Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Novell's Linux Business Takes a Seat At the Grown-Up Table

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the happy-corporate-overlords dept.

Novell 101

CNet is reporting that while Novell still has a long way to go before they start making Red Hat nervous, they have at least gotten a seat at the grown-up table. Reporting 31% year-over-year growth in their Linux business, Novell attributes very little of this success to their Microsoft partnership, looking to their Redmond connection mainly for interoperability work. "Novell's core Linux business is growing. By 'core,' I mean that our non-Microsoft- related Linux business is growing. These are Suse Linux Enterprise Server subscriptions sold directly by the Novell sales force or by our channel partners, without any Microsoft certificates or Microsoft salespeople involved. However, the important thing is that our total revenue picture for Suse Linux Enterprise is growing, as our customers increasingly don't distinguish. As we've said before, Microsoft offers an alternate avenue for purchasing subscriptions but we are focused on growth of the whole category."

cancel ×

101 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Frosty Posts (4, Insightful)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601793)

Go Novell. Competition = good

Re:Frosty Posts (4, Informative)

spun (1352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601937)

I was at Novell Brainshare this year and I can say firsthand that their commitment to open source seems genuine. I was impressed with the amount of work they are doing, not only moving to a Linux based platform and phasing out Netware as an OS altogether, but in taking their partners with them. There were some very good seminars on porting Netware applications to Linux, using the GNU tools like autoconf, and Linux security.

Re:Frosty Posts (5, Interesting)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602409)

Speaking of security, I kinda like 2 things about Apparmor vs SELinux (which oddly, Canonical chose for Ubuntu, over SELinux). One, the control follows the relative path to the file as opposed to the inode. Now, some may like it the other way around, but if you update the executable, as long as the path stays the same, no changes have to be made. This increases the chance of an administrator NOT forgetting to update the settings for the restrictions during an update or for a patch where they have not gotten all the details. The other reason...It is not written by the NSA. Call me nutty, but I don't exactly like the involvement of government in my software.

Re:Frosty Posts (4, Insightful)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602617)

That last point is sort of irrelevant, its open source.

If the NSA wants to develop security frameworks they obviously can, and the main kernel devs seem happy to incorporate their work into the kernel.

If you have some reason to not trust SELinux, much as i hate it, do tell.

Re:Frosty Posts (1)

hxnwix (652290) | more than 6 years ago | (#23607261)

GP:

Call me nutty, but I don't exactly like the involvement of government in my software.
P:

sort of irrelevant, its open source
The opportunity to review patches written by Chinese intelligence agencies would be no more reassuring.

Widely reviewed random number generators and encryption algorithms are one thing. That some of these are regarded as dubious while others are seen as strong is encouraging. Kilobytes of patches touching every part of the kernel are rightly regarded with caution...

Re:Frosty Posts (1)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 6 years ago | (#23608133)

Hell are you kidding?

SELinux was merged a long time ago, and is in use in certain situations already.

Please stop with the paranoia, or tell me how completely open code can somehow let the NSA spy on you, because thats what people are implying when they bring this crap up.

This is not closed code, nor is it somehow able to hide what it is doing, unless of course you don't read the code before patching mainline with it.

PRNG and ciphers are different, there could be weaknesses in them of course but YOU CAN SEE THE CODE, if you suspect weakness don't use them. No one is applying patches to mainline that they don't understand or can't read.

Re:Frosty Posts (1)

awrowe (1110817) | more than 6 years ago | (#23616013)

*tinfoil hat*

Yeah but who is to say they haven't already fiddled with the compiler? [ittoolbox.com]

Re:Frosty Posts (3, Interesting)

spun (1352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602949)

I like Apparmor because it is much much easier to configure and use than SELinux. It also creates less of a performance drain.

Re:Frosty Posts (2, Funny)

Pros_n_Cons (535669) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603053)

You're right about government involvement. Thats why i dont read books. who knows what kinda words they can put in there without us knowing!

Infact im getting rid of Ethernet since nasa wrote most of the drivers.

Re:Frosty Posts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23604271)

Dude, it's open source. And if there is any one entity in the world that knows what security is .. NSA is probably it.

more than a third of a billion (4, Insightful)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601803)

so that $367 million Microsoft paid Novell in 2007 alone had nothing to do with profitablity and growth. glad to hear it

Re:more than a third of a billion (5, Insightful)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601859)

Having worked with Red Hat and Novell as well as HP, Sun and IBM on *NIX, I have to give Novell credit on their support. They tend to go the extra mile and I even really like their documentation better than Red Hat's. Red Hat's kickstart has fewer issues than AutoYaSt, but YaST as a tool to manage servers, plus Novell's Zenworks Linux Management is awesome in capabilities. It seems to just be easier to make things happen on SUSE for me.

But, now at my current job, it is all RHEL and HPUX........with a few older sun boxen tossed into the mix.

Re:more than a third of a billion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602163)

so that $367 million Microsoft paid Novell in 2007 alone had nothing to do with profitablity and growth.

Indeed, it has nothing to do with these income items, as even a cursory glance would make clear.

Re:more than a third of a billion (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602179)

actually, all of that money wasn't realized at the agreement time. I think only $100m or so was up front, the rest is only recognized by Novell as the MS certs are given/sold/activated by customers. So out of the remaining portion (which I think is $240m total), I believe since Nov 2006, about 2/3rds of that has been recognized so far...some in fiscal 07 and some in fiscal 08...most was last fiscal year.

Re:more than a third of a billion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602771)

Since this report was about Q2 2008 and not 2007 at all, yeah. RTFA

Laying off your workforce helps too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23604377)

They laid off this winter and the SEC filings show they are preparing more layoffs this year.

Re:more than a third of a billion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23607129)

Not really, this pre-payment would have only been recognised as revenue upon the sale of licenses.

