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!

Microsoft-Novell Relationship Hits the Skids

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the what-your-community-told-you-long-ago dept.

Novell 194

Anonymous writes "According to Channelweb, the bloom might be off the rose in the Novell-Microsoft relationship: the two companies didn't sign a single, solitary large customer to a Novell Linux deal during the most recent quarter. 'So Novell, one of the biggest Linux distributors in the world, and Microsoft, one of the biggest companies in world history, couldn't find a single large customer on Planet Earth to buy into Novell's Suse Linux Enterprise Server software. Novell CEO Ron Hovsepian has stepped up and, rather than point fingers at Microsoft for that performance, put the blame on his company and its inability to strengthen its reseller channel.'"

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

Well, seriously... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27186805)

Who buys Linux in an economy like this?

Re:Well, seriously... (4, Insightful)

Yfrwlf (998822) | more than 5 years ago | (#27186899)

And even stupider, who'd want to strengthen software patents and give Microsoft leverage by caving into their FUD and paying for this "protection" racket? All efforts to invalidate all software patents should be taken by all companies and citizens.

You get serious (1, Troll)

DomainDominator (1493131) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187121)

That's quite a violent approach to the problem. Invalidate all software patents? I don't think Apple would approve, as that would be the end of their business. But you really meant invalidate all of MSFT's right?

Re:You get serious (2)

alexborges (313924) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187153)

Why would it be any kind of threat to apple? You are talking about hardware, not software patents.

Re:You get serious (5, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187239)

That's quite a violent approach to the problem. Invalidate all software patents? I don't think Apple would approve, as that would be the end of their business.

How do you figure? Half of Apple's revenue is from their PC business where their largest differentiator is OS X, protected more by copyright than patents. Then there is their iPod business, where hardware patents are the major protection. Between hardware patents, copyright, and trademark protections, I don't see Apple being in much trouble if software patents are invalidated... even if it went to extremes and included UI's that include a mix of hardware and software, ala multi-touch.

But you really meant invalidate all of MSFT's right?

Why would you make such an assumption? That's not at all what he said, nor does it even make sense.

Re:You get serious (1)

prandal (87280) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187243)

And good riddance to them too. Thanks for encouraging us all

Re:You get serious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27188367)

That's quite a violent approach to the problem. Invalidate all software patents? I don't think Apple would approve, as that would be the end of their business. But you really meant invalidate all of MSFT's right?

Nope all the god damn things, the time has long since past to drive a stake in the heart of this imaginary property bullshit..

Re:You get serious (2, Insightful)

ozphx (1061292) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188899)

I hope you enjoy "open-source" pharmaceuticals...

Who are your partners? Mismanagement and abuse? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27187665)

Quote from the story: "... didn't sign a single, solitary large customer..."

Who would want an amazingly badly managed company and a routinely abusive company as partners? Even pointy-haired bosses are not completely detached from reality.

Ohhh... You want abuse. This is mis-management. Abuse is two doors down.

Re:Who are your partners? Mismanagement and abuse? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27187943)

"We have two business styles for your enjoyment. There's abuse and mismanagement, and then there's mismanagement that's not got much abuse in it."

Re:Well, seriously... (4, Insightful)

schestowitz (843559) | more than 5 years ago | (#27186983)

"Who buys Linux in an economy like this?"

People still buy Red Hat. Check their numbers.

Novell was warned (since the beginning of its relationship with Microsoft) that Microsoft 'partners' consistently get stabbed in the back. It took Novell a couple of years to take the toll.

Re:Well, seriously... (3, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187317)

Microsoft 'partners' consistently get stabbed in the back. It took Novell a couple of years to take the toll.

Not limited to Microsoft, if "partner" implies some sort of revenue sharing then in bad times you'll find they work find hard to find solutions not involving their partners. In ways it can be more frustrating than a straight-up competitor that you know where you got.

Re:Well, seriously... (4, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187451)

Novell was warned (since the beginning of its relationship with Microsoft) that Microsoft 'partners' consistently get stabbed in the back. It took Novell a couple of years to take the toll.

Not to mention that Novell should have known damned well that Linux is the Microsoft alternative. If you tie it in with Microsoft, suddenly it's the Microsoft partner, not the Microsoft alternative. TONS of Linux customers went to Linux specifically to avoid Microsoft lock-in. They're trying to get further away! It's pretty fucking sad when Novell and Sun are both in Microsoft's back pocket.

Re:Well, seriously... (4, Interesting)

Cassini2 (956052) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189339)

Novell should have already known the don't be a Microsoft Partner lesson. Novell owned WordPerfect when Windows 95 came out. Microsoft gave so much incorrect documentation to the WordPerfect developers, that the lawsuit [theregister.co.uk] was still going on 13 years later. In fact, the lawsuit on-going when Novell signed the Linux deal with Microsoft.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

Pros_n_Cons (535669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187649)

Not sure how to check their earnings but from a google search of "quarterly earnings" they were up 29% in Sept. exceeding projections.
what are the new numbers?

Re:Well, seriously... (0)

schestowitz (843559) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188433)

From memory, it was up 22% just before Christmas.

Re:Well, seriously... (-1, Troll)

Jamie's Nightmare (1410247) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188129)

The only people that mod you up are the idiots that don't know you are behind BoycottNovell.com, or actually believe even a quarter of the garbage you post to that site, newsgroups, and blogs. You talk about people astroturfing but you are even worse. You spend all your free time spamming crap simply because it gives you a true purpose in life, and that's damn scary.

For the ill informed, this post [slashdot.org] should pretty much clear things up for you. This idiot, liar, and scumbag shouldn't even be allowed on the net at all. He's the unfortunate side effect to freedom of speech.

