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!

VMware Looks To Acquire Novell's SUSE Unit

Soulskill posted about 4 years ago | from the talking-turkey dept.

Businesses 161

minutetraders writes "According to the Wall Street Journal, VMware is attempting to acquire Novell's SUSE Linux operating system business. This move would give VMware a full stack of enterprise software and allow it to establish itself as a full-blown infrastructure and software vendor in direct competition with Red Hat." The WSJ report is behind a paywall, but it's accessible in full through a Google search.

cancel ×

161 comments

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

why not just acquire all of Novell (4, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | about 4 years ago | (#33609852)

- with one exception - dump Miguel. Please. Mono is something you see a doctor about. Let's keep it that way.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Insightful)

JamesP (688957) | about 4 years ago | (#33609988)

Really, no

Keep Miguel, he's underrated (and unjustly hated) by lots of people.

Mono, free software, patents, MS is evil, blah blah blah

The guy started Gnome (ok, I hate it) but it's a solid work.

Mono is also a solid work. And Oracle has just shown that there are issues with Java as well w.r.t patents and stuff

Also, Mono is something I see as embrace-extend backwards, that is, Mono does that to MS

Really, Miguel may be 'debatable' sometimes, but he's valuable

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (0, Troll)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 4 years ago | (#33610092)

Underrated? I'd say he's overrated in that he doesn't even really deserve the controversy. Theo De Raadt is more worth debating (and only just a little more), but the OpenBSD project, whether you use it or not, is responsible for OpenSSL and OpenSSH and damned near the entire world relies on those. I don't think I've consciously used a Mono-based piece of software ever, and don't particularly care for Gnome since its started to get lame, or KDE which has always been lame.

Plus, Oracle didn't show anything about Java that people didn't already know: Java's not really entirely free as in "its my sexy software, i'll do what i want", and Oracle isn't as friendly about things as Sun. a .net CLI thats perpetually playing catch-up with Microsoft's version isn't going to be a replacement for Java in any meaningful way that I can see, and its not like we'd be any worse off without either, anyway.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610150)

so... you throw away java, mono and .net, also kde, gnome,... what's left then?? I suppose you're a BSD guy, but I'm *very* curious (seriously! really!) what desktop are you using and what is your language of choice?

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Informative)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#33610202)

so... you throw away java, mono and .net, also kde, gnome,... what's left then?? I suppose you're a BSD guy, but I'm *very* curious (seriously! really!) what desktop are you using and what is your language of choice?

Who says he's using a desktop?

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | about 4 years ago | (#33610460)

Real men use punchcards and a teletype.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Informative)

Nadaka (224565) | about 4 years ago | (#33610864)

Real men use bits of wire and and a soldering iron.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33611474)

real men carve the gears of their difference engine with an hammer and chisel.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33611136)

He's probably assuming that the poster above wants to actually use his machine.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Informative)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#33611774)

He's probably assuming that the poster above wants to actually use his machine.

Well, that depends upon what you're using it to do. You don't need a fancy GUI for a lot of things. Take someone who's just doing the edit, compile, run routine for an embedded system, for instance. Or, maybe he's from some country where fast computers are hard to come by, and he's running on older hardware.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#33611736)

so... you throw away java, mono and .net, also kde, gnome,... what's left then?? I suppose you're a BSD guy, but I'm *very* curious (seriously! really!) what desktop are you using and what is your language of choice?

Who says he's using a desktop?

Honestly folks, I wasn't trolling. Sheesh.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Interesting)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 4 years ago | (#33610252)

Back in the day before "desktops" we had these things called window managers. And as a system admin, if a project is too big to be fixed with Perl, then it probably requires something in C. These are just my personal feelings on the matter though. I did buy a Mac 'cause I was sick of poor power management and lame wifi support on both FreeBSD and Linux, though. I have servers I don't run GUIs on, and I have VMWare for small experiments. I'm happy with the setup.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (-1, Troll)

derGoldstein (1494129) | about 4 years ago | (#33610442)

If I didn't read/hear about this exact scenario numerous times, I'd be incredulous. According to what you've written above, you have at least *some* considerations that would be considered "political" (regarding Free Software), and you've bothered replying and debating the worth of software and the people who wrote/write it. You then say "I got a Mac". How do you reconcile your opinions with buying hardware/software from a company that effectively leeches off free software, gives it a fresh coat of paint and then sells it back to you?