Growth wise, maybe, this is a substantial injection of cash into the business

"Novel Microsoft Present" (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601817)

That's what the flash Ad on this page says at least... "roll over for more". www.moreinterop.com

Amazing (-1, Troll)

heroine (1220) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601837)

31% is about half inflation in dollars. Amazing Novell actually got into a CNet article after all these years. Wonder if the 1 guy still employed there is still in Provo or finally made the move to San Jose.

Re:Amazing (1, Interesting)

spun (1352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601985)

I was at Novell Brainshare recently with thousands of other people from all over the world. I'd have to say your assessment of Novel's position is way out in left field. You really have no idea what you are talking about, sorry.

Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (4, Interesting)

Stu101 (1031686) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601841)

We are late arrivals in linux land. However we are deploying a new suse server a week to replace NT servers. We have gone from zero to 35% in little over 3 months. It really is linux for the enterprise made easy. And whats even better, the toolsets are free, opensuse is free, and no shitty activation codes. It's all gravy, to use a bad term ;)

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (3)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602111)

So how do Linux servers compare to NT servers? Have you done any comparions?

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (4, Informative)

Stu101 (1031686) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602375)

Well so far we are finding that the amount of maintainance is a lot, lot less. Whereas windows you have multiple install and reboots to set it all up, just turn on the suse update repos, and do a zypper up, and press y several times and bingo you have a patched os.

Also we are getting better uptime, those little "glitches" you get with windows. Not that they were a major things but annoyance.

More proof? We needed a new lookup only DNS server. So we dug out a low spec Dell box and used openseuse with yast to install the correct programs, and bingo, within an hour, we had one free, fast, functional dns server. No needing to find a key, or worse, trying to convince some jumped up rep that yes you really did purchase a Windows 2003 license, or even worse still , sorry we cant sell you w2k3 anymore, just windows 2008.

 

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602447)

You may also want to look at the free VMware Server edition. Having multiple servers that require say >300MB of RAM on a nice 4GB or greater new server is nice. If you have any sort of shared storage like a SAN or even a fast NAS, you can even have the LUNs/Shares mapped to multiple machines. That way, while not "elegant" you can have a hardware failure and then launch the VM on the 2nd box.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (3, Informative)

rathaven (1253420) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602687)

Elegant? Try using Heartbeat, OCFS2 and clustered Xen solutions (on top of the Linux iSCSI target/initiator and LVM and DRDB for snapshot and replication). Virtual machine failure with automatic restart and 300ms migration with remote site backup? Nice!

Novell do a really good implementation guide
here [novell.com]

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602817)

I realized it was not an elegant solution, but I will definitely have to look at that write up. I have bounced around at companies a bit lately and will likely stay where I am because I finally kinda like it here. However they are RH and not even RH and SLES.

Regardless, The last place I worked was a big shop that did hosting and client services (large UK company's presence in the US). They had a client with a RH cluster that they kept on complaining about and having it fence off nodes, etc. Of course they "hated" SUSE for some inexplicable reason. I tried to point them to Heartbeat and even http://www.drbd.org/ [drbd.org] but they thought they were "Not big enough to use here" and "Red Hat Cluster is a real product" meanwhile GFS has poor locking, in my opinion.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

rathaven (1253420) | more than 6 years ago | (#23604351)

In all honesty, compared to the ESX server products with all the trimmings it is a little nasty to get running - and even when running you wonder where certain functionality is - until you remember its on Linux and script your own.

Eventually though, you start wondering why people pay so much more when you just keep getting more functionality that works.

As for the solution - Heartbeat and Xen both take some tweaking to get right but are fine and stable when they are right and the other parts of the solution are mostly bomb proof. We use 2 heartbeat clusters - one for storage (running Heartbeat, the iSCSI target, LVM and a remote drdb connection) with fencing. We had some old but rather functionless Fibre Channel kit sat around - hence the storage cluster, we needed to be able to split the disks down in a granular way for the VMs. The other cluster for the xen servers (Heartbeat, Xen, ocfs2 on iSCSI initiator and raw disk to the LVM partitions depending on what is required). I've had no issues recently since stablising the system (which took a little digging - mostly xen and heartbeat) and some early performance ones with ocfs2 which were annoying but they seem to be rectified in later patches.

Some of the other bits you'd normally get are a bit manual (expanding vm's, LVM snapshots, quiescing the VM's before snapping to name a few) to get right but they are largely things that you make procedures or scripts for once you've got the theory cracked.

The only shame about it for me is currently the lack of decent configuration on the network side of the solution (just a bridge) though there are ways we are looking into expanding this.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23604035)

I have been looking at this, but have heard from some colleagues that Xen performance is not up to par with solutions like VMware when you don't use the Xensource drivers. Have you had any other experiences than theirs? How is I/O performance compared to native machine performance? Does it abstract the hardware the same way (relatively) VMware does?

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23604861)

unfortunately the virtualization "religious" wars are also playing out here. Xen is a pretty darn good performer as is VMware. Whether or not one is going to be better than the other really depends on a few things (e.g. $$, the workloads being virtualized, the hardware the host is running on, etc.). The Xen drivers (which I think you may be referring to the paravirtualized drivers for fully virtualized VMs) really only are needed with fully virtualized loads and based on the performance I saw with them in and they really do come close to native performance (seem to recall a german magazine that actually did benchmarks). But again, lots of factors to take into account like which version of Xen, who's drivers, what's being virtualized, pricing, etc.

But with SLES, openSUSE, RHEL, fedora, etc. all w/Xen (and the PV drivers) being available for testing, why not kick a few tires and have some fun and compare the same loads running under vmware vs. running under xen both PV and FV. really doesn't take that long to install and get going.

