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!

cancel ×

202 comments

No good? (3, Funny)

spudnic (32107) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956524)

So my 3.12 CNE is no good any more? Dang!

Re:No good? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956952)

Poor Miguel De Icaza will have to go back to blowing Microsoft executives for copies of Windows 8.

QQ

Re:No good? (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957242)

well it probably runs just fine.

I know I have a complete install of 3.12 and manuals around work some where. the hard part is getting it to work with windows XP.

oblig dune reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956530)

May its passing cleanse the world.

So what will happen to OpenSuse? (3, Insightful)

kalpol (714519) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956564)

I am fond of that distribution - any word on whether it will still be maintained?

Re:So what will happen to OpenSuse? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956834)

Attachmate have stated that there will be no change in the relationship between SUSE and OpenSUSE

http://www.attachmate.com/Press/PressReleases/nov-22-2010-SUSE.htm

Re:So what will happen to OpenSuse? (2)

sudden.zero (981475) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956864)

It looks like they will continue maintaining SUSE according to their website http://www.attachmategroup.com/ [attachmategroup.com] . It also looks like they are going to continue using the Novell name. Both the Suse and Novell logos are on their site.

Re:So what will happen to OpenSuse? (2)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957666)

Indeed, given that Suse was reportedly one of Novell's main profit centers, it seems unlikely that it or OpenSuse is in any danger of disappearing. In fact, it looks like Suse may be becoming a separate subsidiary of Attachmate, independent of the former Novell

Re:So what will happen to OpenSuse? (1)

SpooForBrains (771537) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957396)

(fantasy hat on) Can we have SuSE back as an independent German company again please? It is a shadow of its former self.

Re:So what will happen to OpenSuse? (0)

malignant_minded (884324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957540)

ok this is not directed at the parent but what part of this statement is insightful? Is saying that you are fond of a distro insightful? or is asking a question that can be researched insightful?

Final Abend (5, Funny)

nbvb (32836) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956584)

UNLOAD NOVELL.NLM

System halted Wednesday, April 27, 2011 4:30:00 pm EDT

  Abend: Page Fault Processor Exception (Error code 00000002)
          OS version: Novell NetWare 4.10 November 8, 1994
        Running Process: SCRSAVER.NLM
          Stack: AC 1F 65 01 E7 66 03 F1 50 CA 65 01 03 00 00 00
                          D0 1F 65 01 09 00 00 00 B0 81 01 F9 54 CE 65 01
                        39 67 03 F1 0B CB 65 01 B4 D0 65 01 B0 81 01 F9
    Press "Y" to copy diagnostic image to disk.
    Otherwise press "X" to exit.

21 gun salute, console edition. (1)

Jailbrekr (73837) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956886)

FIRE PHASERS 21

pew! pew! pew! pew!

Re:21 gun salute, console edition. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957352)

That would actually be:

FIRE 21 RIFLE.WAV

The "RIFLE.WAV" sound was one of the default sounds Novell included.

Re:Final Abend (1)

jd (1658) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957144)

Congratulations! You have just vanquished a dragon with your bare hands! (Unbelievable, isn't it?)

ANOTHER LINUX "COMPANY" BITES TEH DUST !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956588)

Ashes to ashes, teh dust to dust !!

Go open sores and you too can sing

And another one's gone
Another one bites the dust !!

Re:ANOTHER LINUX "COMPANY" BITES TEH DUST !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956706)

This wasn't just a Linux company. A major network vendor, and the COMPANY THAT OWNS UNIX! What a sad day.

Re:ANOTHER LINUX "COMPANY" BITES TEH DUST !! (1)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956906)

Novell's demise is mainly a result of Microsoft's obsession with fighting old battles. Meanwhile, allowing itself to be outflanked on multiple fronts.

I don't think we really care who owns Unix, it's just a trademark. And Linux Is Not UniX.

Re:ANOTHER LINUX "COMPANY" BITES TEH DUST !! (0)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957200)

And Linux Is Not UniX.

Funny you should say that, because there's a post from Linus Torvalds on kerneltrap.org in which he says that that Linux is Unix. Unfortunately, the entire kerneltrap.org site seems to be down right now, but if it ever comes back up you can find his post here: http://kerneltrap.org/node/11 [kerneltrap.org]

SCO won after all, so, what does that say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956874)

It's says it all, is what is says.