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (3, Insightful)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 4 years ago | (#33610574)

I would have fully paid the $999 for the BSD/OS license when I was in high school, but they rolled back a bunch of the stuff into FreeBSD, which I could buy for about $30 (this was in dialup days still, and i didn't have the time to actually download stuff that big). I did pay the $150 or whatever for XiG accelerated X server, because it ran better through Linux ABI that XFree86 did natively.

If you've been around the floss stuff for a while, it can rub off some, but frankly, the older I get the less I care about the politics of "free software" or whatever. I don't mind paying to get something that works and saves me time, rather than cobbling together a less-than-optimal solution for geek credit.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | about 4 years ago | (#33611288)

OK, I can understand, if not agree with the sentiment that Apple is bad because they release so little of their software and, have a closed ecosystem, use a Walled Garden approach, etc ad nauseum; but "leeches off free software"? From everything I've read Apple is a pretty good company to work with when it come to them using your project. They follow license terms of course; but also contribute patches, work with project leads, and generally try to be good members of communities. They've also created at least one large project that I know of. I understand that in your ideal world they would simply open up everything they do, but failing that how could they be better members of the community?

Free Software projects exist to be used. The people that wrote them and released them presumably want people to use them. Apple uses them, follows the rules imposed to use them, and often goes out of their way to be more helpful than they really have to be. What more can you ask for?

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (3, Informative)

NickFortune (613926) | about 4 years ago | (#33611656)

what desktop are you using and what is your language of choice?

If I can jump in here: I use FVWM with a heavily customised config file. Languages of choice, depending on the task at hand, are C, C++, Perl, and (currently) Lua or Ruby. That's running Linux, rather than BSD. I do use some Gnome and KDE apps.

I've never used Java for anything significant. I did use Mono professionally for three to four years, a couple of years ago, I can safely say that I don't miss it in the least.

Gnome is all right, and I quite like KDE, but both of them consume a lot of resources to provide a set of integration features that I don't need and rarely use. And I've rather got used to having a desktop that does things my way, rather than whatever is current trendy in the relevant communities.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Interesting)

Lennie (16154) | about 4 years ago | (#33611878)

If you don't want to use .net and java, but looking for something similair, why not Vala ?

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Insightful)

ducomputergeek (595742) | about 4 years ago | (#33610910)

You are not Mono's target audience. Big enterprise is Mono's target. I know one shop here in town that is mostly Java on RHEL. A year or two ago they acquired a smaller company which had some Java apps, but a few of their offerings were C#/.Net

They set up some SLES boxes, configured mono, made some code tweaks to the application (I think most of that was porting the DB from SQLServer to Oracle) and had everything up in running within weeks of acquiring the company and a fraction of the cost of buying & supporting windows servers and licensing costs in addition to their normal linux/oracle stack. It's not just the licenses, but the cost to hire additional people to run the things that quickly adds up.

Really, it's only the "community" and the zealots (many of whom are here on /.) that really give a crap about the ideology. The rest of the world wants something that works can gives them options.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33611194)

Really, it's only the "community" and the zealots (many of whom are here on /.) that really give a crap about the ideology.

So, in other words, everyone who matters? Maybe that would explain why Novell is about Mono, but no one else is.

You Fucking Piece Of Shit (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610370)

Anyone want a perfect example of why Linux on the Desktop continues to wallow in irrelevance?

Pieces of fucking garbage like this fucking idiot. Microsoft, Apple development communities and fanbases have zero tollerance for incompetent and malicious assclowns like Miguel.

But the fucking open source/Linux world always has people who step up and defend these cancers on the platform.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (-1, Troll)

poetmatt (793785) | about 4 years ago | (#33610538)

Miguel used to do good work, and now he has mission creep. That's why we say get rid of him, and appropriately so.

Maybe when he's free of influence and can go back to doing what he wants he'll stop supporting mono and start doing more real and good things.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (3, Insightful)

mdm-adph (1030332) | about 4 years ago | (#33610612)

If there's suddenly a problem with Java w.r.t. patents and stuff, would the alternative really be something "open source" based upon a Microsoft product? :\

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (0, Redundant)

Lennie (16154) | about 4 years ago | (#33611898)

If you don't want to use java, you don't need to go with .net, why not Vala ?

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (4, Interesting)

arivanov (12034) | about 4 years ago | (#33610956)

Dude, whatever you are smoking can you please share it.