All in all...both great solutions, but I have seen a lot of my peers looking at Xen and starting to utilize it for new deployments vs. Vmware mainly because of the performance and low-cost -AND- Xen is open-source so it can run on more hardware and with other OSs, which is nice too.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602975)

and if you supply the '-n' switch - as in "zypper -n up" , you don`t even have to press y several times :)

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23609561)

N for Y, makes sense.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (3, Funny)

y86 (111726) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603093)

I run 2 applications for a major retailer. One runs on AIX (and has some linux nodes), the other runs on MS Server 2003.

I've never been paged at 4AM because my Linux/AIX boxes rebooted in the middle of a major data aggregation job because of an automatic update.

In fact my AIX / linux boxes all have uptimes of over 700 days, except one of my new servers which has been up 200 days.

The windows server is relatively stable, besides the occasional freeze up(like 2-3 times a year it hardlocks). The real PIA is the updates rebooting them all the time.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1, Flamebait)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603429)

Why in the holy fuck would you ever turn on automatic updates on a production server?

Don't you have a test enviroment?

Fucking noob.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23604579)

Be nice, the guy is obviously some kind of retard. (as evidence, he's the guy who gets called at 4am)

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

y86 (111726) | more than 6 years ago | (#23617317)

A retard who makes 6 figures.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23608417)

You could always give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that management heard his concerns and said "We'll assume all risks" which means "You take the fall when my manager asks why shit went wrong."

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

y86 (111726) | more than 6 years ago | (#23617297)

Why in the holy fuck would you ever turn on automatic updates on a production server?

Don't you have a test enviroment?
We have a server administration team that will roll out 0 day exploit patches to production servers. We use tivoli and our own MS patching server(SMS) to control these updates and packages.

I have 2 test environment for all of my systems, a test and a qual environment.

Perhaps it's out server admin team who is to blame for this. All I know is that my windows applications are a PIA.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23606297)

MS Server 2003 rebooting automatically because of updates? Stupid administrator that doesn't setup their server properly.

MS Server hardlocks 2-3 times a year? Sounds like some hardware issues.

I know it's fun to bash MS here, but the issues you talk about have nothing to do with Microsoft's product.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

totally bogus dude (1040246) | more than 6 years ago | (#23608167)

Hmm - there's been quite a few security updates for the Linux kernel lately, that affect the version in Debian stable. I've been rebooting our Linux boxes a fair bit lately as a result...

YMMV if you're still running a 2.4 kernel though.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23606113)

why was this post modded flamebait?

honestly, i really feel that he asked a valid question of the OP.

and obviously the OP felt it was worth answering.

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 6 years ago | (#23607897)

why was this post modded flamebait?

Because I have a very special fan. Check my journal for details. ;)

Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? (2, Informative)

alexborges (313924) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603419)

If you were going on the free (as in really free-free) side of the ecuation, youd have done a lot better in centos,scilinux, mandriva, debian or ubuntu.

In particular Mandriva's conf screens beats the ---- out of yast any day of the week and twice on sunday.

What makes SuSe Linux more interoperable? (3, Informative)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601851)

According to this page, http://www.moreinterop.com/solutions/benefits/ [moreinterop.com] , they are "The Most Interoperable Open Source Platform on the Market Today"

Re:What makes SuSe Linux more interoperable? (1, Flamebait)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 6 years ago | (#23601923)

the first bullet point in your link explains it: "Only Linux distribution recommended by Microsoft and SAP"

only Linux distro to take Microsoft bribe on the order hundreds of millions of dollars.....

Re:What makes SuSe Linux more interoperable? (3, Funny)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603217)

the first bullet point in your link explains it: "Only Linux distribution recommended by Microsoft and SAP"
Translation:
if(you.suit()) {
    buy();
}
else {
    run_like_hell();
}

dislike this company (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23601901)

I will never purchase anything from novell. ever. they have signed agreements that microsoft intends to leverage to subvert the open source community. youd be blind not to see this and i want no part.

Re:dislike this company (4, Informative)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602177)

Speaking of blind.... Have you read the GPL v2 or v3? OK then. Microsoft wants to hedge bets on many levels and getting any stream of income from open source would be good for them. Hell, I am sure that if they sold MS Office a a binary blob solution for Linux, there would be takers.

That being said, regardless if you like Novell or not, they contribute to some of the most important and popular projects for F/OSS that if you use almost any distribution, you are touching daily.

Your assessment of the situation is flawed and incorrect. Please see the following as some proof: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/ [openinventionnetwork.com] http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/about_members.php [openinventionnetwork.com] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_v._Novell [wikipedia.org] http://www.novell.com/ctoblog/?p=54 [novell.com] So... In summation, if you use the Linux Kernel, SAMBA, Gnome, KDE or any numter of other F/OSS products/projects...thank Novell for their contributions.

Re:dislike this company (5, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602381)

> Microsoft wants to hedge bets on many levels and getting any stream of income from open source would be good for them.

I don't think that is what the deal is about. Msft's business model does not work unless msft can control the standard. Msft wants linux to be legally encumbered. Msft is getting Novell to agree that all other version of linux are violating msft patents. This is supposed to create one legal version of Linux, and all the rest are illegal. Why do you think msft is sponsoring the Acacia lawsuit against Redhat?

Right now, there is no way msft can kill off linux in the same manner that msft has killed off msft's proprietary competitors. But, if there is only one linux, and this linux is commercial product, then it becomes much easier for msft to kill off, or at least contain the problem.

Re:dislike this company (2, Informative)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602513)

http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq.html [novell.com]

http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensource.html [novell.com]

http://news.cnet.com/Microsoft,-Novell-spar-over-Linux-agreement/2100-7344_3-6137444.html [cnet.com]

Microsoft got Novell to agree to very very little :). This is a collaboration effort and customer indemnification.

"indemnification" from what? (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602797)

Microsoft got Novell to agree to very very little :). This is a collaboration effort and customer indemnification.
#1. Microsoft got Novell to agree to pay royalties to Microsoft.

