On TechRepublic: Windows 7: Slower to boot than Vista?
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 14 of 29:
Next »
« Previous
That's Not What I've Heard JetBlue Say . .
"They said they wanted to consolidate little MS servers onto a Windows Mainframe and get rid of non-Windows stuff"

Um. You may be right, but that's not what I heard the JetBlue CEO state. He maintain's JetBlue is a 100% M$ shop.

Looks like at least part of the consolidation is going very well:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/CaseStudy.asp?CaseStudyID=13932

Outside of having previously implemented SAP, home much outside technologies for what I'll call core software requirements do you think M$ uses? I'd guess they use very little. How much do you think IBM uses or HP? Probably more but not to any great extent.

The jist I got from the original commentary was that a company should second-source as much as possible for the sake of COB (Continuity of Business) et al, which I think is ludicrous.

Let's assume for a moment that JetBlue is being above board. How much benefit to its IT bottom line do you think it makes to not have to pay tons of money from all sorts of vendors for mtc and support alone. No extra $ to Oracle, IBM, PeopleSoft, CheckPoint, intranet portal vendors, CRM, Novell, OLAP et al. That would add up to a ton of money.

Yet. I'm not suggesting every Fortune 500 company should ditch their IT software vendors and run over to M$. But there's certainly a lot of money a growing startup like JetBlue can save by going with a single source vendor like M$. Some day not too far in the distance future a company will be able to acquire "enterprise ready" OS technologies for 80-90% of the stack I'm talking about. It's getting close.

And in most cases companies will choose to is willing to not go with an HP or IBM for in-depth product support for the OS stack which cost a boat load of money but there will be similiar type savings to be had in these cases.
Posted by: jjworleyeoe   Posted on: 06/18/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Second Source  poocow666 | 06/16/04
Open source not so open  Anton Philidor | 06/16/04
This wasn't about lock in  NemesisNL | 06/18/04
Single vendor efficiency  poocow666 | 06/16/04
Yes, efficient.  Anton Philidor | 06/16/04
No such thing as Linux Lock-in  poocow666 | 06/16/04
So then...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/16/04
Or...  Martin Marvinski | 06/24/04
Would you prefer Red Hat lock-in?  Anton Philidor | 06/17/04
Wrong again...  poocow666 | 06/17/04
Who heads Fedora?  Anton Philidor | 06/17/04
JetBlue  jjworleyeoe | 06/16/04
JetBlue said the goal is to be sole sourced ....  oldskool | 06/17/04
That's Not What I've Heard JetBlue Say . .  jjworleyeoe | 06/18/04
Not always true, there are many issues to consider.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/16/04
No problems for Nasa???  poocow666 | 06/16/04
Dear ranter...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/16/04
Your ignorance is astounding  poocow666 | 06/17/04
It's "just fine" that there are no Shuttles running?  mlindl | 06/16/04
umm, perhaps your definition of successful is "biased"  oldskool | 06/16/04
Single source evolution  Anton Philidor | 06/17/04
NASA lost its mission and now its just another government agency  oldskool | 06/17/04
Ax has a point, but not a good example...  Judas I. | 06/17/04
these FBI/CIA intel shotages are trumped up  oldskool | 06/17/04
Um, I think you may have missed my point...  Judas I. | 06/18/04
How To ?  pj-xmesh | 06/16/04
One of Linux's biggest strengths  zijiang | 06/17/04
I used the iTunes Music Store yesterday  mlindl | 06/16/04
Open Source Is Multiple Source  rtb | 06/23/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here