Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Firefox IBM IT

IBM Makes Firefox Its Corporate Browser 152

Posted by kdawson
from the good-thing-orange-goes-with-blue dept.
e9th writes "Ars Technica reports that IBM has adopted Firefox as its company-wide browser. Firefox will be installed on all new employee computers, and all 400,000 employees will be encouraged to use it. Speaking of encouraging Firefox use, IBM VP Bob Sutor blogs: 'We will continue to strongly encourage our vendors who have browser-based software to fully support Firefox.' I hope this means that if IBM can't navigate a vendor's site with Firefox, they'll just look elsewhere."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM Makes Firefox Its Corporate Browser

Comments Filter:
  • Bad news for banks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by assertation (1255714) on Friday July 02 2010, @09:59AM (#32772582)

    This is bad news for banks and other big orgs that dodge supporting browsers other than IE giving the "cover story" that other browsers are wildcards in term of security.

    People will ask if IBM can do it, why can't they.

    I guess the admins of such orgs could always say
    "Well, we do not have the resources of an IT company giant"

    Yet, with all of those employees, going to all of those sites......

  • Tell the vendors. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by John Hasler (414242) on Friday July 02 2010, @10:11AM (#32772754) Homepage

    > I hope this means that if IBM can't navigate a vendor's site with Firefox,
    > they'll just look elsewhere.

    I hope this means that if IBM can't navigate a vendor's site with Firefox they'll tell the vendor why he is losing the sale.

    Buyer: "I tried to check on your Web site as you suggested but it doesn't seem to work with Firefox." Salesman: "Oh, yes. We only support IE." Buyer: "Get back to me when you've fixed your site."

  • by xzvf (924443) on Friday July 02 2010, @10:18AM (#32772848)
    IBM offers a fully supported open client based on Linux. The Red Hat and Ubuntu versions are very mature, but there is also support for other distros. There is even a Mac client. While it isn't widely used yet, an IBMer can perform their job using it. Using Firefox and Symphony (IBM remix of OO.org) is just common sense, when you have 100K employees.
  • by hedwards (940851) on Friday July 02 2010, @10:35AM (#32773118)
    Chrome isn't a better browser, it is faster at the moment, but it uses a lot of memory and isn't mature at this point. It's mostly fast by virtue of not having all the features that have made the competition somewhat bloated. But rest assured that Google realizes this and is in the process of larding it up.

    Being fast is one thing, but it's really pointless when it's spying on you and makes it a headache to use sites because it randomly refuses to show images without explanation. I have a sneaking suspicion that, that whole spying things probably has something to do with it not being chosen.
  • by quanticle (843097) on Friday July 02 2010, @10:41AM (#32773184) Homepage

    Notice that IBM is not going with Chrome, though it is a faster and better browser for the moment.

    Well, there's also the fact that Chrome is only a year or so old. Firefox, in all its iterations, has been around for almost six years. Which one do you trust more?

  • by ageoffri (723674) on Friday July 02 2010, @10:42AM (#32773206)
    As an IBM'er who has run Firefox for years as my primary browser I can tell you that a large number of web based tools just don't work with anything but IE. Maybe some parts of IBM can get away with only using IE, but in ITD we just can't. Even the corporate education site works better in IE and pretty much everyone has to use it several times a year.

    What we are really seeing here IMHO is an internal political battle that has spilled outside the corporate structure. One exec has decided to stake his name on adopting Firefox and will blame the every development group that only supports IE when this fails.

  • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Friday July 02 2010, @10:45AM (#32773252)

    I fail to see how it would be of any benefit to us for IBM to take that stance.

    Regardless of if end users have to use a site, other vendors will, and that affects what browsers are in use at those other vendors. It also determines what Web development skills, developers, and tools benefit most moving forward. Companies being pressured to spend money and comply with standards or lose deals will suddenly care about standards, which means their Web developers will and their tool providers will. So now you have more Web development tools and developers who make standards compliant sites and that will almost certainly bleed over into other Web sites that average people do use.

  • by pr0nbot (313417) on Friday July 02 2010, @11:42AM (#32774146)

    In my job I use the various browsers to varying degrees.

    However, for my own use, I stick to Mozilla for ideological reasons: Firefox is their raison d'etre. They have a vested interest in keeping the web open and standards-based.

    Apple and Google might someday decide that it's not worth developing their browser any further, or decide that it should really be a vehicle to promote their core services (media sales, QuickTime, ads, analytics etc) to the detriment of the user. I think it's revealing that neither Apple nor Google chose to invest in Mozilla instead of going it on their own - either it's impossible to work with the Mozilla folks, or they wanted to retain control, in which case you have to ask why.

    Nevertheless, it's good for everyone that there's a bit of competition, so use what you like!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 02 2010, @01:06PM (#32775804)

    Does a GPO configured IE prevent you from running portable Firefox?

    No. Because the two things aren't at all related, just like in your example.

Computer programmers do it byte by byte.

Working...