Re:SCO won after all, so, what does that say? (2)

Shimbo (100005) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957744)

If this is victory, I don't know what defeat would look like. Novell shareholders will get roughly $2 billion dollars; SCO shareholders will probably get nothing.

Novell's rights to the legacy System V business was only of significant value in SCO's fantasy world where Linux was a derivate of System V.

Re:SCO won after all, so, what does that say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957988)

SCO. Attachmate. Is there really any difference? NO!

It's like the Wide World of Sports opening: "The ... AGONY OF DEFEAT!"

It's like a woman who straps a bomb on her back and boards a bus then realized it's empty when she pushes the button!

It's the Finns who realize Nokia has sold its soul to the devil!

It's Wile E. Coyote catching the Road Runner only to find Chrysler is no more!

It's like winning the lottery and dieing the next day!

It's like installing Linux to be free of MS, only to find out it's all in Geek!

Corel Wordperfect is still around (3, Interesting)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956620)

Reading this, I kinda wondered what ever became of Wordperfect, once a dominant player in the business world (along with Lotus 123), before Microsoft, well, Microsofted them.

Now I remember, Corel [wikipedia.org] bought Wordperfect, and apparently it's still around [corel.com] .

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956704)

Word Perfect killed itself by being so late in bringing out a Windows version that by the time they did they were irrelevant to anyone but lawyers still using DOS.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (2)

RatBastard (949) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956814)

That and the version they did come out with, 5.2 for Windows, was crap. By the time they did come out with a good version it was way too late.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (2)

iplayfast (166447) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956816)

Wasn't there a problem with WordPerfect working with windows due to api details being withheld?

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (2)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956962)

Thats the common folklore myth, but theres little grounding to it - the issues WordPerfect 5.1 (the first Windows version) was down to a poorly adaptable architecture internally and the fact that Windows superseded most of the advantages that WordPerfect had enjoyed up until then (a consistent internal character set which meant that WordPerfect 5.1 couldn't handle all of the languages that Windows did, and the fact that Windows entirely replaced the print subsystem that WordPerfect had used up until then, making its extensive print driver collection worthless).

Sure, like Netscape, Microsoft had a hand in its death, but the real story, again just like Netscape, was that the product lost its competitive edge and fell by the way side.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (3, Interesting)

guruevi (827432) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957052)

That's indeed part of the problem. MS used secret API's in Word that made it work much faster (you know, back in the day when everything was optimized in order to be able to run acceptably) than WordPerfect. It also happened that if you installed a version of Word, WordPerfect would start crashing because of a missing or replaced DLL.

But WordPerfect was not without fault either, they made mistakes marketing, they made mistakes programming, they basically pulled a Vista. They had (and still have) a much better word processor than Word and it's continuing to be used although they're not the cash cow they once were.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (1, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957486)

That's indeed part of the problem.

No, that wasn't part of the problem at all. That's just crap made up after the fact by people plagued with nostalgia who can't possibly fathom that Microsoft could haven't beaten WordPerfect by anything but sneak moves.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (1)

Xross_Ied (224893) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957764)

In the Win3.x and Win9x and NT4 days I built and maintained computers labs at a community college.

For Win3.x, WP5.x and 6.x shipped with a msvrt.dll and one other MS provided DLL that was identical binary (and version number) to what was shipped with Windows itself. The WordPerfect installer replaced the Windows installed copy with it's own copy where the timestamp was the only difference.

As soon as you installed MS-Office these two DLLs (in the windows directory) were replaced with different binaries which reported the same version number.

Once installed, WordPerfect would be slower and more crash prone.

I don't know if this was a planned/malicious change on the part of Microsoft or just crappy version control development, you decide.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (2)

inode_buddha (576844) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957854)

Um, some of us were actually around when it was all happening, some of us can read court documents, and some of us have *long* memories.

I call astroturf.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957498)

There is no evidence that WordPerfect was in any way hindered by lack of access to secret APIs. I've used WP 5.1 and it didn't run particularly slowly. But stability was a big issue. WP 5.1 had a tendency of dereferencing null pointers and re-accessing previously freed memory, which given the nature of Windows 3.1 generally meant that it was time for a reboot.
In addition to that, there was also a sense of too little, too late. I used WP for Windows because I had used the DOS version before, but many people I knew went with Word because it shipped earlier, and too be honest, even though I hate to admit it, it was a better word processor too, it wasn't just more user-friendly but had more useful features as well.
And WP never really progressed. (To give an example of how bad the situation is: 2011 and still no Unicode support.)

