Novell to Ship MySQL With NetWare 6

An anonymous reader writes "Coming close on the heels of their announcement that they've ported PostgreSQL to NetWare, Novell announced today that they will begin shipping MySQL with NetWare 6. Owing to customer and partner doubts about the GPL, Novell has chosen the commercial version of MySQL, rather than the GPL'ed version."

Comments

Shipping both?

[mgkimsal2]

Were they going to ship both, or only ship mysql, and have postgres as a 'supported' but not 'shipped' system?

Re:Shipping both?

[FreeLinux]

It appears that they will be shipping MySQL as part of the OS distribution however, PostgreSQL is available as part of a separate Software Developer's Kit.

Re:Shipping both?

[ttfkam]

Makes sense. If PostgreSQL were standard, no one would bother with their SDK. On the other hand, this guarantees that folks will be developing for the lowest common denominator. Oh well...

Does the SDK cost anything? If not, I guess it works out. If it does, Novell just marginalized itself a bit more.

Re:Shipping both?

[Anonymous Coward]

PostgreSQL for Netware is free and it is planned to give back the changes to the community.

No choice about the license.

[feinorgh]

Reading the license term for MySQL it seems pretty clear that Novell has no choice in choosing the license model. According to the terms at the MySQL page, MySQL is only GPL if the whole system is open sourced or GPL:ed. N'est ce pas?

Re:No choice about the license.

[Anonymous Coward]

If GPL MySQL required itself to only be packages with other GPL software, it would violate the GPL...
It's the same reason why Pine is not OSI Free Software

Re:No choice about the license.

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the GPL didn't allow putting additional clauses in/around it? Either you use it or not..?

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

MySQL has always published incorrect information about it means for MySQL to be licensed under the GPL. Much of the text was from when it was published under the free-for-non-commercial use license. They keep this incorrect explanation to encourage people and companies to financially support the company's work.

And while I applaud them seeking financial support, and hope companies who profit from MySQL do support the company and the product's development, their having that false explanation of the GPL licensing and what it means should be removed and replaced with a more honest licensing explanation.

Re:No choice about the license.

[mattc58]

I can verify this post. I am an ISV with a product for MySQL. Their understanding of the licensing issues is confusing at best.

Re:No choice about the license.

[pmineiro]

Reading the license term for MySQL it seems pretty clear that Novell has no choice in choosing the license model. According to the terms at the MySQL page, MySQL is only GPL if the whole system is open sourced or GPL:ed. N'est ce pas?

Actually this points to an important weakness in the GPL ... it only applies if you link against code.

It is possible, for instance, to write your own mysql client library, which then communicates with the mysql server over a socket. Separate programs, no license infringements, so your code (with your special client library) can be closed source even if you use the mysql GPL license (and, when you distribute your complete product, be sure to include a copy of the mysql source).

However, most people use (link against) the (GPL'd) mysql client library to talk to the mysql server, and that's what gets them.

It is for this reason that I suspect mysql's protocol and client documentation is nonexistant. Contrast to the extensively documented PostgreSQL protocol and client libraries, which is a BSD license product. There is no incentive for the PostgreSQL guys to create impediments to custom engineered client libraries.

-- p

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

The reasoning is somewhat inaccurate here. The mysql client library is LGPL, making it prefectly ok to link in non-GPL software.

What gets people is that MySQL continues to describe the GPL licensing of MySQL in a false light, and as such creates a confusion among those who are not already knowledgable about the GPL.

As I said in my earlier post, I understand the reason why they are doing it, they want to encourage purchase of commercial support licenses. But in doing so, they are making themselves look ridiculous, and should instead post an accurate explanation of the licensing.

It's my opinion that MySQL AB never really wanted to open source their product, but did so under pressure from the community who regularly used its non-open source licensing as an attack against it. So this is their way of getting open sourced, but still trying to make people feel that they are obligated to purchase licenses that they are not obligated to do under the GPL license.

Re:No choice about the license.

[tshak]

and hope companies who profit from MySQL do support the company and the product's development

Why hope? Just charge them. I don't understand this. We talk about free (as in beer) software, and then we hope someone donates. It proves that software costs money to make, and that most software should be commercial. Why not write free (as in speech) software and charge for a commercial license to use the software.

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

Because that is a contradiction. If the software is free, then you can't then turn around and try to control HOW it is used. The two requirements would be mutually exclusive.

The fact is that software DOES cost money to produce, but that doesn't mean that the best way to profit from it is by selling it only as a commercial non-free product. I believe that MySQL does profit from its commercial support services, for those who need that service, or use it as a means of supporting the product. The problem I have is only that I feel that the licensing explantion is deliberately deceptive, and that it reflects poorly on them.