#2. What "indemnification" is Novell paying for, specifically?

Companies usually do NOT pay for things that they do not receive.

Re:"indemnification" from what? (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602839)

The indemnification is basically MS' promise to not go after Novell's customers. I agree they sold them "magic beans" but I have to assume A customer or customers wanted this. This was done under the umbrella of SCO's lawsuits, etc. Some customers probably did not want the hassle and wanted to have somebody shield them. Maybe it was no better than a policy against alien abduction, but shit, Lloyds of London will sell you one if you want them to.

So Novell Pays MS and Novell gets paid MORE than that BY MS.

Explain that again. (3, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603107)

The indemnification is basically MS' promise to not go after Novell's customers.
So Novell DID agree that there was SOMETHING Microsoft could sue over.

I agree they sold them "magic beans" but I have to assume A customer or customers wanted this.
Explain that one again. It makes no sense to me.

This was done under the umbrella of SCO's lawsuits, etc. Some customers probably did not want the hassle and wanted to have somebody shield them.
Red Hat didn't seem to have a problem with that.

So Novell Pays MS and Novell gets paid MORE than that BY MS.
That's what is known as "selling out".

It doesn't matter how much you get paid, you've still entered into an agreement stating that you are paying Microsoft for the property that know is included in the product that you are selling.

Re:Explain that again. (1)

Gavagai80 (1275204) | more than 6 years ago | (#23609057)

I can sue you for anything if I like. It'll get thrown out of court, but it'll still cost you money. An agreement to prevent the suing isn't an admission of guilt, particularly when the agreement runs both ways, protecting Microsoft from possible Novell lawsuits (and some speculate Novell's patents could attack MS Office).

Times are changing (4, Interesting)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602825)

Do you remember the days when any company that stroke a deal with Microsoft, died a horrible and agonizing death? Well, look at this deal with Novell: it seems this is the first time a company pulled a fast one - on Microsoft! Novell saw a small opportunity to make a bit of money and offered to Microsoft something Novell must have known is worthless and impossible: the proprietarization of Linux. Microsoft was desperate enough that it wanted to believe this baloney and Novell was more than happy to oblige and feed them the BS, making a few bucks in the process, and attracting (extremely few) additional customers. Not too much profit, but every little helps, and you won't spit on it, especially if you give NOTHING in return, like Novell did to Microsoft.

Microsoft is getting sloppy and silly. These are indeed new times.

Re:dislike this company (1)

KutuluWare (791333) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603313)

I don't think that is what the deal is about. Msft's business model does not work unless msft can control the standard.
Their business model worked just fine before they were big enough to "control" anything. In fact, that's sort-of how they got to be that big. It never ceases to amaze me how ready the groktards are to condemn a company for doing what every company since the beginning of the free market are trying to do: make money.

Msft wants linux to be legally encumbered. Msft is getting Novell to agree that all other version of linux are violating msft patents. This is supposed to create one legal version of Linux, and all the rest are illegal.
Good thing Linus and all those other developers gave Novell the permission to "agree" that they were violating patents they've never even seen. Of course Microsoft wants Linux to be using its patents and be liable for huge amounts of monetary damages -- that doesn't make it true. And even if it were, they're going to have a hard time being that selective in their patent licenses with open-source code written by thousands of people. The simple, conspiracy-free truth is that they're acting like any other large tech company with a huge patent portfolio would act, and hedging their bets just in case someone else screws up big time.

Right now, there is no way msft can kill off linux in the same manner that msft has killed off msft's proprietary competitors. But, if there is only one linux, and this linux is commercial product, then it becomes much easier for msft to kill off, or at least contain the problem.
Microsoft killed off it's proprietary competitors with the controversial and predatory technique of not sucking as much. Seriously, I know most of the kids here on /. probably weren't around before there was a Windows 95, but have you ever seen an old Apple II or Mac OS? Commodore? Tandy? DesqView or DRDOS or OS/2 or any of those other OS's and applications that Windows was "competing" against? Windows might be a pile of junk by todays standards, but compared to what it was up against it may as well have been ordained by God. It would have taken a concerted effort at sucking by Microsoft just to stay even with those crap-fests in sales, let alone go out of business.

So, in some twisted, accidental sense, you're right. Microsoft can't kill off Linux or OS X the way it did every previous competitor because those two are actually worth using. But somehow we expect MS not to adapt its business strategy to compensate for the fact that someone actually managed to come out with a quality competing product? Get real.

--Mike

Re:dislike this company (2, Informative)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603885)

Their business model worked just fine before they were big enough to "control" anything.

On the contrary, Microsoft was controlling from the beginning: it piggy-backed on IBM's clout to control DOS, and went from there.

Seriously, I know most of the kids here on /. probably weren't around before there was a Windows 95, but have you ever seen an old Apple II or Mac OS? Commodore? Tandy? DesqView or DRDOS or OS/2 or any of those other OS's and applications that Windows was "competing" against?

My first computer was a Tandy 1000 RLX (an "IBM compatible" with a 286). It ran Deskmate 3 [wikipedia.org] ... on top of MS-DOS. And why did it run MS-DOS? Because the IBM PC did, which made it the "standard." Microsoft was already getting its tithe, even then.

Re:dislike this company (1)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 6 years ago | (#23608785)

Hey, DesqViewX was pretty good !

Re:dislike this company (1)

Kennon (683628) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603805)

But, if there is only one linux, and this linux is commercial product, then it becomes much easier for msft to kill off, or at least contain the problem.

Sorry the very idea of this is absurd. I don't think anyone at MS is deluded enough to believe that this is a viable strategy...Maybe in the year 2100 under one world government someone could actually believe this line of reasoning but otherwise you are just making shit up.

