Beta
×

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

Thank you!

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

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

Novell CEO Gives Behind the Scenes Account of Microsoft Deal

samzenpus posted more than 7 years ago | from the and-then-what-did-he-say dept.

Novell 215

raffe writes "Here is a Q&A with Ron Hovsepian CEO of Novell. He describes 'a love-hate thing' between the two companies." From the article: "This past May, I picked up the phone and called Kevin Turner, the COO at Microsoft. I knew Kevin when he was the CIO at Wal-Mart. I said, "Kevin, I'd like to have a conversation about what the customer needs. If you could put back on your old hat as a customer, if I came in and started talking to you about virtualization on Linux, and this Microsoft guy showed up and started talking to you about virtualization on Windows, what would you say to us?""

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

I'd say (5, Interesting)

billsoxs (637329) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041848)

" if I came in and started talking to you about virtualization on Linux, and this Microsoft guy showed up and started talking to you about virtualization on Windows, what would you say to us?"

OK which one of you would cost me less in TCO.

What I still don't understand is ... (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041938)

So, Novell's lost 4 deployments to Microsoft ..... and now Microsoft wants to help Novell get a chance at future deployments?

Is this something that makes sense in CEO-land?

Because it sure doesn't make sense from where I'm at.

Re:What I still don't understand is ... (1)

billsoxs (637329) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041982)

So, Novell's lost 4 deployments to Microsoft ..... and now Microsoft wants to help Novell get a chance at future deployments?
But he does not say how many he has won. This could be the real reason that this was signed my M$. Novell has signed to kill some FUD.

Re:What I still don't understand is ... (1)

billsoxs (637329) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042022)

OK before I get flamed! "Novell has signed to kill some FUD." at least as far as the CEO of Novell is willing to let on.

Re:What I still don't understand is ... (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042012)

It is simple. It means even if you lose the big deal, you will still pick up sales form it.

Running Microsoft on Linux is only a fraction as bad as running Linux and no Microsoft. So were a company would have gone the direction away from Microsoft all together, it still lets Microsoft in the door to cause them to think otherwise. or at least for parts of their operations.

It isn't that Microsoft is winning the deals, they got lucky on a few. Microsoft knows this.

Who will do that? (4, Informative)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042146)

Running Microsoft on Linux is only a fraction as bad as running Linux and no Microsoft.

And what company is going to deploy Linux just so it can virtualize Windows? Why wouldn't they save the time and expertise (and finger pointing) and just deploy Windows as the host and Windows as the guest?

So were a company would have gone the direction away from Microsoft all together, it still lets Microsoft in the door to cause them to think otherwise. or at least for parts of their operations.

But it was Novell's CEO who said that he lost deals to Microsoft, again and again and again. I don't often see Microsoft complaining about losing deals to Linux.

It isn't that Microsoft is winning the deals, they got lucky on a few. Microsoft knows this.

You might want to check your email server logs. It seems that 95%+ of the businesses we deal with are running Exchange.

And Novell's marketshare has been in decline for years.

Somehow that doesn't add up to "got lucky on a few".

Re:Who will do that? (5, Interesting)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042202)

And what company is going to deploy Linux just so it can virtualize Windows? Why wouldn't they save the time and expertise (and finger pointing) and just deploy Windows as the host and Windows as the guest?

People who want a stable subtrate operating system on which they can deploy their Windows services? Think about it. A stable underlying OS allows you to stop worrying about the actual servers and focus on the VMs. This means you can do things like hot VM fail-over, for higher availability. Seems like a big win to me.

Not to mention developers who might want a Linux box as their core OS while they do Windows development. Or those doing cross-platform work.

www.vmware.com (2, Informative)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042250)

People who want a stable subtrate operating system on which they can deploy their Windows services? Think about it. A stable underlying OS allows you to stop worrying about the actual servers and focus on the VMs. This means you can do things like hot VM fail-over, for higher availability. Seems like a big win to me.

WMWare already offers something like that.

And Linux, when administered by someone who does NOT know what he's doing is no more stable than Windows. But Windows can be as stable as Linux when you have a competent administrator. In your scenario, the company would be paying for Linux experts AND Windows experts. Why? Why not just spend the money and get competent Windows administraters?

Not to mention developers who might want a Linux box as their core OS while they do Windows development. Or those doing cross-platform work.

www.vmware.com

It's even free (as in beer) now. And you don't have to tweak the guest OS. It runs clean. We use it all the time.

So close, but so far away (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042364)

So close, but so far away.

Parent wrote "WMWare already offers something like that."

Yes, technologically VMWare can run all the Vista variations.

Unfortunatelly the Vista EULA for some of their versions apparently prohibit it, so despite being technologically capable of doing so (in much the same way you're technologically capable of pirating Windows or violating the GPL), it doesn't do you much good if you're trying to obey the law.

Re:So close, but so far away (1)

schwaang (667808) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042722)

Yes, technologically VMWare can run all the Vista variations.

Unfortunatelly the Vista EULA for some of their versions apparently prohibit it[...]
Having missed this nuance, I googled up Scott Granemann's Nov 6th article [securityfocus.com] on the subject. The EULA for home versions of Vista don't permit running under virtualization. The business versions do (but with added restrictions on use of some DRM-protected software).

Re:So close, but so far away (1)

sleeper0 (319432) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043302)

Folks confused you with knee jerk analysis of the vista eula - All versions of vista can be virtualized, the clause that you are referring to allows some versions of vista to be run both as a guest and a host for that guest while only purchasing one vista license. This is a continuation of their program from windows 2003 (r2?) that allows you to run 1 host win2k3 and 4 guest win2k3's simultaneously with a single license as long as it's on the same hardware... This applies if win2k3 isn't the host as well, one license gets you up to 4 guest instances with one license no matter what the host OS is (esx, linux, etc)

Re:www.vmware.com (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042504)

You do realise that VMWare's bigger stuff like ESX runs a stripped down version of Red Hat, right? So basically you're getting the same thing that the OP said. Linux with Windows on top, hot swapping VM's, fail-over support, etc..

AFAIK, only the Player and Server are free-as-in-beer. The Player can't actually create the VM, or install a guest OS, etc...and I'm assuming that the free Server is crippled as well.

The Workstation is not free, but it is a reasonable price (~$200 US) for a single developer looking to do Windows development on a FOSS box.

Re:www.vmware.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17044032)

Absolutely Wrong!