Re:Well, seriously... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27188391)

So you guys are feeling the pressure [blogspot.com] these days? You missed the 1400, you're wondering if you're in the next 3600?

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

lordtoran (1063300) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188863)

Looking at your comment history, I see you are strictly anti-FOSS. Thanks anyway for defaming an informative, rationally written post and sharing your hateful views with us.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

WaywardGeek (1480513) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189285)

And, I hope my personal efforts played a small part in Novel's crash. Will anyone here be offended if I do a little dance on their grave? Novel... morons.

Re:Well, seriously... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27187107)

Who buys Linux in an economy like this?

Who buys a proprietary operating system in any economy when you can download and use linux free. And if you need support then you can pay for linux support without ever having to pay for a license, unlike our favorite proprietary software vendors that charge for a license and for support and in in some cases for every client connection to said software. I guess you can't fix stupid.

Re:Well, seriously... (0)

Chaos Incarnate (772793) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187719)

Who buys a proprietary operating system in any economy when you can download and use linux free.

Someone who wants to do anything in a GUI? Linux makes a powerful server, but its desktop applications (even OpenOffice) lag far behind their proprietary counterparts in features, or are non-existent (where's the Photoshop or InDesign clones?).

Re:Well, seriously... (5, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187841)

Someone who wants to do anything in a GUI? Linux makes a powerful server, but its desktop applications (even OpenOffice) lag far behind their proprietary counterparts in features, or are non-existent (where's the Photoshop or InDesign clones?).

Uh, the photoshop clone is called the gimp. Whether you think it's a valid replacement or not, it has all the same features, except the most important one: Adobe plugin support. You can do the things you can do in InDesign in Scribus or Inkscape, but neither one is much of a contender.

On the other hand, since less than 1% of the world's population needs to use those two programs to get their work done (graphic artists are a severe minority in computer professionals - a term pretty loosely applied there, since most of them are about as computer-savvy as a pygmy warrior from ubangme) this is probably not a big deal. Most people need an office suite that will let them write papers and letters, and a web browser, and a media player. Since any operating system offers all of these, Linux will work for most people. Kind of like Electric cars... they can only meet the needs of what, 95% of the population? How terrible!

Re:Well, seriously... (4, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187863)

Look, for most people who A) Don't need the "obscure" features of Office B) Don't need MS server support (such as Exchange) C) Don't game or D) Don't need photoshop, Linux is the obvious choice. There are many, many, many businesses and most homes that fall into these categories. There are some people who obviously *need* Photoshop, there are a lot more that *think* they need Photoshop when The GIMP (or a more basic image editor) can do exactly what they want albeit with a different UI. Sure, there are some features of Office that OOo doesn't have yet, but these features aren't the "everyday" features, its the obscure stuff, secondly, the argument of a lower learning curve goes down the drain when you show the UI of 2007 to a user of a previous version of Office, and then show them the familiar interface of OOo. Sure, there will be people who can't switch to Linux because of a program that is crucial to their business doesn't run on Linux (or isn't emulated well in WINE). But for all others,(and that is a large amount of people), Linux does just fine.

Someone who wants to do anything in a GUI?

What are you talking about? Installing? Almost all distros have a GUI for installing. Changing settings? For any day-to-day settings, there is a GUI for that. Etc. About the only time you don't have a GUI (assuming of course that this is on Ubuntu or similar, not Gentoo or Arch) is when you change a setting that to do the approximate Windows setting you would edit the registry.

Re:Well, seriously... (1, Flamebait)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188075)

I'm in the "should use Linux" case you describe. Every year, I try to install Linux. Every year, I run into a hardware compatibility/driver roadblock, and fail to solve it after a handful of hours. I'm motivated to keep trying, even went as far as requesting advice on which components to use (cpu, gpu, sound...) for an easy Ubuntu install on a couple of Ubuntu forums: no useful answer.

I'll try again soon, and I'd dearly like it to work this time. I'm a fairly competent Windows user, building and installing PCs for myself and others, but I don't feel confident at all about recommendng let alone installing Linux yet.

Re:Well, seriously... (1, Informative)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188435)

All-Intel chipset and you'll be very happy indeed. Except your graphics will be crappy. But they'll work!

(Do you have links to where you asked? I'm somewhat surprised you got no response.)

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189385)

Thanks. I had guessed as much about intel, which is a pity because AMD looks better in the low midrange I'm aiming at. I'll need a discrete vidcard though, and especially sound through HDMI. Is ati 48xx ok ?

Also I couldn't get Wifi to work last time around. Is it OK now or do we still need a specific chipset ? All soundchips work even the Asus-specific Realtek ALC1200 ?

I'm sorry it was a while back I deleted the bookmarks to the forums requests. I actually got 2 answers indeed: one directing me to a US-only ready-made PC seller, and another to try out from a boot CD. Both don't really help when speccing a PC that I don't have yet, and I'm not in the US.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189557)

No idea, sorry. All-Intel chipsets are good basically because Intel give a damn about Linux drivers. I live on laptops, and crappy Intel graphics and OK Intel wifi means I have a working system.

With Linux: if your hardware has drivers, you get Mac-like levels of "it just works." If it doesn't, you have a world of pain. This will change only as manufacturers start supporting Linux properly. Which is slowly happening - Dell is gently pressuring suppliers to make the parts work with Linux.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189777)

I usually have a better time disabling built in wireless drivers, and using ndiswrapper... nvidia has historically had better linux support, but AMD/ATI has been working at turnung this around. I've done really well with linux on 2-3 year old desktop hardware, less well on laptops. I've had a lot of issues with hardware and software on some of the latest distros. Ubuntu 8.04 was it's strongest release to date, and imnsho 8.10 one of it's weakest. The inconsistency is really hard to deal with. I want to like Linux. Half of the clients I had that went with linux, have at this point switched back to windows. I would really like to see more community structure with developers. I'm not a good enough low level developer to help with driver software though, justnot into the hardware like that...

