Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

How Many SUSE Subscriptions Can You Get For $240M?

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the i-got-the-stuff-you-got-the-money? dept.

Microsoft 121

itwbennett writes "According to an SD Times article, Microsoft is almost through passing out the infamous subscription certificates for SUSE Enterprise Linux that it purchased for $240 million as part of its investment in Novell. According to the article, Microsoft says that 'a total of 475 customers have used an unspecified number of coupons.' Blogger Brian Proffitt calculates that 'if indeed just 475 customers have received these coupons, then Microsoft has essentially subsidized SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) deployments to an average tune of US$505,263.16 per customer.'"

cancel ×

121 comments

Free? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30996506)

I don't want to hear any more about how Linux is supposedly free!

Re:Free? (2, Informative)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996592)

What is not "free" is support above web forums and such and "Enterprise" level distros tend to include programs that run on but are by no means Open Source. In fact even individual level distros have things like DVD players and other commercial programs that run on Linux.

Re:Free? (4, Funny)

Maniacal (12626) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996722)

And I think we should all write the name SUSE as "$U$E" to make up for the way we've been unfairly referring to "M$" all these years.

Re:Free? (-1, Flamebait)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997064)

Oh yeah, a shitty update on outdated humour. That'll help.

Re:Free? (0, Offtopic)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997402)

M$? Everyone knows that £oo£l€ are the new evil empire.

Re:Free? (1)

JonJ (907502) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997690)

I thought we were hating @ppl£ this week?

Re:Free? (3, Funny)

Sebilrazen (870600) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997998)

Wait, £ is 'e,' 'g,' and 'G?' and 'e' is both '£' and '€?' I thought English was confusing.

Re:Free? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30998678)

$on¥

Re:Free? (1, Informative)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997902)

Seems like it would be an apt label, as Novell apparently has some patent agreement [wikipedia.org] with Microsoft. And SCO, which did that whole "Linux is infringing patents" thing, bought DR-DOS from Novell and is working with SUSE (Novell) on some standardization of Linux [wikipedia.org] , which sounds like a terrific proprietary-profit-bastard idea.

Re:Free? (4, Insightful)

Xugumad (39311) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996788)

OpenSUSE is free: http://www.opensuse.org/en/ [opensuse.org] - we run it here.

SUSE is not free. However, when your Oracle server has decided to keel over on the development server, and you've spent a couple of hours now trying to find out why, you really begin to wonder if it wouldn't have been cheaper to pay for the version with support and be able to call someone (OpenSUSE isn't an officially supported Oracle platform, so we couldn't even call them) and have them fix it.

Re:Free? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30998074)

More like:

a) you can call someone and then tell your boss that they said "WONTFIX" or "Fix in next release, next year".
vs
b) having to tell your boss that you don't know how to fix it.

a) tends to be less risky.

Re:Free? (1)

the_hellspawn (908071) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998806)

Well, there is your problem. You have Oracle installed. If you went with MySQL you would be fine like a 15 year old school girl enrolled in gymnastics verses a mature drunken ding-bat. I'm just paying, but it is kind of true.

Re:Free? (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999400)

Wait, you have the money to run Oracle and choose to use an unsupported OS? RHEL and Oracle's version of RHEL are both supported and don't cost much at all.

Re:Free? (1)

Xugumad (39311) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000770)

Fun with departmental vs team budgets. For 2 years my team had no hardware/software budget (or, more accurately, we did but we didn't have any way of accessing it), but we have a site license for Oracle so could run it at no cost to the team.

Once we did get a budget, it wasn't until Oracle keeled over that we went "Wait, we have a budget, why are we running unsupported OSes?"

opensuse.org = free beta (1)

Brigadier (12956) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000310)

Isn't that what opensuse really is ? free beta testers. I've been running suse now since their 6.0 version (switched from redhat because they were the only ones that supported my g200 gfx card). I've always noticed that Dell Hardware (which we run) ran the 9.0 version while the 10.0 version of opensuse was available. One day I got smart figuring I would download the fully patched 9.0 version of suse being the cheap bastard that I am. Turns out it didn't exist on any mirrors anywhere.

Re:Free? (1)

Gerzel (240421) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997754)

This one case of linux and it is being subsidized ie it is costing the customer LESS than free.

Re:Free? (1)

zepo1a (958353) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999418)

less than free?

is that like, "None more black."

:)

Value of Software (-1, Troll)

rwv (1636355) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996518)

Does this emphasize the fact that Microsoft has no idea about how to properly evaluate the value of any particular software product?

Re:Value of Software (2, Interesting)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996586)

They are selling SUPPORT. The idea is to essentially kick out a RedHat subscription, at a customer ready to change the way they manage support. The MS subsidy makes this an attractive change.