ESX does not run under RedHat Linux. The management console that bootstraps the machine is redhat but once ESX's VMKernel is loaded the management console becomes just another virtual machine that happens to be running redhat; it no longer has any direct control of the hardware.

Re:www.vmware.com (2, Insightful)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042718)

But Windows can be as stable as Linux when you have a competent administrator. In your scenario, the company would be paying for Linux experts AND Windows experts. Why? Why not just spend the money and get competent Windows administraters?
Theoretically I suppose that would be true. But competent Windows administrators deem to be quite rare compared to decent enough Linux administrators.

At least that's what I gathered from the several shops I've seen and numerous people I've met. Now I don't touch the Windows side any more so of course it's mostly second hand.

Re:www.vmware.com (1)

killjoe (766577) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043150)

"Why? Why not just spend the money and get competent Windows administraters?"

Both Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have said many times that one of the reasons why windows is cheaper to run is because you don't need to pay for an expensive sysadmin. Anybody can administer windows. Bill Gates says so and he would never lie.

Re:www.vmware.com (5, Interesting)

bill_kress (99356) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043392)

I rarely use Linux, but by what means are you judging stability?

I can keep a linux system up and running for years with a handful of services, and I'm horrid at unix. For instance, I know "dd", ":q", ":wq", "i", "a" from VI, that's IT.

On the other hand, I'm pretty much a windows expert. I can do pretty much anything with a windows machine EXCEPT keep it running for more than a month. I'm not talking windows expert as in the guy in your family that helps with PCs, I'm speaking as the guy who helps the IT department when they get stuck.

How about hackability? I don't think I've ever seen a rooted Linux machine (but as I said, I don't get a ton of exposure to Linux workstations, maybe I don't know?)--yet I find it rare when dealing with a PC over 6 months old to not have a rootkit or some such garbage installed. I keep a Linux machine at home and won't do financial transactions on any of my 4 windows PCs or this work pc I'm on now.

I admit I'm talking different uses. PCs I've used have generally had apps installed and uninstalled over time, and are in a pretty flakey condition within a year. The Linux pc's I've set up are generally fire-and-forget, but as I said, I do run one linux laptop where I load bunches of apps, delete bunches of apps, etc and it's still crashless (well, apps lock up sometimes and I'm sometimes not good enough to shut them down without rebooting the laptop, but it could be done if I was better with Linux.)

Also: a "Good" windows admin will schedule reboots daily or weekly. I've never heard of a "Good" linux admin doing that. Doesn't that alone say a lot about general stability?

Did you have some different definition of stability than uptime (no crashes, no reboots) and a lack of degradation over time?

My definition of stability (3, Informative)

OmniGeek (72743) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043804)

Is my Samba server that's been running in a back room for two years, and only ever gets rebooted when the power's out long enough to drain the UPS (which has happened maybe twice during that time.) Didn't even need a reboot when we changed its IP address. Did I mention it's had NO problems since being initially configured?

Parent poster has it dead on about uptime...

Re:Who will do that? (1)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043494)

People who want a stable subtrate operating system on which they can deploy their Windows services? Think about it. A stable underlying OS allows you to stop worrying about the actual servers and focus on the VMs.

All you are doing is adding an extra layers of complexity and points of failure.

This means you can do things like hot VM fail-over, for higher availability. Seems like a big win to me.

If your hardware is failing frequently enough for this to be a meaningful issue, you need to buy better hardware (and, regardless, it's still going to fail running whatever your virtualisation host is).

If it's OS failures that concern you, then it's pretty much irrelevant whether the OS is running on real or virtualised hardware when it fails.

The only advantage to virtualisation in production environments that I can see, is consolidating hardware resources - and given how ridiculously cheap low-end servers are, while still being more than powerful enough for low-end tasks, even the value proposition there is difficult to see for typical environments.

I've been using virtualisation for development and testing since VMWare 1.0. The value there is obvious. But having run some numbers, I really can't see any meaningful advantage at all to virtualisation in production environments - unless you're doing something kinda weird where you want *lots* of relatively slow machines without actually having physical hardware.

Re:Who will do that? (1)

jargon82 (996613) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043696)

That's an odd statement, as I've seen lots of production environments running in vmware. When the average windows box runs around 5-10% cpu utilization 90% of the time, it's hard NOT to see value in it.

That aside, vmotion, if you've ever experienced it, is an amazing thing. Absolutely amazing. The flexibility it gives you creates a whole new methodology of building an IT environment.

Re:Who will do that? (2, Interesting)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042340)

And what company is going to deploy Linux just so it can virtualize Windows? Why wouldn't they save the time and expertise (and finger pointing) and just deploy Windows as the host and Windows as the guest?
I dunno, the company that wants to sandbox their production environment and make sure that the latest windows virus that exploits a hole microsoft already fixed but no one is updating because it borkes allot of other items. Or maybe it is the company that wants to run get away form Microsoft but is held on by one killer app and cannot. Why would anyone want to virtualize anything?

But it was Novell's CEO who said that he lost deals to Microsoft, again and again and again. I don't often see Microsoft complaining about losing deals to Linux.
He claimed to lose four deals with microsoft for being unduly influenced with IP problems starting about 18 months ago. I'm going to guess SCO fud and Microsoft helping maybe. Microsoft knows this will eventually be hammered out and the record set straight. No one will ever specify any particular part of anything in linux(or bsd) that is infringing because they know it either doesn't exist or will be replaces within a week. If they spread the fud, It will be DOJ anti trust all over and Microsoft knows it. Novel is big enough to go this route and cause a lot of problems for Microsoft's anti competition. Smaller Linux deployment won't have the ability Novel does to counter claims and seek resolve with the DOJ like Novel or IBM can.

It is in their best interest to deal with it now. the comment made from microsoft's vice monkey was either to influence a deal in the works or to promote Vista adoption and deter Linux replacements for aging Microsoft OSs.

You might want to check your email server logs. It seems that 95%+ of the businesses we deal with are running Exchange.
You might want to check the article. the CEO said for the first time, about 18 months ago, he lost an account because of fud!. That means this 95% just got a little larger because if lies! And novels market share hasn't been dropping at any stagering rate. You not going to get nose bleeds from the ride. But lucky because enough fud was spread about IP belonging to Microsoft or SCO or whoever else means exactly what it implies. Microsoft got lucky on a few deals because of fud being spread around!