Gnome perpetrates Winhoze coding practices into the unix world. Just take any piece of gnome code and read it. Carefully. And follow the code design, not just the code "quality".

Let's just take ekiga as an example, though any gnome app will do.

The state machine is tightly coupled with the UI just like a Windows application. As a result making it use multiple CPUs properly or reusing the code for anything other than another Gnome application is impossible. Not surprisingly it triggers races in underlying (similarly badly coded) libraries like there is no tomorrow. Same for having the UI stripped away. This is impossible. And just do not get me started on the subject of trying to integrate something to a piece of gnome code. Because the apps state machines are built around the UI half of the key functions that should show up on dbus end up as inaccessible. Taking same ekiga as an example - call is exposed while hangup is not because it is so UI-tied up that there is no way in hell to expose it.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33611582)

Winhoze? Seriously?

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (2, Informative)

butalearner (1235200) | about 4 years ago | (#33611080)

Mono is also a solid work. And Oracle has just shown that there are issues with Java as well w.r.t patents and stuff

Java is perfectly fine. It's when you want to mess with the bytecode and VM implementation that you can run into trouble. Mono, on the other hand, the main implementation already violates MS patents for which there is no patent protection (e.g. ASP.NET, ADO.NET, Windows Forms).

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (4, Insightful)

rantomaniac (1876228) | about 4 years ago | (#33611100)

While personally I think Mono is a very nice piece of technology, in many ways superior to the Java platform... in my eyes Miguel lost all credibility back when he endorsed OOXML and later Silverlight.
Helping Microsoft embrace/extend the web with Silverlight by giving the illusion that it's cross-platform was the last straw.
For reference, Silverlight is neither cross-platform by design, because it's able to call native DLLs, or in practice because Moonlight is waaay behind.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | about 4 years ago | (#33611448)

Check out OpenJDK and Icedtea. Oracle is suing Google for Java related patents, but that doesn't affect Java developers, because any Java implementation that conforms to the old specs by Sun is covered.

Re:why not just acquire all of Novell (1)

greenskyx (609089) | about 4 years ago | (#33611614)

Agreed. Miguel rocks. Just look at how well Mono is doing. It's being widely used to write iPhone/pod/pad applications with MonoTouch and it they are extending the tool so it can write Android applications as well.

No Single Person Has Done More Damage To Linux (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610116)

"with one exception - dump Miguel"

Not Bill Gates.
Not Steve Ballmer.
Not Steve Jobs.

There hasn't been a single person who has done more damage to Linux than that miserable piece of shit Miguel.

Re:No Single Person Has Done More Damage To Linux (2, Funny)

derGoldstein (1494129) | about 4 years ago | (#33610282)

So first the one-liner slamming Mono gets a +5 Insightful, and now this AC gets a 'funny' for placing the word "shit" and "Miguel" next to one another. Who said hate doesn't pay.

Re:No Single Person Has Done More Damage To Linux (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610290)

Erm, like a lot of folks, I disagree with Miguel's position on the desirability of promoting MS standards; but you need to get a grip. The guy has done FAR more for the F/OSS world than most. I think his business acumen is suspect, but his coding ability and commitment to F/OSS are unassailable, as far as I can see. Use Linux? Try turning off every bit of software Miguel has touched, and see what you're left with.

Google Search of WSJ Articles (0, Offtopic)

freefal67 (949117) | about 4 years ago | (#33609858)

I had previously noticed that this works for all WSJ articles. Does anyone know why? Is Google paying the WSJ for content?

Re:Google Search of WSJ Articles (2, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 years ago | (#33609986)

If you don't present google with the content they won't index it. If they index it, they cache it. I've noticed that some things can't be pulled from google's cache so I assume that they have agreements with some not to display caches. From this half-baked assumption I further assume that they have had the discussion with the newspapers, told them that news wants to be free, and that if they don't like it they can certainly deindex them.

Re:Google Search of WSJ Articles (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | about 4 years ago | (#33610220)

I'd place greater emphasis on that last part. If a publisher becomes aware of the cache loophole and contacts Google about it, they most likely send out a canned reply in the spirit of "this is the way we roll. If you don't like it, there's the door.". I can't find the article at the moment but there's been more than one occasion where someone at Google made it clear that they don't design their software according to publisher's needs -- no one's forcing you to remain indexed, the decision is yours. There may be some exceptions with the very big players (Murdoch), but not many.