SuSE runs on HyperV with native hooks - Like Server 2008 does. This is a way to ensure MS doesn't get lost in the data center - but continues to emerge as a player.

Re:Value of Software (2, Insightful)

Locutus (9039) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996812)

so the coupons are only for putting SUSE inside a Microsoft hosted virtual machine? If that is the case, it's quite obvious that they spent the money to keep Windows installed. IMO.

LoB

Re:Value of Software (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997262)

SuSE runs on HyperV with native hooks - Like Server 2008 does.

Is it just SUSE that does that? I was under impression that the necessary code was admitted to mainline kernel...

Re:Value of Software (0)

Foredecker (161844) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996646)

Relay? how do you figure? That's a pretty big statement to make. Can you back it up with anything other than hand waving? We just had a spectacular quarter. A lot of that is attributed to selling Windows 7. Looks like we did a pretty good job of evaluating value there... Note that a lot of these sales were upgrades where people chose to buy. The could just have just as easily chosen Linux. They didn't.

Re:Value of Software (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30996832)

Choosing to get rid of Vista isn't really a choice...its a necessity The consumer just chose to throw more money at the problem and swear next time they'll buy a Mac. Win7 is better than Vista! Great job! That must have been tough...

Re:Value of Software (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997598)

Getting rid of Vista is NOT a necessity. We've got 90,000 Vista machines here and they run just fine with SP2 on them. Win 7 is nice, and maybe we will go to it in a year or two (I did at home of course). But there is absolutely NO necessity about getting rid of Vista.

Re:Value of Software (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30996862)

Haha! They chose Windows? Only because their PC vendors chose Windows for them.

Don't underestimate marketing and business deals essentially tying you to some crappy API.

Re:Value of Software (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997322)

Yeah it's just people being tied down and has nothing to do with how shit Linux is for most people.

Re:Value of Software (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997336)

Yeah, because it's not like they couldn't have easily chosen a Mac if they didn't want Windows, right?

Re:Value of Software (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997382)

At least there's only one set of crappy APIs, as opposed to half a dozen conflicting and competing APIs, bloating the install base.

Re:Value of Software (5, Insightful)

koiransuklaa (1502579) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997412)

Your posts are usually insightful and this one is on the whole no exception. However, I have to comment on the "The[y] could just have just as easily chosen Linux": that statement totally forgets the monopolies Microsoft has been able to build in the last fifteen years (legally or otherwise) and the "traps" that were built on top of those monopolies. Most operating system customers _cannot_ choose non-MS products, and that is not just because the competing products themselves aren't good.

The OS and document format monopoly, the IE-trap that many companies unknowingly stepped into ten years ago and the well documented anti-interoperability stance that seemed to be the M.O. at Microsoft for some time... These things may not be illegal (although I expect they may be in combination) but I have no problem calling them immoral.

In any case saying that customers have a choice is bollocks. They had a choice ten years ago, and hopefully will again after five or ten years... Let's hope so.

I'm not talking about the parent necessarily (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998224)

I don't understand how people can simultaneously claim that OpenOffice can read and write MS Office files and then turn around and say MS customers are "trapped".

In addition, anybody who designed an application around IE certainly went in to it with their eyes wide open to the fact that it was a Windows-specific solution. There are thousands of non-MS applications that won't run on Linux.

Re:I'm not talking about the parent necessarily (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998396)

I don't understand how people can simultaneously claim that OpenOffice can read and write MS Office files and then turn around and say MS customers are "trapped".

The word you're missing is "mostly". OpenOffice's compatibility with MS Office files is probably in the 95-98% range. For most home users and probably a lot of businesses, that's good enough. There are some times, though, when a customer has done something that MS Office saves in a way that OpenOffice can't handle, so your only choices are to just use MS Office or lose business. Until formats that are truly and completely open become standard, this problem will continue.

Re:I'm not talking about the parent necessarily (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998484)

Funny I don't see any marketing that says it can only handle 98% of MS office files. In any case, if your numbers are right, it's a rather minor barrier for switching from Windows to Linux.

Re:I'm not talking about the parent necessarily (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998714)

Well of course you won't see any marketing that says "We do most of what you need." And for the people that don't care about that 5% of obscure features that OpenOffice doesn't support, it isn't a barrier for switching to Linux. There may be other barriers though, such as the few annoying web sites that still don't work in anything other than Internet Explorer.

Re:I'm not talking about the parent necessarily (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000342)

Again, a minor issue.

It's just that some people can't admit that there are MS customers who are actually pretty satisfied. There always has to be some alternate explanation.