Well .... (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042548)

I dunno, the company that wants to sandbox their production environment and make sure that the latest windows virus that exploits a hole microsoft already fixed but no one is updating because it borkes allot of other items. Or maybe it is the company that wants to run get away form Microsoft but is held on by one killer app and cannot. Why would anyone want to virtualize anything?

Well, the reason use virtualization is to get the most usage out of our existing hardware by running multiple low-usage instances of servers so badly behaving apps can all run "together" without actually impacting each other.

Virtualization does nothing if your machine is already vulnerable to an exploit. I've used virtualized workstations to dig into spam trojans and such.

What you are thinking of is more commonly referred to as a "firewall".

As for a company wanting "to run get away form Microsoft", you may have missed the part of the article that said Novell was losing the deals to Microsoft. People were running away from SuSE and toward Microsoft. Not from Microsoft.

He claimed to lose four deals with microsoft for being unduly influenced with IP problems starting about 18 months ago.

Yep. People did not want to deploy SuSE but were happy to deploy Microsoft. So I'm not seeing your point about companies wanting to "get away" from Microsoft and move to SuSE.

You might want to check the article. the CEO said for the first time, about 18 months ago, he lost an account because of fud!.

So, we agree that Novell is losing deployments and Microsoft is gaining them.

And novels market share hasn't been dropping at any stagering rate. You not going to get nose bleeds from the ride.

Ummmmmm, yes, it has.

Microsoft got lucky on a few deals because of fud being spread around!

Check your email server logs. Look at how many different companies run Exchange.

Then see how many run GroupWise.

And next year there will be even fewer instances of GroupWise out there. That is what "declining marketshare" means. Novell is dying.

And focusing on "virtualization" so you can offer the chance for companies to run the most common OS on top of your dying platform is just ..... delusional. You can argue all you want about how companies could want this ... but I'll predict now that Novell's marketshare will be lower next year than it is today. There is no benefit for any company to run Windows on top of SuSE, today or in the future when this "deal" bears fruit.

Windows on top of Windows would be easier for Microsoft to produce and support with no finger pointing.

Re:Who will do that? (1)

antonyb (913324) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043054)

And what company is going to deploy Linux just so it can virtualize Windows? Why wouldn't they save the time and expertise (and finger pointing) and just deploy Windows as the host and Windows as the guest?

The company who doesn't want to pay for an extra Windows license?


ant.

Re:Who will do that? (2, Insightful)

Ash Vince (602485) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043154)

It seems that 95%+ of the businesses we deal with are running Exchange.

We are linux based web hosting and development company and we are moving to exchange server for our emails. The boss wants customer relationship management software with a high level of integration with office software. What are the techies supposed to do? Refuse to do what we are told and get the sack?

There is only so much dissuation of the boss you can do before he says the security problem is something you will have to deal with, I need this to enable the sales dept to do their job effecively.

The real problem is that Micorsoft are allowed to use their position as primary OS retailer in order to enforce their dominance in other (Application) sectors over and over again. This is why they will not even try to release a version of Office for any platform except their own. And every time they do step over the legal (monopolistic) line all they every get is a slap on the wrist compared to the huge profits it makes them year in, year out.

And if I was in their position I would never change either. The only thing that will ever change the corporate ethos in their case is if the company is forcibly cut into two halves. But this will never happen as the OS division would never be able to stand on it own feet when having to compete with one side giving the OS away free to earn service revenue (Redhat) and the other side giving their OS away free in order to sell hardware (Apple). Legislators always hate shafting a profit making company in their own backyard especially one with the media ear as much as MS.

And to all the linux enthusiasts who might claim that linux will win in the end - I hope so. But reality is that until linux developers start adapting a more pragmatic, business led point of view this will never happen.

The best example of this blinkered point of view is Linus Torvalds refusing to allow a binary API for driver communication in the kernel.

It is nothing but good business sense to try and hide that you are selling the consumer the same old crappy graphics card from last year with improved driver software. You escape the Moore's Law problem of the same product halving in value by repackaging it. But this would be alot harder if you had to publish all the hardware specs so you avoid this by locking that all away from prying eyes with a layer of intellectual property that nobody else can touch (or reverse engineer).

But if you then have to publish all the internal specs of your card to allow someone you do not know to write the interface software then selling the public last years card becomes alot harder as you have to convince them to play ball. This is why most companies require signing an NDA in order to get the specs of their hardware.

So to anybody who has actually read this far in this rant it should have become clear that the other real problem is capitalism. It is not a system based around doing what is best but in doing what nets you the greatest return on investment in your tenure at that company. So if you agree with this try and change it, otherwise try and make as much money as you can then retire early so it becomes someone elses problem while you live in the Bahamas.

Re:Who will do that? (1)

sangreal66 (740295) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043434)

This is why they will not even try to release a version of Office for any platform except their own.
Last I checked, Microsoft offers Office for Mac OS.

Re:Who will do that? (2, Informative)

bberens (965711) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043846)

Yes, but not the integration piece (exchange) which was basically his point.

What color is your parachute? (1)

BitterAndDrunk (799378) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042666)

I'm pretty sure Ron's is Golden. Which may (or may not)make this move semi-rational.

Then again, maybe he's just playing the role of abused spouse. Hitting me shows he cares!

Re:What I still don't understand is ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042700)

So do you always thread-hijack to get a higher comment that'll up your karma by relation because you're a karma whore who thinks his thoughts are more important than everyone else's, or are you just a fucking prick?

Re:What I still don't understand is ... (5, Interesting)

crush (19364) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042834)

Hovespian gets to the meat of it in the first page: either J2EE stacks or .Net stacks. Novell has bedded down with Microsoft because the future looked rather bleak for them with Red Hat owning the Free Java space and acquiring JBoss and Novell wasting a lot of money and time on their .NET implementation. As a result Novell gets a couple of hundred million and in return Microsoft gets ...

  • a chance to spread FUD about linux patents
  • Novell working for free on making Microsoft offerings run on Linux
  • Novell ceasing development of work on an Exchange killer

Microsoft wins, Novell execs get a bigger pot of money to pay themselves out of, so they win. Novell gets some value out of what is otherwise a dead loss (Mono) and can make a stronger case for their GNU/Linux/.NET mashup. Every other business dependent on GNU/Linux loses because Novell's engineers are wasting their time doing Microsoft's engineering development for them instead of improving Free software.

