Slashdot Mirror

I hear ya! My distro of choice is Novell openSUSE 10.2, which is very easy to set up and use, though I had to remove zmd to get efficient updates with opensuse-updater (the upcoming 10.3 doesn't install zmd by default). IMHO, Novell openSUSE 10.2 is an order of magnitude easier to set up and use than Ubuntu, though the /. community in general has taken an anti-Novell stance due to its patent cross licensing agreement with Microsoft (which is funny, considering how /. loves Apple despite Apple's numerous patent and technology cross licensing agreements with Microsoft, but I digress).

I've been able to "convert" two people at work from Windows XP to openSUSE 10.2 based on its merits and ease of use. Ubuntu will hopefully get to a similar position from a technical perspective, but IMHO at this time, Novell openSUSE 10.2 is already there, and Novell has committed themselves to making SUSE Linux a world-class desktop operating system.

From your post, here is what openSUSE 10.2 and likely other distros can offer:

- Browser: Firefox, Konqueror, Mozilla Seamonkey, Opera, and IEs4Linux (I use IEs4Linux to access Outlook Web Access's calendar at work, since I use Thunderbird for my email. I'm looking forward to an Exchange plug-in for Mozilla Lighning)

- Email: Thunderbird (yay! I'm also writing a Salesforce.com extension for it called Thunderforce), Evolution (I actually despise it, though I also don't like Outlook's interface. To each, their own.. Don't bother with the Exchange connector; it's slow and crashes often), KMail, and others

- Quicken 2008 might be tricky. Quicken 2007 appears to work to an extent, but it might have issues, which is probably not good for an accounting package

- GnuCash is a possible replacement for Quicken, though it's more like QuickBooks than Quicken. For a personal finance look and feel, KMyMoney might be the better way to go, though some time might need to be invested in the conversion process. Converting from Quicken Mac 2004 to KMyMoney was not seamless for me, but I haven't gone back and fixed the errors in the import configuration that I used and tried again. If you do the GnuCash approach, then you can use my GnuCashToQIF program to export back to Quicken in case if you want to go back to it or if you need to export your data to an accountant, either as QIF or IIF. I have an old Mac at home that I'm moving away from, though I'm still using Quicken and iTunes on it

- Novell's version of OpenOffice includes extensive support for Excel macros, so it's worth trying out. It might address all of your Excel needs. As a nice bonus, OpenOffice uses a single-document interface (SDI) instead of a multiple-document interface (MDI), permitting you to have two or more separate top-level spreadsheet windows side-by-side or on different monitors. Excel is MDI, though it does create a top-level start menu button for each open document, essentially faking SDI, but it's really MDI. You could enlarge Excel to span multiple monitors and have your MDI windows not maximized, but that breaks down if you have one monitor portrait and the other one landscape. If you really, really need Excel, then it appears to be well supported by CrossOver Office

- Visual Studio 2005 is a tough one because MonoDevelop might not include all the features that you may be accustomed to. It does implement a lot, but it's probably not a drop-in replacement yet.

Miguel should resign, or be fired. Sadly, he is the linchpin on several of these big projects. I hope Novell can find someone to replace him.

Miguel says crap like, "We never made a promise to avoid patents.

BULLSHIT.
From Novell's website
Q4. With this agreement, will Novell include Microsoft patented code in its contributions to the open source community?

No. Novell will not change its development practices as a result of this agreement. It has always been our policy in all development, open source and proprietary, to stay away from code that infringes another's patents, and we will continue to develop software using these standard practices. If any of our code is found to infringe someone else's patents, we will try to find prior technology to invalidate the patents, rework the code to design around the infringement, or as a last resort remove the functionality.

Novell is committed to protecting, preserving and promoting freedom for free and open source software.

Of course, it should be understood that under the patent agreement each party will promise not to assert patents against customers. The patent agreement does not cover the development activities of Novell or Microsoft, and Novell has no plans to changes it development policies relating to patents.

Please re-read the bolded section (emphasis added). Someone need to smack Miguel in the face; he's sounding more and more like an MS hack everyday.

http://www.novell.com/licensing/indemnity/pdf/6_12 _03_n-scoandibm.pdf

http://www.novell.com/licensing/indemnity/pdf/10_1 0_03_n-sco_ibm.pdf

Judge Kimball has ruled these waivers were valid. In-fact, SCO's contract claims were hurt MORE by the ruling than the copyright ones, cause SCO can still claim infringement over code they own (although they haven't presented any).

http://www.novell.com/licensing/indemnity/pdf/6_12 _03_n-scoandibm.pdf

http://www.novell.com/licensing/indemnity/pdf/10_1 0_03_n-sco_ibm.pdf

Judge Kimball has ruled these waivers were valid. In-fact, SCO's contract claims were hurt MORE by the ruling than the copyright ones, cause SCO can still claim infringement over code they own (although they haven't presented any).