Re:dislike this company (1)

Repossessed (1117929) | more than 6 years ago | (#23606891)

The deal with Novell gives Microsoft a great deal of power, but in a subtle way. By encouraging the Linux servers to be as compatible as possible with Windows, Microsoft is able to hedge their bets against a time if/when Linux is the dominant server, by reducing any desire to get Windows off the desktop just to avoid headaches in the server room. They also reduce resistance to technologies like Silverlight if there are compatible versions of them, but because they make the main version of it, they continue to stay in control.

I see it this way. (3, Interesting)

RotateLeftByte (797477) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602557)

Ok, I use Linux and have since Slackware 1.1. I promote Linux as a more than viable alternative to the Redmond 'Lock in System'.

But, I see SUSE as the following.

A Linux system that you can buy (note not OpenSUSE) without the fear of being sued by Microsoft for the duration of the licensing agreement between the two companies.

For that reason, I would not recommend SUSE to any business at all. I might be legally wrong but that is how the tie up between Novell & MS seem to me a non Lawyer.

I do appreciate the stuff that Novell has contributed but personally, I won't touch anything that uses MONO with a 100m Barge Pole. Yes, I know it is apparently free of any potential patent liabilities but I see it as a trojan horse much like Moonlight.

IMHO, Microsoft wished that Novell, RedHat & Canonical would just disappear. They are not so I wish that for once they (MS that is) would say 'Ok guys, we will work properly with you for the pure benefit of our customers'. That is as likely (IMHO) as Concorde ever flying again.

Re:I see it this way. (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602611)

In the words of Burgess Meredith:

"They can wish in one hand and take a crap in the other, and see which gets filled first"

I don't think MS is trying to play nice. Hedging your bets is not about "Ok guys, I can't stack the deck anymore, lets play fair." It is simply "How can we make money off this thing we can't control while we figure out how to fsck them in some way?"

I think Novell got smarter to the ways of the beasts within MS. They are not some small group of Doofus faced chuds (Ok, Miguel is). I have faith that MS is not the dragon they once were, but not from their lack of trying.

Re:I see it this way. (1)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602953)

I do appreciate the stuff that Novell has contributed but personally, I won't touch anything that uses MONO with a 100m Barge Pole. Yes, I know it is apparently free of any potential patent liabilities but I see it as a trojan horse much like Moonlight.
And you're wrong. Even disregarding estoppel (look it up), it's an excellent way to leverage cross-platform code without the brain damages of Java. (Hint: it's Mono, not MONO.)

Anyone who uses "hurf durf Mono M$ LOLOLOLOL" as a reason not to take advantage of an awesome set of tools is a fucking moron.

Re:I see it this way. (2, Insightful)

KutuluWare (791333) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603459)

Holy crap am I glad you aren't my legal counsel.

But, I see SUSE as the following.

A Linux system that you can buy (note not OpenSUSE) without the fear of being sued by Microsoft for the duration of the licensing agreement between the two companies.

For that reason, I would not recommend SUSE to any business at all.
I can just imagine the look on my CEO's face if our legal department sent this memo. "It is our conclusion that, by using Linux, you may be (but likely are not) taking on legal liability for patents which Microsoft may (but likely do not) have, that may be infringed (but likely are not) by Linux. Additionally, if you purchase SUSE Linux directly from Novell, you are guaranteed that Microsoft will not sue you for any such patents for at least some period of time in the future. So we strongly recommend you go with Red Hat".

Here's the part that I don't get. If by some cosmic stroke of bad luck, there is something infringing in Linux, and only SUSE Linux is indemnified, then you gain protection by using it. If, as we all know, there isn't anything infringing in Linux, then the indemnification pledge is meaningless fluff, and what the hell's the difference which distro you pick?

Re:dislike this company (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603377)

One thing is to thank Novell for their contributions (which I do at least), and another thing is not looking at their "differentation through interoperability" strategy as the outright damned lie it is.

THey are saying that because they have this deal with MS, they are MORE interoperable than other linuxes.... which is an EVIDENT LIE.

In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro.

While I m at this, I thank novell for their contributions, but i dont HAVE TO from any ethical standpoint. They contribute, but not because its fun to do it, or because it feels nice to, but because there is money in it for them.

So perhaps they should thank Linus Torvalds and the main team for them building a kernel and providing a free ecosystem where they can rescue their long forgotten company.

Re:dislike this company (1)

T-Ranger (10520) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603909)

Your assertion of a absolute truth is plainly false. While it is possible for other distros do do the same thing that they do, that is not at all the same thing as saying that they do do the same thing as SUSE.

Clearly, if all distros did the same thing, then there would be no reason for multiple distos. All distributions aim to be best at something special, and make some effort to differentiate themselves.

Distributions are designed around different goals, different sets of target users, built by different developers, working for different companies, to different ends. Quite possibly zero distributions modify none of their included packages, and all distributions modify heavily especially their "core" package and system management tools, at least adding on distinct high level tools. YOU vs RHN comes to mind here.

SLES, during installation, prompts you to join a Windows domain. I don't remember seeing this option the last time I tried Fedora. I do specifically remember seeing it in SUSE at about the same time as I last installed Fedora though. The Fedora people could do the same thing. But they don't (or didn't, at the same time as SUSE)

SUSE installs the Novell version of OpenOffice. This version exists specifically to better interoperate with MS office (and this polished version existed long before any formal Novell/MS partnerships). It is available for anyone to download - source included. There is nothing stopping other distributions from including it - but they don't.

How well these two specific examples work is a point I won't argue. But they are two things, off the top of my head, that are distinct about SUSE and their commitment to better interoperate with MS stuff.

Re:dislike this company (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 6 years ago | (#23605047)

Ok, you concentrated in an evident mistake I made. Here is what I would change:

From:"In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro."

To: "In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that can not be done in another distro."

