO, a smart move - long overdue. Macs also fit much better into a Linux server environment.... when you drop down to the shell it is basically the same.
What a wonderful time being an IBM rep selling to / consulting with Enterprise IT ... (nobody ever got fired for buying IBM) ...
Now, you IT dudes & dudas (hay dudas) ... if you're not careful, we'll convince top management that, to be effective, you all need Macs & iPads, iPhones and Apple Watches!
At the other end -- the self-employed or SMB solutions becoming available:
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
Nope. It just became iOS >and< OSX. As IBM has a lot of experience with back-end infrastructure, they are certainly capable of providing a solid one for Apple's ecosystem. They'll be happy to be squeezing out MS. So my bet is that something like this will happen in the near future.
IBM need to run easy, low level courses for IT nerds and give them little certificates and a pat on the head to make them feel important so they can move over from being 'Microsoft Certified' people to 'IBM Certified' people and retain their self esteem. Then we might see more IT support for Macs from these types that historically block Macs at every turn from their backroom desks at so many small to middle sized companies the world over.
Nope. It just became iOS >and< OSX. As IBM has a lot of experience with back-end infrastructure, they are certainly capable of providing a solid one for Apple's ecosystem. They'll be happy to be squeezing out MS. So my bet is that something like this will happen in the near future.
I also hope IBM and Apple get closer and ever better cloud services are developed for both enterprise and the rest of us. That said, it doesn't really matter if Apple uses OS X or Linux or even NeXT (Ok kidding there) in their severs, does it? Apple are not claiming to be in that business and IMHO should use whatever works best (which by default rules out anything from Microsoft!).
"IBM noted that shipments of Macs have outpaced the overall PC market every year for the last decade."
Maybe Mac shipment "growth" has outpaced that overall PC market?
In real terms it won't be long. That said, there are so many old beige boxes, less powerful than an iPad, out there that I suspect get included in the 'PC market' by Gartner et al that it would probably take several decades for Apple to get close if ever. As to how many are in use is another matter, and I bet most run XP! If these 'market' numbers included all devices above a certain level and included iOS devices that qualified Apple probably lead by now.
In real terms it won't be long. That said, there are so many old beige boxes, less powerful than an iPad, out there that I suspect get included in the 'PC market' by Gartner et al that it would probably take several decades for Apple to get close if ever. As to how many are in use is another matter, and I bet most run XP! If these 'market' numbers included all devices above a certain level and included iOS devices that qualified Apple probably lead by now.
While I'm not arguing with your comments, my point above was related to the article's wording around "shipments" (not old beige boxes still lying around). Without searching for proof, I don't think Mac shipments have ever outpaced PC shipments in the last 10 years. GROWTH in shipments is quite a different story...
Nope. It just became iOS >and< OSX. As IBM has a lot of experience with back-end infrastructure, they are certainly capable of providing a solid one for Apple's ecosystem. They'll be happy to be squeezing out MS. So my bet is that something like this will happen in the near future.
Are you kidding? Apple doesn't even run Mac servers in their own data centers. From the few pictures I've seen, they appear to be HP servers. Apple doesn't even make servers. Why would IBM implement a Mac server program when they have been pushing Linux in all their enterprise solutions for a long time? Makes no sense. Go read the IBM website. All their enterprise solutions are Linux or IBM AIX. IBM does not offer any Windows based server products so I'm not sure what your squeezing out MS comment is about.
Nope. It just became iOS >and< OSX. As IBM has a lot of experience with back-end infrastructure, they are certainly capable of providing a solid one for Apple's ecosystem. They'll be happy to be squeezing out MS. So my bet is that something like this will happen in the near future.
Are you kidding? Apple doesn't even run Mac servers in their own data centers. From the few pictures I've seen, they appear to be HP servers. Apple doesn't even make servers. Why would IBM implement a Mac server program when they have been pushing Linux in all their enterprise solutions for a long time? Makes no sense. Go read the IBM website. All their enterprise solutions are Linux or IBM AIX. IBM does not offer any Windows based server products so I'm not sure what your squeezing out MS comment is about.