Re:Value of Software (1)

jabbathewocket (1601791) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998526)

Ehh thats whats wrong with this entire debate.. OMG is spreading FUD and trying to keep the good team down... When in actual point of fact, the linux side of this has ALWAYS used FUD, and played the classic role of "victim" in all of these arguments..

There is just one major problem with this view of the world of OS monopolies, its simply and utterly false.. If a shop had chosen linux 10 years ago, they would be JUST as locked in and forced to continue to use Linux as they are "forced" to continue to use MS products..

In short the lock in is because of scale, difficulty of switching from A to B for what is most likely negligible gain (or a net cost.. free software is most definitely NOT free in the real world of help desks, installs, and support) and other factors that are completely unrelated to WHICH platform your company is currently using.

IE linux community members tend to cry foul in the same way that opera software does.. which results in the sane folks of the world dismissing them as lunatic fringe, rather than trying to compete on merits, they try to play victim.. If the linux community would actually come together and stop trying to make a vanity distro every 60 secs, standardize a desktop, and actually pay some attention to the fact that regardless of which choice is the dominant one at the time, its the role of the "alternate' choice to work with the dominate choice.. not the other way around (in any and all business not just operating systems) then perhaps we wouldn't be sitting her crying about MS, and instead would be choosing the right tool for the job. Not trying to treat everything as a political game..

Re:Value of Software (1)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001206)

In any case saying that customers have a choice is bollocks. They had a choice ten years ago, and hopefully will again after five or ten years... Let's hope so.

10 years ago was nearly the height of Microsoft's "monopoly power", to say nothing of the relatively dismal quality of the alternatives. Probably the point of least "choice" in the last two decades.

Microsoft hounds (5, Funny)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996522)

Microsoft has a special hounds training program. They train them to smell a very subtle scent that exist only when wealth and stupidity is mixed. They call this program "marketing". Open source sellers have moral qualms about it and prefer to solve stupidity which they see as a core problem. Guess who is making money ?

Now the important question : am I trollish, insighful, funny or CowboyNeal ?

Re:Microsoft hounds (4, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996570)

You know, It's funny how often those 4 coincide...

Re:Microsoft hounds (1, Offtopic)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996730)

The Microsoft shills will mod you "flamebait" for your funny comment, Mr. Neal!

Re:Microsoft hounds (0, Flamebait)

Foredecker (161844) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996734)

People have "moral qualms" against marketing? Do you? really? What the heck is wrong with marketing? I suppose you dont like lots of things then. Are you going to level your criticisms at all companies that engage in marketing? How about the company you work for? Do they do marketing?

Next, you mention "stupidity". Thats a great word to throw around.... can you be a bit more specific? Its easy to call someting stupid. Its harder to say why.... come on, spend a little time on it.

Re:Microsoft hounds (4, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996828)

> People have "moral qualms" against marketing?

Yes. Little things like lying and fraud bother some people.

Re:Microsoft hounds (0, Troll)

Foredecker (161844) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997182)

So only on Slashdot does all marketing become "lying and fraud". Really? Did you just run out and buy the biggest broadest paint brush you can find? What do you do for a living? How do people know about it? Do you work with Marking people? Are they lyers and fradusters? Would you have the guts to say that to their face?\

Really, Im enouraging you to answer these questions. You took the time to post something that is massive troll. Now take the tame to back it up.

Re:Microsoft hounds (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997510)

Calm down, dude! Your spelling and shit is getting all fucked up in ways that make no sense...

Re:Microsoft hounds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997626)

Nobody said marketing=lying. The OP said that MS has trained hounds, implied that they engage in this type of behaviour, and they call it marketing. Then he said that some people are opposed to it. He wasn't talking about marketing at all, but what some companies engage in under the guise of marketing. The troll is you.

Try to keep up (0)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998276)

"Nobody said marketing=lying"

Right. Nobody typed the exact equation "marketing=lying". But that's exactly what was implied.

Re:Try to keep up (1)

hmar (1203398) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000444)

"Nobody said marketing=lying"

Right. Nobody typed the exact equation "marketing=lying". But that's exactly what was implied.

Not really, by the original poster at least. What was "implied" by the quotation marks around "marketing" is that the practice described is not marketing. Later posters straight out said that marketing is lying and fraud. so no, no one really implied that marketing is the equivalent of lying.

Re:Microsoft hounds (4, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997628)

So only on Slashdot does all marketing become "lying and fraud". Really? Did you just run out and buy the biggest broadest paint brush you can find? What do you do for a living? How do people know about it? Do you work with Marking people? Are they lyers and fradusters? Would you have the guts to say that to their face?\

You're being very antagonistic (fine, some of what the other poster(s) have written are BS).

But let me help explain why there is a huge anti-marketing sentiment amongst a large subset of the readers of slashdot.