Re:What I still don't understand is ... (1)

Quantam (870027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043920)

What, you thought a company having some products based on FOSS would make them automatically immune to Common Business Sense (doing what most benefits their company, even if it harms others)? FOSS isn't magic, you know.

If I were Ron H I'd say one of these things: (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041968)

I'd trust him more if he said one of these statments; since they at least sound plausable.

- "In one contract I closed more Linux revenue at a higher profit margin than we make in most of a year; and as a new CEO it makes me look good regardless of what it does to Novell long term" or

- "Oracle's too strong on the lobbying side in the federal government business for us to compete with; so we needed someone like Microsoft to partner with there because Microsoft has good ties to lobbyists thanks to Gates's dad's company where brahamoff got his lobbying job." or

- "Yes, there really is Microsoft IP there - here are the patent numbers so you can see that we really are protecting you"

But instead he's just spewing Micrsoft FUD that this has something to do with what customers want - while it's pretty obvious looking around that ZERO customers respect what Novell has done here.

Re:I'd say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042116)

Actual transcript of conversation:

Microsoft lawyer: Hey Ron... we'd like Novell to commit suicide and piss away all the work you've done to gain Linux credibility by helping is do an end run around the GPL and make yourselves look like our willing accomplices.

Ron Hovesplan: Duuuuh... h'ok.

Microsoft lawyer: Good, oh and while you are at it we'd like to take your testicles too. Preferably in a nice decorative jar. Bill would like to mount them behind his desk.

To quote I Love Lucy (2, Funny)

robyannetta (820243) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041868)

"Lucy, you got some 'xplaining to do!"

Re:To quote I Love Lucy (2, Funny)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042346)

oh, we're doing accents now?

...what would you say to us? (5, Funny)

gr8whitesavage (942151) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041874)

itsatrap

Wow... (2, Interesting)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041880)

That was fairly contentless.

If you didnt read it and pretended 2 marketers yakking, it was about as interesting.

Well, that and Virtualization is the next key word. Add that to Web 2.0 and Beowulf cluster.

Zzzzzz

Re:Wow... (1)

Ruie (30480) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041980)

That was fairly contentless.

On the contrary, it was very illuminating. Novell started the process first and, on top of that, they have illusions of technical collaboration with MS. So, either they are really desperate and needed cash ASAP, or are thinking of somehow double-crossing MS on the deal.

Re:Wow... (1)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042040)

When I think of Novell, I think of a company that has an outdated file server and other cruft that they charge 100,000$+ for 250 licenses.. But they charge only a percent of that to schools.

Hell, Id rather deal with Windows and MS than the Bindery. Egads.

So, big whoop they're bending over to MS, thinking they might try to screw them.

Re:Wow... (1)

daveb (4522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042836)

Bindery?? Wow that's a blast from the past. You haven't worked on a Novell system for a while have you!

They've got this new (circa mid 1990's) thing called a Directory. Microsoft have a bad copy which they say is active. I don't even think you can install bindery even for legacy apps in the current netware.

Your view of the outdated file server is outdated.

Re:Wow... (1)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043146)

I know my "view" is out of date. I've been on Unix from the mid 80's when my dad had an active purdue account. I used MSDos and sysV over a 300 baud modem.

And I dealt with Win31 when it came out. Big surprise.

Last time I had to deal with Novell was when my high school had it installed on their servers and IPX as their network proto.

I tend to stay away from stuff like that.

Re:Wow... (1)

AmigaBen (629594) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042972)

Well considering your knowledge of Novell's offerings is over a decade old (Bindery? are you kidding me?), it's no big surprise that you'd rather deal with Windows.

Don't try to sound informed when you're not. You don't come off as informed. You come off as stupid.

Re:Wow... (1)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042826)

Novell started the process first and, on top of that, they have illusions of technical collaboration with MS.
I can't believe that in this day and age, someone can in good faith go see Microsoft and ask if they want to collaborate on a project.

The closest image that comes to mind is some sort of tribesman peeking inside the cannon of a shogun while tickling the trigger wondering what that little comma shaped metal thingie is for.

What is wrong with you ?? Don't they teach you anything at school ??? Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball !!! Um, I mean Microsoft !!!

Re:Wow... (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043812)

The closest image that comes to mind is some sort of tribesman peeking inside the cannon of a shogun while tickling the trigger wondering what that little comma shaped metal thingie is for.

That image is absurd an unrealistic!

I mean, since when would a tribesman know about commas?!

Re:Wow... (1)

cweber (34166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042606)

I'd have to agree at least in part. The higher up a guy is on the totempole the less information they utter, and replace it with buzzwords, filler and marketing fluff. Much of this interview was like this.
Still, the first page had some interest: how the two companies started to talk, customer-centered.

Re:Wow... (2, Informative)

Nicholas Evans (731773) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043082)

As I recall, he actually said the same thing during the press conference (I sucked it up and listened to the audio since Quicktime decided it didn't know how to decode the video).

From the transcript [microsoft.com] :

What I really said was, look it, as a customer, you would have taken me, when I was working at my old company and said, I want you to get this, and get together with the other vendor, and make this stuff work. Don't put that responsibility on me. And Kevin, being a former CIO at Wal-Mart, he resonated, that was right on the money. He went and grabbed Steve and Brad, and said, you know what, this probably is the right thing. Steve had been hearing it, and Brad had been hearing it from customers, and then that really drove them into a meeting that we had in the May timeframe where we got the teams together and really began those discussions. I would tell you, it always takes two in a relationship. Both sides were listening very intently to each other, but that's how the story unfolded. Thank you to Kevin.

The only real piece of material in this interview tht was original was Mr. Hovsepian every-so-delicately pussyfooting around saying anything useful about Microsoft's IP allegations. I mean, come on. Grow some balls. Steve Ballmer just beat you over the head with the proverbian chair while you were standing on stage with him and you refuse to so much as condemn the comment?