Re:Well, seriously... (2, Informative)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188799)

If you have been having compatibility issues, have you tried OpenSuSe?

It has been my experience (YMMV) that SuSe has better hardware support than some of the others.

On the other hand, I think it is Debian, possibly Ubuntu, that has a licensed package of codecs for stuff like mp3s and other files. With SuSe, the best method for me is to add the Pacman reository (SuSe makes it really easy) but those are codecs and not drivers.

The only 3rd party driver I've needed for SuSe has been the standard Nvidia driver, but again, SuSe makes that near automatic too.

Linux isn't that hard to deal with but it is a new paradigm and takes a little getting used to. For a standard setup, I really like SuSe. If you want the multimedia stuff with better mpeg support, learn about Pacman. But I think you will find Linux very powerful and very rewarding.

And if you want to get under the hood and explore the UNIX-like underpinnings, it is really an amazing OS and you won't ever look back. Also, if you still need to run some Windows applications, check out Codeweavers.com for Crossover Office. It's great and allows you to load and run Microsoft Office and a bunch of other Windows apps under Linux.

Re:Well, seriously... (2, Interesting)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189417)

I'd really like to explore, though the learning curve is steep. It's very frustrating going from DOS/Windows expert to Linux noob: finding an editor, then finding the config files, finding the info... Things I can do in 2 minutes in Windows take me hours, when they work at all.

I was thinking of going Ubuntu because of its success. PLus Wine for a bit of light gaming.

Re:Well, seriously... (1, Informative)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189497)

I can't speak to Ubuntu since I've never run it, but in SuSe you can do all of the configuration in the GUI. You do get more control in the config files themselves, but you can do all the essentials in the GUI.

At least in SuSe you can open the yast2 control center and configure the network stuff, open holes in the firewall for various services, configure your display and such, set up users, and basically everything you can do in Microsoft's control panel and more.

I haven't done anything with Wine but Codeweavers is one of the biggest contributors to the Wine project. I fyou go Linux and have issues with Wine, remember Codeweavers. ;-)

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189515)

One other thing - depending on the kind of gaming you are into, be sure to check out the games packages in Linux. There are all sorts of really excellent games. Multiplayer, puzzle, board, card, and such.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189527)

And lastly - almost forgot - most of the setup apps for Linux, if not all, give you the option to dual boot. The setup is a little more complicated but you still have Windows and can experiment with Linux at your leisure.

Also, be sure to check out Linux Journal. It's not very expensive and there are lots of good how-to articles.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189669)

I'm in the "should use Linux" case you describe. Every year, I try to install Linux. Every year, I run into a hardware compatibility/driver roadblock, and fail to solve it after a handful of hours. I'm motivated to keep trying, even went as far as requesting advice on which components to use (cpu, gpu, sound...) for an easy Ubuntu install on a couple of Ubuntu forums: no useful answer.

that's strange because that worked for me.

- first time

- with debian

- on a powerpc

- in 2002

and later, with various pcs, for all stuff that is reported to work, hdspa modem, printers, camera, dtv tuner, wireless.

Re:Well, seriously... (-1, Troll)

Vancorps (746090) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188387)

My entire office switched to Office 2007 and the vast majority of people had no trouble adapting to the new UI. It makes your common features much more accessible. People that had the most problems were people that knew the old office the best and were used to hunting for the feature they wanted when it was no longer necessary in 2007.

As for GUIs I can safely say my Ubuntu install is far less consistent than the Windows install I have in a VM. Once I had the keymaps for Ubuntu I was able to operate my VM correctly.

Very few apps on any Linux distro have a consistent look and feel because there are a lot of toolkits available and there is very little effort in the way of standardization.

Ubuntu is famous for this lack of consistently, with Debian or CentOS you get consistency across boots at least. With Ubuntu right now sometimes my screen manager is at the very top of the screen, sometimes it is the second line. This makes Ubuntu look amateurish so you can't blame people for being uncomfortable with it. Then of course comes the playing of videos. Right now for the life of me I can't download youtube videos and play the flv when I can do it just fine on my Windows box using the same software no less. Firefox with downloadhelper to be exact. This is because mplayer doesn't know about the flash libraries available for whatever reason as it used to work in the past.

Sorry, but there are very few situation where I recommend Linux to anyone that I'm not around very often in terms of desktop usage. OOo takes a long time to load even on modest hardware and there is simply no compelling reason for someone to switch from Windows to Linux. They don't gain anything that they are going to use and the lose a lot that they will.

The only time in the last year I've been able to recommend Linux was for a netbook scenario where it was a relatively new computer user that just wanted to be able to check email and browse the web while out and about. Even things like printer setup is sometimes awkward with most Linux distros. I'll admit that its getting pretty slick these days though with automatic network printer discovery. Of course this is a feature Windows has had for 9 years.

Re:Well, seriously... (4, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189155)

As for GUIs I can safely say my Ubuntu install is far less consistent than the Windows install I have in a VM.

What are you on? Just take a look at most Windows programs, different looks everywhere. (there used to be a nice screenshot that someone took highlighting this fact, but I can't seem to find it on google at the moment) Just look at Office 2007, it has a different look then XP's native toolkit, that looks different then Windows Live Messenger, that looks different then Visual Studio, etc. Mix MS's own inconsistency (remember that aside from the base GNU toolkits, almost all the software is from different people/organizations) with programs almost every Windows user uses (iTunes, etc) and you get tons of interfaces. On the other hand, most Linux software is either QT or GTK.