There is something that can still foil this position that I am not seing talked about. I hate to be the one to take the wind out of some people's sails but,

What happens when Novell distributed the GPLv3 covered works under a different product name? The vouchers cover SUSE Linux Enterprise Server maintenance and support,. So they could call anything with GPLv3 covered software SUSE Linux Enhanced Enterprise Server maintenance and support, and update the standard versions the vouchers cover until it becomes too difficult to do so and then just "end of life" it. The GPLv19 could be out when you cash a voucher in, but you would only get the standard GPLv2 covered works that are packaged under the name SUSE Linux Enterprise Server maintenance and support,

It is too early to tell exactly what it going on here. I think it is premature to think something is settled when it hasn't even happened yet. Novell might have to change the name a little more then what I suggested but it isn't out of the question. And the lawsuit protection can be claimed to only go to the GPLv2 users and developers because it was not only the license in effect when the deal was made, but because Novell didn't distribute GPLv3 covered works under the terms of the deal (SUSE Linux Enterprise Server maintenance and support). Novell stated it as Microsoft will not assert its patents against individual noncommercial open source developers Which it has already stated with their own open source efforts and Microsoft is promising not to assert its patents against individual contributors to OpenSUSE.org whose code is included in the SUSE Linux Enterprise platform, including SUSE Linux Enterprise Server and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop. It should be noted that the specific products are mentioned. If SUSE Enhanced Linux could be a separate product, it wouldn't be subject to the terms.

I haven't seen the voucher itself but all the official sites talking about them say it is for SUSE Linux Enterprise Server maintenance and support only.This would indicate that Novell certainly could offer other products that aren't effected by the deals. For some reason, I though the FSF was supposed to be smarter then this. Maybe I am missing something.

"Except that, well, they didn't. They issued vouchers when SUSE was (as it still is) distributed under GPLv2 terms, under an agreement with Novell, with very specific limitations on where the patent guarantee applies that are inconsistent with the GPLv3 (which didn't, IIRC, exist at the time the agreement was made.)"

Now there's two things here that give the FSF leverage. One is that Microsoft agreed that Novell should release software under a 'GPLv2 or later' license. The other is that the SuSE vouchers did NOT have an expiration date. Meaning if someone has one of those vouchers, they can wait until GPLv12 to cash it in. There's no way that Microsoft can plead ignorance of the 'GPLv2 or later' language in the code it was distributing, there's no way it can complain about the lack of the expiration date, since it clearly agreed to the voucher system, and Microsoft must surely have been aware that the GPLv3 was being drafted. How can Microsoft suddenly be surprised that it was going to help supply the world with GPLv3 software?

"ah, they do. And, under the terms of the GPLv3, Novell is not permitted to distribute software under the GPLv3 with only the guarantees Microsoft has provided, which are not as broad as the GPLv3 requires."

Except that Novell has confirmed that it's going to go ahead and distribute GPLv3 software anyway. If Alice comes along with a voucher, supplied to her by Microsoft, and gets GPLv3 software from SuSE, and then reads her GPL, happily offers that software to Bob, who gets sued by Microsoft for patent infringement, who is at fault? Bob isn't, he took his GPL at face value. Alice isn't, she took her GPL at face value AND Microsoft helped Alice get this software, with full knowledge that it was going to contain a GPL license. The answer is that both Novell and Microsoft are at fault. Microsoft can't sue Bob, because Microsoft helped Bob (via Alice) get his software with all the GPL guarantees and whatnot. And if Microsoft DOES have the right to sue, then Novell is guilty of copyright infringement for not providing a secure enough GPLv3 guarantee along with the code it supplied.

"Most likely, though, what it really means is that Novell doesn't move SUSE to GPLv3 until and unless the vouchers aren't a substantial issue"

Novell ARE distributing GPLv3 software. The FSF DOES believe the vouchers are a substantial issue, and made that clear as soon as they spotted that the SuSE vouchers had no expiration date. Your 'most likely' scenario is already in the bin.

"While I would like to point out this is not about critical flight control systems (where I doubt any Linux would be certified as it costs a lot to be) and in-flight entertainment machines are OK to crash sometimes, the specific functionality is, probably, a win for Linux distros."

While the link below describes ground based flight control operations rather than in flight aircraft controls it is still pretty damn critical stuff. The implementation described in the article is impressive. From the article:

"DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH developed a radar data-processing system called PHOENIX, which runs on SUSE® Linux Enterprise Server for high availability and performance - helping ensure safety for aircraft across Germany."

