NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
In the near future, the probability is close to zero. In the distant
future, I'll be dead, and posterity can do whatever they like... :-) --lwall
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
He had to say something (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't take the CIO at his word here. Note that Southwest Airlines, which has a similar business model to Jet Blue, and has been doing it a hell of a lot longer, has always turned a profit also. I have no idea what Southwest uses in their IT department.
The CIO has to say something good about his decision to standardize on MS, right? It was his decision, after all.
The fact that so much of the Web is run by Unix/Apache, so many palmtops are Palm OS, so many corporate databases are Oracle says something ab
Re:He had to say something (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, and it appears that he made a sound business decision, based on a handful of objective metrics that impact the bottom line. He's bucking the common wisdom that (1) you need multiple platforms to run an enterprise and (2) an all Microsoft shop is a solution for managers who don't know any better. These were conscious decisions he took for JetBlue, and interestingly enough, it seems to
Re:He had to say something (Score:1)
Appearances can be deceptive. This article is not exactly bristling with objective metrics.
This CIO chose Office 2003 over XP for its XML support. XML support that is mostly a marketing checkoff as, by all accounts, it lacks interoperability and formatting information. Sounds like he's got a One Microsoft Way story to tell and he's pushing it for all it's worth.
I don't know about common wisdom. The largest marketing department in the world is pushing the vision of MS everywhere, so it's hardly a brave decision on this CIO's part.
You seem to be missing the point here. Internally, JetBlue is in a better position if it standardizes on a single platform: A320 and Microsoft Windows being two examples. The trickledown reduction in complexity for the organization in terms of training, support and parts inventory directly impacts the bottom line. This kind of standardization allows the organization to be leaner and more frugal.
Standardizing has efficiencies, sure. You can standardize on a given aircraft to save on training and maintenance costs, a model that Southwest pioneered a long time ago with its fleet of 737s. You can standardize on database software, or client software, or servers, etc.
I just don't see the big synergies on standardizing everywhere on MS technologies. Computers are used for widely different functions, from palmtop to back office. Standardizing on all MS everywhere would be like Jet Blue standardizing on a single 'transportation' platform, using taxiing jets to deliver maintenance equipment.
If Linux/Apache delivers better price/performance for Web-based apps, as even a Microsoft funded study shows [itworld.com] ,other non-Microsoft funded research shows a tremendous savings [earthweb.com]. I just don't see where the big synergies are by having ALL MS in your shop. Seems like you could partition off a place in your IT infrastructure for Web servers running Linux or BSD.
It's pretty telling that Yahoo and Google run almost no Windows, I think. Clearly, when you really need performance, which at some level translates to money, you don't go with Windows.
It's not really standardizing on one platform anyway. In the back room, there are big Unisys mainframe systems running Microsoft Server 2003, on the departmental level, there're probably HP servers running Windows 2000 Server (possible 2003 Server), then HP Compaq desktops and laptops running Windows XP and Palmtops running WindowsCE. Supporting these different machines requires widely different training, certification and expertise levels.
Microsoft may sell it as all one platform, but that's just marketing spin. You are still going to have Server admins and desktop admins and Palmtop support, etc.
There's nothing hypothetical about Microsoft pricing practices. Only Microsoft raises prices in a tech downturn [siliconvalley.com]. It wouldn't be prudent for any executive to ignore this history or the realization that they would be faced with paying through the nose or painful migration costs in the future if Microsoft dramatically raised prices. It is a certainly part of a CIO's job to look to the future.
Microsoft has been mouthing this Windows everywhere strategy for more than a decade. In 1995, they were saying they were leading edge and ignoring the Web as a passing phase. Seeing Microsoft's pathetic history of lack of innovation, I could easily see them blindsided again by some new technology.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:He had to say something (Score:2)
I'll grant that this article is hardly brimming with real information. Yet I still find myself intrigued with the idea that eliminating non-MS platforms from an enterprise could possibly reduce overall IT costs. Specifically, that the same economic factors that aid jetBlue and Southwest to save money by standardizing on a single model of aircraft may also be a factor in IT.