Re:Well, seriously... (2, Interesting)

gbarules2999 (1440265) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189171)

"My entire office switched to Office 2007 and the vast majority of people had no trouble adapting to the new UI." Excuse me if I stop believing you here. I helped out in a fairly major project that involved the local university servers, and the only way to save the files in a "meta-taggable" way was to use Microsoft Word 2007. And let me tell you, it was utter hell trying to get the common people to work that damn thing. So, anecdote negated. Try again.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188425)

I found it useful to say "Those who have a business need for Photoshop, here's the link to get the company to buy it. Turnaround is several weeks. In the meantime, here's where Gimp is on the company server, and here's the manuals." Even in Gimp 1.2 days, that was quite enough in practice. Even on Windows.

Re:Well, seriously... (0, Troll)

Chaos Incarnate (772793) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188749)

Look, for most people who A) Don't need the "obscure" features of Office B) Don't need MS server support (such as Exchange) C) Don't game or D) Don't need photoshop, Linux is the obvious choice.

Maybe it's possible that I'm just an odd use case who wants the "obscure" features of Office and who games. :p But in my personal experience—even setting games aside—Linux applications just aren't up to snuff.

But I'll accept that, as I said, I may not be typical. It certainly makes considering Linux for the desktop a hard thing for me to consider, though.

What are you talking about? Installing?

I'd meant interactive desktop applications, but you're right, it was poorly phrased.

Re:Well, seriously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27188265)

Someone who wants to do anything in a GUI?

I use linux exclusively for my computing outside of work and work on the side, I use a Windows desktop at work because thats what I'm provided with. The Windows desktop is EXTREMELY limited in what it can do because all the proprietary solutions require licensing fees that for one reason or another are not justified for my position in the business. So occassionally I bring in my personal laptop with linux installed so I can use those GUI apps to get my work done.

Re:Well, seriously... (1)

SleepingWaterBear (1152169) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189191)

where's the Photoshop or InDesign clones?

Here [gimp.org] and here [scribus.net] . I've not used Scribus much, but I actually prefer GIMP to Photoshop in most cases.

I agree that Open Office really just isn't up to par, though. Open Office is fine, or even better than MS Office for a casual user, but it fails pretty badly for a serious user.

Re:Well, seriously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27189649)

> Someone who wants to do anything in a GUI?

nobody wants to do anything in whatever UI. Everybody wants to do as less as possible to get exactly what they want.

Try helping people troubleshoot a shared drive on the phone under windows vs. having them ping and grep smb.conf under linux.

Re:Well, seriously... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27188179)

Umm, any and every large corporation that uses Linux? You think any large company will just download Ubuntianix 3.9 and install it on their computers? How quaint of you.

This article is bullshit anyway, because I happen to work at a 50000+ employee corporation that uses SLES 9 and SLES 10. We aren't a new customer, but Novell is certainly getting money out of us.

Re:Well, seriously... (3, Insightful)

sloanster (213766) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188355)

Who buys Linux in an economy like this?

Lots of people, including the fortune 100 company i work for. In fact, the linux demand has gotten much stronger, as my employer is dumping old school platforms and moving to linux in the server room.

The tough times motivate them to maximize their bang for the buck.

Oh, and trust me, big companies want the official paid support - so that basically means Novell or Redhat, though debian/ubuntu are there in some cases now too, since you can purchase support for either one from HP now.

Re:Well, seriously... (1, Informative)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189459)

People who want to install 500 clients and have the management tools handed to them in a set, rather than hand-writing their own? People who need half a dozen servers and someone upstream they can whine to when they need a kernel patch to run new hardware, and get the patch provided pre-release? People who want their bug fixes to show up in the next official release? People who couple the base OS to other commercial services, like VMware? (Although CentOS operates just fine to replace the underlyinkg components of VMware ESX: I've done it as a proof of concept.)

er? (4, Insightful)

Speare (84249) | more than 5 years ago | (#27186855)

And I'm sure that all the hiring-freezes, paycuts, forced unpaid furloughs, capital freezes, capital audits, travel restrictions, quarter-by-quarter purchase order approval budget oversight procedures, executive-authorization-required-for-new-staplers, and restructurings that we see in most of the Fortune 1000 have nothing to do with this.

It's not all bad news... (1)

empesey (207806) | more than 5 years ago | (#27186857)

Microsoft developers are working on SkipMark(R) version 1.0 even as we speak.

Cue Delusional Tubby Fucks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27186865)

I invide the fattest and most delusional among you to try to explain this away.

Only an idiot tries to make money with Open Sores.

Microsoft commitment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27186867)

It seems that M$ is commited to destroy everything around Linux, don't trust them never in your life.

I'll take it (1)

ezwip (974076) | more than 5 years ago | (#27186881)

Wrap it up. I'll buy one.

And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (5, Insightful)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187009)

Really, Novell doesn't do marketing. They had the most reliable server OS for connecting windows boxes, and Microsoft came and ate their lunch with an inferior (and more expensive) product. Did someone really expect that all of a sudden, Novell would discover the secret to marketing and manage to sell something? Even after striking a deal with Microsoft, they still need to be able to sell their own product - or at least make it look like they are selling their own product.

Being as they won't likely be able to get (many of) the former Novell shops back to NetWare, if they are planning to revive their company by selling Linux, their goose is cooked.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (0)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187207)

"Most reliable?" Have I entered into a parallel universe, or are you in one? Netware was a complete POS. Even if AD is "inferior" (which I don't believe), the stability would be more than worth the switch.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187279)

Some versions of netware are, some aren't, and it's highly hardware dependent. Now me? I get more consistent results from AD, so guess which environment I'm going to push ( although to be fair, I never did try out edirectory on linux )?