It is not anything new there, it has been this way ever since they become GPL. The text describing the licensing is almost identical to the text describing their non-open source licensing prior to becoming GPL, except they replace non-commercial use with GPL in the text.

If you want to release a product and require a commercial license to use it, then release it under that commercial license, but don't try to also claim that it is GPL, and that you can't use the GPL license if you are using it commercially. The GPL license allows no such exemption, nor should it.

Re:No choice about the license.

[zak_greant]

Hrm. Nothing like responding to dead thread to drag out the hours of the night, but here goes... :)

The MySQL 4 client library is GPL not LGPL.

Regarding the licensing explanations, what is unclear about:

"This is our licensing policy in brief: Our software is 100% GPL, and if yours too is 100% GPL (or OSI compliant), then you never have to pay us for the licences. In all other instances, you are better served by our commercial licence."
-- http://mysql.com/support/arrangements.html

As for never wanting to be Open Source, we have had an open license for non-Windows versions of the software from day one. For a period of time we did sell the Windows version of MySQL as shareware, but this opened up after we gained a bit more confidence and stability as a company.

Of course, we want people to buy licenses, but we don't have to do a bait and switch to get them to do it. :)

Your friendly neighborhood mysql evangelist...
--zak

Re:No choice about the license.

[zak_greant]

The holder of the copyright has a choice to allow exceptions and extensions. For example, the Free Software Foundation decided to allow Bison to be used to develop non-free programs, even though the programs it helps to generate contain GPL'd code.

See the GPL FAQ for details:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html #CanIUseGP LToolsForNF

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

Because the "licensing policy" explanation contradicts the GPL.

And no, you didn't have an "open license" you had a free license for non-commercial use. Under that old license, ISPs offering MySQL databases were required (though I'm sure most didn't) to purchase commercial licenses, as were many others that would not be required to once the product was GPL'ed. Open does not equal "limited free" in the licensing world.

The Windows licensing was different, in that you didn't even offer a free for-non-commercial use version, and restricted it to purchased licenses only.

And if it is true that they are changing the licensing policy on the MySQL client libraries for Version 4, and using the GPL instead of the LGPL for them, that is a huge step backward in my opinion, and will do more to push users to alternatives with more friendly licensings, such as PostgreSQL and Interbase/Firebird.

Re:No choice about the license.

[pmineiro]

The reasoning is somewhat inaccurate here. The mysql client library is LGPL, making it prefectly ok to link in non-GPL software.

Actually, it's GPL not LGPL. Talk about inaccurate.

Glad to see that the (inaccurate) response to my post got moderated at +4, while my post was +2.

hmmm ...

-- p

Re:No choice about the license.

[zak_greant]

Where does it contradict the GPL? We explictly state in the first sentence that GPL compliant software can use MySQL for no cost.

As for the exact details of the licence, oh great, now I have to go dig out an old version of MySQL. Dum, deee, dum, dum... here we are:

The MySQL Free Public License grants the right to modify the program, create works based on the program and distribute copies of such throughout the world.

blah blah blah ... some paranoid psuedo-legal verbiage ...

To roughly sum up, then the license states that you can't resell the program.

So yes, we had a free (as in free speech, though and will) license that also ensured that you could only share your changes to it if you kept them free as in free beer, donuts and love.

However, the license did not force ISPs to purchase license - at least nothing in my reading of it could be interpreted this way.

(Please note that this misperception was a glitch in my personal circuitry, rather than some ominous evil corporate misdirection. :)

Yes, the Windows licensing was different - thought that we had been over that already.

We have changed the license - read the license file in the source.

As for whether this change is for the better or the worse, who knows - we will find out in a few years. :) Ethically we are comfortable with the choice and it makes it easier to explain the licensing to people which is always an added bonus. ;)

Licensing is a tricky issue and I know few people who would claim to be able to see the end effect of the licensing choices that we make today.

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

Where does it contradict the GPL? We explictly state in the first sentence that GPL compliant software can use MySQL for no cost.

Because the GPL CONTAINS NO SUCH RESTRICTION!

The GPL also places no restriction on the distribution of the GPL Software in combination with other non-GPL products, but your "licensing explanation" continues to try to protray the GPL as meaning that.

Quite seriously, if your knowledge level of open source licensing is typical of that at MySQL AB, then I understand why this contradiction has existed for so long, and you all need to get someone in to explain it to you.

I am available for that task if needed.

I do know that a change in the client lib licensing in 4.x from LGPL to GPL will be the first thing to seriously motivate me to switch to Interbase/Firebird or PostgreSQL.

Had they left it LGPL, and thus seriously encouraged its commercial use, they would have a FAR greater community using it from which to pull support, financial and otherwise. Moving to the GPL only for the MySQL client lib will be the first step in the end of commercial products using and supporting MySQL as a database option. As a developer of commercial software that supports MySQL databases (as well as other DB backends), I know that I will cease support of MySQL except for the 3.xx version.