1. Slashdot readers tend to be very analytical. We like to get all the facts and make a decision based on those facts. Marketing often obscures the facts by which we could make informed decisions.

2. A lot of us work in product development (typically software, but not always). We see marketing staff pulling in 2-3 times what we make (or more) while not actually producing anything of value (according to how we ascribe value). We see marketing staff get promoted while seeing them goof off most of the day. Some of it may be sour grapes, some of it may be jealousy, some of it may just be a lack of respect for people who don't seem to work hard -- but in any case, it's hard for the typical slashdotter to accord respect to someone who produces nothing.

3. Some of us have been burnt, professionally, by marketing people. Deliverables are marketed that have no hope of being implemented, etc.

4. Most slashdotters feel that their work stands for itself. Most people in marketing self-promote; this runs contrary to the values of most nerds. It's frustrating to see a marketing person take the credit (and the accolades) when a lot of hard work was done by the development teams.

Maybe you just need to accept the fact that some people hate the idea of marketing. Getting bent out of shape about it isn't going to do you any good.

Re:Microsoft hounds (2, Funny)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998340)

"1. Slashdot readers tend to be very analytical. We like to get all the facts and make a decision based on those facts. Marketing often obscures the facts by which we could make informed decisions."

If one considered Slashdot readers to be a separate group from Slashdot posters, what you say may be true. Oops, you said "we".

Re:Microsoft hounds (3, Insightful)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998422)

1. Slashdot readers tend to be very analytical. We like to get all the facts and make a decision based on those facts. Marketing often obscures the facts by which we could make informed decisions.

Well, as long as the facts agree with their preconceptions, anyway.

From all I've seen over the years, /. readers are as likely to ignore inconvenient facts as any other demographic out there.

Re:Microsoft hounds (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30999754)

How do I mod this (-1, Wish to Ignore)?

Re:Microsoft hounds (2, Funny)

TimHunter (174406) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000430)

From all I've seen over the years, /. readers are as likely to ignore inconvenient facts as any other demographic out there.

Slashdot's chief weapon is ignorance! Ignorance and cynicism. Cynicism and ignorance. Our two weapons are cynicism and ignorance. And arrogance. Our three weapons are cynicism, ignorance, and arrogance. And an overweening sense of entitlement. Our four...no. Amongst our weaponry are such elements as cynicism, ignorance...I'll come in again.

Re:Microsoft hounds (4, Insightful)

Anonymusing (1450747) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998730)

As someone who has worked in marketing, technology, and product development... I'd say you summed up the situation pretty well. On a forum for marketing pros, you could reverse most of your points and get a decent picture of how marketing folks view programmers and product devs.

I think the key problem is noted in your #2: "We see marketing staff pulling in 2-3 times what we make (or more) while not actually producing anything of value (according to how we ascribe value)." Everybody has different opinions of value. But it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Which came first, the product, or the demand for the product? A marketer is supposed to deliver demand for a product; a good marketer will do it on a phenomenal level, and possibly even without resorting to deceptive tactics. But, without the product, there is nothing for the marketer to do. They need each other.

Should marketers make 2x or 3x the pay? Depends. A senior, proven marketer should make 3x more than a middling developer. But a senior, proven engineer should have some kind of parity. Also, marketing is inherently riskier: if you fail to produce demand and therefore sales, you're likely to lose the account, if not your job. But engineers, in my experience, tend to be more insulated from sales ebbs. (emphasis on "tend")

Re:Microsoft hounds (1)

Crawling King Snake (167313) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999104)

Without marketing, I could buy a pair of Nike sneakers for $9.

Re:Microsoft hounds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31000030)

I think you mean, without marketing, you'd be happy with a $9 pair of bobos...

Re:Microsoft hounds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30999218)

No, alot of the readers of Slashdot know that Marketing is a "by any means necessary" method
of convincing someone to consume a product, service, etc. Marketing is also not above spinning
the facts in favor of the product as opposed to the consumer's best interest.

Re:Microsoft hounds (3, Funny)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000536)

Are they lyers and fradusters?

Hey, did you see that Jim Carrey movie "Lyer, Lyer"? I think it's about some guy who makes soap.

Re:Microsoft hounds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997786)

Exactly why, for example, GMO crops should be clearly marked as such.

Re:Microsoft hounds (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998326)

Mostly people will defraud themselves, there's no reason why "rich, famous and sexy person uses product X" should imply "product X will make me rich, famous and sexy". Customers are much happier to buy an overpriced item at reduced price than a full price item because they feel smart, they're as much looking to beat the "fair" price as the marketers are. And you shouid always recognize that a marketer will talk about the ideal customer, that "Teach Photoshop in 21 days" will not make you an artist, that exercise machine won't help you when you break down 5 minutes in because everything hurts and go on a MacDonald's gorge and so on. Failed reality checks vs you as a person is also not fraud.