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (1)

inode_buddha (576844) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957982)

There is plenty of evidence and in fact a court case or two. Dig back through the archives at Groklaw sometime, it's a real education.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957364)

Windows version that by the time they did they were irrelevant to anyone but lawyers still using DOS.

HAH, our clients have some of those, and they dont use DOS.

Have you ever tried to get 16 year old software to run on windows 7? Its a lot of fun.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (1)

Vancorps (746090) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957822)

Do it all the time, easy as hell with Virtual Box.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (3, Interesting)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957250)

Reading this, I kinda wondered what ever became of Wordperfect, once a dominant player in the business world (along with Lotus 123), before Microsoft, well, Microsofted them.

Now I remember, Corel [wikipedia.org] bought Wordperfect, and apparently it's still around [corel.com] .

Microsoft really had nothing to do with Wordperfect's death. They were far and away the number one DOS word processor and felt they could ignore that newfangled Windows thing that came along. By the time they realized that Windows wasn't a passing fad, it was too late. And it didn't help that their intial Windows versions were crap.

Novell bought Wordperfect for $800 Million and just a couple of years later sold it to Corel for $200 Million. Then a few years later Corel (the entire company) was sold for $200 million.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (2)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957304)

I'm not a lawyer, but I deal with them every day. WordPerfect is still used a lot in the legal profession. Not too long ago, I was reading the transcript from a hearing from 2007 as a part of which the court reporter certified that in addition to the printed transcript, she had also provided the document in WordPerfect 5.1 (yes, for DOS) format. Yes, really.

Re:Corel Wordperfect is still around (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957444)

Anyone remember the Corel/Wordperfect suite written totally in Java? It was slow, buggy, and well, it just sucked.

Happened back in the 90's when everyone thought Java was going to rule the world (that is until they actually tried to use it).

Memories (2, Interesting)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956634)

Netware
Utah
WordPerfect
QuattroPro
Digital Research
DR-DOS
Simian GNOME
Suse
USL
UNIX
SCO
patents
Mono

Sic semper Microsoft particeps (1, Insightful)

straponego (521991) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956652)

(I'm sure that's bad Latin)

Re:Sic semper Microsoft particeps (0)

jd (1658) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957088)

ad perpetuam memoriam, Novell, cor aut mors

not the least bit surprising (2)

v1 (525388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956672)

Just another example of innovate or die. They had a HUGE place in business servers years ago, and then they just sat down on their laurels, and never stood back up.

Was there even anything worth acquiring in this sale? even the name brings a musty smell to a conversation.

Re:not the least bit surprising (4, Insightful)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956792)

Just another example of innovate or die. They had a HUGE place in business servers years ago, and then they just sat down on their laurels, and never stood back up.

No, their prices were being undercut by Microsoft, which had independent revenue stream in the form of MsOffice and Windows. It is impossible for any company to fight this in their own turf. Microsoft will simply wait for you to run out of cash and then sweep in and peck on the carcass.

Re:not the least bit surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35958154)

Just another example of innovate or die. They had a HUGE place in business servers years ago, and then they just sat down on their laurels, and never stood back up.

No, their prices were being undercut by Microsoft, which had independent revenue stream in the form of MsOffice and Windows. It is impossible for any company to fight this in their own turf. Microsoft will simply wait for you to run out of cash and then sweep in and peck on the carcass.

Yep, it's just like Microsoft did to Google. Remember when we all used to use Google for searching and now we all use Bing? Sad really. There is truly no way to stop the all powerful Microsoft. No point in blaming the poor businesses for their lack of innovation or execution because we all know that no matter how good you are, Microsoft will win.

Re:not the least bit surprising (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956824)

Was there even anything worth acquiring in this sale?

There was, but hopefully we dodged a bullet [electronista.com]

Re:not the least bit surprising (1)

crasshacker (1274528) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956880)

Really? Novell has been around almost 30 years, so I suspect that they bring more than a musty smell to a conversation - unless those involved in the conversation believe that they've built no new products since the early days of NetWare. In any case, I hope they continue going strong. I love Mono, and I love SUSE Linux. (I also happen to work for a business unit with the same parent company, The Attachmate Group, so I may be a bit biased. :-))

Re:not the least bit surprising (1)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957038)

Indeed. Novell isn't going away. They just have new owners.