Link to full article with video:

http://www.novell.com/success/dfs.html

Wabi-Sabi
Matthew

Happily running openSuse 10.2 with KDE/Beryl-SVN as my primary OS.

One piece (collection) of software Linux really isn't competing with is Microsoft's Active Directory.

setting up your own Repositories

Yes, since none of those things work on other platforms

Another way is BlockHosts and an explanation can be found on this page

No more then 4 password attempts per host and then playtime is over. For me a minute is even too much time.

Where is the software support, for one?

You guys keep waiting for MS to fuck up. Give me a reason to get rid of them first!

B.S., pure b.s., lol... you won't face up to your mistakes, here:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=264303&thresho ld=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=20218887

Let's reiterate them:

====

1.) Didn't you state what I stated about "race condiritions" was false?

Please - quote what I said, & show what is wrong with it... thanks & GOOD LUCK (You will need it on that account).

----

2.) Didn't you state that your Ubuntu distro did not have SeLinux in place & later, you said it did??

Hey - YOU AREN'T EVEN AWARE OF THE CAPABILITIES OF YOUR DISTRO of LINUX YOU USE (and you certainly are not willing to use "layered security" via SeLinux, per your own words, regardless of #3 no less below!)

I.E.-> SeLinux can be used to secure things (& acts as layered security) @ A SOCKETS LEVEL, to aid IPTables (which I had to mention as far as specifics) usage, & also @ a filesystem & userrights ACL level (via MAC) supplementing & reinforcing chmod/chroot/chown (which I had to mention as far as specifics to use no less, NOT YOU)

----

3.) Didn't you ask me to show you an example of apps being able to use "privelege escalation, via impersonation analogs on *NIX & buffer overflows" to have an app escape a chroot jail via those machinations even IF YOU DO NOT RUN IT AS A ROOT/SUPERUSER's context, & I provided you the info. to look for??

Here is a specific one:

http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/20 03_014_lprold.html

(You felt it could not be done, UNLESS done via web apps)...

Well - NOW, I am showing you differently, as per usual in this exchange!

"Programmatic impersonation" is possible on *NIX's, via buffer overflow exploits, and you do NOT have to be online or use online tools as you stated, for this to occur (& thus, even IF you DO NOT RUN a program as ROOT/SUPERUSER, it can still escape chroot jails via these machinations, period!)

AND, on that note? So much for their efficacy vs. a machination of that nature... @ least by themselves, that is, hence why layered security ROCKS! Beat one? You hit another (& the limit is only that of your imagination, if you can code to create more ONTOP of it, logging things OR cleaning things, lol, once the std. tools run out OR do not fit a specific purpose you need).

----

4) AND YES - YOU Felt the multiplatform test of security CIS TOOL, by the center for internet security, might be 'malware'?

(Funny - SANS & COMPUTERWORLD showed otherwise)...

So much for that, & it was YOUR MAIN DEFENSE IN AVOIDING TAKING THIS TEST! So much for all of your evasions in posting a score from this test really!

APK

P.S.=> Long & Short of it? I think you are either:

----

A.) Scrambling to TRY to learn SeLinux & raise your score on the multiplatform CIS Tool test, & finally post a score on it via your *NIX rig setup, as good as the 84.735/100 I can gain on Windows Server 2003 SP #2 fully hotfix patched & custom hardened by myself...

OR

B.) YOU KNOW YOU CANNOT EXCEED THAT SCORE @ this point, you cannot answer those simple questions above, & your body of objections appear to be overcome (such as SANS + COMPUTERWORLD articles, sources who are often cited @ /. no less, note the CIS TOOL as well, & it is NOT "malware", heck, it is "ANTI-MALWARE" IF ANYTHING, lol... for Pete's sake!)... period!

====

Either way, you are running from simply installing & taking this test of security, in a competition between myself as a Windows user, & you as a *NIX user, on a multiplatform test that runs on them both (variants thereof, & its not Windows

Novell's iFolder is great for laptops that travel in and out of the office. Has an open-source version as well as a commercial--so management can pick their comfort level. Clients run on Windows, Mac (better support coming soon), and Linux. Setup some automated methods of dumping your MSDE data.

Check it out: http://www.novell.com/products/ifolder/

-m

Answer these (quit the partial quoting too, you are using my quotes in partials only, not finishing them (you are WEAK & LAME because of that)):

----

1.) Didn't you ask me to show you an example of apps being able to use "privelege escalation, via impersonation analogs on *NIX & buffer overflows" to have an app escape a chroot jail, EVEN IF YOU DID NOT RUN IT UNDER ROOT/SUPERUSER PRIVELEGE CONTEXTS (which I did recommend against & to run it as non-root IF POSSIBLE) via those machinations, & I provided you the info. to look for??

