Slashdot Mirror
SCO Tuning for Services, Ports Tarantella
According to a story on Sm@rt reseller, SCO is tuning now to be a service company (not just to Linux but to AIX and other unices), and they are porting (this is unofficial and not confirmed) Tarantella to Linux. Can anyone post details about Tarantella? What is it? How is it compared to Citrix's Metaframe?
Click here
J
Remember this story from last September where SCO was bashing Linux? To quote:
The bandwagon is getting a mite crowded...
In the words of Infoworld's Nicholas Petreley, "Tarantella is middleware that pretends to be a client to a heterogeneous mix of applications platforms" For the full description and comments, check it out at http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/01/10/ 000110oppetreley.xml
The market for things like Citrix and Tarantella(sp?) is shrinking rapidly. The cost of PCs have dropped, making the cost of deploying PCs and deploying Citrix probably close to being the same. The only place where something like this would work is where there is a limited support structure.
For example:
Airline terminals (oops, they're using Java)
Remote offices (but probably not telecommuters, bandwidth issues).
I would include Linux users to that list, but the amount of quality software that works with Windows is increasing by the day, so compatability with Windows doesn't matter anymore.
Anyone remember SCO's nice comments about Linux maybe 6 months ago? We don't hold a grudge. Welcome to the party.
-- Ever notice that fast-burning fuse looks exactly the same as slow-burning fuse? I didn't... (Edgar Montrose)
SCO UNIX might have had it's place in the market 10 years ago, but the steamtrain that we call Linux robbed it of it's right-to-existance many years ago.
After my experiences with the above mentioned SCO UNIX box, I can only hope that their services are better than their software. SCO UNIX felt like a car at the crash derby, with bits and pieces falling off to the left and to the right constantly. In my mind, there's not real justification to their (continued) corporate existance.
Well, I'm glad we got that cleared up!
Ok, so it gets slightly more informative, but apparently the most important thing about the product is that it's fully buzzword compliant.
I can't speak for UnixWare, since it won't install on my test machine at the office, but I hear it really isn't bad
From what I've seen of it, it is pretty much a formula SVR4 product (based on older versions, I don't know how much it has diverged since then). It reminded me a lot of other direct SVR4 descendants like Solaris 2.x). Compared with OpenServer which has a lot of goofy baggage from Xenix to carry around, UnixWare seems like a lot more clean product.
(of course, SCO didn't write it, they bought it from Novell.
Who in turn bought it from AT&T.
Other than add-ons of Netware connectivity, the last version of UnixWare I saw didn't look all that much different than when AT&T still owned USL. I think one of the reasons that Novell sold USL was that they never really figured out what to do with it, and what they did wasn't that much.
"Enterprise class features"? Antimatter warp drives, voice controlled computers with interstellar communication links? Control panels with colored smears which require special training? Okay.
for customers demanding an extensible, scaleable solution.
I'll settle for several hundred staff members to start with. If extension requires more ships, I'll deal with the accountants when that is needed.
Tarantella Enterprise II servers can be configured as a centrally managed array, supporting thousands of users. They can also connect to hundreds of application servers providing the reliablility, availability and scaleability needed for enterprises.
Well, I'll have to see some reliability figures. It seems to me that the Enterprise class encounters major problems on a weekly basis.
What is Tarantella software? Is it middleware? In a way it is middleware, but that term does not truly describe the full capabilities of the Tarantella product ("Tarantella"). Tarantella is middleware in that it sits between your appliation servers and client devices.
I thought the Enterprise class did not sit between things, it tends to travel between things.
But unlike most traditional middleware, Tarantella allows you to deploy existing server based applications, as well as new ones, over the network, via a web interface, without the need to rewrite anything.
Can I deploy remotely with a photon torpedo?
I shouldn't feed the Trolls, but hearing that SCO donates money to the NRA (assuming this is in fact true) would be one of the first GOOD things I've heard about them in a long time. As for the assertations that the NRA is pro-violence, it seems to me that the venom is in your rhetoric, not the NRAs. On the other hand, you could be posting just to get a reaction, if so, your just a little too far over the edge to have much credibility.