I think the general argument still stands: there is no real "interoperability" feature that exists in Novell's Suse and nowhere else. That can be done in ANY linux distro (if you feel such inclined).

Therefore, their campaing is full of BullShit (TM)

Re:dislike this company (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602219)

They've used their money and IP to defend Linux and by proxy open source in general. "You'd have to be blind" to think they weren't integral in SCO's downfall. Come down off your self-righteous pedestal.

Re:dislike this company (4, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602503)

Novell execs do what novell execs think is in their own best interest. Sometimes that means helping Linux/foss, other times not. Novell execs may presently wants to linux to succeed - but only for novell, not for everybody. Bottom line, novell execs are looking at their own bottom line - whether that helps, or hurts, linux is inconsequential. Novell execs are not in business for the sake of any kind of idealism.

Whatever criticisms people have against msft, you have to give msft credit for being strategic. Right now, msft is teaming with novell to defeat redhat via msft's patent scam. Once redhat has been defeated, msft can turn their attention to other linux distributors, including novell. Let me remind you, msft has a long history of turning against their business partners.

Re:dislike this company (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602663)

Most company execs will do what is in their own best interests and/or those of their shareholders and doesn't just include Novell, but also RedHat, Oracle, Enron, Microsoft, etc. Now that's not to say that Novell or Redhat or Oracle or IBM don't contribute to open source and/or want Linux to succeed...they most certainly do, because they give them leverage against MS and others who might want to control things...not to mention the fact that it lowers their internal development costs in most cases.

But another point is that Novell also holds many patents over Microsoft, so don't think for a second that the company who was first to market with a network operating system, a directory, file and print sharing, as well as UNIX-related stuff (which MS supposedly licensed from SCO) -- all of which are Novell -- wouldn't and/or hasn't used those to put MS at bay. I personally think that's the leverage Novell used to get MS to give them so much money in those darn agreements...Novell definitely ends up getting more than MS (moneywise).

Why does everyone forget that Novell actually holds some pretty incredible patents which they've never used other than to protect open-source thus far? And that they very easily could prevent any action from MS towards the community.

Re:dislike this company (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23604611)

If Darth Vader had kicked Luke Skywalker in the balls during they're lightsaber fight...

"Whatever criticisms people may have against msft, you have to give msft credit for being strategic."

You don't owe anyone credit for being "strategic."

Re:dislike this company (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602241)

Do you matter? I mean do you make purchasing decisions for your company? If not and if you are talking about personal purchases Novell probably would not mind.

Re:dislike this company (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602265)

Fine - dislike the company, but you really need to get away from the FUD and the fear of microsoft and realize that they are doing nothing of the sort (subverting the open source community). you can hate mono, hate gnome, hate evolution, hate kde, you can hate opensuse/suse linux, whatever, but you can't say that novell hasn't done a lot for the community -- they've donated TONS of code (opened up all of SUSE Linux, app armor, yast, hula, etc. and have done tons to go after folks who try to hurt the community and/or open source (gifting patents to OIN, going after SCO, etc.).

stop pushing FUD and realize that they, just like other companies are in the business of making money and despite that, they continue to help the community. I'm not saying that I necessarily love their MS agreements either, but I don't think they're going to let MS poison open source and/or hurt the community...

appreciate your comments, but honestly am a bit sick of some of the novell bashing, most of which is based more on fear than on reality.

Mod Parent Up (3, Interesting)

mpapet (761907) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602369)

While the parent's tone is strong, there are other factors besides the trojan horse microsoft has delivered to consider. The company is not financially healthy in any way, shape, or form. Management performance is still dismal. SuSe is not a silver bullet, or at least hasn't appeared to save the company.

Argue for a minute that SuSe saves their bacon, there's no proof Novell can out-manage RedHat. Let's say BOTH companies are viable growth assets, then I think Microsoft will open the trojan horse they sent to Novell at bare minimum.

Re:Mod Parent Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602433)

so true...believe MS is struggling (well, for MS it's not where they've been in the past).

As for Novell out-managing RH, they might be getting there...according to a recent IDC report I read recently that in the last year RH lost marketshare (4 or 5 points), and Novell gained 9 points. Still not even, but seems to indicate something.

I know that I've found RH one of the most arrogant and horrible vendors to deal with, and if Novell is better, that alone would make me switch -- especially considering that Linux is really Linux and the differences between the distros is relatively minor.

Re:Mod Parent Up (5, Informative)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602743)

From my various experiences with both, Novell's support IS better.

In getting somebody on the phone, they are about a tie in time, but Novell edges them out in hold music.

In getting solutions, RH loves to point you to articles, Novell likes to get lots of logs, but goes a bit further sometimes. I have 2 stories to share on that.

At one prior company that switched from MS infrastructure servers to Linux, they moved from RHEL 3 to SLES 9 and 10 on VMware. I had an issue with logging into their servers via SSH using the company approved terminal program (not free, but oru version was not in support, being about 2 versions out of date. PuTTY worked fine.) After calling their support and escalating, their 2nd level guy said he'd call me back. A few hours later, having downloaded and installed the trial for the terminal program, he gave me the settings I had to change in the sshd_config to make it work.

At the same company as above, we had issues using SAMBA/Winbind to authenticate users to the server. It kept losing kerberos tickets in our environment. We sent various logs to them and finally were sent to 3d level support. They shortly sent us to engineering support and issued us a patch for "our" environment and told us to use this version of SAMBA and to email them when the next version alert for it was sent to us with the reference to this case so they could check the change logs and backport the fixes they had implemented when/if we wanted to upgrade.

Hell, I love their cool solutions pages and even use the novell docs sometimes to get things done on Redhat, due to their being more informative.

Re:Mod Parent Up (2, Interesting)

alexborges (313924) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603285)

I have the exact opposite experience.