Here is a specific one:

http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/20 03_014_lprold.html

(You felt it could not be done, UNLESS done via the web... I am showing you differently, as per usual in this exchange!)

----

2.) Didn't you state that your Ubuntu distro did not have SeLinux in place & later, you said it did???

Ha - YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THE CAPABILITIES & FEATURES OF THE LINUX DISTRO YOU USE!

(& your refusal to use SeLinux as layered security over IPTables (since SeLinux has SOCKETS CONTROL) & also your refusal to learn & use SeLinux as ayered security over chmod/chown/chroot for additional security control @ the filesystem + userrights levels (which I had to mention the specifics on here no less, NOT YOURSELF)? You are NOT A PERSON I WOULD TEST AGAINST ANYHOW, because you don't use layered security, period! It would be TOO EASY to win vs. your setup I suspect @ this point & I think YOU KNOW IT!)

----

3.) Didn't you state what I stated about "race conditions" was false also??

Please - quote what I said, & show what is wrong with it, specifics... & GOOD LUCK (You will need it on that account).

----

"You keep saying that I "think it's malware" or I "said it's malware", which is not true. I said it could be malware." - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Monday August 13, @04:44PM (#20216543)

AND, especially THIS one, answer it:

4.) Didn't you state the multiplatform test of security CIS TOOL, by the center for internet security, might be 'malware'?

(Funny, SANS & COMPUTERWORLD showed otherwise - I trust them before I trust you, & I am certain others consider SANS especially more of an authority on security than yourself as well!)

----

No, it's clear that YOUR motivations here now are to either:

A.) STALL, to TRY to learn to use SeLinux capabilities PROPERLY... & thus, to try to reinforce your system up to a score that is higher than mine of 84.735/100 on the multiplatform CIS TOOL test for security!

OR

B.) I'd almost wager you found you cannot exceed my score on CIS TOOL's multiplatform testing (& are trying to avoid taking this test, lol, with PURE B.S. REASONS!)...

APK

P.S.=> So much for that & the rest of your b.s. (answer these questions, quit avoiding them... I know WHY you do though - they show your arguments to be QUITE inadequate & you are unwilling to face your mistakes, period!)...

All this 'playing around' on your end is NOT putting up a score that is better than mine of 84.735/100 on a legitimate test of security that is multiplatform (runs on *NIX's & Win32 platforms) called CIS Tool, which is noted by SANS + COMPUTERWORLD as a legitimate test of security... my guess is you ran it OUT of a chroot jail, put up a much lower score than mine, & are scrambling/stallng to try to get time to TRY TO PASS IT.

Good luck, lol...

AND, above all else?

CIS Tool is NOT a malware like you said it might be!

(Thus, your main defense to avoid putting up a score less than my own of 84.735/100 with myself scoring that on Windows Server 2003 on the multiplatform CIS TOOL, while you run your *NIX not NEARLY AS SECURE AS IT CAN BE, because you avoid using SeLinux OR le

"But again, here's a lie from you, so this post stops here, until you learn the difference between "felt that it was" and "knew that it might be"." - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Monday August 13, @04:20PM (#20216233)

A lie? No lie @ all... you just do NOT want to face up to your inadequacies & mistakes here is all, of:

1.) Didn't you state what I stated about "race condiritions" was false also?? Please - quote what I said, & show what is wrong with it... thanks & GOOD LUCK (You will need it on that account).

2.) Didn't you state that your Ubuntu distro did not have SeLinux in place & later, you said it did???

3.) Didn't you ask me to show you an example of apps being able to use "privelege escalation, via impersonation analogs on *NIX & buffer overflows" to have an app escape a chroot jail via those machinations, & I provided you the info. to look for?? Here is a specific one:

http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/20 03_014_lprold.html [novell.com]

(You felt it could not be done, UNLESS done via the web... I am showing you differently, as per usual in this exchange!)

4) AND YES - YOU Felt the multiplatform test of security CIS TOOL, by the center for internet security, might be 'malware'?

(Funny - SANS & COMPUTERWORLD showed otherwise)...

So much for that, & it was YOUR MAIN DEFENSE IN AVOIDING TAKING THIS TEST! So much for all of your b.s. really!)

APK

"You do know date/time stamps can be modified, right? Manually set? You can also modify a file and avoid using these... Or are you completely clueless?" - by SanityInAnarchy (655584) on Saturday August 11, @02:43PM (#20196971)

Give me a break, lol: I had to point out chroot/chmod/chown to you as native *NIX tools to use... yea, "TOUCH" can do that on a *NIX rig... I knew that, but it is a possible test of file validity (along with checksums/crc32, size, time & date, etc.).