Re:Wow... (1)

daveb (4522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043016)

EXCELLENT That's going to be how I respond to the next vendor that pops in here them: We have an excellent HR managment system and discounts on volume licensing of PrintPal me: Yes but will it help virtualise my Web2.0 Beowolf or: Great - will it turn my virtualised Beowolf cluster into a Web 2.0 service? i can see their lips quivering already [evil grin]

good puppy (2, Insightful)

superwiz (655733) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041882)

here's a $100,000,000 bone

the guy sounds like an MS soundbite now

had to be said (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041888)

What about a beowolf . . . never mind

In Soviet Russia . . . never mind

The previus poster mispeled . . . oh never mind

There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct, (2, Interesting)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041906)

We did not do a full review as part of the process. [Microsoft] may have; we did not. I think your question was based on an assumption that we did a deep review, and we didn't.
By a full review there, I believe he means a code review, to look for patent violations, before they signed a deal to protect their customers from possible patent violations. So he bought something, without actually doing due diligence to find out if they actually needed it. That's like buying flood damage insurance when you live on a mountain, it's not spending company money responsibly.

Re:There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct (4, Insightful)

Mostly a lurker (634878) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042028)

So he bought something, without actually doing due diligence to find out if they actually needed it.
I have listened to this argument over and over. I do not buy it. What is the appropriate due diligence to know if you are going to be the target of bogus litigation? The US legal system is a complete mess, and getting worse. The assumption that you have nothing to fear if you have done nothing wrong is unbelievably naive. There is nothing irresponsible about taking out insurance against one of the biggest business risks corporations face today.

Re:There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042516)

I have listened to this argument over and over. I do not buy it. What is the appropriate due diligence to know if you are going to be the target of bogus litigation?
What is the point of trying to agree a deal to ward off patent litigation when you believe any litigation to be bogus and needless and you haven't performed at least a modicum of due dilligence to establish whether such claims would actually be bogus? For Novell, due dilligence would primarily be performed on Mono, Open Office and possibly Samba, with Mono being the main focus followed by Open Office. I can't believe they didn't at least investigate those pieces of software and then use it as the basis for a retaliatory marketing campaign. Doing a deal with Microsoft is just surrender and an admission that they don't know what to do.

There is nothing irresponsible about taking out insurance against one of the biggest business risks corporations face today.
Hovsepian has admitted that Novell have lost deals due to a great deal of IP FUD from Microsoft:

It was going to be an all-Linux deal, and I lost it because they were unduly influenced, in my opinion, to be fearful of these [IP and indemnity issues].

The problem is that when a covenant letter lands on the door mat of one of those customers it will seemingly confirm what Microsoft have been telling them on the quiet, whether Novell likes that or not. Novell have been screwed, and they just don't know it and can't see why.

Re:There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct (1)

killjoe (766577) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043180)

MS isn't promising not to sue Novell, they are promising not to sue novell customers. That's a big difference. Of course there are loopholes so their promise is worthless anyway.

Ballmer has recently stated that they are ready to start suing people who USE linux if that linux was not purchased from SUSE/Novell. This mean you could be sued by MS, I could, anybody could.

Re:There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042092)

They have been in financial difficulties for years, this deal gets them a big chunk of change and the MS marketing machine goes to bat for them. The royalty payments are likely to be insignificant compared to the markets they gain. Good luck selling that one to the shareholders as misconduct.

Re:There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042166)

It was a bargain. the agreement allows them access to 108 million in patented items were they only had to pay 40 million for. In a direct exchange, that would be a profit of over 60 million dollars.

I find it annoying when people think Novel only does Linux now. They have tons of other products that are not free as in spirit or beer. Their group ware application could probably benefit from tons of Microsoft IP seeing how Microsoft's product generally run better then others on Microsoft's operating systems. And the claims for this seem to revolve around secrete api's and such stuff no one else has access to without forking a sum of money over to Microsoft.

So i guess we need to see were novel is going to use this patented IP and see if the deal allows them to deploy something free of royalties. It would probably burn Microsoft a new ass if they found novel could take a closed source app made with Microsoft's patented materials and then open source is or create an add on "advantage" pack that isn't strictly GPL compliant but give a lot of the stuff away anyways.

Re:There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct (1)

FST777 (913657) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042230)

You know, I worked at an organization that had it's building withing a 500 meter range of a river. Therefore it was forced by the government to take an insurance against crashes with ships. The fact that there was an altitude difference of about 30 meters didn't count at all.

Now replace government with customers and you have a Novell-Microsoft deal.

Re:There ya go, Ron Hovsepian admits to misconduct (1)

vbillings (967901) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042314)

Ron bought a dollar for a dime, it's Ballmer that should be the one who's head is examined. Microsoft can only lose in a patent fight with Novell and Linux.

A man walks into a bar (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041956)

and tries to sell virtualized Linux on a Win server and right after him another man walkes into the bar and tries to sell virtualized Windows on a Linux server. The barkeeper says "Get the f*ck outta here, both of you!".

Bad joke, eh? At least now you get the deeper meaning of the Novell/Microsoft deal.

Re:A man walks into a bar (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043218)

``Bad joke, eh? At least now you get the deeper meaning of the Novell/Microsoft deal.''

Yes, but I don't get it. We can already run Windows on Linux with virtualization (e.g. with Xen 3.0), and Linux on Windows with virtualization (e.g. VMWare). What do we need Microsoft and Novell signing deals for? IIRC, Xen is even packaged for SuSE (Novell's Linux distro).

Microsoft uses software patents against Linux (3, Insightful)

pieterh (196118) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041990)

The key point from the article is that Novell accuses Microsoft of spreading patent FUD to kill Linux deals.

Software patents are such a fantastic weapon for monopolists who have lots of lawyers. No surprise Microsoft is pushing so hard to get them legalised in Europe.

A lesson from SCO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042054)

As Darl McBride showed us: You can say whatever the hell you want to the press. It's what your contracts say that really matters.

Debian is the second largest GNU/Linux distro (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042066)

Well, if you are not happy with Novell, you can always migrate to Debian, the second largest GNU/Linux distribution.

From the Netcraft's GNU/Linux distribution share [netcraft.com] stats:
RH - 34%,
Debian - 25%
Suse - 11 %

Re:Debian is the second largest GNU/Linux distro (3, Informative)

Pantero Blanco (792776) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043306)

Well, if you are not happy with Novell, you can always migrate to Debian, the second largest GNU/Linux distribution.

From the Netcraft's GNU/Linux distribution share stats:
RH - 34%,
Debian - 25%
Suse - 11 %

That chart is only for webservers. Debian has nowhere near that much of the Linux market overall, though distros derived from it might.

Re:Debian is the second largest GNU/Linux distro (1)

dreamlax (981973) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043878)

Yep! Lets all move to Debian Stable and run software that was really top notch 3 years ago.