Re:Google Search of WSJ Articles (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610108)

I had previously noticed that this works for all WSJ articles. Does anyone know why? Is Google paying the WSJ for content?

They may be checking the user agent string and allowing one that says "Googlebot/2.1 (+http://www.google.com/bot.html)".

ZFS for all (-1, Offtopic)

AHuxley (892839) | about 4 years ago | (#33609902)

Oh wait wrong distro ..

Not SuSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33609920)

They should acquire Mandriva. It's just as good an Enterprise distro and casn be had for much less.

Re:Not SuSE (3, Interesting)

DrgnDancer (137700) | about 4 years ago | (#33609974)

It won't be taken as seriously. You can *say* it's as good as an Enterprise Distro, it might even *be* as good. People that buy OSes for companies want to see a name they recognize. Right now those names are Red Hat (not available), SuSE, and to a less extent Canonical/Ubuntu (not available). Red Hat would probably be the one everyone wants to buy, but between being the market leader and being fairly profitable (not Microsoft or Apple levels of profitable, but plenty of money to keep everyone in kibble for sure), that's not much of an option.

Re:Not SuSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610118)

Mandriva is still a bargain and is more compatable with ReHat than SuSe.

It's still pretty well-known in Europe and South America, just not in Nrth America.

It suffers only from crappy graphics and poor management, but it is an Enterprise-class distro.

Re:Not SuSE (3, Informative)

tomhudson (43916) | about 4 years ago | (#33611906)

Mandriva is dead. Almost all the devs have either quit or been fired in the last week. read moe here [vub.ac.be] , the goodbyes on Cooker here [mandrivalinux.org] , and the newest "plan" - to move development of Mandriva to Brazil here [mandriva.com] and turn it into a BRIC- country distro. Forget that China already has Red Flag Linux. Forget that they were able to grab Connectiva (a Brazilian distro) and killed the brand. Forget that ALT Linux is an actively maintained Russian distro with a new release earlier today.

Mandriva has lost 30 million euros, unable even to win over its' home market despite the government helping push them in education. It's dead, Jim!

Re:Not SuSE (1)

durdur (252098) | about 4 years ago | (#33610478)

Red Hat would probably be the one everyone wants to buy, but between being the market leader and being fairly profitable (not Microsoft or Apple levels of profitable, but plenty of money to keep everyone in kibble for sure), that's not much of an option.

Red Hat has a market cap of around $7 billion. It's possible they will be acquired, if not by VMware, but the stock has always been high-priced relative to earnings, so that makes it unattractive. But buying SUSE is not a great alternative, IMO. Why would you want to own a company that is not profitable? Also, SUSE has no equivalent of the JBoss assets Red Hat has.

Re:Not SuSE (1)

sznupi (719324) | about 4 years ago | (#33610776)

SUSE is now profitable by itself. And quite deployed in some parts of the world / those continuing contracts might be nice.

Re:Not SuSE (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | about 4 years ago | (#33611106)

They could be acquired if enough of the preferred shares are available, but a good chunk, if not the majority of Red Hat's preferred shares are in the hands of company officers and Open Source partisans IIRC. Those people could simply refuse to sell the stock at any price. Since the company is doing well (relatively speaking), there's no real leverage to force the issue. Of course someone like Apple or Oracle could dangle so much money that people essentially couldn't refuse, but it would probably take more than $7 billion. There's a pretty small number of companies in the world that could do that, and I don't see most of those having an interest.

Re:Not SuSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610672)

They'll have to re-brand it - they'll call it 'VMWare OS' or something. It may take a year or two but I think they could do it. They could offer VMWare branded support, and hawk better integration with VMWare overall (OS deployment and monitoring tools, etc.). My previous company was very happy with VMWare, and like many companies didn't like having to deal with too many different vendors, so this would be appealing to them.

Re:Not SuSE (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | about 4 years ago | (#33610862)

Why would you re-brand something that is known around the world as a mature, stable enterprise OS?

Re:Not SuSE (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 4 years ago | (#33611290)

People that buy OSes for companies want to see a name they recognize.

Like, um, Novell?

Re:Not SuSE (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | about 4 years ago | (#33611480)

I'm not sure what your point is? My parent said that VMWare should buy Mandriva instead or SuSE. I said that buying Mandriva would be a mistake because companies want name recognition in their OS purchases, and that SuSE would be a better choice. Now you say that Novell has name recognition... This is true, but beside the point. Novell is not up for sale, its SuSE division is. Even if it were all of Novell that was up for sale your comment would reinforce my point, not counter it. Yes, having the Novell name associated with your product is good. That's immaterial to whether VMWare buy Mandriva instead of SuSE.