About clueless?

Hey - aren't you the one who:

1.) Felt the multiplatform test of security CIS TOOL, by the center for internet security, was 'malware'? Funny, SANS & COMPUTERWORLD showed otherwise... so much for that.

2.) Didn't you state what I stated about "race condiritions" was false also?? Please - quote what I said, & show what is wrong with it... thanks & GOOD LUCK (You will need it on that account).

3.) Didn't you state that your Ubuntu distro did not have SeLinux in place & later, you said it did???

4.) Didn't you ask me to show you an example of apps being able to use "privelege escalation, via impersonation analogs on *NIX & buffer overflows" to have an app escape a chroot jail via those machinations, & I provided you the info. to look for?? Here is a specific one:

http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/20 03_014_lprold.html

(You felt it could not be done, UNLESS done via the web... I am showing you differently, as per usual in this exchange!)

Please - Don't call others names, especially that one, until you are correct about things, because you have made some BIG blunders here in your trollish method of attempted escape & lessening the value of this fair, multiplatform test noted by SANS called CIS TOOL, & YOU CANNOT BEAT THE SCORE ON A *NIX OF YOUR CHOICE I OBTAIN USING A CUSTOM HARDENED BUILD OF WINDOWS SERVER 2003 SP#2, period...

Back up your b.s. @ least - take the test, & let's see if the F.U.D. I see get spread here @ /. of "(Insert *NIX variant here) is more secure & more securable than Windows" type b.s. (put your monies where your mouth is, put up, or shut up!)

APK

P.S.=> How many more of your "failings" here & attempts @ evasion of taking a valid/legit test of security can you try @ this point?

All your objections are overcome, especially the one where you state this program may be malware...

Plus, the fact that native *NIX tools like chmod/chroot/chown exist to "cage apps" (but you now know about privelege escalation via buffer exploits that could 'escape' a chroot jail & even though I recommended NOT running as ROOT, which that CAN easily escape a chroot jail & you KNOW it too? I said to NOT run as root/superuser IF possible)...

The bufferoverflow/privilege escalations prove, also, that chroot jails are NOT complete solid layered security in & of themselves, OR very secure really!

(This is where SeLINUX can help on ALL accounts you noted (sockets level control to layer ontop of IPTables usage (which I first suggested, alongside my first suggesting chmod/chroot/chown & it turns out to NOT be able to control things on an APP basis, but in Windows, using a software firewall like ZoneAlarm? I can do so, easily, via an easy to use Point-N-Click GUI tool), & also filesystem/userrights/ACL-MAC level control of filesystem for security too))...

YOU HOWEVER, refuse to use it, so you are NOT the "right person for the job here", point-blank as I stated before, for the reasons above & because you don't apparently value your security, by setting up SeLinux for this test... & you refuse to learn its "complexities" as you said (poor usability in LINUX tools for that, eh? NOT IN WINDOWS!)... apk

Three reasons why Linux cannot be used in an enterprise environment: "I am unaware of a framework that allows corporate system administrators to change a setting on all of their Linux PC's at the same time .."
"Novell ZENworks helps customers eliminate administrator effort and reduce IT costs while delivering the IT resources that users need, when they need them--all based on identity. It provides an integrated set of cross-platform tools that automate management across the lifecycle of desktops, laptops, server, and handheld devices"

"when things go wrong, you can point your finger at Microsoft .."

"So you bought the product and got it installed. Now what? Don't worry--we don't leave you hanging. We've got world-class training and round-the-clock support at your beck and call. We're here for you"

"on the job market, a worthy knowledge of Linux .. is hard to find"

You're kidding, once you have a core understanding of the protocols then admin on a Linux box is a doddle.

Re:Two reasons why Linux cannot be used

Three reasons why Linux cannot be used in an enterprise environment: "I am unaware of a framework that allows corporate system administrators to change a setting on all of their Linux PC's at the same time .."
"Novell ZENworks helps customers eliminate administrator effort and reduce IT costs while delivering the IT resources that users need, when they need them--all based on identity. It provides an integrated set of cross-platform tools that automate management across the lifecycle of desktops, laptops, server, and handheld devices"

"when things go wrong, you can point your finger at Microsoft .."

"So you bought the product and got it installed. Now what? Don't worry--we don't leave you hanging. We've got world-class training and round-the-clock support at your beck and call. We're here for you"

"on the job market, a worthy knowledge of Linux .. is hard to find"

You're kidding, once you have a core understanding of the protocols then admin on a Linux box is a doddle.