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27187411)

i'd check your own universe, bub. you've just implied active directory is stable. have you *met* active directory?

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (3, Informative)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187461)

Until 2005, my Netware servers were an order of magnitude mroe reliable than my Windows servers. Period.

NDS 'worked' when AD was borked. Does no one remember mixed mode, and the joy of early Server 2K? We will leave NTAS out of this, though it was the first competitor to NetWare.

The myth that NetWare is no better or worse than Windows was untrue up till Server '03, and then only barely.

The real reason NetWare failed to survive? Not reliability. Applications. Microsoft built apps on Windows servers that you could program in essentially the same IDE as the client Windows desktop app. NetWare required you learn .NLMs and be in a foreign and not very good IDE. Microsoft salted the community with freebie dev tools, and from there on in, it was over. Of course, hosing the Novell client didn't hurt either. As an example, the Novell client would return a 'not found' in 2 seconds when it had searched the tree and did not find what you were looking for. The Microsoft client would then spend 15 seconds begging for a response from any resource, after it had searched all it knew. Ok, just for grins, why would you ask essentially 'anybody out there got this?' when you have already searched all you know? The fraking MUP drove us crazy. And people blamed Novell. Nice.

Microsoft out smarted Novell. We lost. Darn. But not because they were better.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187809)

AFAIR, at 1999 Novell gained support for Windows DLLs - you could write and _compile_ a DLL in Visual Studio and then load it in Netware. Of course, you can't use Win32 API.

NDS was rock solid, granted. But by 1999 Netware was still an OS without memory protection. So applications on it sucked hard, for example Btrieve liked to crash the whole system.

And the worst: Novell had no clear plans on development of new OSes.

Oh, and Novell licensing was pure hell.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (1)

rtechie (244489) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188383)

NDS 'worked' when AD was borked. Does no one remember mixed mode, and the joy of early Server 2K?

Worked fine for me. Win2k was a lot needier in terms of hardware than Netware/NDS, so that might have been your problem. Ease of use more than made up for the higher hardware requirements for me. The Netware clients (for ALL OS') sucked, but the Windows client was apocalyptic. About 1 in 3 logins failed on a freaking test network. This was entirely Novell's fault. Every single one of their customers used Windows on the desktop it was incumbent upon them to make a client that worked well in Windows, period. Hell, the Novell client STILL sucks and they've been working on it for 10 YEARS.

There's also the fact that NetWare took a nosedive in quality and features (relative to Windows) after version 4.1. As you pointed out, for all kinds of reasons Netware sucked as an application server.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (1)

JSG (82708) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189303)

"my Netware servers were an order of magnitude mroe reliable than my Windows servers"

Get a grip. A NetWare system runs nearly everything unhealthily close to itself (can't remember the correct technical term). This means its rather fast and lean on resources but rather unstable, unless you have an optimal mix of things running on it and the right patch set.

However a NW server does not have to have a GUI with a bloated window manager with masses of extras bolted on (eg Explorer)

I have several 100s of NetWare systems under my belt from the last 18 odd years and feel qualified to comment. Oh I have 1000s of Windows ones and 10s of Linuxs (shame but growing as fast as I can shift them).

I will however concur that eDirectory beats seven shades of whatever out of Active Directory. There is barely any comparison. Despite several of my customer's best efforts they have not killed their eDir but others have found that their AD fell to pieces on its own (although to be fair that only happened to two and one of those *may* have been self inflicted)

To sum up - a NetWare server or a Windows server (both - any version) can be wildly unstable or very stable. It just depends what you run on them. Neither is more inherently more unstable out of the box and patched appropriately. That is because neither of them disassociate kernel and userspace properly.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (2, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187781)

Netware was a complete POS.

You and I must have used different products called "Netware". While Windows was totally fucking incompetent on the filesharing tip, you would have Novell servers with uptimes of months. The biggest problem with Netware was maintenance. When it came time to do maintenance it was time to place your bets as to whether the system would actually work properly after you installed a patch, or installed some software. Did netware have no memory protection or something? Installing two complex packages on the same server was pretty much guaranteed to fuck it up, especially if one of them was Arcserve.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (1)

Mista2 (1093071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187833)

Novell may be finding out that resellers cant sell a product if they haven't got experiance with it, and you can t get experiance in it without a reseller channel coming along and giveing lots of tech and sales presentaitons, and getting customers to come along to these too. IN NZ, I think the Novell presence is just about dead. I've got one major customer who is using SLES for their linux requirements, but there wasn't one single cent of Novell assistance in the sale. It was only that the customer required a couple of linux servers for a role, and I was familiar with Ubuntu and OpenSuse. They wanted support, and Novell were the only ones with offices in NZ at the time.

Major companies wont go out and buy serious infrastructure just from looking at a website. The will require serious faceime form the vendors and the resellers.
Large corps who require Linux, probably already have an experianced in-house team, so may just be using open source, free versions and supporting it themselves.
Those in the middle will be buing MS stuff, because that is all their CIOs see in magazines and all that in use by the middle sized companies around them. In these recession times, it would take a very brave CIO to recommend a major infrastructure change from MS to Linux right now.
Now the other issue is that out of the 20 or so linux servers i do administer, only 2 of them are actually SLES boxes, the rest are appliances with whatever distro is supported by that vendor. We have centos, Debian, a few boxes with some mini distro for VM appliances, etc.
However, with the SLES servers, I do appreciate their uptime over 300 days 8) Thats just like the Novell Netware I used to know and love!