Re:Not SuSE (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 4 years ago | (#33611818)

They won't have to call it SUSE, they could call it NovellOS, Novell Linux, anything they want. If they're buying a distro company it doesn't really matter which company has the best name, it matters that the product suits their customers' purposes. Microsoft does this all the time; who ever heard of "Stacker" before MS screwed them over?

What I wouldn't like is if they bought Suse just to ruin, kill, and bury it like MS did with Foxpro (I used to love that DBMS).

Re:Not SuSE (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | about 4 years ago | (#33611912)

Umm. Novell already owns SuSE. They have for years. They're trying to sell it not buy it. VMWare is the potential buyer and they have no name recognition in the OS field. Hence it would be good for them to buy a recognized name.

Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (1, Interesting)

Rogerborg (306625) | about 4 years ago | (#33609990)

Discovers that it now "accidentally" "owns" "Linux", and GRRRRRAARGH! BALLMER SMASH PUNY KERNEL!

You read it here first, although doubtless many more times below. It's coming. I can feel it coming in the air tonight (drum break).

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | about 4 years ago | (#33610068)

Discovers that it now "accidentally" "owns" "Linux", and GRRRRRAARGH! BALLMER SMASH PUNY KERNEL!

You read it here first, although doubtless many more times below. It's coming. I can feel it coming in the air tonight (drum break).

Ssh, don't give them ideas.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (1)

Jawnn (445279) | about 4 years ago | (#33610112)

Well..., maybe. It is certainly in the realm of the possible, but somehow, I have a feeling that if VMware keeps doing things right, they would be inclined to extend their middle finger at Microsoft when Microsoft arrives with their checkbook. Now, of course, the big question is "Does buying SUSE count as 'doing things right'?" That's a very big question. Getting to the point where you can take make serious runs at Windows Server and RHEL is the only scenario where this acquisition makes sense, and that is a tall, tall order, IMO.
It will be fun to watch, regardless. Red Hat should pay close attention.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (3, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | about 4 years ago | (#33610128)

I don't see Microsoft acquiring EMC [cnet.com] anytime soon.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33611424)

I don't see Microsoft acquiring EMC [cnet.com] anytime soon.

EMC's market cap is $42B

Microsoft's market cap is $217B

(Rumors occasionally circulate that Cisco might be a buyer for EMC. Their market cap is $125B.)

If Cisco could buy EMC, then I don't suppose much would stop Microsoft from buying EMC either.

That presumes that Microsoft would want Novell/SuSE and that VMWare would somehow snatch it up before Microsoft could. I'm sure Novell would love to see a bidding war between EMC/VMWare and Microsoft.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (1)

angloquebecer (1821728) | about 4 years ago | (#33610160)

Why would Microsoft wait for VMWare to buy Novell, when they could just buy Novell now?

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (2, Insightful)

FlyingGuy (989135) | about 4 years ago | (#33610618)

It would never get past the DOJ or FTC or their European equivalents not even when Bush was President.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (0, Offtopic)

FlyingGuy (989135) | about 4 years ago | (#33611376)

And this was modded troll why? But then again I don't really give a fuck.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610172)

Maybe but Microsoft already bought the Virtual PC stuff and has been running with that. They could have bought VMware for cheap back then but did not.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (2, Insightful)

jonescb (1888008) | about 4 years ago | (#33610406)

VMWare is actually pretty friendly to open source. Granted their flagship products aren't open source, but they bought Tungsten Graphics a couple years back which was known for their work on Mesa and X.org. And VMWare still employs a bunch of X.org developers. So if they buy Suse, I don't believe they'll do anything harmful with it.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (2, Interesting)

Bert64 (520050) | about 4 years ago | (#33611120)

They used to make a vmware esx client for linux, but not anymore... If you run any of their highend products, you are stuck running windows boxes for management...

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (1)

Stachybotris (936861) | about 4 years ago | (#33611384)

I would be exceptionally happy if this acquisition meant a return of the linux-native VM Infrastructure Client, even if nothing else came of it.