And I bet a Gentoo-based live CD would load and run faster from the CD than Debian would from my hard drive . . .

Nothing against Debian, Stable is very stable, and reasonable package management, but gee . . . it's a bit slow and a bit dated.

Memo From Turner (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042074)

To which Turner replied, "OK, I'm Microsoft now, so I can be a customer by buying out Novell's strategic assets, like its patent licenses. How much?"

We know the rest.

Admissions my arse (5, Interesting)

Bronster (13157) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042080)

Did the patent review turn up any possible violations of Microsoft patents in the Linux source code? We absolutely have made no admissions of any infringements, period, from our point of view. No admissions.

Slimy toad. The question should to follow this should have been. "Are you personally aware of any violations of Microsoft patents having been identified as present in Linux code." None of this wishy washy "I haven't admitted to anything" nonsense. Bloody admit to it or state for the record that you aren't sitting on something that you'll "admit" later.

I would say (1)

pair-a-noyd (594371) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042270)

Up your ass Novell.
You betrayed us. I hope you crash and burn in hell for your SINS.

You're going to pay a heavy price for your transgressions. Better dust off those resumes, you're all about to be out on your asses looking for work once Novell goes tits up..

Traitors..

Re:I would say (1)

Lothsahn (221388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042380)

How exactly did they "betray" Linux? Is there an article you can point me to on how this deal harms Linux? This issue has come up a number of times and I don't understand how this hurts Linux in any way.

Re:I would say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042910)

How exactly did they "betray" Linux?

1. By trying to exploit a loophole in the GPL 2.0

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200611161 03031303 [groklaw.net]

2. By giving MS a huge new FUD campaign

Bye bye SUSE!

Re:I would say (1)

Tadrith (557354) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042402)

I could have sworn Novell has been tits up for quite some time...

Okay, sorry! OW! Stop hitting me!

All jokes aside, Novell hasn't been a choice for me in some time. I grew up on Netware 3.11 and 3.12, all the way up until 5.5. I look back fondly on those days, but Novell hasn't been the same for some time. My recent experiences with it were anything but pleasant, with a lot of strange issues cropping up. A part of me wishes that Novell would get back to their former glory, but I doubt that's going to happen. They seem to have a case of indecision, and I think if they were to really decide what they wanted to focus on and keep at it, they could make some progress.

haha (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042594)

it's the CEO, not the employees. The ceo is making deals with MS so he has someplace to go when Novel folds.

Re:I would say (1)

bstempi (844043) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043390)

you're all about to be out on your asses looking for work once Novell goes tits up

So wait...Novel's getting a tit job? Maybe this isn't such a bad thing after all.

/duck

so much backpedding ... (1)

LorenzoV (106795) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042328)

... to naught.

I'll do my part to see that Novell never sells another Suse install anywhere I have influence. I suggest you do the same. All these asshats could see were the dollar signs in theri eyes. I hope they enjoy it while they can. I wonder if the courts would say that the outcome was obvious, therefore Novell's executives are civilly liable to the shareholders for doing the deal in the first place.

he asked microsoft this question? (1)

wardk (3037) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042368)

man, they must have felt like PT Barnum identifying todays "sucker"

Novell is still Novell I see. willing to slash their own throats for a buck

OldNovell -> Caldera -> SCO
NewNovell -> SuSE -> Microsoft

no pattern here, move along

I'll Take Shareholder Lawsuit for $300 (1)

mpapet (761907) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042398)

The CEO of what company entered an agreement with the largest software company in the world only to proclaim "I didn't examine the agreement?"

I predict there will be no shareholder lawsuit.

Yet another example of how the Executive Class in America have long ago passed the point of accountability for their actions.

Re:I'll Take Shareholder Lawsuit for $300 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042996)

The CEO of what company entered an agreement with the largest software company in the world only to proclaim "I didn't examine the agreement?"
I read TFA. Where the hell are you getting that?

What a Total Idiot (5, Interesting)

segedunum (883035) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042412)

Honestly, I didn't think anything more stupid and insane could be said about this whole thing, but Hovsepian has really topped it off. I'd love to get paid the amount of money some of the execs are at Novell for the sheer, it really has to be said, incompetence and stupidity.

This past May, I picked up the phone and called Kevin Turner, the COO at Microsoft. I knew Kevin when he was the CIO at Wal-Mart.
So you called Microsoft out of desperation because you had no idea how to get Novell out of the cesspit it has found itself in? Why don't you just say that? No one calls the company who is taking business off you hand over fist and is the source of all your woes unless you're effectively conceding defeat. There's no deal you can do with them. They're just going to laugh at you and have you on.

...if I came in and started talking to you about virtualization on Linux, and this Microsoft guy showed up and started talking to you about virtualization on Windows, what would you say to us?"........
Yet again, we get this virtualisation nonsense which seems to be Novell's answer to everything these days. In what possible way is virtualisation a stumbling block to anything?! Somebody, tell me. We've been able to virtualise Windows quite happily under VMware for years without any trouble - no thanks to Microsoft. Xen won't yet virtualise Windows, but it can, and when the right hardware support is in place it will do without any help from Microsoft.

Again - what on Earth is the problem apart from your own business and your own strategy?!

"Well, that's why I'm calling. How do we make that work around virtualization?"
Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. You wait until Xen works with the hardware it needs to make virtualising Windows possible, or in the meantime, you grab a copy of VMware and install Windows or Linux on it? You could even partner with VMware. Fancy that. *Puts phone down*

My point of view is that customers are going to have J2EE stacks and .Net stacks in their shops.
That's not the way Microsoft views it.

If I'm a CIO, that's what I'm dealing with: "What are you guys doing to make my life easier to make those things work together?"
From Microsoft's perspective, absolutely nothing, because they don't care about interoperability. They must be doing something right, because its worked for them. All the useful Java and .Net interoperability software is already being sold successfully via smaller software companies, and most are doing quite well out of it. It's a pity that Novell isn't a part of this, isn't making any money out of this and can't put Mono to some actual good use.

A week later we were all sitting in Chicago having a discussion about virtualization.
To do with what exactly? Cluestick: people are already doing it.

Their desire to do some things around IP [intellectual property] came up as one of the things they wanted to talk about.
So the deal was about interoperability, what there is to actually talk about, and Microsoft wanted to talk to you about patents and IP and you agreed, which serves their own ends? Brilliant. What a bunch of clueless idiots. I'm sure you're now part of another long running office joke in Redmond.