As for the ISP, the "free license" was supplemented by additional restrictions, including a detailed document on when the party would be REQUIRED to purchase a commercial license. ISPs providing MySQL preinstalled for access by their hosting customers was one of those exceptions listed in that document.

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

Sorry, but you are wrong. In the DEVEL release of MySQL 4.xx the client lib is GPL, in the 3.xx version, which is still the version in wide use except for those willing to use pre-release software in production environments, the client lib is LGPL.

You might want to make sure you are right before telling others they are inaccurate.

From the manual for Mysql 3.23.53a, the latest version:

• A license is *NOT* required if:
• - You do not need a license to include the client code in commercial programs. The client part of MySQL licensed with the LGPL `GNU Library General Public License'. The `mysql' command-line client includes code from the `readline' library that is under the `GPL'.

The rest of this is to the MySQL AB rep who posted earlier, I found the text I was referring to in a local copy of MySQL 3.22 (pre-GPL days, and I'm including it here:

• * A license is required if: - You sell the *MySQL* server directly or as a part of another product or service - You charge for installing and maintaining a *MySQL* server at some client site - You include *MySQL* in a distribution that is non redistributable and you charge for some part of that distribution

On the website then was an explanation of the "You sell the *MySQL* server directly or as a part of another product or service" specifically mentioned that web hosts who bundled MySQL database access with hosting accounts had to buy a commercial license per CPU in this case. The only exception was if the hosting client installed MySQL themselves, and therefore MySQL was not a part of the bundled service, and in fact that line in the licensing would mean webhosts would be required to buy a license.

The client code was public domain then, and this is one of the key reasons why MySQL was adopted by commercial software developers and why MySQL support was built into so many commercial software programs. Alas, they are now shooting themselves in the foot in the 4.xx versions.

Re:No choice about the license.

[tshak]

I'm sorry this is off-topic, I was already heading this direction. But I have never (I'm a developer with 6+ years in the field) needed support on any of my software with exception of Allaire's Cold Fusion Application Server. The support I recieved for that was never charged because they all ended up being bugs on their end (the early 3.x days of CF were pretty bad). However, for Access 97, MSSQL 7, MSSQL2000, WinNT3.51, NT4.0 (SP1-6) 2K (SP1-2, Desktop, Server, Enterprise), Visual Studio (6,.NET), ASP (2.x, 3.x, .NET), PHP (4.x), Perl (5.x), RH Linux (7,8), and Apache (even on Windows at one point!) I have never once needed or paid for services or support. However, I've paid nice licensing fees to MS for their software, but the creators of the OSS software essentially invested into our IT department for free. I guess I just don't understand why you'd want to give something of monetary value to a business for free. I can understand if it's for individuals (the community), non profit orgs, and educational institutions (which should be the underwriters of OSS IMHO), but not for businesses.

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

I guess I just don't understand why you'd want to give something of monetary value to a business for free

Because you want to support the continued development of the software, because you know your company will only continue to benefit by the additional time and investment that company will be able to make in the on going development, enhancement, and bug fixing that the product will undergo as a result. I could go on and on and on, but the bottom line is that it just makes sense to do so, and it is the ethical thing to do, as well as the financially sound thing to do.

Re:No choice about the license.

[zak_greant]

As your humble MySQL community advocate, I exist to serve. ;/

To address your concerns with our understanding of the GNU GPL, we are happy to try and improve the quality and clarity of our work.

Feel free to review the following minor modification of the licensing summary? Does it help clarify the issue for you?

--

Our software is 100% GPL licensed, and if your use of it is 100% GPL (or OSI) license compliant, then you may use it without a fee. In all other instances, you are better served by our commercial licence.

--

As for what restrictions were historically imposed on the ISP, I have not run across any old documents to support this (but frankly I have not looked too hard nor do I care too much. I will ask David Axmark about it next time I am in touch with him.)

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

Our software is 100% GPL licensed, and if your use of it is 100% GPL (or OSI) license compliant, then you may use it without a fee. In all other instances, you are better served by our commercial licence.

But that is not what the company is saying on that webpage, and that is not the impression that are trying to give.

This has been an issue with MySQL AB for a long time, and I'm far from the first person to point it out to them, and the exchanges I know of illustrate either a complete lack of understanding of the GPL, or an intentional attempt to present a false impression in order to drive people to purchase commercial licenses.

As I said, all I am saying is that the explanation of the licensing needs to be more honest and more direct about the facts, rather than being an attempt to make people feel like they should/must purchase a commercial license.

Re:No choice about the license.

[zak_greant]

... and I was asking for your input on the changes that I will suggest to the rest of the MySQL team.

Do these changes clarify the issue?