I suspect that IBM and Apple's heavy use of Linux servers was instrumental in open-sourcing Swift -- Compiler and standard libraries will be available for OS X, iOS, Watch OS2, and Linux.
I suspect that IBM and Apple's heavy use of Linux servers was instrumental in open-sourcing Swift -- Compiler and standard libraries will be available for OS X, iOS, Watch OS2, and Linux.
That will be interesting to see. Do you think Swift will actually be a server scripting language on the order of PHP? Currently PHP does integrate with compiled binaries such as curl, gd, apc, module, mysql and others so perhaps apps written in Swift could be compiled in but that would depend on whether PHP itself can be compiled with LLVM.
I suspect that IBM and Apple's heavy use of Linux servers was instrumental in open-sourcing Swift -- Compiler and standard libraries will be available for OS X, iOS, Watch OS2, and Linux.
That will be interesting to see. Do you think Swift will actually be a server scripting language on the order of PHP? Currently PHP does integrate with compiled binaries such as curl, gd, apc, module, mysql and others so perhaps apps written in Swift could be compiled in but that would depend on whether PHP itself can be compiled with LLVM.
It well could be a server scripting language. Based on Lattner's background it seems preordained that Swift will not be just another app programming language. I haven't perused the Swift section of the Apple site recently, but there was a time when they referred to Swift as a System programming language. That could mean anything from a language to write compilers/linkers/runtimes, OSes, to a replacement for low-level Scripts such as OAS (AppleScript) Bash, even some JavaScript.
As to the PHP LLVM question -- they could :
write a SIFT app to convert PHP to Swift
co-exist (share APIs) with PHP ala Objective-C
let the PHP apps run side-by-side until there is a compelling reason to change.
It's been more than 15 years since I did any Web programming. I cut my teeth on JavaScript, then Perl, some PHP, but at then end I mostly used ColdFusion. So I am not current on the State Of The Art of PHP -- IDK if any of the suggestions are practical. What do you think?
As to the compelling reason to rewrite apps in Swift ... I would be amazed if Apple and IBM don't have projects already in place to make that happen (where you can't afford not to change to Swift) . IBM has quite a few Software Engineers that they could hire out to consult/teach/manage/perform the conversions
IBM has quite a few Software Engineers that they could hire out to consult/teach/manage/perform the conversions
It seems to me that if Swift functionality was equivalent to PHP such that it was essentially a tag replacement runtime engine like all the others including Coldfusion .Net, or RoR, etc., there would still have to be a compelling reason to port existing web apps to Swift. Unless it is light years faster or more secure and have a large enough developer base, I don't see it displacing PHP. It is really expensive to rewrite software. If your app is already tested and functioning well, why risk introducing a potentially buggy first rewrite version just because it is a new trendy platform? If it ain't broke don't fix it.
That is why I never really got into RoR. Perhaps it is just as good as PHP but there are very few experienced developers or resources online, mostly requires a different server other than Apache and thus limited hosting opportunities, basically just Media Temple, the syntax is a bit odd in my opinion, especially for SQL queries, and it is just not as fast. It started out as sort of a trendy new platform that younger people just getting into web programming were promoting. I don't think it ever really caught on.
I don't see how you could save money buying $2,000 computer every 2 years instead of every 4 years.
Regardless of the tax savings the highest taxes rate is about 50%.
Ok, I was exaggerating but these are the types of excuses companies will give to not bring in Macs. As for a $2000 computer. Are you suggesting companies will actually pay $2000 for a Windows PC desktop, complete with 15" monitor? I'd say they're going after rock bottom throwaways in the $500 range.
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
I understand this is what's happening right now and that Apple will (probably) never market an OSX Server platform but that doesn't mean IBM couldn't supply a tightly connected OSXServer running on IBM hardware (I know they dumped their small server hardware) providing an integrated management system (better than JAMF) with a replacement for AD that doesn't require exorbitant client licenses. As more Macs enter the corporate network, there will be a justification to do this. AD can be configured to work almost well with Macs but Microsoft will never give them everything and OSX just works differently than Windows and Microsoft can't figure out the best way to support them (not in their business plan). If IBM is trying to stay alive by working with Apple, then there needs to be some give and take to help small and larger corporate offices run a Mac shop properly.