...we saw that when you look at the math, the balance of trade was $108 million to us and $40 million to them.
And you thought that gave you the upper hand, and you never once asked why Microsoft were willing to go along with something that they just didn't need to do?

All I cared about was, I lost a deal with a large retailer to Microsoft for the first time about 12 or 18 months ago.
OK. You lost a deal to the company you're now trying to do a deal with. In fact, you can't make any headway against Red Hat either.

It was going to be an all-Linux deal, and I lost it because they were unduly influenced, in my opinion, to be fearful of these [IP and indemnity issues].
OK. So you're a bunch of weak minded fools who loses deals because of things that don't exist, and your hesitance spills over to the customer benefitting Microsoft? Yep, I can see that. So to make things better you then fanned the flames of these mythical IP issues, which you've admitted you haven't done due dilligence on? :-

We did not do a full review as part of the process. [Microsoft] may have; we did not. I think your question was based on an assumption that we did a deep review, and we didn't.

Then I watched it happen three more times.
And it happened again, and again, and again? Young children usually learn to keep their hands away from hot surfaces, or learn what they're doing wrong and get some heatproof gloves. They don't try and make a deal with the hotplate to stop being hot.

Well, the question is why you lose those deals really, isn't it? Of course, the quality of your software, products and the way that you present them to customers has absolutely nothing to do with that does it? It's all to do with the fact that you need to interoperate with Microsoft and virtualise!

What an idiot.

Steve and [general counsel] Brad [Smith] and Bob [Muglia] -- have been very supportive and understanding of our situation.
Dude. They're putting you out of business - that's your situation (he actually describes Novell being in a situation). You've admitted that. They're not supportive and they're not your friends.

I'm aghast at the extent of the stupidity.

Your explanation (2, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042568)

" I picked up the phone and called Kevin Turner, the COO at Microsoft. I knew Kevin when he was the CIO at Wal-Mart."

Good ol' boy. Just trying to figure out to make a bunch of money. It has nothing to do with customers or Novell surviving.

Missing the point (1)

Haych (519525) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042894)

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr r. You wait until Xen works with the hardware it needs to make virtualising Windows possible, or in the meantime, you grab a copy of VMware and install Windows or Linux on it? You could even partner with VMware. Fancy that. *Puts phone down*
I think you have missed the point completely in regard to the whole Novell/Microsoft deal. I think Novell are being very clever in their strategy and this deal was the last stumbling block in their virtulization plans.

Let me explain:

Novell has announced their new product - Novell System Management (http://www.novell.com/products/zenworks/systemsma nagement/ [novell.com] ) which includes components such as Zenworks Orchestrator, Zenworks Virtual Machine Management and others. They are giving their customers the opportunity to align their architecture and provide a complete managed virtulization environment that will support multiple operating systems with no litigation worries. All on SLES10. This can only make their customers happy and make the shareholders money.

Why does everyone assuming Microsoft is getting all the benefit from this deal?

Re:Missing the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17043818)

Astroturf, anyone?

Re:Missing the point (1)

Shawn is an Asshole (845769) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043820)

Why does everyone assuming Microsoft is getting all the benefit from this deal?
One reason is immediately following the announcement of the deal, Ballmer started using it to generate FUD. Microsoft can't control Linux, but this deal is an attempt. Ie, you can use the approved distro, but using anything else has vague threats against it.

Re:Missing the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17044026)

Good point. The only issues is how are they going to be able to accomplish this if noone's running SUSE? I know it wont be touching my server room.

When dealing with crooks (1, Insightful)

straponego (521991) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042432)

You are almost certain to either lose your shirt or come out dirty yourself. People who lie and steal for a living, whether legally or not, are better at this than you. They have certain advantages, for example the fact that there's nothing they won't do for money.

Just a general statement of principle, apply it where you will. I've never seen it to be wrong. I've seen more than one business destroyed because people thought they could take tainted money and get away clean, or they were in denial about the source and motivation behind the money.

plus 1, 7roll) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042440)

You to joiUn the are just 3ay over

Don't Believe it for a Minute (1, Interesting)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042494)

I don't believe it. It's easy to revise history when you were one of a few partcipating in it.

Even if he did have some initial thoughts regarding the matter in that way clearly Microsoft did not, even from the beginning.

Several factors will hurt this deal. It will potentially taint the developers and their contribution back into the linux development cycle. It will give Microsoft some control on the development of Linux.

Microsoft knows they can't compete so they wanted to control the development and then threaten anyone that didn't do it their way. That is so utterly clear I can't understand how this guy expects me (or anyone) to believe his rendition.

Honestly he may have had some intent as he described it but clearly Microsoft never did. This was at attempt to get Microsoft into a position that if you pulled them out of the works the whole thing would fall.

If Microsoft can compete then let them. If they can't compete then let the company die. But do NOT threaten the Linux community and attempt to manipulate it with slight of hand.

First 4o5t (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17042770)

GGodbye...she had of *BSD asswipes

Making Up For PR Loss (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042946)

It seems that Novell is working hard to make up for the PR loss following their latest deal with Microsoft. Apparently, they did not expect this to have such a negative impact on their image. I wonder if that's because they simply miscalculated, or because the community is overreacting and it's actually no big deal. I haven't been following the case closely, so I don't know, but maybe someone else can enlighten us all?

Re:Making Up For PR Loss (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17043334)

The actual negative impact is coming from the fanatical, and clueless to business, Linux geeks.

The fact is that nearly every major COMPANY is behind this deal and looks to it to actually allow them to properly position Linux onto thousands of systems where as before they were hamstrung by possible lawsuits (which the CEO and CFO would be paranoid about) and by lack of true interoperability.

You can bitch and whine about MS all you want but the FACT is they ARE the marketplace. Their software and OS have set the standards that ALL companies must be compatible with. And I'm not talking about the small business owner who is installing Linux for his website, I'm talking about GM, Motorola, United Airlines, etc.

IBM, HP, Dell, and other major IT companies are behind this move 100%. Their CIO/CTO have all spoken and applaud the move so they can now get Linux and MS to work together in their infrastructure.

And for all you "up yours Novell I'm not going with SUSE"...you are a tiny, itty, bitty drop in the financial bucket compared to the corporations and their IT staff who will go into this with glee.