Can't live on legacy business forever (2)

sjbe (173966) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957714)

They had a HUGE place in business servers years ago, and then they just sat down on their laurels, and never stood back up.

Their Netware product was arguably better that Microsoft's offerings but the problem was that Microsoft's competing product was good enough for most customers and it was cheaper and bundled. Businesses don't make money by buying network management software. Novell built their Netware business around features that was missing in Microsoft's offerings. When Microsoft provided it, Novell's business model no longer made sense. The only reason they hung around as long as they did is because ripping that sort of software out and replacing it is an expensive pain in the ass. But you can't live on legacy customers forever.

For the same reasons I would never buy (to hold) stock in an anti-virus vendor, inkjet cartridge refill company, or any other company whose business is based on some mis-feature of another company's product. They can be put out of business very easily.

Re:not the least bit surprising (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35958072)

The perception at the time was that the NT GUI interface was much less intimidating than the (cryptic) command line management of Novell's product. Regardless of whether the perception was true in fact, it was certainly true in the hearts and minds of the minimally to moderately skilled LAN "administrator" of the time. The simple truth is that the command line interface intimidated small business implementors during the computerization of small business America.

So Long Novell (1)

Quato (132194) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956680)

I'll fondly remember our Novell 3.x server that we didn't reboot for two years. We replaced it with about four NT servers that needed constant attention.

Re:So Long Novell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956754)

I also remember Novell 4.0, which wouldn't boot at all...

Re:So Long Novell (2)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957166)

I worked in a 4.11 shop, it worked just fine, years of uptime. Groupwise had some problems, the migration to 5 was nightmarish.

I really think IPX instead of IP was a mistake after 1995 though.

Re:So Long Novell (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957092)

Why did you replace?
Why didn't you revert to Netware?

Re:So Long Novell (3, Interesting)

Quato (132194) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957276)

Why did you replace?
Why didn't you revert to Netware?


The word came down from management that Exchange/Outlook was going to be the way of the future. So we needed a domain server, a Exchange server and a couple of file servers. Of course our Novell server did this all in one machine, and did it a hell of a lot faster.
Novell didn't go out of style because of poor design, it went out of style because Microsoft put more advertising out and convinced more users in upper management that it was the best thing out there.
All of a sudden there was this if it isn't 'Windows on Intel it's crap mentatlity' that made Microsoft what it is.

Re:So Long Novell (5, Interesting)

bratloaf (1287954) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957218)

I recently got called in by a client to "help out a relative with their server". A smallish family business at least three generations deep (selling and maintaining farm equipment). When I arrived I was greeted with a lot of questions - about if I could possibly help them move their office to a smaller space down the road. They were very concerned about their server, because a bigger local consulting company had told them it would cost $4000 to move it to a new office.

I took a look, and found a pristine (c) 1992 DEC server (x86) running Netware 3.1 with two software mirrored SCSI drives. 10-base-T, and an old "concentrator". Heheh...

Workstations were IBM PCs (the old style) with Novell ethernet network cards.

I backed up their entire server (SYS vol and DATA vol) to my FLASH DRIVE. Did some testing offline to be sure their (c)1994 accounting software could be made to run independently of the server if needed, and moved their stuff the next weekend. The server had been up for 2664 days. Uneventful move. Server is still up. We plan to replace it with a small SAN sometime this summer. That thing had been running 24/7 with only a few reboots due to power loss since 1992. This just happened a month or two ago. (And no, no one had ever applied the Y2K fixes to it...)

Crazy reliable.

Re:So Long Novell (1)

man_of_mr_e (217855) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957346)

It's hard to believe that the hardware kept working for 19 years, particularly the hard drives, but just as surprising the power supply (which tends to suck in so much dust and lint that they eventually die from overheating). The cooling fans also tend to give up the ghost after about 5 years as well.

I'm more interested in how you backed up the server to USB when all of the computers were made before USB ports existed.

Re:So Long Novell (1)

Quato (132194) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957428)

He probably just plugged a laptop into the ethernet, mapped drives and copied to his flashdrive.

Re:So Long Novell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957544)

Perhaps:
*A Windows-based PC with Netware connected to the same network
*A CompactFlash card with an IDE adapter
Either way, quite a feat.

