Canonical-IBM: Virtual Ubuntu Desktops vs. Windows 7
As Microsoft gears up to launch Windows 7, Canonical and IBM have a message for channel partners and CIOs (chief information officers): Virtualized Ubuntu desktops, running on centralized Linux servers, provide lower TCO (total cost of ownership) and lower acquisition costs vs. traditional Windows desktops. Here’s the scoop.
To be sure, The VAR Guy is always skeptical when vendors throw around TCO and ROI claims. It’s pretty easy to find statistics that will back up just about any vendor claim or position. But the folks at Canonical and IBM — leveraging a small virtualization partner called Virtual Bridges — continue to march forward with a virtualized Ubuntu desktop strategy.
So far, that IBM-Canonical-Virtual Bridges strategy has achieved three key milestones:
- December 2008: IBM discloses the initiative with Canonical and Virtual Bridges, introducing a per-user price point of $49.
- May 2009: More than a dozen new VARs and integrators sign up to support Virtual Bridges’ software.
- July 2009: IBM, Virtual Bridges and Canonical introduce the latest version of their combined efforts.
Several VARs and managed service providers have climbed about the virtual Ubuntu desktop effort, which depends on Virtual Bridges’ VERDE 2.0 software. True believers include Midas Networks, a managed service provider that evangelizes virtual desktops to customers.
Man in the Middle
Also of note: Canonical’s point person on the IBM relationship has plenty of experience dealing with Big Blue. Peter Woodward, Canonical’s manager for the IBM global alliance, previously held IBM-centric partnership posts at Citrix Systems and Novell.
Not even Woodward suggests as mass-market movement from Windows XP and Vista to virtualized Ubuntu desktops. But he does expect the IBM-Canonical-Virtual Bridges relationship to start generating revenue within a few months.
“Microsoft is having another impending event,” quips Woodward, referring to Windows 7’s scheduled October 2009 arrival. “Traditionally that meant going out and buying a bigger and beefier machine.” This time around, Canonical and IBM intend to educate CIOs and VARs about how virtual desktops (running on Linux servers) can save money, eliminate Windows and Office licensing fees, and eliminate security software fees.
“The message is resonating well in emerging markets and in Europe, particularly Western Europe,” says Woodward. “Channel partners are also raising their hands with interest. You’ll see us doing webinars and seminars to continue the education.”
Hmmm. The VAR Guy isn’t predicting a wholesale shift from Windows desktops to virtualized Ubuntu desktops running on centralized Linux servers. Still, IBM seems pretty darn serious about promoting its Lotus desktop software in tandem with Canonical and Virtual Bridges. And Canonical’s Woodward has more than a decade experience building relationships with IBM… …
This could get interesting.
The VAR Guy covers channel partner programs on his own site. Follow WorksWithU via Identi.ca, Twitter and RSS (available now) and our newsletter (coming soon).
WorksWithU on Identi.ca
WorksWithU on Twitter
WorksWithU's RSS Feed
Question:
So Virtual bridges charges $50 per seat on 1000+ seat volume orders for its proprietary VERDE tech when purchased directly from Virtual Bridges. What about Canonical? Is Canonical seeing any revenue from this “partnership”? Or is Ubuntu just being used as the no-cost vehicle to push Virtual Bridges proprietary technology? This arrangement certainly looks good for Virtual Bridges…but is there revenue sharing in place to help sustain Canonical and therefore Ubuntu?
-jef
[...] http://www.workswithu.com/2009/07/30/canonical-ibm-virtual-ubuntu-desktops-vs-windows-7/ [...]
@jef
You’ve been posting exactly the same questions for months now.
Is it just obsessive behavior, an ax to grind or some other motive?
This still does not address my only serious complaint about Linux on the end-user desktop. There needs to be something akin to Group Policies in order for wide scale corporate adoption of Linux on the desktop, and it needs to be easy to use. I have been playing around with Puppet, but it is far too complicated for the majority of businesses ti implement and use. Additionally, there are not serious enough lock-down controls which can enforce policies on the individual users in a granular way. I do love Linux, and it’s the only OS I run at home, but for work I still have to enforce corporate policies, and I can’t readily do that on Linux.
Simplicius:
I’ll turn that around… why does the Var Guy persist in obsessively rebroadcasting the partnership announcements? Does the Var Guy have a hidden motive?
I’d stop asking the question…if and when anyone would ever go on record with the answer. It’s an important question as it goes directly to the heart of the question of how Ubuntu can be sustained long term. Do you care about seeing Canonical reach profitability? Do you care about the long term sustainability of Ubuntu? If so.. then why aren’t you asking these sorts of questions? Giving Canonical a free pass doesn’t magically make their scattershot business model a viable one nor does it make their management team any better at executing the plan.
This partnership drives revenue directly into the hands of Virtual Bridges..a company that builds proprietary products and does not materially support the continued development and sustainment of the Ubuntu community with their own engineering manhours. When you buy into the bundle does any of the money go into supporting the development of Ubuntu or open source projects or does all the money go directly into supporting the building of Virtual Bridges proprietary tech? As a customer, which do you value? Which are you willing to spend money on?
The proprietary tech or the open tech in Ubuntu? As an Ubuntu support which do you want to see money spent on?
I would love nothing better than to be told that there was a profit sharing arrangement and that half of that $50 per seat that Virtual Bridges charges flows back to Canonical. I would be thrilled to know that these partnerships were a significant means by which cash was flowing back into the sustainment of the Ubuntu community as a new source to offset Shuttleworth’s personal cashpile. I don’t want to see people purchasing proprietary Virtual Bridges tech under the assumption that such expenditures were going to help sustain Ubuntu when they do not. If people are paying for solutions that include Ubuntu..I want it to be clear to everyone as to where that money is actually going.
-jef
I’m with jef – I’d love to see the answer to this, as it is a very valid and important question.
I agree with Jef and Joe. How does Canonical benefit from this?
Josh, Joe, Jef: Fair points all around. The VAR Guy “repeats” himself because there have been milestones in the Canonical-Virtual Bridges-IBM relationship, as listed in the blog’s bullet points. Also, Canonical has made it clear they are not profiting from this … yet. As soon as there is revenue info to share The VAR Guy will be sure to dig it up… …
[...] Is Both Ubuntu Rival, FriendCanonical Launching “Switch to Ubuntu” Desktop Migration ServicesCanonical-IBM: Virtual Ubuntu Desktops vs. Windows 7 Ubuntu GeekHow to setup Cisco VPN using VPNC Ubuntu Jaunty (9.04)Howto Make Link to Filesystem on [...]
IBM are a massive organisation which has the capability to architect an end-to-end IS strategy for the largest of companies, so I have no doubt that they could implement such solutions.
I presume The VAR guy is primarily interested in those small and medium enterprises which have traditionally purchased their IT solutions through resellers. For these the Virtual Bridges solution is much less compelling. Few SMEs would see desktop infrastructure as a key area of concern. Also it is necessary to have a Windows licence for every desktop running the software, so the economic argument does not favour this product.
So the only value I see to this story for most of us is that IBM’s endorsement of the solution adds credibility to promotion of Ubuntu on the business desktop.