As for IBM and Apple running Linux on their systems, so what. IBM already provides the source code to compile their DB2 Express database onto Macs. All that's necessary would be for them to provide a way to host OSX Server, clean up that product, add whatever other IBM services seem reasonable and market a Mac-specific IBM server product. Seems reasonable to me.
IBM has quite a few Software Engineers that they could hire out to consult/teach/manage/perform the conversions
It seems to me that if Swift functionality was equivalent to PHP such that it was essentially a tag replacement runtime engine like all the others including Coldfusion .Net, or RoR, etc., there would still have to be a compelling reason to port existing web apps to Swift. Unless it is light years faster or more secure and have a large enough developer base, I don't see it displacing PHP. It is really expensive to rewrite software. If your app is already tested and functioning well, why risk introducing a potentially buggy first rewrite version just because it is a new trendy platform? If it ain't broke don't fix it.
That is why I never really got into RoR. Perhaps it is just as good as PHP but there are very few experienced developers or resources online, mostly requires a different server other than Apache and thus limited hosting opportunities, basically just Media Temple, the syntax is a bit odd in my opinion, especially for SQL queries, and it is just not as fast. It started out as sort of a trendy new platform that younger people just getting into web programming were promoting. I don't think it ever really caught on.
The main compelling reasons that I can think of are:
speed -- not only running the app on the server, but transmission speed and performance at the client side (especially mobile)
function -- something new that is easy with Swift, but not practical to retrofit into PHP
As to 1) -- I think it was Gruber who reposted an article where some major web sites had an initial page load time of ~60 seconds. That could mean the difference between gaining a customer or the customer just moving on. Much of that was related to the ungodly amount of distracting ads (title bar, side bars), self launching video adds, etc. I think it was Rene Richards at iMore.com who confronted this directly -- mixing the need for ads and the need for performance. We are becoming ever more dependent on our mobile devices -- where speed in not just nice, there can cases where it may be vital (health care, for example).
As to 2) -- you touched on a couple that could be compelling: Security and Data (including DB) access. IMO, to be used for System Programming, a language, has to be designed to handle both in stride. Again, it's been a while, but I preferred the ColdFusion approach to interfacing SQL over PHP. Apple/IBM certainly could implement DB as native Swift commands. *
* I just took an online tutorial to interface FoundationDB with PHP. It was a fairly comprehensive class-scheduling app with thousands of classes and students, limitations on classes per student and class size -- with transactional processing to avoid the fatal embrace. It was clumsy, with PHP and seeming to tolerate each other -- rather than work towards a common goal.
Comments
Here's an article from Forbes written just prior to the news of an Apple tie-in, discussing IBM's problems in the new order.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtmarko/2015/02/04/bad-news-for-ibm-and-hp-is-good-news-for-it-and-your-business/
...and another discussing other IBM problems, and again prior to the Apple partnership.
http://thevarguy.com/business-technology-solution-sales/050714/just-how-deep-do-ibm-s-troubles-run
The IBM/Apple partnership may benefit IBM most of all. They were reported becoming less and less relevant in enterprise, to the point that layoffs were being considered if there was truth to the rumors. Partnering with Apple brought them new attention.
Here's an article from Forbes written just prior to the news of an Apple tie-in, discussing IBM's problems in the new order.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtmarko/2015/02/04/bad-news-for-ibm-and-hp-is-good-news-for-it-and-your-business/
Forbes has had a recent history of overstating the problems at IBM, and there are many to pick on ..... IBM is going through a big transition recently where they have sold off parts of their business to focus on new business.... and the newer business has not risen fast enough to offset the slide in the other side. Yes, there have been significant downsizing as well. You also have to understand that "the cloud" like AWS and google cloud have had massive growth with companies which failure is not as much of an issue as it is with the older businesses (i.e. cloud business vs hosting for financial companies, retail etc.) which have driven the growth and profit for cheaper infrastructure (to a certain extent it has even affected Oracle).... IBM has been transitioned from a hardware company to a 50/50 hardware /services company and now is transitioning to be primarily services. Most of the company's customers for the company I contract with.... have their companies running on IBM serviced infrastructure (even though our application uses Oracle RDBMS with Websphere). IBM Global Services still brings in over 50Billion / year in revenue and thus you can figure out their customer base is fairly significant. Yes it is beneficial to IBM, but it is likely as beneficial to Apple which has been almost locked out of most enterprises.... to get their foot in the door of so many new potential customers. It really is a win-win situation.