I know there are marketers that really defraud people, but having worked as a consultant I've come to recognize a lot of gray. For example, in our estimates we generally assume the customer is prompt, competent, coherent, authorized and in general a very good customer. Almost all of them fail on some level of dysfunctionality, but it's hopeless for us to estimate it in. Either they take forever to evaluate the pros and cons, they don't understand them, they disagree internally, no one feels authorized to decide, circumvented some internal process and have to backtrack, come into conflict with purchasing or with legal or indeed any one of a million things. Once we're out the door, they're free to blame us for every failure and cost overrun but I digress. The point is I go into many projects believing little of the estimates. Does that make me a fraudster?

Re:Microsoft hounds (1)

dyingtolive (1393037) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999782)

Were you a loan officer in a previous life?

Re:Microsoft hounds (1)

microbox (704317) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999888)

Mostly people will defraud themselves, there's no reason why "rich, famous and sexy person uses product X" should imply "product X will make me rich, famous and sexy".

You my friend, are labouring under the presumption that human-beings are rational. Taking advantage of the human condition is why we have a laws in the first place -- because we could scape every law in the rulebook if people could be trusted to behave themselves.

Re:Microsoft hounds (3, Insightful)

notque (636838) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997292)

Marketing was created as a systematic way of lying to people. Marketing not only shows a contempt for Democracy (Marketing for candidates), but contempt for Markets (which are supposed to work with "perfect information", the very thing marketing avoids.)

Re:Microsoft hounds (4, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998836)

Marketing not only shows a contempt for Democracy (Marketing for candidates), but contempt for Markets (which are supposed to work with "perfect information", the very thing marketing avoids.)

I don't think that's always the case. What if you have a good product that no one knows about? There's a lack of information in the market, which marketing can help fix.

The problem is dishonesty in marketing, not marketing itself.

Re:Microsoft hounds (1)

microbox (704317) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999928)

The problem is dishonesty in marketing, not marketing itself.

You can remove the marketing from dishonesty, but you cannot remove the dishonesty from marketing. Buyer beware.

Re:Microsoft hounds (2, Insightful)

cmacb (547347) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000838)

True to a point. But if a product is really good, word of mouth takes over, the product becomes well known and eventually starts to "sell itself". What then is the need for a marketing effort in a company such as Coke, or Microsoft? It certainly doesn't consist of educating people about the product. More often it consists of giving the public a warm and fuzzy feeling about the company itself. Paving over mishaps as quickly as possible, pushing product out a retail channel faster than might be needed, developing intermediate unpaid marketing channels (MCSEs), sponsring charitable events, etc. I mentioned two companies. Windows has never been great. The one change Coke made to their formula was a marketing disaster, although the public soon forgot its outrage. If there was simply nothing close to the products from these two companies, they would need to do little marketing. Fact is, viable alternatives are there, waiting for a stumble significant enough to trip up the giant. Such stumbles rarely happen. Especially if the company keeps a groups of people around to cover them up and draw the public's attention to something else.

You will note that when some new big virus or malware comes out the mainstream publications rarely if ever mention that only those running Windows are vulnerable, even if this is the case. I don't think this is happenstance. You have to dig deep to find that the lates Flash or Acrobat vulnerability only affects those running Windows. Microsoft marketing has done a great job of convincing people that since they are the number one OS, they can't be blamed because almost all the attacks target their system.

Re:Microsoft hounds (1)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998864)

'Good' marketing (in the sense of good for the economy and population at large, which isn't always the same as good for the company paying for it) helps that market assumption of 'perfect information': It informs you of a product you didn't know existed, and gives you the reasons why it might be a product you would wish to buy.

Of course, most of the people/companies paying for the marketing would rather it informed you of a product you didn't know existed, and created a need to buy that product. Regardless of whether you would wish to buy it or not, or if it would benefit you in any way.

Screw marketing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31000288)

Marketing and the entire concept behind it is one of the WORST things in the history of the entire planet.

Their job is essentially to take money from people with slick talk and lies when facts and reality will not sell a product thru legitimate means.

They rank down there with telemarketing and spammers. The world WOULD be better off without them. Theres not even a question about it. Things would improve greatly across the entire globe if all the marketing people dropped dead instantly and the entire concept became taboo.

And those who can not see that.. well. the world would be better off without you too. Sorry.

Or in the words of george carlin.

This is called "Advertising Lullaby!"
Keeping in mind, of course, that the whole purpose of advertising is to lull you to sleep!