I know in my case I'm damn happy about the move. The one thing that has been holding me back from going with Linux on the desktop and on certain servers was the lack of TRUE compatibility on several levels. We are a Novell house, we have MS servers, Red Hat, and SUSE as well. Yes, with LOTS of time and work they can work well together...but companies see time = money and so don't want their IT staff doing it when the companies (MS and Novell) can do it for them.

Frankly the ONLY REAL FUD is coming from some of the Linux fanboys. Ballmer's stupid comments pale in comparison. If the fanbase keeps this up it's going to be the very thing that destroys Linux from ever being anything more than another OS/2 on the OS train.

IP and indemnity issues (2, Informative)

HRbnjR (12398) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042952)

All I cared about was, I lost a deal with a large retailer to Microsoft for the first time about 12 or 18 months ago. It was going to be an all-Linux deal, and I lost it because they were unduly influenced, in my opinion, to be fearful of these [IP and indemnity issues]. From my point of view that was really too bad, because Linux lost. Then I watched it happen three more times.

I don't believe for a second that Microsoft wasn't acutely aware of exactly that! They understand very well that they win deals due to FUD about Linux IP and indemnity issues, and that is exactly why they entered into this agreement.

This deal is serving as a major catalyst to make that very problem worse, not better!

The Question (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17042976)

``Novell CEO Gives Behind the Scenes Account of Microsoft Deal''

In other words, he answers the all-important question:

What the hack where they thinking?!

So, what's the big mystery? (1)

LibertineR (591918) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043004)

Novell CEO:

"We are almost broke, and wrong or right, Microsoft can sue us until our kids are geriatric."

"Or, we can take a hundred mil or so from Microsoft, and have some black ink on our balance sheet, and I wont be the 20th Novell CEO to get fired."

"But, I run the risk of losing the love, respect and admiration of the Linux Community, be labeled a sell-out, and be forced to eat alone at trade shows."

Novell CEO's wife:

"What would your cut be of that hundred Mil?........Really?..........Well,....look bitch, if you want a friend, get a dog. Mama needs a new SUV!

Credentials are everything! (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043058)

I knew Kevin when he was the CIO at Wal-Mart.

Ah. High praise. Says volumes about both of them.

Re:Credentials are everything! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17043608)

Way to go and open your mouth, now everyone knows how stupid are you.

J2EE and .Net (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043098)

FTFA:

``My point of view is that customers are going to have J2EE stacks and .Net stacks in their shops. If I'm a CIO, that's what I'm dealing with: "What are you guys doing to make my life easier to make those things work together?"''

What they _should_ have done was to keep things compatible in the first place. In fact, Microsoft did something along those lines with Visual J# .Net. However, that's really a .Net port of Visual J++, Microsoft's own, incompatible imitation of the real Java. At any rate, various projects have sprung up to allow better collaboration between CLR and Java code, and, of course, there are also the trusted old tools of protocols that can be used to make code written in any language cooperate with code in any other language. Why Mr. Novell CEO thinks we need virtualization for this is beyond me. Perhaps it's just because virtualization is the new buzzword.

Foolish (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043144)

Regarding Ballmer's "undisclosed balance sheet liability" comments:

``Obviously, I was disappointed, because the heart and essence of the deal was around the technology collaboration and what we want to get done for the customer.''

Perhaps that's what you (Novell CEO) thought, but if Microsoft finds a way to exploit this and rape you or your customers or the rest of the world in any way, you still made a foolish deal.

ZOS (1)

certain death (947081) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043254)

Much like the UNIX subsystems on IBM MainFrames, Linux provides an Ultra high availability backbone for a system that otherwise might bring down the entire infrastructure when needing to be rebooted. With a Linux virtualization system, you can provide a level of redundancy and support for applications that Microsoft can only dream of. I personally know of a company (yes, I work there) which runs a Seibel CMS system on Windows servers which are virtualized on SuSE 10, and have not had a single outage since they went that route. Prior to that, the system had outages on a weekly basis, and our bonuses suffered for it.

I'm glad we're all friends now (1)

bl8n8r (649187) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043266)

Ron seems to have completely forgotten about Microsoft's track record with "collaboration"..psst Ron..it sucks.

*Ron, we smell poniez: http://techp.org/ [techp.org]

I don't get (2, Insightful)

slashdot.org (321932) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043348)

If you could put back on your old hat as a customer, if I came in and started talking to you about virtualization on Linux, and this Microsoft guy showed up and started talking to you about virtualization on Windows, what would you say to us?

What a weirdly constructed phrase. If I was the customer I would say, wtf are you talking about? Or I might say, get the fuck out of here, I'm not interested in your virtualization marketing-speak.

What I need as a customer is for things to become mre clean, simple, consistent, stable, secure, etc, I don't need yet another layer of shit on top of the layers of poop that are already there.

If I'm a CIO, that's what I'm dealing with: "What are you guys doing to make my life easier to make those things work together?" I saw virtualization as a key to us being able to do that in a different manner than we have in the past.

Why? So instead of two dual core systems I can now buy one quad core? Except the two dual core systems would always run smoother because there's less resource contention?

Is virtualization really what the market demands nowadays??

No answers here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17043400)

...just a lot of dodging. If it was a honest and straightforward deal, it would be easy to explain without all this non-answering.

I would say I would change Vista's EULA about ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17043848)

virtualization....that's what they would say................oh..that's what they did aye?

One has to wonder (5, Interesting)

caseih (160668) | more than 7 years ago | (#17043916)

One of my co-workers spent the summer working for Microsoft on a very cool project (IronPython). During his stay there he heard from Microsoft lawyers during a presentation that Microsoft has approached Novell numerous times over licensing concerning .NET patents during the last year or two. Each time they were rebuffed by Novell. He got the impression Microsoft was very displeased about this. In their minds after all, .NET *is* their IP and Novell was flouting it. One has to wonder what really changed Novell's mind about dealing with Microsoft in a patent covenant relationship.

Re:One has to wonder (2, Informative)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17044238)

Which just shows the mono and c# loyalists who ignored the patent and legal implicantions with it because it was better than java are idiots.

Mono has been around for 2 years and yet winforms is still not finished the last time I took a look at it last spring. Winforms has been around since .net 1.0. I have yet to see a single app that could cross compile to Linux and Windows nor have I ever seen any successfull non Windows sites use ASP.net using mono.

Now since java is GPLed its time to abandon Mono. Its been known for many years that it had legal implications associated with it and yet Miguel thought such accusations were crazy.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?