Re:So Long Novell (1)

HuguesT (84078) | more than 3 years ago | (#35958040)

1992 hardware did not require as much cooling as it does now.

Re:So Long Novell (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957374)

i did something similar 3 years ago. the netware 3.1 server just never died. when we los tpower and rebooted you had to reset the clock as the calendar was fine software wise but the hardware bios wouldn't set right upon boot.

However the company closed/sold out and i made two copies of their SYS and DATA vol each one to a separate computer. all i had to due was flip a couple of settings and redirect some file pointers and the server became two separate computers with all data intact.

One of those has since died(unlucky lighting strike) the other is in an old HP laptop that only boots off of the power cable and isn't hooked up.

Whats attachmate? (3, Funny)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956710)

Whats "Attachmate"? Dating website? Some sort of trademarked fastener, you know, like tapcon (tm)?

Re:Whats attachmate? (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956870)

Whats "Attachmate"?

Some robotic device NSFW, I guess!

Re:Whats attachmate? (1)

Genda (560240) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956876)

"What's the difference between a lawyer and a tick?... when you die, a tick falls off!." - Joke of the Day.

Re:Whats attachmate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956894)

Last time I did anything with Attachmate, it was a 3270 emulation card for PCs.

Re:Whats attachmate? (1, Troll)

wassermana (962167) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957106)

Another dinosaur. One that made (makes) hardware to connect PCs to mainframes. Mainframes are... oh, never mind. One dinosaur ate another.

Re:Whats attachmate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957132)

Attachmate is really just the corporate vehicle being used for the Novell acquisition by several software investment firms, who are now Novell's real owners.

Re:Whats attachmate? (1)

jd (1658) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957172)

It's a papermate line of pens with added superglue.

Re:Whats attachmate? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957206)

Attachmate is a Seattle-based company like GoDaddy, only with bison instead of leopards and elephants.

http://www.9news.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=108695&catid=346

Re:Whats attachmate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957264)

Attachmate is a Seattle-based company, similar to GoDaddy, except with bison rather than leopards and elephants.

http://www.9news.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=108695&catid=346

Value (2)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956788)

Andsomethingthatusedtobeofvaluewaslost?

Open Source companies (0)

submain (856941) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956808)

I wonder why companies that strongly support open source software are being bought by other companies - is there any correlation?. First Sun, now Novell. I sure hope that doesn't happen to IBM...

Re:Open Source companies (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956934)

Why is this not marked as funny? Who could possibly buy IBM?

Re:Open Source companies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957044)

Didn't someone managed to buy GM recently?

Re:Open Source companies (2)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957324)

That was me. Sorry about that.

Signed,
An American Taxpayer

Re:Open Source companies (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957064)

Who would want to buy a company that had a $4 billion lawsuit against them?

Dealing with lawyers is a pain in the butt, think of dealing with 4 billion dollars worth of them chasing after them like they were an ambulance leaving an accident scene.

Re:Open Source companies (1)

malignant_minded (884324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957136)

from what i can see ibm has a different business model than those other companies. i dont work for ibm or have any business relationship with them but it appears they take all the cool stuff out there and try and put it together into a working solution they can sell. they got out of the laptop world which was smart since hardware is a losing place. imo they are doing the right thing. their support is expensive but they do bring solutions to the table and companies will always need that.

I miss my worm screensaver (1)

Sigmon (323109) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956854)

Fear the worm!

another ms partner.. (5, Informative)

Jeek Elemental (976426) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956856)

will meet you all here again when its Nokias turn

Crap (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956898)

Now I feel really old. Again.

this just in (1)

nimbius (983462) | more than 3 years ago | (#35956982)

novel just sold something in the last decade!...oh wait...

Mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35956994)

What I really want to know is what's the future of Mono then?

Impact on Mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957084)

Has there been any word on how, if at all this affects Novell's sponsorship of the Mono Project [mono-project.com] ?

Snake colors (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957102)

We ran 3.1x through 5 on dual processor Compaq Proliant 5000s, the screen saver had the blue and red snakes.

If you ran it on quads, what were the colors of the other snakes? Anyone know?

Deeprun Tram in WoW has screens running Netware like screen savers too, but gnomes only run dual core in Deeprun.

http://www.wowwiki.com/Deeprun_Tram#Notes [wowwiki.com]

Re:Snake colors (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957240)

Googling around I found this (very recent) re-implementation for Linux: LoadSnake [opera.com]

Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (2)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957164)

Sometimes, the company with the best product is not the company with the best business strategy. And we've seen before that when that happens, the company with the crappy product and the better business strategy almost always wins.