Quality, value, style, service, selection, convenience, economy, savings, performance, experience, hospitality, low-rates, friendly, service, name brands, easy terms, affordable, prices, money-back guarantee, free installation! Free admission, free appraisal, free alterations, free delivery, free estimates, free home trial! ...and free parking! No cash? No problem! No kidding!

No fuss, no muss, no risk, no obligation, no red tape, no down payment, no entry fee, no hidden charges, no purchase necessary, no one will call on you! no payments of interests till september!

Limited-time only, though! So act now! Order today! Send no money! Offer good while supplies last...

Two to a customer, each item sold separately, batteries not included, mileage may vary, all sales are final, allow six weeks for delivery. some items not available, some assembly required, some restrictions may apply!

So come on in! Come on in for a free demonstration and a free consultation with our friendly professional staff! Our experienced and knowledgeable sales representatives will help you make a selection that's just right for you and just right for your budget! And say! Don't forget to pick up your free gift! A classic, deluxe, custom, designer, luxury, prestige, high-quality, premium, select, gourmet, pocket pencil sharpener...Yours for the asking! No purchase necessary!

It's our way of saying "Thank you!" And if you act now, we'll include an extra added free complimentary bonus gift! A classic, deluxe, custom, designer, luxury, prestige, high-quality, premium, select, gourmet, combination key-ring, magnifying glass and garden hose!

In a genuine, imitation leather-style, carrying case with authentic vinyl trim. Yours for the asking! No purchase necessary! It's our way of saying "Thank you!" Actually, it's our way of saying: "Bend over just a little bit further...!" so we can stick this big advertising dick up your ass a little bit deeper! A little fucking deeper! A little bit deeper! You miserable, no-good, fucking consumer asshole! '

Cause you do know, folks! Living in this country, you're bound to know... that every time you are expose to advertising, you realise once again, that America's leading industry, America's most profitable busines is still... ...the manufacture, packaging, distribution, and marketing of bullshit!

High quality! Grade A! Prime cut,pure American bullshit!

And the sad part is, is that most people seem to have been indoctrinated to believe that... ...bullshit only comes from certain places!

So i'd like to say... A big FUCK YOU to all the sales, marketing and other assorted criminal scumbags out there who make a living ripping people off. Actually criminal isnt even the right word... Criminals admit they are ripping people off. Marketing assholes will never admit that.

Bastards.

Why even bother with the money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30996594)

Select this link: http://software.opensuse.org/112/en [opensuse.org] I just saved you anywhere from $0 for 0 servers to $INF for INF servers!

In related news... (5, Insightful)

Maniacal (12626) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996686)

Microsoft Corporation announced today that customers who deploy their server solutions can save over $400,000 when compared to deploying a solution based on SUSE Linux.

Keep in mind the extras (1, Informative)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996706)

I wouldn't be suprised if - included with the dollar figure - they are adding in Windows 2008, SQL 2008 and other back office products they sell. Keep in mind, that Microsoft even has Novell at their launch and TechNet events showing off SLES on a server with Win2008 instances (each of which require a license) running in XEN virtual machines.

Customer != users (4, Insightful)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996718)

Each company could be count as one customer, but theirs hundreds of users could count in the price of the license.

Re:Customer != users (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997016)

Or even 100k+ users since MS is in all the biggest companies in the world.

Xcalc? (1, Funny)

mystikkman (1487801) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996754)

This struck me as a very interesting figure, because after firing up XCalc, I figured out that if indeed...

Was that before or after jumping into his Ferrari and flashing his iPhone? Why do people need to display their smug superiority from the unwashed masses when any decent calculator would give the same result?

Re:Xcalc? (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997092)

How is that smug superiority. It's what he did and likely he didn't think anything of saying that.

People do say "firing up calculator", "firing up google", "firing up IE". when they do those things.

And running a calulator program on a computer is hardly "elite" or smug.

Re:Xcalc? (0, Offtopic)

c0d3g33k (102699) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997404)

Because "firing up [my] calculator" is necessary and sufficient to describe an action that has been commonplace for more than 30 years now. It's an unremarkable action, so any mention of specifics has to be deliberate. Maybe smug superiority wasn't the intended goal, but something was. Perhaps an attempt to self-identify as a 'cool' FLOSS user' or a hardcore nerd. But something.

For example:

"I drove to the recycling center and got in line behind the other cars" vs. "I drove my Prius to the recycling center and got in line behind the SUVs"

or

"I wiped up the spill with a paper towel and tossed it in the trash" vs. "I wiped up the spill with a recycled paper towel from Whole Foods and tossed it onto my compost heap"

Adding detail where none is needed is a deliberate act intended to convey a message.