Methinks IBM is capable of bringing a substantial Mac server and backend infrastructure on the market and make it a success. I hope they will go that way eventually.
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
Of course, many companies keep PCs until they die
Like the company I work at.
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
The IBM/Mac initiative is about IBM finding new services to expand their business into.... it is not just about iPad apps. They have seen potential in iPad apps first (since it is the newer of the markets and more open to growing), but with the general excitement of employees when given a chance to chose their workstation.... it was only natural that they would expand into the Mac service market as well.... lots of potential.... less competition.... IMHO, a smart move - long overdue. Macs also fit much better into a Linux server environment.... when you drop down to the shell it is basically the same.
At the other end -- the self-employed or SMB solutions becoming available:
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
Nope. It just became iOS >and< OSX. As IBM has a lot of experience with back-end infrastructure, they are certainly capable of providing a solid one for Apple's ecosystem. They'll be happy to be squeezing out MS. So my bet is that something like this will happen in the near future.
Maybe Mac shipment "growth" has outpaced that overall PC market?
I also hope IBM and Apple get closer and ever better cloud services are developed for both enterprise and the rest of us. That said, it doesn't really matter if Apple uses OS X or Linux or even NeXT (Ok kidding there) in their severs, does it? Apple are not claiming to be in that business and IMHO should use whatever works best (which by default rules out anything from Microsoft!).
In real terms it won't be long. That said, there are so many old beige boxes, less powerful than an iPad, out there that I suspect get included in the 'PC market' by Gartner et al that it would probably take several decades for Apple to get close if ever. As to how many are in use is another matter, and I bet most run XP! If these 'market' numbers included all devices above a certain level and included iOS devices that qualified Apple probably lead by now.
While I'm not arguing with your comments, my point above was related to the article's wording around "shipments" (not old beige boxes still lying around). Without searching for proof, I don't think Mac shipments have ever outpaced PC shipments in the last 10 years. GROWTH in shipments is quite a different story...
Nope. It just became iOS >and< OSX. As IBM has a lot of experience with back-end infrastructure, they are certainly capable of providing a solid one for Apple's ecosystem. They'll be happy to be squeezing out MS. So my bet is that something like this will happen in the near future.
Are you kidding? Apple doesn't even run Mac servers in their own data centers. From the few pictures I've seen, they appear to be HP servers. Apple doesn't even make servers. Why would IBM implement a Mac server program when they have been pushing Linux in all their enterprise solutions for a long time? Makes no sense. Go read the IBM website. All their enterprise solutions are Linux or IBM AIX. IBM does not offer any Windows based server products so I'm not sure what your squeezing out MS comment is about.
I suspect that IBM and Apple's heavy use of Linux servers was instrumental in open-sourcing Swift -- Compiler and standard libraries will be available for OS X, iOS, Watch OS2, and Linux.
I suspect that IBM and Apple's heavy use of Linux servers was instrumental in open-sourcing Swift -- Compiler and standard libraries will be available for OS X, iOS, Watch OS2, and Linux.
That will be interesting to see. Do you think Swift will actually be a server scripting language on the order of PHP? Currently PHP does integrate with compiled binaries such as curl, gd, apc, module, mysql and others so perhaps apps written in Swift could be compiled in but that would depend on whether PHP itself can be compiled with LLVM.
It well could be a server scripting language. Based on Lattner's background it seems preordained that Swift will not be just another app programming language. I haven't perused the Swift section of the Apple site recently, but there was a time when they referred to Swift as a System programming language. That could mean anything from a language to write compilers/linkers/runtimes, OSes, to a replacement for low-level Scripts such as OAS (AppleScript) Bash, even some JavaScript.