Re:Then Microsoft acquires VMWare (1)

Courageous (228506) | about 4 years ago | (#33611394)

VMWare is 80% held by EMC. I doubt EMC will sell. Regardless, such an acquisition would not pass antitrust inspection.

Great news (1)

dpolak (711584) | about 4 years ago | (#33610010)

This is great news! VMWare is growing and a fantastic product as is SuSE but Novell just couldn't do the job and didn't have the funds. I would love to see what VMWare's budget can do for SuSE.

As a loyal Novell customer (2, Interesting)

m0s3m8n (1335861) | about 4 years ago | (#33610052)

This news seems to me to be another bad omen. We run NetWare, Border Manager, ZENworks and Groupwise and have been very happy for many years. However, Novell seems to be a ship without a rudder and as the IT Director will cause me to consider other alternatives, including Microsoft.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610094)

How can anyone be happy with the crud that is Border Manager, ZENworks and Groupwise? NetWare... I understand, but the other three are awful. And have you considered the usability of the Groupwise client?

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | about 4 years ago | (#33610288)

I'm forced to agree. He may be happy, but none of his users are if he's using zenworks and groupwise.

I've found novell customers exhibit the same symptoms as battered wives; at first they are confused, then they are greatful for the few acts of kindness they receive, then finally they feel like they've done something wrong, but he's really a great guy.

Wake up call folks; NOVELL SUCKS. They HAD good products, but have since been eclipsed by MS and AD. Their product is painful to use and doesn't stand up to the competition, especially when you factor in all the support the competition has.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

FlyingGuy (989135) | about 4 years ago | (#33610568)

Hmmm are sure your not Steve Balmer in disguise?

You must be because you have not spoken of any other product except for Microsoft that could replace their suite of software

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

Petaris (771874) | about 4 years ago | (#33610640)

I disagree. And if you knew how to use ZENworks correctly you would find that its a great product. And for a school it comes at a great price (very much discounted) if you use the SLA. Also eDir is much friendlier to work with then AD and it far more compatible with other software that requires LDAP to function. AD's version of LDAP access required specially tweaked Kerberos configs since MS doesn't follow standards. I will agree thought that Netware is a bit long in the tooth but SLES 10 and OES 2 are good products and make for a good replacement. Now Novell just needs to get the last of their products moved over so that I no longer need a solitary Netware server for NSM (supposedly v. 3 will run on SLES), and a few others.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

certain death (947081) | about 4 years ago | (#33611450)

They have integrated Netware services with UNIX and Linux...YEARS AGO! They just don't know how to market the awesomeness of their main money maker, that being eDirectory. One place I worked for several years had E10Ks named SUNEDIR1 and SUNEDIR2...HUGE eDirectory servers running on...Solaris!

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610310)

You're one of those annoying incompetent IT managers who talks about being happy with Novell products and how you've used them forever. It really means you have limited skills and know how those products work so you're trying to use them until the very end.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1, Flamebait)

m0s3m8n (1335861) | about 4 years ago | (#33610656)

A little harsh. Maybe you should stop playing WOW in your mom's basement and find a vagina or something.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (4, Interesting)

FlyingGuy (989135) | about 4 years ago | (#33610524)

Really crud is it? Then Please tell me about: an equivalent open source piece of software that Encompasses all the features of :

  • Border Manager
  • Zen Works
  • NetWare
  • GroupWise

Please do educate us ( at least me ) as to ready to install software that can duplicate or exceed the capabilities of each of those that does not have the Microsoft label. Because as it is I am ready to through Novell under the train, but not until I can do so without turning to The Empire.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610622)

So your only motivation to not use Microsoft is because they are Microsoft? Or do you just want everything for free and do not pay any support contracts? As an IT Director, I would think you would be agnostic about vendors and get the right tool for the job...not refer to vendors as "The Empire". Personally, I run heterogenous environments and have for years...usually a mix of Windows and Linux...with an occasional Solaris box lying around.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

FlyingGuy (989135) | about 4 years ago | (#33611440)

Oh I have no trouble paying for support contracts in the least. But I have yet to see anything from the Open Source world that comes even close to the level of polish and usability of any of those products that does not come from Microsoft.

And yes, I do have a problem using MS stuff as I do have a sense of morals and ethics.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

youngec (239360) | about 4 years ago | (#33611128)

If you're using products from one company (Novell) that *aren't* open source, then what's wrong with using products from another company (Microsoft) that aren't open source?