Re:Two reasons why Linux cannot be used

No, that's untrue. The GPLv3 does not prohibit Novell of any of its Linux offerings.

"Instead access to files should be further restricted by process..."

Such as http://www.novell.com/linux/security/apparmor/over view.html or http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/

From my experience, Apparmor is far more straightforward.

The pertinent question is this: is OOXML an open format?

Whenever I hear the term "People-Ready Business", I suddenly remember that My Linux is Ready.

"AutoYaST allows unattended and automated installation. With AutoYaST, administrators can create a consistent baseline configuration for new installations in large or expanding deployments. In addition to AutoYaST, other installation methods include PXE Boot, CD-ROM, NFS, CIFS/SMB, HTTP, FTP, and the Service Location Protocol (SLP), which allows autodetection of install servers."

nothing else has done such a good job at integrating contacts, e-mail, and calendars.

This is no longer true. You really need to take a look at products like Zimbra. From my perspective it has everything Exchange has going for it, plus the benefits of running OSS and on my favorite platform. It even handles Blackberrys, Palms, and PDAs (via NotifyLink). In addition to Zimbra there is Open-Xchange and many more (though I'm not sure they're as solid as Zimbra).

Also have you seen GroupWise 7? I would say it has feature parity. I also hear a lot of places are fine on Lotus Notes (but I haven't used that product personally). Exchange is a nice product, but it simply isn't true that there are not Exchange alternatives.

It's an interesting point. I've been using a laptop running SLED 10 for a few months now (Disclaimer: I won it in a Novell promotion), and I'm still impressed with it as a very clean, professional Linux distro - anyone wanting to introduce Linux to corporate desktops could use it as a drop-in replacement for XP/Office easily. One of the great things about it though, is the set of tutorials that comes with it. They're accessed from one of only three icons on the default SLED 10 desktop, and include enough for a beginner to get comfortable with the OS.

The training is produced by a company called BrainStorm, and on checking the package info, http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpackages/deskt op10/i386/sled-gnome-cbt_en.html, it looks like they're commercially licensed. Training like that could be a big differentiator between open and proprietary versions (such as OpenSuse).

Come to think of it, Novell bought a pretty good clone of DOS long ago, originally from the makers of CP/M (Digital Research).

On the other hand, the third and latest draft does not prohibit Novell of any of its Linux offerings.

It's worth noting 3.4:

  3.4 No Acknowledgement of Infringement. Nothing in this Agreement shall imply, or be construed as an admission or acknowledgement by a Party, that any Patents of the other Party are infringed, valid or enforceable.

Which will hopefully finally put an end to all the nonsense conspiracy theories that "Novell admitted that Linux infringes patents" etc., even though Novell have constantly re-iterated that such a claim was ridiculous. As I've said several times before, blaming Novell for Microsoft's recent claims is just completely unfounded, and in fact there's nothing new or particularly recent about it; Microsoft have always been flooding the market with falsities about Linux's infringement on their patents.
 
Hopefully the published results will provide the community with a general better understanding of the deal, so that at least if they disagree/hate it, they do it for real reasons (which seems to be rare).

No. Suse can't be a target for the simple reason that Novell and MS have both signed a mutual agreement no to sue (in addition to agree to collaborate for interoperation).

Incorrect. Novell and Microsoft agreed not to sue each other customers. They can still sue each other. See this:

Q5. Novell's November 2 press release states that, "Novell will also make running royalty payments based on a percentage of its revenues from open source products." Are these payments for a patent license to Novell?

No. Novell has no license or covenant not to sue from Microsoft under this agreement. The payments are for Microsoft's covenant directly to Novell's customers. By the same token, Microsoft's customers receive the same covenant from Novell in return for payment from Microsoft to Novell.
http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensour ce.html

First it is SUSE, not SuSE
Second There is only SUSE 10. The next will be SUSE 11. That is SLES and SLED for you
Third, the versions you talk about is openSUSE. openSUSE 10.3 Alpha 4 just came out and is unrelated to this whole deal.
There are no coupons for openSUSE. You can just download it.

Now SLES or SLED are valid for 7 years anyway.

Also understand that these coupons buy you one year of free updates on SLES or SLED. Now what if in 8 years they are at SUSE 14 and you recieve a coupon from Microsoft. What most likely will be is that they send you to the URL where you can download it just as you can now. They activate your account for one year and send you a bill if you want to use it for the next 6 years.

That is all that coupon is. It is a registration key that Microsoft has payed for. The product will not stop running, you just won't be able to update for free. Now if that is not an issue, then you might as well use openSUSE with a 2 year lifespan on free updates.