Re:Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (2)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957506)

You're basically talking about eDirectory vs Active Directory, right? And you are implying that eDirectory was the better product?

Uh no. That was true 15 years ago, but as soon as Active Directory came out it was time to jump ship to MS. Still, to this day Novell has a few hold outs ( and sadly, I've worked at several of them ). The difference between AD and ED is startling. Why any company would put up with ED is beyond me; I'm fairly certain that some of the CIOs involved were getting kick backs from Novell. That's the only thing that makes sense.

Re:Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957670)

Why any company would put up with ED is beyond me

Maybe they are currently celibate and don't really care about their ED?

Re:Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957812)

So you're saying their Mac users?

Suddenly, it starts to make sense.

Re:Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (1)

toadlife (301863) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957990)

No. Mac users use special proprietary connectors when they mate.

Re:Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (1)

Vancorps (746090) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957968)

As someone that loved NDS and is less familiar with the later eDirectory, what didn't you like about it when compared with Active Directory of the same era? Only since Server 2008 has Active Directory met up with NDS functionality, did Novell screw the pooch on edirectory?

Re:Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (1)

toadlife (301863) | more than 3 years ago | (#35958142)

I had a very long discussion with a Novell devotee about ED vs AD back in 2000 and from I got that ED and AD were functionally equivalent with different methods of implementing core functionality.

All of the disadvantages of AD he cited were the result of on him not really understanding how AD worked.

Re:Corporate Darwinism, I guess... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35958116)

never heard of NDS or eDirectory, but why any company puts up with Active Directory is beyond me. If either of those 2 things are worse, I can't imagine how. I'm unfortunately forced to write authentication modules for AD from time to time and even using MS own libs the damn thing doesn't work. It reminds me most of IE, creating non-standard standards that only they follow, and then in the next version not following them either. It makes me want to vomit just thinking of it.

Looks like a patent trolling company. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35957292)

2011 The Attachmate Group, Inc.

1233 West Loop South
Suite 810
Houston, TX 77027

free at last? (1)

redfood (471234) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957438)

Maybe my employer will finally move away from Novell's terrible Web Services, GroupWise, and iPrint.

I have a dream that one day I'll be able to have my name, longer than 8 characters, supported as a username w/o being cut off.

Re:free at last? (2)

MarcQuadra (129430) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957636)

Actually, I've always wondered this. Are there a lot of corrupt/illegal kickbacks in I.T.? I'm not in management, but sometimes it feels like the entire organization is pointing at a cheap, simple, effective solution, and management goes and picks some multi-million-dollar monster that takes a year to set up.

Also, I've met a LOT of I.T. sales folks, and most give me the willies.

Re:free at last? (1)

redfood (471234) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957964)

In Novell's case I think its inertia. There was a time that Novell offered a suit of solutions that worked together well and made things easier. Eventually, industry surpassed Novell.

Good IT managers are conservative. In the short term, "If it ain't broke don't fix it" is a good motto. But sometimes sticking with the old becomes a burden and its good to be proactive. Knowing when to migrate or upgrade (and when not to) is what separates the good managers from the great ones.

I'm guessing you are an engineer. The willies you get from sales is your BS detector going off. The sales people are selling product they don't completely understand. The management making the buy decision is buying a product they don't completely understand. But the sales people and the management speak the same language. The engineers usually do not. So the management trusts the sales people and the "monster" is purchased.

Novell behaved perfectly rationally (2)

JTW (11913) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957596)

Software companies have their own "physical laws" of operation.

1. Innovate
2. Incorporate
3. Reorganize
4. Downsize
5. Distribute the proceeds

It's just completing the cycle.

I couldn't name a company that has escaped this Schwartz child limit. Microsoft isn't so much that type of company as a "holding company" and it has a longer life cycle. If companies were stars, Microsoft would be a red dwarf, Novell a yellow sun, Netscape a blue giant (or maybe a Eta Carinae that went Nova).

If Microsoft lasts as long it could be with us for billions and billions of years (lol).

Re:Novell behaved perfectly rationally (1)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 3 years ago | (#35957972)

If Microsoft lasts as long it could be with us for billions and billions of years (lol).

God I wish there was a +1 Scary moderator option.

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...