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (2, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188401)

Netware was good in it's day but Novell rested on it's laurels for too long and became a legacy solutions provider. They've had over a decade to come up with the next new 'thing' and the best they managed was to buy Suse and make an unpopular deal with MS only to find out that businesses that are going with Linux don't really want MS to put it's fingers in it (shocking I tell you!).

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised (1)

Degrees (220395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189213)

For what it's worth, when Ron Hovsepian was at IBM, he and his crew over there marveled at at the NetWare reseller channel. It was awesome - customers got resellers that knew their stuff, and resellers got lots of money. But when he got to Novell, he was disappointed to find out that the reseller channel had been decimated. I don't know why, although I know that the bean counters were (are?) in charge at Novell, and they were ruining the company.

Upshot is that Ron Hovsepian told his people to rebuild the reseller channel into it's former glory. So it kind of makes sense that Ron said "do X" and when it didn't happen, he's looking at the people he told to do it.

It's probably not a bad idea, to train resellers of SuSE to be particularly competent, and make the product look good. It's an uphill battle though, because Microsoft has dumbed down the requirements for "good enough". If a small business has to choose between awesome / expensive (a.k.a. complicated) or good enough / cheap (a.k.a. simple), cheap will win.

OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! (5, Funny)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187095)

OK, cue the violins! Now, all of you at once!

AAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!

Bruce

Re:OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187275)

Wow. I think I just heard a beowulf cluster of the world's smallest violins playing.

Re:OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! (3, Insightful)

Sxooter (29722) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187495)

I have made sure that no one I know buys Suse as long as Novell has that stupid partnership with Microsoft. If they renounce it, tear up their contract and dance a jig, I might take them back. Til then, I run RedHat, Debian and Ubuntu. No need for any of the crap Novell is peddling.

I'll play some nice slow Irish songs about people drowning on a ferry for Novell, but I won't give them one thin dime. They're whores, and not the good kind.

Re:OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! (0)

UnRDJ (712762) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188215)

It's a shame really, I love SuSE as a distro. Yast is probably the most complete centralized gui based configuration tool for linux. Much better in that sense than ubuntu with gnome which is obsessively minimal and redhat who scatters random tools everywhere that all have varying levels of completeness, stability, and support.

Re:OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! (1)

ion.simon.c (1183967) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188933)

From what I've heard, Suse is the DoDIIS recommended Linux distro. IDK if this happened before or after the MSFT/Novell deal.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/core/dodiis.htm [fas.org]

Re:OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27188349)

what's with the violins on the interwebs recently?

Nice (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189683)

I was going to go with "and nothing of value was lost".

Muddled Issues (3, Interesting)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187225)

TFA seems to muddle together a bunch of different issues.

One is the purely Novell issue of not being good at selling stuff. Which might be true (though I spend a lot of time dealing with SLES issues at the hardware vendor I work for) but really doesn't have anything to do with the Novell-Microsoft deal.

Another issue is the core of the Novell-MS partnership: interoperability. AFAIK, that part is working well.

Finally, there's the fact that MS is committed to supported mixed Windows-SLES installation, but hasn't bothered to actually sell any SLES licenses. Really, what else do you expect? People actually making deals based on technology they've worked with for years are not going to change their strategies just because management says so. IBM never could get its people to sell OS/2 instead of Windows, and Sun salespeople often continue to push SPARC products to all their customers, even though Sun is now in the x86 business. And in the case of MS, they have particularly limited motivation to sell Linux, since doing so would not actually generate any extra profits for MS.

Re:Muddled Issues (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187369)

(though I spend a lot of time dealing with SLES issues at the hardware vendor I work for)

I think I have a better explanation for that than it selling well.

Re:Muddled Issues (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188379)

I'm a tech writer. So when I say "issues" I mean "documenting use of SLES".

Re:Muddled Issues (3, Insightful)

bertok (226922) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188677)

Another issue is the core of the Novell-MS partnership: interoperability. AFAIK, that part is working well.

Not so much.

The last time I played with SLES/SLED was about a year ago, and interoperability was not hugely better than any other generic Linux. They just don't have the manpower now to rewrite core stuff themselves. They do have a nice distro with well chosen components, and a default desktop that is very "Windows-Like", which is nice. They even had the start-bar at the bottom!

However, in the environment where I worked, it all broke down in testing. For example, joining a domain was painful, broken, and flat out didn't work in my client's environment (multi-domain, multi-forest, with users and machines all over the place). It could talk to one domain, most of the time, until you removed a domain controller, which would break it.

A note to Linux devs working on Active Directory compatibility: When 'joining' an AD domain, a Linux desktop is allowed to ask exactly 3 questions:

- The name of the domain (either the 'short NT4 name' or 'long DNS name')
- A user name to connect with
- A password

Lets compare this to instructions I randomly found on Ubuntu's support site:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=91510 [ubuntuforums.org]

That's about 2 pages of config files! NO. Just NO. It's not even slightly correct. I have nothing against config files as such, but "hard coding" parameters that MUST be looked up dynamically is WRONG. You can't state "compatible with Active Directory" when it is clearly NOT COMPATIBLE.

What happens when the machine and the user are in different domains? What happens if domain controllers move? Why doesn't it automatically locate the nearest servers using Sites & Services?

Correct behavior isn't even one of those Microsoft secret proprietary things. The API for dynamically obtaining configuration data for a desktop's AD connection is well documented:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms684291(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]

Novell..?? (2, Insightful)

MTTECHYBOY (799778) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187235)

Novell has been clue-less since Version 3.x - If it wasn't for all the old Novell-Fanboys in the world, they would have been belly-up years ago. Not that they HAD bad products - quite the contrary - they just couldn't sell anything to save their soul...