Re:Xcalc? (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999446)

Except that Xcalc is shorter than calculator. So it's both more accurate and less verbose. Both your examples are simply adding extra words which serve no purpose other than advertising themselves. There's no addition in the xcalc example, it's a simple way of saying "I didn't add this up in my head".

I would say "fired up calc" over "fired up a calculator", and showing that I use the window calc program isn't the goal of the statement. It's just how I see the action. If I used excel instead I'd say "fired up excel" not "fired up a spreadsheet" too. Not to add detail but because that's how I think of it.

Of course I'm not the original author who very well may have been trying to show off that he uses a shitty OS.

Re:Xcalc? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997860)

Yes, but... let’s say... Apple users are especially well-known for using Apple products as e-penises.
Of course far from all. But unfortunately the loudest ones are usually the worst, and are seen best.
So it’s likely that GP’s experience made it most efficient, to just assume it’s a fanboi.
You can judge that as prejudice. But pay attention that you’re not falling into prejudice with that, yourself. ;)
I just see it as “most likely possibility, based on own experience”, as around here, you even get modded down, for mentioning anything Apple in the same comment with anything bad. Completely irrational. But that’s what fanbois by definition are.
No matter if Apple or something else. (If you read this, you are no Apple fanboi. ;)

Re:Xcalc? (0, Offtopic)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997202)

Was that before or after jumping into his Ferrari and flashing his iPhone? Why do people need to display their smug superiority from the unwashed masses when any decent calculator would give the same result?

Nonsense, my calculator made of rich mahogany and fine corinthian leather is far more accurate than your lower-class calculator.

Re:Xcalc? (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998400)

Your funny comment got modded as Offtopic. I guess we have to meta-meta-mod down the Slashdot community again (-1 Whoosh).

Re:Xcalc? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997732)

I thought XCalc was a calculator for the X windowing system.
Oh, and if somebody brags with his material stuff, we all know that that’s all he has, and *needs* to brag, in order to be able to accept himself. Just like acting all “Oh, what time do we have? Wait, I’ll just look at my *$30000 ROLEX*” will not get you any real girls. (Except for those that you don’t want anyway.)
No need for you to mention it. We’re on your side already. :)

By the way: Qalculate! is the best calculator of all time! OF ALL TIME! ;)

Re:Xcalc? (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998876)

Wait, I'll just look at my *$30000 ROLEX*" will not get you any real girls. (Except for those that you don't want anyway.)

Speak for yourself. Money may not be able to buy love, but it sure can buy a few nights of steamy passion -- and sometimes, that's all that is wanted.

Bad math alert! (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996782)

The total number of clients is not what they seem to think - a client might have 1,000 - 5,000 machines, thus taking hundreds or thousands of certs.

Re:Bad math alert! (-1, Flamebait)

mystikkman (1487801) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996944)

From the TFA:

...after firing up XCalc..

But...but... he's using XCalc, how his math be bad?!

Re:Bad math alert! (0, Redundant)

c0d3g33k (102699) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996970)

Thank you. I was myself about to point out the rather "convenient" oversight. Who needs clear thinking when sensationalism is as stake?

Re:Bad math alert! (3, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998312)

When it comes to Novell+Microsoft,, there hasn't been much clear thinking making the rounds.

For example, the whole Mono fiasco. de Icaza is a Microsoft fanboy, but that doesn't mean that openSuse is somehow "contaminated" by Mono. Just remove mono-base with teh package manager and it all goes bye-bye. Your machine will continue to work just fine (actually, better than fine since doing so also removes Kerry Beagle, resulting in a much more responsive machine).

Then there's the whole "patents deal" hysteria. What do I care about what Microsoft claims the deal was about? Ultimately, Ballmer is a snake-oil salesman, after all. The deal was more likely made as a back-door way to compensate Novell for the expenses Microsoft indirectly caused by financing the SCO attack against linux, which Novell has been doing a lot of the heavy lifting in the courts - remember, there was talk about piercing the corporate veil wrt the $50 million PIPE deal.

SLED is not opensuse. There may be stuff in SLED (which has proprietary extensions and applications), that needs Microsoft's okay for virtualization to work with Microsoft products. So what? Doesn't affect me, since I can't see any scenario where I would want to run linux instances hosted on a Microsoft server, or Windows instances hosted on a linux server.

The numbers are there (5, Informative)

jpobst (262199) | more than 4 years ago | (#30996936)

If you click the links in the slashdot summary, you'll end up at the original announcement, which told you roughly how many subscriptions the deal was for: 70,000.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116249026689311557-helTbrheLKgbaJ5iO5z40ZFCiOs_20061109.html?mod=blogs [wsj.com]

I guess that's not as much fun as wild speculation though.