So no, if Novell is smart, they will sned you a bright new shiney whatever they have as their latest URL. They got Microsoft payed for their promotional material.

Under the business collaboration agreement, the companies will pursue a variety of joint marketing activities to promote the adoption of the technologies they are collaborating on. In addition, Microsoft will purchase a quantity of coupons from Novell that entitle the recipient to a one-year subscription for maintenance and updates to SUSE Linux Enterprise Server. Microsoft will annually make available approximately 70,000 of these coupons to customers, with a mix of priority and standard support services. By providing its customers with these coupons, Microsoft is enabling companies to benefit from the use of the new software solutions developed through the collaborative research effort, as well as a version of Linux that is covered with respect to Microsoft's intellectual property rights

Suggestion: Try OpenSuSE.

I know that SuSE has taken a lot of crap for being the MS-Novell love child, but the distro (particularly the Open version) is sound.

Example: Partitioning.

If I remember correctly, if you have a standard, one partition Windows system, the partitioning screen doesn't even come up. Right after you select the "New Install" option, you get a list screen, which says,
Software: Install Standard Desktop
(click to change)

Partitioning: Resize Windows Partition to X GB
Create / (root) partition of X GB
Create /home (home) partition of X GB
Create swap (swap) partition of X GB
(click to change)

If you "click to change", you get a choice of either using a wizard to setup your partitioning (step-by-step asks questions), or using the partitioning tool with the suggested above setup (if you just want to tweak the sizes) or using the partitioning tool with your existing disk setup (if you want to create a new setup from scratch.

This is similar to the way Apple's install works. There's a sensible default (and particularly one that is capable of nondestructively resizing your Windows partition), there's a wizard that can help you change the default, and there's a fully functional partition tool for power users.

The whole process is well documented by an illustrated install guide. Plus, the SuSE Install, User, and Admin guides are the probably the best set of documentation I've seen for any software package, bar none. Here's a sample of the Partitioning Instructions for installing, which I think exactly outlines your concerns: http://www.novell.com/documentation/opensuse102/in dex.html?page=/documentation/opensuse102/opensuse1 02_startup/data/sec_i_yast2_proposal.html#sec_i_ya st2_auswahl_part

Note that it doesn't bug you with any technical details, but asks things like this by default "Your Windows partition takes up the whole disk, and there is no room to install Linux. Would you like to ()shrink your Windows partition, or ()delete your Windows partition".

Take a look at that link above; it illustrates all the install screens.

From the Novell press release, issued yesterday:

"We disagree with the recent statements made by Microsoft on the topic of Linux and patents. Importantly, our agreement with Microsoft is in no way an acknowledgment that Linux infringes upon any Microsoft intellectual property. When we entered the patent cooperation agreement with Microsoft, Novell did not agree or admit that Linux or any other Novell offering violates Microsoft patents."

The commentary on Groklaw is interesting as well

Come on guys, is it really news every time Microsoft patches a new security flaw in Windows? When are we going to see the weekly Slashdot articles about the Linux security patches?

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-0338.html
http://support.novell.com/linux/psdb/bydate.html
http://www.debian.org/security/
http://www.slackware.com/security/list.php?l=slack ware-security&y=2007

I watched their flash demo, with some interest. It doesn't do anything the GroupWise does not do now or will not do in the next ( no not a future release ) scheduled release.

GW has had 95% of what they have now, for the last 5 years and will have everything they have and more in the next few months.

When you can put 5000 users ( Cache-Mode ) or 1000 users in full on-line mode and hitting it heavy with say on average a 300MB to 500MB mail box, on a dedicated server with only 2 gigs of ram, come talk to me.

When you can put 100,000 users in at most 50 post offices, around the world, in one domain and have all the schedules, tasks, e-mail, document libraies, address books ( shared and otherwise ), complete rule based deligation of Calandars, Tasks, E-mail, etc. etc. all visable to each other, or not DOWN TO THE INDIVIDUAL USER LEVEL with complete class of service control, again come and talk to me.

The GroupWise clients support damn near every popular ( and unpopular ) messaging protocol including accessing your favorite news groups. Full RSS reader support is in the next version along with lots and lots of other goodies.

Have a look at what your saying is going to get "killed" and do a real feature by feature comparison with GroupWise before you start shooting your mouth off.

Probably useless speculations as all drafts of the GPLv3 have no direct effect on Novell; see http://www.novell.com/prblogs/?p=310.

Yes, there are *some* people who will not produce information-products (including software, music, images, or what-have-you) if they cannot globally enforce copy restrictions. Agreed. Such people should, IMO, go in to a different line of work. That is perfectly acceptable for a very simple reason: there will be more than enough people who find good reasons to produce such works in the absence of copyright restrictions. Some people will find an alternative means of making money off freely-duplicated works, and others just because they are altruistic.