Ive had novell support tell me that some packages IN THEIR DISTRO are supported and some arent.

Which are which (i asked him) and where in your page can I know?

You cant, he said....

In RH, everything in the distro y rightly supported through adn through.

Is this a good thing? (2, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602233)

Is this good news? Are novell sales up, in part, due to their dirty-deal with msft?

I could argue that apple and sun also benefited from their deals with msft.

But, long term, although the individual deals are often beneficial, at least in the short term; the long term effects of these deals is to further entrench msft standards.

JMHO.

Re:Is this a good thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602343)

Is this good news? Are novell sales up, in part, due to their dirty-deal with msft?
I can see not reading the article, which in fact addresses your question starting with the fifth sentence, but it's even in the fucking summary:

"Novell's core Linux business is growing. By "core," I mean that our non-Microsoft- related Linux business is growing. These are Suse Linux Enterprise Server subscriptions sold directly by the Novell sales force or by our channel partners, without any Microsoft certificates or Microsoft salespeople involved.

Re:Is this a good thing? (2, Interesting)

oatworm (969674) | more than 6 years ago | (#23605659)

Personally, I'm happy to see "embrace and extend" applied against Microsoft. Microsoft overturned industry-established standards by embracing them (adopting them, providing interoperability with them, etc.), then creating Microsoft-only extensions that locked people into their products. Now, Novell is giving Microsoft a little taste of their own medicine, embracing .NET and turning it into Mono, among other things.

The only way we're going to get back to truly open standards for everyone is if we accept the reality that, at the current time, a lot of standards are Microsoft-only, and only by providing a clean interoperability path with existing tech will we ever be able to migrate to something better.

should we agree that Linux is patent emcumbered? (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#23610001)

Personally, I'm happy to see "embrace and extend" applied against Microsoft. Microsoft overturned industry-established standards by embracing them (adopting them, providing interoperability with them, etc.), then creating Microsoft-only extensions that locked people into their products. Now, Nov ell is giving Microsoft a little taste of their own medicine, embracing .NET and turning it into Mono, among other things.
WTF? Who uses Mono? I thought Mono was completely borked, and a joke to real developers? Besides, what does Mono have to do with novl/msft scam? And how does this use "embrace and extend" against msft?

The only way we're going to get back to truly open standards for everyone is if we accept the reality that, at the current time, a lot of standards are Microsoft-only, and only by providing a clean interoperability path with existing tech will we ever be able to migrate to something better
So we should go along with the msft/novl scam, and agree that Linux is patent encumbered, and that Linux needs this dirty under-the-table deal to be legal? And that only novl Linux is legal to use?

Ah ha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602463)

Lameness filter of please

The Name Change (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602469)

The first thing Novell did when they acquired SuSE was change the name to SUSE. Sort of thing that separates the amateurs from the pros. Like when Intergalactic Digital Research [digitalresearch.biz] switched to a grownup name.

Re:The Name Change (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 6 years ago | (#23605473)

What was wrong with SuSE?

The company's full name was Software- und System-Entwicklungsgesellschaft (Software and System Development Society), and S.u.S.E. is just the abbreviation. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Re:The Name Change (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23606643)

You're either a very good typist, or a very bad one.

Re:The Name Change (1)

turbidostato (878842) | more than 6 years ago | (#23610275)

"What was wrong with SuSE?"

You answered your own question.

What's wrong with SuSE? That SuSE is an acrostic for "Software und System-Entwicklungsgesellschaft" and the product name for Novell's Linux distribution is "Software und System-Entwicklungsgesellschaft" no more thus the old acrostic doesn't hold water.

Current Novell's Linux distribution's name is SUSE. What is wrong with that?

Re:The Name Change (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 6 years ago | (#23615881)

Nothing. I just didn't understand fm6's allegation, that changing SuSE to SUSE somehow was a sign to "be grownup".

SuSE was the acronym for the company which distributed SuSE Linux. I don't see any childish behaviour there.

Boycottnovell.com & Groklaw are the best sites (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602543)

Boycottnovell [boycottnovell.com] is where I keep up-to-date with Microsoft's latest anti-free, anti-open source, anti-human actions.

Don't let the name of the site fool you, they do keep a close eye on Microsoft and Novell's pact and current actions, but it's so much more than that. I'm discovering BoycottNovell.com to have fresher and better Linux news and Microsoft watching news than almost any other news site on the web, with Groklaw being one exception.

I'm counting down the day until Novell's site turns into a 100% pro-Microsoft masturbatory piece devoid of any Linux mention, just as Corel.com became after Microsoft's money went into the Corel hiney. What happened to all of the Corel software ports to Linux? Go to Corel's site now and it's one big Microsoft Windows e-penis cum fest. Where's all the Linux ports? Ha, ha! Yet again you bend over for Microsoft and you get nothing but an eggy rectum full of Ballmer and Gates smiling and steaming orc sperm. The Orc sperm will take awhile to settle deep in Novell's e-anus, but when it sets, expect the Linux offerings to dry up like an old lady's forgotten and unloved cunt.

That Microsoft is allowed to still maintain anti-open source feelings in the face of overthrowing Corel Linux with money and returning to Corel Linux as it was rebranded as XandrOS and enter into a patent agreement, sign patent agreements with other companies involved with Linux, lie about interoperability and offer nothing than a few bent pubic hairs from Satan's ballsack by the name of Moonlight, tells me lady justice in America isn't just blind, she's also a rich, money grubbing whore who wouldn't know justice if all the jailed non-violent pot smokers surrounded her and blew smoke in her face.