Relationship going bad? (3, Funny)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187245)

Well, did you send flowers? No. Did you write anything but crappy emo poetry? No. Actually, no poetry at all. How about flaunting yourself in tight outfits, or at least making some minimal effort to be sexual? No there too. And apparently Microsoft is a louzy kisser (way too much tongue). Big surprise the relationship failed.

More seriously: What do these people expect? The economy is crap. Nobody's going to be trying anything new right now. And neither side spent much on marketing from everything I'm reading. And at any rate, their marketing strategy is crabbed -- you open with support, not a feature set. Whatever feature set is being offered better be one for one what they have now or don't even bother. Support is the key here -- they should have been screaming "We have technicians trained for this! Really! More than you can fit on a bus!" Except that would be a lie. So they focus on what they can effect: Which is some limited marketing propaganda that won't fool anyone. Microsoft lost its crown jewels when Vista tanked. Now everything they say comes under scrutiny -- Apple's been taking free potshots at them in the general media for about a year now and I see average people parroting those "Hi, I'm a Mac; Hi, I'm a PC" commercials. This relationship needs some pizzaz back in it, and instead Novell comes home to Microsoft wearing a familiar wonderbra and fishnet stockings?! Seriously, we're all supportive of Microsoft getting in touch with it's softer, less monopolistic side, but crossdressing in linux is not the answer. -_-

Re:Relationship going bad? (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187707)

Marry me?

Re:Relationship going bad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27188199)

Red Hat is doing well. Canonical's revenues are growing. So blaming the economy doesn't seem like a complete explanation.

Re:Relationship going bad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27189463)

What a punch! I want your newsletter!

Novel (2, Insightful)

certain death (947081) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187403)

Novel needs to pull their collective heads out of their asses if they want to live on...They haven't done a bit of successful advertising since the 2000 superbowl, and that is questionable! They just don't seem to understand the fact that you need to have your shit in front of people in order to get them to buy it. Then they canceled Brain Share, that was the only place anyone ever gets the scoop on what they are doing. Damn! Why are they so stupid?!?

Novell loss of quality (1)

ACMENEWSLLC (940904) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187419)

It use to be that Novell stuff was extremely difficult to setup, but once you got it running it ran for ever. Like the difference between a Cisco router and a $20 DLINK.

Anyone still using Novell software today? It's crap. Zenworks 10.1.3 blows up if you try to use it to delete a registry key. It's a known defect a year after the product has been released.

Check their forums, their software is crap. http://forums.novell.com/ [novell.com] In there you can see they are bleeding customers.

Re:Novell loss of quality (1)

thecarpy (1006527) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188057)

On a forum, you always see customers complaining, that is what a forum is for! You also see customers threatening to leave, that is their way of trying to get the provider, Novell in this case, to fix the issue! Every piece of software I know has awful bugs, that is life!

Re:Novell loss of quality (1)

Mista2 (1093071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188263)

I found this too. I used to love Zenworks, it was fraggin fantastic, but never get the .0 version. That would suck.

I tied setting up a lab with Open Enterprise Server, I went with the Small Business Server one, as I thought that might appeal to small operators who don't want to fork out NZ$60G plus in licensing for a good portal website (licensing for sharepoint for individually tracked users is hugely expensive), VPN, remote desktop, groupwise for mail, etc. but I couldn't even activate the damn eval product. Talk about screwing up an evaluation. After a week of getitng nowhere on the forums (only two people in the world seemed to be able to answer any questions, and their last post was months ago)
I couldn't get official Novell support without paying through the nose, I gave up.

This BTW would have been a great starter pack:
Take base server hardware - any platform, even Dell would be fine and make sure you have atleast 3 ethernet ports and one switch and an internet connection - Add VMWare VI3 (free for 2 CPUs) at a large disk and 8 GB RAM, and SLES OES Small Business. On the VI3 server, create 4 VMs, one bordermanager server, one file/print/mail server, One NDS (DNS, DHCP etc) only server, and another utility/Application server (for managing backups, internal websites, databases with MySQL etc)

Clients could be anything you want - even 24" iMacs if you like, as you are saving many thousands in software costs, may as well make the clients nice to use.

RIM also have a free 5 user blackberry server plugin for Groupwise)

This would handle up to 5 users easlily. For a small business this might be a great startup pack. Also this would easily allow secure remote access for support from their vendor, Me!

Once setup, image the whole thing.
Sell again and again.

Doesn't matter what hardware the client wants to use, as long as it supports VI3 and has lots of local disk.

When the client grows, just add more VM capacity, and licence appropriately. ....
Sell a support package with monthly admin time and an hourly rate for extra stuff .......

Profit 8)

Advantage over MS, MS-SBS is still all one one server, I still don't think it can be broken down easily and I think the licence specifically forbids virtualisation, and if you want to go from SBS to full AD or windows server, be prepared for more CALs than you can shake a stick at. Oh, and don't forget the patch and reboot cycle for Windows taking down the whole network for the client every patch Tuesday.

BTW, SLED10 runs great on a mac mini and so does Windows Vista (havn't tried 7 yet) or OSX and all are supported clients for OES.

Re:Novell loss of quality (1)

thecarpy (1006527) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188413)

You should have gone to see the Novell sales guyz and ask for a POC, that's their job.

Re:Novell loss of quality (1)

Mista2 (1093071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189169)

I did, they had noone in NZ who understood the product. They referred me straight to Novell support in the US.

Another attack of the spin monkey... (3, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187575)

> 'So Novell, one of the biggest Linux
> distributors in the world, and Microsoft, one of
> the biggest companies in world history, couldn't
> find a single large customer on Planet Earth to
> buy into Novell's Suse Linux Enterprise Server
> software.

