Re: [Fsfe-uk] IBM says bye-bye to PC

[Ian Lynch]

On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 22:21, Graham Seaman wrote:
> Paul Mobbs wrote:
> 
> >Well, it had to happen sooner or later.
> >
> >Does thi smean they're ditching small systems because consultancy makes more 
> >money???
> >
> >  
> >
> They say they  think everythings going to be on demand.
> 
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12/08/ibm_lenovo_memo/
> 
> The strategy (which I find unbelievable, but I keep hearing it) is that 
> they use free software to kill MS etc; then when there's no market for 
> proprietary software everything becomes a service (a la salesforce.com, 
> or grid computing for more processor intensive stuff), so no-one needs 
> PCs - thin clients are quite enough.  Since the gpl can't affect 
> services they neutralize free software as a competitor. And then they 
> have a monopoly on the services so we're back in the 1970s and they're 
> happy again after a regrettable slip with MS for a few years.

In the 1970s they had a monopoly on mainframe technology. This won't
happen as many people are free to compete for services. It makes sense
to take the cost of software licenses out of the equation as that is
monet the customer can then spend on your services if you are a service
supplier. PCs will become commodities like kettles and washing machines.
I believe Sony's next playstation will have a Keyboard and run Linux so
for most people that will be good enough - why by a PC as well? If large
corporates use thin clients for database, office, internet and that's
mainly all they need, why pay MS a load of license money on top? This is
going to knock massive holes in MS's revenue stream over the next 10
years. IBM is just reinventing itself as a service company and its
probably a sound strategy. The question is what is MS re-inventing
itself as? Games company through Xbox? That won't replace the lost
revenues from Office and Windows. They have a real problem on their
hands as indicated by their recent profits warning to the SEC.

> To me it sounds a bit mad/paranoid,  but I do believe its seriously what 
> they're proposing.

That's perhaps the public face, but they are not going to achieve a
monopoly on services unless they patent them all :-)

-- 
Ian Lynch <address@hidden>
ZMS Ltd