As to the PHP LLVM question -- they could :
It's been more than 15 years since I did any Web programming. I cut my teeth on JavaScript, then Perl, some PHP, but at then end I mostly used ColdFusion. So I am not current on the State Of The Art of PHP -- IDK if any of the suggestions are practical. What do you think?
As to the compelling reason to rewrite apps in Swift ... I would be amazed if Apple and IBM don't have projects already in place to make that happen (where you can't afford not to change to Swift) . IBM has quite a few Software Engineers that they could hire out to consult/teach/manage/perform the conversions
IBM has quite a few Software Engineers that they could hire out to consult/teach/manage/perform the conversions
It seems to me that if Swift functionality was equivalent to PHP such that it was essentially a tag replacement runtime engine like all the others including Coldfusion .Net, or RoR, etc., there would still have to be a compelling reason to port existing web apps to Swift. Unless it is light years faster or more secure and have a large enough developer base, I don't see it displacing PHP. It is really expensive to rewrite software. If your app is already tested and functioning well, why risk introducing a potentially buggy first rewrite version just because it is a new trendy platform? If it ain't broke don't fix it.
That is why I never really got into RoR. Perhaps it is just as good as PHP but there are very few experienced developers or resources online, mostly requires a different server other than Apache and thus limited hosting opportunities, basically just Media Temple, the syntax is a bit odd in my opinion, especially for SQL queries, and it is just not as fast. It started out as sort of a trendy new platform that younger people just getting into web programming were promoting. I don't think it ever really caught on.
Please explain.
I don't see how you could save money buying $2,000 computer every 2 years instead of every 4 years.
Regardless of the tax savings the highest taxes rate is about 50%.
Ok, I was exaggerating but these are the types of excuses companies will give to not bring in Macs. As for a $2000 computer. Are you suggesting companies will actually pay $2000 for a Windows PC desktop, complete with 15" monitor? I'd say they're going after rock bottom throwaways in the $500 range.
Nope. IBM servers and back end infrastructure is all Linux. This IBM/Mac initiative is about creating an ecosystem for their iPad apps and nothing to do with servers.
I understand this is what's happening right now and that Apple will (probably) never market an OSX Server platform but that doesn't mean IBM couldn't supply a tightly connected OSXServer running on IBM hardware (I know they dumped their small server hardware) providing an integrated management system (better than JAMF) with a replacement for AD that doesn't require exorbitant client licenses. As more Macs enter the corporate network, there will be a justification to do this. AD can be configured to work almost well with Macs but Microsoft will never give them everything and OSX just works differently than Windows and Microsoft can't figure out the best way to support them (not in their business plan). If IBM is trying to stay alive by working with Apple, then there needs to be some give and take to help small and larger corporate offices run a Mac shop properly.
As for IBM and Apple running Linux on their systems, so what. IBM already provides the source code to compile their DB2 Express database onto Macs. All that's necessary would be for them to provide a way to host OSX Server, clean up that product, add whatever other IBM services seem reasonable and market a Mac-specific IBM server product. Seems reasonable to me.
The main compelling reasons that I can think of are:
As to 1) -- I think it was Gruber who reposted an article where some major web sites had an initial page load time of ~60 seconds. That could mean the difference between gaining a customer or the customer just moving on. Much of that was related to the ungodly amount of distracting ads (title bar, side bars), self launching video adds, etc. I think it was Rene Richards at iMore.com who confronted this directly -- mixing the need for ads and the need for performance. We are becoming ever more dependent on our mobile devices -- where speed in not just nice, there can cases where it may be vital (health care, for example).
As to 2) -- you touched on a couple that could be compelling: Security and Data (including DB) access. IMO, to be used for System Programming, a language, has to be designed to handle both in stride. Again, it's been a while, but I preferred the ColdFusion approach to interfacing SQL over PHP. Apple/IBM certainly could implement DB as native Swift commands. *
* I just took an online tutorial to interface FoundationDB with PHP. It was a fairly comprehensive class-scheduling app with thousands of classes and students, limitations on classes per student and class size -- with transactional processing to avoid the fatal embrace. It was clumsy, with PHP and seeming to tolerate each other -- rather than work towards a common goal.