A defensive maneuver for VMWare (4, Interesting)

symbolset (646467) | about 4 years ago | (#33610298)

Microsoft is giving away their shiny new hypervisor with their operating systems. What would be more fair than for VMWare to give away operating systems with their hypervisor?

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 4 years ago | (#33610418)

Novell has been that way for a very long time I fear.
Netware was great. I have not used it for years but if you need a NAS it is probably still a good way to go. It probably flies on modern hardware.
Novell bought WordPerfect ,Quattro Pro and Unix and ran them right into the ground or at least just let them waste away.
Novell could have intergrated Netware services onto Unix which they only half hearty did now they are really pushing for that on Linux which is a little late.
WordPerfect and Quattro Pro where both very good programs but Novell never really put the effort in them to take on Microsoft.

VMWare buying them is interesting. I could see VMWare making their own Linux system. Make VMWare into a full OS that you then install Linux or Windows on top off.
I don't know if a client Linux makes any real sense for them.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610488)

You're about ten years late there skippy.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

helix2301 (1105613) | about 4 years ago | (#33611038)

This could be a good thing for Novell VMware is financially stable and can help Novell with OES linux development. I think Suse is a great linux distro but needs to be developed better. Plus Novell is in need of better management there was a time when Novell was a head of Microsoft they have fallen behind in recent years.

Re:As a loyal Novell customer (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 4 years ago | (#33611670)

My shop has been Novell ever since they got an internal network around 1995 or so. They're in the process of going all-Microsoft now.

Glad I'm close to retiring, I don't like much of MS's software.

I would love to see what vmware can do with suse (1)

zaphod777 (1755922) | about 4 years ago | (#33610238)

Vmware is by far the best in class virtualization product and on top of that they have made it very easy to use. I think they could really do great things with suse in addition to Zimbra and their document collaboration suit they can be a big MS competitor.

If they bought SUSE... (3, Interesting)

brennanw (5761) | about 4 years ago | (#33610258)

... does that mean we'd eventually see versions of vCenter Server and vCenter Client that run on something other than Windows? That would be nice.

Re:If they bought SUSE... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610388)

Can I get an AMEN?!

Re:If they bought SUSE... (1)

Dani Filth (677047) | about 4 years ago | (#33610772)

AMEN brother!

Re:If they bought SUSE... (2, Interesting)

MrNemesis (587188) | about 4 years ago | (#33611442)

As much as I'd love that... I doubt it. vCentre is a pretty complex bunch of code, at least a large chunk of it in .net. It's also the flakiest part of the VMware infrastructure IME; the ESX hypervisor hasn't crashed on us since the earliest days of 2.0.

Not saying that VMware couldn't re-implement VC as a linux client but.. biggest issue with a port would be the plugins however; the integrated live P2V management (VMware Converter) runs on windows because it's easy to provide Linux services from a windows host - all you need is an SSH binary. Running the myriad of services windows requires from a linux host would mean alot of reinventing the wheel; not to mention all the other goodies like guided consolidation and recovery manager that would be useless to the majority of shops that run mostly windows (and I've yet to see any business of more than a few dozen people that doesn't have at least one MS server somewhere).

Then there's all the third-party code that integrates into VC - backup clients, hardware monitoring... and VMware are even getting rid of ESX (which gives you a linux console to play with) and shifting to ESXi (much smaller footprint hypervisor with no "proper" console [although you can finagle SSH access if you wish]) and relying on a virtual centre intregrated CLI, in the form of powershell.

ESX might have a bunch of linux in its guts, but VMware's direction over the last few versions has been moving away from linux based frontends to a much more windows-centric approach. I say this as a person who was allowed several years back to become the company expert on VMware cos I was the de facto "Linux guy" in a windows shop (well, not strictly true - we're windows and AIX). Of all the hundred or so people I met doing the various certifications, only three were confident on a linux CLI (they were also the only other people working for a FTSE100), and five more knew how to use `ls`, `service XXXXX restart`... the rest shit bricks whenever they had to use it. Sad but true.

An even better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610430)

get rid of Novell .
get rid of any M$ Corp influence
tell Vmware to go play in the fast lane in the fog
and get SuSE back to rights once again

note i said SuSE not OpenSuse or OpenSUSE

Novell can't afford it (3, Insightful)

42sd (557362) | about 4 years ago | (#33610610)

No matter how much VMWare is willing to pay, Novell can't afford to lose that part of the company. They are already hardly relevant. They need SuSe and the clout they have to make sure that they have a suitable place to run all of their other software. I'd guess they'd have to get the whole company instead of just the SuSe division.