Why can't you simply cut and paste instead of putting your own lying slant on things?

You Imply Novell never signed any SLES customers, which is not true.

The actual article stated:

    "During the first quarter of fiscal 2009, we did not sign any large deals, many of which have been historically fulfilled by SUSE Linux Enterprise Server ("SLES") certificates delivered through Microsoft."

So Microsoft didn't even try to sell these certificates for SLES. Novell still sold SLES, probably to the very same customers that send Microsoft packing.

How hard do you suppose Microsoft tried to sell these certificates?

Re:Another attack of the spin monkey... (1)

thecarpy (1006527) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187883)

They did not seriously believe that MS would sell large #'s of SLES licences in enterpsie (high rev for MS) markets instead of Windows? How many ppl on this planet really believe MS is committed to selling any substantial number of SLES licenses, seriously? Can somebody please remove the CEO of Novell? That guy has less brains than my goldfish!

Re:Another attack of the spin monkey... (1)

quickOnTheUptake (1450889) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189227)

Maybe I'm totally confused, But wasn't weren't the licenses that MS sold Walmart [slashdot.org] one of these large sales that the article says didn't happen?

Not just Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27187587)

IBM has been actively pushing SUSE for zSeries virtualization customers. We were one of the minority of zSeries customers who chose Redhat and it was always amusing to read IBM's tailored-for-SUSE documentation.

I'd blame the poor sales on the economy, but it is fun to jab at the two big SUSE backers:
1. IBM ("We pretend to support open source but really only use open source where it could potentially lock a customer into a proprietary upgrade cycle for a product that runs on an open source platform")
2. Microsoft ("We don't even pretend to like open-source (does that make us more honest than IBM?)")

Re:Not just Microsoft (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187777)

1. IBM ("We pretend to support open source but really only use open source where it could potentially lock a customer into a proprietary upgrade cycle for a product that runs on an open source platform"... and try and divide and conquer the linux space by not letting the leader consolidate in aything at all).

There, thats more like it.

Im not sure if thats good or bad for the consumer though, I just felt that part was missing.

I'd say grinding SCO very, very fine... (4, Insightful)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187821)

1. IBM ("We pretend to support open source but ...

I'd say playing "mill of the gods" and grinding SCO exceedingly fine constitutes more than just "pretend" support for open source.

Marketing (1)

ddillman (267710) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187637)

Novell has ALWAYS sucked at Marketing. One reason why we have Microsoft servers today.

The Buck Stops (2, Insightful)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 5 years ago | (#27187711)

CEO Ron Hovsepian is right; the buck stops with Novell. They're to blame. Not because their retail channel needs to be tweaked. But rather, they got in to bed with Microsoft! I mean, c'mon. Your hedging your bets on a technology that your partner is busy trying to bury. Yeah, sure... Microsoft is trying to help make Windows and Linux work together. Meanwhile, Microsoft's CEO is discussing Linux and so-called IP law like Eddy Izzard discussing the mortality of Englebert Humperdink [youtube.com] . And Novell wants people to pay for the privilege of getting in to the middle of that?

Over the past few years, I've purchased licenses for Windows, Solaris, and Linux. Not once during these procurements did the name "Novell" come to mind.

Red Hat (2, Insightful)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#27188479)

Anybody have any figures for how Red Hat (and Canonical) are doing?

'government on campaign to get credit flowing' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27188583)

we must not be far enough in debt yet? better days ahead.

Oh My, What a Lie (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189051)

So Novell, one of the biggest Linux distributors in the world, and Microsoft, one of the biggest companies in world history, couldn't find a single large customer on Planet Earth to buy into Novell's Suse Linux Enterprise Server software.

I know this is a lie. I know two large companies that make wide use of SLES and SLED.

Uh huh (1)

XanC (644172) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189133)

And did they buy into it this quarter?

Novell who? (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189695)

Didn't they used to do networking or something? I remember seeing the red boxes, but the people who sat in the cubicles with the red boxes were unhappy as a rule.

Whoa! Based on what data? (1)

itomato (91092) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189705)

Now, I hear tell about a Very Large, Three-year contract with the USPS to deploy Novell's SuSE Linux Enterprise product. I haven't heard of any strict Microsoft involvement, but between HP's consultancy wing, and every major recruitment firm in the U.S., they are apparently having a heckuva time locating an individual with the desired level of competency in some of Novell's Linux deployment technologies, namely AutoYaST, particularly scaled to the level they are deploying at.

That aside, this is a deployment of significant scale and importance, and in my humble opinion, negates the claim of there not being a 'single large customer on Planet Earth to buy into Novell's Suse Linux Enterprise Server software', Good Sir.

To wit: (1)

itomato (91092) | more than 5 years ago | (#27189771)

Monster's Link to the United States Postal Service position: [monster.com]

HP is proposing an infrastructure solution to support the mission critical US Postal Service project that will modernize the existing USPS.com environment. USPS' objectives are to create a new USPS.com portal that will enhance user experience, provide flexibility to meet market needs, simplify operations and create a venue for additional revenue generation.

Oh yeah, Wal-Mart [monster.com] has apparently been struggling to keep someone on for their IBM/SLES deployment. This has been going on for a year now - a month or two at a time. They're not exactly small-time, either.

I don't know, it just sucks that the difference between Redhat and SuSE is so great when it comes to the number of active installations, and how stably they appear to be supported. Maybe it's because I've tried to specialize on SLES during the past few years (having worked on another couple of large-scale SLES deployments), and I'm exposed to all these reqs, but with what amounts to German vs. North Carolinian Engineering, (no offense intended), I'm confused and saddened by the fact that there aren't more SLES/SLED deployments.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?