In the "United States of Advertising" (Bill Hicks), Microsoft's egg sucking Ballmer runs free and we all suffer for it one way or another, with Bill Gates waiting in the wings to splash himself like an enema into American politics, so like the many curious remote exploits (backdoors) in WindowsXP, their biggest backdoor is yet to come. No project is safe so long as Microsoft is around, they will always find a way to inject their devil sperm into it, while their paid off cronies pump up anti-Google hype for the unwashed mashes to digest, while they are guilty of many of the same things, such as censorship in China, but the typical person, like the DOJ, always gives Microsoft a free ride.

Microsoft in 2008 is still ever the monopoly it was when it was convicted, if not much more so, especially with its filthy cock twisting and turning in the vulva of Linux and open source, the mysterious patent list looming.

If justice will not come to Microsoft, we must bring it ourselves.

"No More" I say to you, fat sissy boy pig Ballmer who hides from the flying eggs.

NO MORE!

"grown-up table" ? (2, Interesting)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602615)

So, I actually went and R'd the FA, because I was curious about this phrase -- of course, it doesn't appear in the article, so I can only assume that it was the submitter's invention.

That said, what, exactly, constitutes the "grown-up table" and who sits there? Does it mean that they're now a player against Red Hat? Against Sun? "Endorsed" by Microsoft?

What exactly are the rules of the game at this point. 10-15 years ago, BSD and Linux were going head-to-head against commercial UNIX, such as Solaris, HP-UX and the like. Now, Sun is getting back to its roots and open sourcing Solaris (Bill Joy, original BSD author and creator of vi and csh was a founding partner of Sun, after all).

It seems that from old metrics, the "grown ups" are trying to sit at the "kid table."

Does that indicate that we now look at Microsoft as "grown up?" Are we talking merely from a business standpoint, not technological? I surely hope that is the case.

Re:"grown-up table" ? (1)

arhhook (995275) | more than 6 years ago | (#23604505)

My question is what they're doing at this "Grown-Up" table? Is the table meaning they're all getting along friendly? Cooperating, making decisions together? For some reason, I just don't see Beastie, Tux, and the other OSS mascots sitting around chumming with Microsoft?

Re:"grown-up table" ? (1)

wilec (606904) | more than 6 years ago | (#23607191)

"Does that indicate that we now look at Microsoft as "grown up?""

We must be, 'cause kids don't lie about or refuse to be accountable for their actions or toss chairs in angry hissy fits do they?

wabi-sabi
matthew

FP TRNOLLKORE (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23602755)

Re:FP TRNOLLKORE (1)

nawcom (941663) | more than 6 years ago | (#23602929)

Aw, come on. If you're gonna troll goatse-style, you gotta give it your all.

1) Actually complete a sentence and

2) Link us to the real thing! Seeing a pumpkin isn't shocking.

Shameless, just shameless.

Trojan Horse (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 6 years ago | (#23603257)

Novell is Microsoft's Trojan Horse against Linux and thats ALL it is.

They are selling their "differentiation through interoperability" so that they appear as a Microsoft friendly Linux.

A complete lie, of course, because if there is one thing true about the GPL, is that they cannot do anything without giving it back. Particularily in samba.

Assholes.

Re:Trojan Horse (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23608449)

Wrongo, chum.

They are selling a distribution that actually does seem to "get along better" with a windows environment right out of the box. Sure, you can do the same things with Red Hat, but it is just a tad easier with the features in YaST to get things done.

They are not MS' bitch, Trojan horse, or anything else. I may be wrong on this, but Novell contribute a "Metric Shit Ton" towards F/OSS software and are champions of it, in general. The deal with MS is being blown way out of proportion.

A strikingly similar statistic to Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23603499)

A 31% growth rate is interesting, in that it is identical to what Fedora is seeing.

A year ago we had the release of Fedora 7 (Moonshine). In the first week, Fedora recorded 70,254 new, unique IPs. This year, we recently had the release of Fedora 9 (Sulpher). There were 91,847 new, unique IPs in the first week.

That's a growth of 31% for Fedora over one year as well.

Here are the stats pages, so you can see for yourself:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics/Legacy

I love it!!! (1)

louzerr (97449) | more than 6 years ago | (#23604781)

I abandoned RedHat when they first adopted the Redmond sales model with their WS, AS, and ES products. Nothing like telling the suits "Linux can save money" and then have the price of the OS make MS CALs look like a good deal.

Novell's offering has been very, very stable for the server environment, and at a very reasonable price. Plus, I like what Novell has done for OpenSuse (my preferred choice for desktop platform).

Good price, good stable environment, and even contributing back to the greater community. How could I not wish Novell continued success at this point?

(now just don't blow it, or that giant N will stand for "No More!")

Dance with the devil (1)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 6 years ago | (#23604907)

Novell may attribute its earnings "outside of the Microsoft deal" in more ways than one. To many IT buyers, a Microsoft-tainted Linux supplier is the equivalent of napalm. I can certainly attest that we've done absolutely no business with Novell since they signed the deal, and will continue to avoid Novell as a vendor for as long as the Microsoft contract is in effect. Red Hat, on the other hand, has remained "pure" and has received the majority of our Linux business.

"The grown up table" (2, Interesting)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 6 years ago | (#23605329)

So, was the rats' table full?

Novell attributes it to the MS-FUD deal, yeah of course, if you receive big large amounts of money from another company so you paid them for every purchase done to you, and you would also use this fact to advertise yourself as more legal and "more interoperable" than other distros, it probably will put you in a high spot. However, that doesn't make you less of a rat.

Smearing other Linux bussiness and using false advertising to climb and steal their market, it makes you a rat in a book.

Oh, sorry slashdot, I forgot "Novell contributes a lot to free software", so it is untouchable and I cannot make a bad commentary about them or what they are doing to exploit a deal that should have never been made. Sorry for criticizing Novell, uh oh.

Glad to see it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23607907)

The more genuine competion the better. the SLES product and all the Novell bits on top to manage etc is good kit. Just as the Red Hat stuff is.

Good luck to them I say.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?