They are both using different technology for their implementation. SCO's is Java based and therefore more portable. That's why it is available for so many platforms such as OpenServer 5.x, UnixWare 2.x and 7.x, Solaris, AIX, Tru64, HP-UX, and soon Linux. It allows for any application server to serve applications to any client through a Java capable browser. MetaFrame is purely for serving Windows applications, but Tarantella allows you to run Mainframe apps, Linux apps, Unix apps, Windows Apps, etc... on any client. It provides a much better solution as an ASP than MetaFrame ever could. It's flexibility and robustness is not easily matched by any other solution.
I have seen a piece of the technology used for Tarantella in a tool provided in UnixWare 7.1.x called Webtop. It allows a administrator to adminstrate the system from any browser. It also allows clients to execute X applications in a browser. One of the coolest things I saw was a full X desktop in a browser. This can be done in any client. I know for windows you would need an X emulator, but this solution now does away with that for windows clients.
It is a very cool product that I see being a very good addition to the applications available for Linux. You can also look at it as another way to attack Microsoft dominance.
---- "It is never too late to give up our prejudices." --Henry David Thoreau(1817-1862)
This is a good thing to hear; both for SCO and the computing community as a whole. SCO has been selling and supporting some nice enterprise unices/unix-novell hybrids. But it was about time they changed directoin.
I have had most experience with SCO OpenServer 5. Its a nice enterprise solution. Its sort of a unix that you dont really want to work on, probably set it up for a company requiring an e-commerce solution but too scared to run a Linux box. It does not come with the development package by default (gcc/libraries/header file) - so its not targeted at developers at all. Being a descendant of Xenix, it has a lot of superfluous anomalies. It does not like talking to other operating systems too much either. The technical support by SCO was good, however. SCO OpenServer has pretty good security too. SCO Unixware 7 is also a nice OS, but face it, you can't cross UNIX and Novell and expect something nice to come out. It's a great thing for novell entusiasts, i'd say, but UNIX guys probably wont like it. Even still, UW7 is WAAAAY better than UW2 and earlier!
These are limited application OS's.
SCO unfortunately did not see the direction the community was going, and targeted too much on servers to please the Managers, not the techs. Their OS's are too hermitic to compete with the versatility of Linux and BSDs and Sun. Its better now to target their attention on thing that would be beneficial to both the community and to themselves.
The architecture for Tarantella is designed for very large deployments (several thousand simultaneous users), and it has a lot of unique benefits along those lines. E.g., you don't have to modify the application that you want to run across the network, or even the server you want to web-enable.
However, it is EXTREMELY expensive. It runs around $400/seat, plus deployment costs, and, as such, it only seems useful in special cases, not as a simple workgroup-level solution, if you ask me. I think GraphOn targets this lower-end market, but I'm not as familiar with their stuff.
As for VNC, it competes much more closely with PCAnywhere, not Citrix or Tarantella. It's a really cool program, but you can't use it to provide access to SAP to 20,000 desktops.
Overall, I think they have some issues with their product placement/pricing strategy that'll really hurt them. For instance, to use it with Windows apps, you still need the per user license for Terminal Server. So why not directly access the Terminal Server from desktops? There are certainly situations where Tarantella would help here, but it's hard to justify the huge cash layout that this'll incur, in my opinion.
As enterprise software (especially ERP and accounting packages) moves more and more to a great web-based front-end right out of the box, Tarantella will lose even more relevance.
--JRZ
Actually I don't think that deal fell apart, I think it was more that IBM also signed on. That joint venture is called "Project Monterrey" if memory serves, and I believe it is SCO, HP, IBM, Intel and one other partner that I can't remember.
Try Navigator 4.61 or 4.7 on a recent (RH 6.0, Mandrake 6.0 or SuSE 6.2 or newer) distro and you should find stability considerably better.
Funding more than one smaller Linux distribution makes a certainly makes some sense. They are buying access to a potential customer base for support contracts. Not necessarily a bad idea. It might also be a way of hedging their bets if the day comes when they have to move their existing customers from their OS to Linux. They will have a couple of different distribution choices with which they have an existing relationship.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.