Remember that people pay good money for their hardware, and copyright restrictions mean they cannot make full use of it. Copyright isn't actually a "freedom" for the person producing a work....people will still be completely free to produce works without copyright restrictions. Copright may be a "benefit" to the producers of a work (though in practice it is not; it is only a benefit to the distributors of the work, but I won't get into that here), but to call it a "freedom" is incorrect. Copyright law is a restriction on freedom to everyone in the world, and if such a freedom is going to be globally sacrificed, there had better be a damn good reason for it.

The only reason you have given is the false premise that without these restrictions, no-one will produce knowledge-products. Not only is this false in theory (since some people will produce stuff for free, and since some people will find ways of making money off knowledge-products in the absence of copyright restrictions), but there are lots of examples of businesses that make money off a free end-product, and of profoundly useful products made without any profit motive. And there are more where those came from.

That last set of links is pretty important. Google gives all of its services away for free, and yet has a market cap of over 100 billion. Not only are there business models built around free products, but they are very profitable and fiercely competitive.

Also check out this and this. Copyright is still there, but it is unenforced upon the consumer. It will be interesting to see how this selective approach to enforcement will pan out.

It is true that a farmer who gives away his crops for free would go broke, and if farmers could not legally force people to pay for their products then there would be no farmers. However, this observation not apply to information products. Information is fundamentally different from physical products, and business models surrounding it wind up taking a different form than traditional business models (a form which includes a free and/or freely redistributable product).

What we are dealing with is a new kind of abundance. Oxygen is an abundant resource, (anyone can get it for free because it just never runs out). Traditional capitalistic wisdom says that it is not possible to build a business around such resources, and further that no one will produce them because of that. Information is also abundant, once it exists (since it can be duplicated at zero cost by anyone). But it is also strangely non-abundant, since it's initial production requires an expenditure of resources. Traditional capitalistic models have a very hard time categorizing it...is it abundant or isn't it? Copyright law is an attempt at forcing it in to the "limited" category so that the traditional models wil

Q1: http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensour ce.html

It certainly have. It seems that since Novell took them over, the only downloads available are demo versions - even so-called "open server". Otherwise, you have to pay for the disks. So I was wrong - it's even worse than I thought.

It certainly have. It seems that since Novell took them over, the only downloads available are demo versions - even so-called "open server". Otherwise, you have to pay for the disks. So I was wrong - it's even worse than I thought.

NetWare has had block suballocation for a long time: http://www.novell.com/documentation/nw51/index.htm l?page=/documentation/nw51/trad_enu/data/hotiiczz. html

http://www.novell.com/news/press/novell-introduces -suse-linux-enterprise-thin-client-solution/

http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_2.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_3.mpg

http://www.novell.com/video/

http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_2.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_3.mpg

http://www.novell.com/video/

http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_2.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_3.mpg

http://www.novell.com/video/

http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_2.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_3.mpg

http://www.novell.com/video/

I can see the commercials now: "hi, I'm a PC......I'm a Mac....and I'm the new kid on the block."

You mean like these:
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_2.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_3.mpg

I can see the commercials now: "hi, I'm a PC......I'm a Mac....and I'm the new kid on the block."

You mean like these:
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_2.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_3.mpg

I can see the commercials now: "hi, I'm a PC......I'm a Mac....and I'm the new kid on the block."

You mean like these:
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_2.mpg
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li nux_3.mpg

Let us take a look at the recent topic of a Madwifi vulnerability affecting certain wifi users in Linux.

Julien Tinnes reported it at 13:48:00 EST on December 7, 2006.

At 14:17:50 on the same day the patch was available in the main source code repository.

A little while later at 17:08:26 the vulnerability is officially confirmed by Madwifi and advisories had been prepared.

Looking downstream, the response times for an official fixes/advisories by distribution specific security teams were:
Gentoo: December 10
SUSE: Confirmed December 8, Fixed December 11
Ubuntu: January 9

There is certainly some room for improvement here with distribution specific fixes, but that also includes time spent testing the changes to the driver. To be fair to Microsoft (actually, I'm just being overly optimistic), they probably had a patch ready within 30 minutes of the initial vulnerability report as was the case with Madwifi. But instead of giving the customer the option of trying the "beta" patch so they can test it themselves, it is kept private. Days tick by at Microsoft HQ and nothing appears to happen. Eventually, a patch is released on the patch Tuesday of the next month (or the month after that). System administrators get no choice and no chance to test it themselves.