Re:The numbers are there (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997656)

So actually numbers are $240,000,000/70,000=$3428.57 per coupon. Seems to me the term "subsidized SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) deployments" is a pretty accurate statement, don't you agree?

oblig with a twist. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30997076)

1. Blog.
2. ???
3. Proffitt!

Now I get it. (4, Funny)

Joe Snipe (224958) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997348)

When you put it that way, Windows 7 ultimate is a bargain!

Re:Now I get it. (2, Funny)

wiredlogic (135348) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998974)

It finally proves that Linux has a higher TCO.

GPLv3 tries to take advantage of this (1)

yuhong (1378501) | more than 4 years ago | (#30997930)

GPLv3 tried to take advantage of the coupons to extend MS's patent protection to all users. I wonder how successful that has been.

3.5 years later (3, Interesting)

neurovish (315867) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998128)

Novell stock has lost 30%

Microsoft stock has lost 1%

Redhat stock has gained 78%

Good going Novell, yet another stellar business decision. The $240mil had to have been the value of the entire deal, which was mostly beneficial to Microsoft in that they weren't going to be sued by Novell since Novell owns a lot of the UNIX patents. The licenses were being resold by Microsoft at prices substantially less than ($240/77)x1000

Re:3.5 years later (0, Troll)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999222)

I get it, when we're talking about Bing search share, any % increases are to be downplayed by 'well increasing from 0 to 1 is a Infinity% increase!' whereas when it comes to Red hat stock, play it up. Alright.

Re:3.5 years later (1)

Neil Watson (60859) | more than 4 years ago | (#30999948)

What if those UNIX patents were to fall into other hands through the acquisition of Novell?

Re:3.5 years later (2, Insightful)

McBeer (714119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000054)

Novell stock has lost 30%

Microsoft stock has lost 1%

Redhat stock has gained 78%

Stock price probably isn't the best way to demonstrate that a firm is doing well or poorly as it is based largely on speculation. I like to look at profit per employee. If you take that metric:

Microsoft: $156, 656
Novell: - $59,083,
Red Hat: $28,107

or if you're looking to actually invest in one of these companies, price earnings ratio (smaller is better) is a useful metric:

Microsoft: 15.63
Novell: N/A
Red Hat:69.37

So you can see while Red Hat stock price is doing pretty well, Ret Hat itself isn't making a ton of money. Though it is beating the pants off Novell for what thats worth...

Good going Novell, yet another stellar business decision.

agreed

Re:3.5 years later (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000110)

It's not inconceivable that Novell would be a smoking hole in the ground today if they didn't deal. No, I don't believe it either. Also, from where I'm sitting, Novell already looks like a smoking hole in the ground. Or, at least, some kind of hole.

Ill bet (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#30998374)

I'll bet that one of those customers is that "slashdot" site I've heard about. I've heard they'll do anything for a freebie. What a bunch of MicroSoft fanboy's!

Just see it for what it is... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30998924)

... which is a competitive curve ball against Red Hat. Period. Red Hat's profitable income is heavily concentrated in relatively few major volume accounts, served direct (not by resellers). So, all Microsoft are doing is cross funding Novell to try to take the average unit prices down significantly in those accounts, as part of a strategy to undermine Red Hat's business model in some way. If you follow the reporting line of the folks doing the joint selling, it maps back through MS Legal and Corporate Affairs. That said, it seems to generate more PR than pain to Red Hats business results. To date at least. Fascinating to watch.

Deliberately Negative Assumptions? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31000448)

I like the super anti-Microsoft antagonism to the point of being silly. Isn't it entirely possible and, in fact likely, that some of those 475 or so unique customers were actually corporations and they ordered several, several hundred, or even thousands of seats? I don't see it stated anywhere that only 475 COUPONS were redeemed, just that there were 475 CUSTOMERS. In fact it specifically states that the number of coupons was unspecified. I am not a Microsoft lover, in fact I used to work for them and thankfully quit. I used to criticize them and some of their practices a lot too before, during, and still after I worked there but it was some of the ad hominem, baseless, and deliberately pessimistic interpretations like these that made me second-guess the accuser's credibility. I am back to working on Linux, and not Windows anymore, but I assure you is is not a SUSE distro. :)

What is going to happen in 2011? (1)

fritsd (924429) | more than 4 years ago | (#31000452)

I wonder what's going to happen in 2011, when the Novell-Microsoft "agreement not to sue on the valuable Microsoft intellectual property" patent agreement runs out.
To be honest, I haven't the faintest idea what will happen to Novell's customers. If I screw my tin-foil hat on tighter, I'd guess that Microsoft would start to rumble about customers with Mono to have to pay royalties. After all, the agreement's duration was long enough for Mono to have caught on in mission-critical software, surely there's profit to be made there by next year.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...