Re:Novell can't afford it (3, Informative)

tsstahl (812393) | about 4 years ago | (#33610886)

I think you missed the news about Novell looking to break itself up into pieces.

Re:Novell can't afford it (1)

ocularsinister (774024) | about 4 years ago | (#33610904)

I may be misreading the events here but as I understand it when this goes through there will be no more Novell. Its just a question of who buys which bits.

Re:Novell can't afford it (1)

kiddygrinder (605598) | about 4 years ago | (#33610950)

it's not like they're buying the code, the only real losses are the Suse name and possibly the coders. plus i think they're pretty keen on the money, from their jumping into bed with MS i'd say they like money, not that there's anything wrong with that, i feel like they just want to keep there company ticking, which at the root of it keeps a shitload of open source devs in a job.

Re:Novell can't afford it (1)

Target Practice (79470) | about 4 years ago | (#33611908)

They need SuSe and the clout they have to make sure that they have a suitable place to run all of their other software.

Seriously, VMWare is only interested in SuSE. They want a complete stack to compete with Microsoft's and Red Hat's VM product lines. I believe they recently picked up another company to fill another role in that stack, but I'm far too lazy to look it up right now. They do offer a version of Linux called Just Enough OS, but I've heard nothing spectacular about it.

Novell's other software is being slavered over by a rumoured 20 companies or so. Granted, one of them wants it for legacy compatibility, but I don't think we can call their other products dead yet. And, oh, I WISH we could... :)

This is following Novell's earlier buyout offer that they rejected on the condition that they would procure other suitors to appease the shareholders. I thought they were off their rocker when they rejected that offer, so I'm glad they've made good on their promise.

Fund their Retirement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33610712)

If Novell sold Suse, then that would leave them with only NDS, "Novell Directory Services." I don't see them winning against AD and roll-your-own LDAP. I thought the whole point of the Suse acquisition was to join the area of dominant development in PC OSs (i.e. GNU/Linux), as Netware continued to fade away. Without that, I don't see them as viable going forward. Well, they could close up shop and retire to the beach with a couple of Coronas. But then again, the boys from Provo rather have a Sprite instead.

Re:Fund their Retirement? (1)

The Second Horseman (121958) | about 4 years ago | (#33610894)

Huh? eDirectory and Identity Manager are major products in that space. It's the preferred IDM solution for SAP, for example. Zenworks (especially with the endpoint security add-ons) has been doing well, and there are still a lot of GroupWise customers (running it on Linux, even). Novell Access Manager (take a look at what it does) is also a really terrific product in its arena as well.

interesting move (2, Informative)

slshwtw (1903272) | about 4 years ago | (#33610734)

An interesting move since VMware's flagship virtualization product (ESX) is based on Red Hat, yet the current release of that product is the last that will support using the full-blown ESX with the privileged (red-hat-like) guest. They are moving to only support the bare hypervisor product (ESXi).

Re:interesting move (3, Informative)

Courageous (228506) | about 4 years ago | (#33611430)

ESX is not "based" on Red Hat, even using a loose reading of the word "based".

When you log onto the console operating system in a ESX environment, you are not, in fact, logging onto ESX at all.

The console operating system is a privileged VM running on the ESX server that solely exists to let you run command lines and the like, to discover information about the hypervisor's state, tell it what to do, and so forth. That has turned out to be the source of numerous security holes, hence the moving away from it.

C//

What about UNIX copyrights and patents? (1)

azrael29a (1349629) | about 4 years ago | (#33611304)

What about UNIX copyrights and patents? Will they go to VMware, or to the other buyer which will buy the rest of the old Novell?

Not good for Xen. (1)

dr.newton (648217) | about 4 years ago | (#33611502)

If VMware buys SuSE that will be a blow to Xen.

Red Hat has already switched to KVM, and Ubuntu doesn't provide a Xen Dom0 kernel. If SuSE goes to a virtualization vendor that competes with products built on Xen, what options will be left for enterprise distros that provide Xen Dom0 support? Oracle Unbreakable Linux?

Mandriva (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33611538)

Why don't they buy Mandriva? Its a good distro.
And... Mandriva is having a hard time to get investors around (stock is frozen [euronext.com] right now for that reason).
Seems to me they will be a cheaper to buy...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?