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

I think they would be a very positive step in that direction.

That said, I still think that the page in question would still be intentionally confusing on the subject.

I will be out of town the rest of the day at a client location 50 miles north of here, but perhaps when I get back, I can draw up a brief example of what I think would serve both intellectual honesty about the GPL, and the obvious, and lauduable effort to encourage users to purchase commercial support and licenses for non-GPL compliant use. I haven't done so until now, because, quite frankly, this is the first time someone from MySQL has ever shown an interest in maybe addressing this contradiction.

Re:No choice about the license.

[zak_greant]

I would be glad to see your work. If you don't get a speedy reply, don't be suprised - I am flying from Germany to San Francisco shortly and may not have stable network access for about the next 10 days.

Re:No choice about the license.

[Anonymous Coward]

So let me see if I've got this straight:

MySQL AB's position is that redistribution of the GPL'ed MySQL along with a commercial product (not a derivative work) requires a commercial license?

That I can't even ship the LGPL'ed 3.x client library with my commercial application without a commercial license?

Or is MySQL AB claiming that my application which uses MySQL (or alternatively MS SQL or Oracle) is a derivative work of MySQL? Otherwise, I don't see how these restrictions on redistribution of MySQL can NOT violate the GPL.

Anyone care to enlighten me?

Re:No choice about the license.

[tshak]

Because you want to support the continued development of the software, because you know your company will only continue to benefit by the additional time and investment

But this is completely utopian! My company notices that your company, plus a bunch of nerds are already putting enough time and investment into it. For example - my company as never and will never invest in any open source project. Yet, Apache, Perl, and Linux are going to continue to grow successfully. Why should I drop a dime for it when I don't have to? Because it's nice?

Re:No choice about the license.

[pmineiro]

Sorry, but you are wrong. In the DEVEL release of MySQL 4.xx the client lib is GPL, in the 3.xx version, which is still the version in wide use except for those willing to use pre-release software in production environments, the client lib is LGPL.

You might want to make sure you are right before telling others they are inaccurate.

Well, since this is for posterity (you know people will be digging into the obscure flamewars of this thread in the archives for years :) ), I feel compelled to note that, from the mysql website, we have:

The software from MySQL AB that you can download from the pages listed below, are licensed under the GPL license and is provided "as is" and is without any warranty.

'nuff said.

-- p

Re:No choice about the license.

[WilliamX]

Might want to check the online documentation a little deeper, and find out the truth, rather than making false statements and thinking you are being witty.

What version?

[mgkimsal2]

It says it'll ship in 2003, but a beta is available.

WHEN will MySQL 4 get out of 'development' and into 'stable'? The infoworld article was already mentioning MySQL 5, but 4 is still alpha/beta, not 'production', and the 3.23 series seems to be progressing still.

Re:What version?

[Anonymous Coward]

It might be called 'alpha' or 'beta', but MySQL AB seem to err on the side of caution.

I consider MySQL 4 to be OK for production use.

Re:What version?

[mgkimsal2]

If the developers won't give it the label 'stable', then it's not worth it. Funny, they think it's good enough to win head-to-head competitions via eweek against big db players, but they don't have enough confidence to label it 'stable'. Seems a bit hypocritical. What would the outcry be if MS 'won' benchmarks with 'alpha' software?

Re:What version?

[scott1853]

I don't know why they could be so far behind schedule, they hired John Romero and the project manager for Falcon 4 to help keep them on track. What could have happened?

Re:What version?

[io333]

I've never seen this said before, though I suppose it has been:

In my experience, a program that runs under a Microsoft OS is usually into version 3.x or 4.x until it is anything that could actually be called "stable." And by stable, what comes to mind are programs that don't crash unexpectedly and do what they are actually supposed to do.

Examples under windows of programs that were not really "stable" under at least version 4 are:

Internet Explorer
Microsoft Word
Microsoft Windows
WordPerfect
Eudora
Lotus123
CoolEdit ... the list is nearly endless.

On the other hand, under Linux, I've used software called "beta", and less than version 1.x (heck, sometimes it's like version 0.1alpha) that is just as solid and functional as a 6.x or 7.x version of something in the Microsoft world.

Examples are:
Komba
Mozilla
bbweather
WindowMaker
flux box
mplayer
xine.... again the list is nearly endless.

I'm not quite sure what the philosophy is here except to kind of thumb noses at Winsoftware windows versions and commercial software marketing BS in general... but fact is that I'd trust a 0.3 beta version of some linux program just as much as I'd trust a release verison 9.x of anything under Windows.

But then I wonder if this hurts Linux when it comes to getting JoeAverage to run LinSoftware:

Isn't Joe gonna think that version 6 of Internet Explorer might be better than version 1 of Mozilla?

Re:What version?

[be-fan]

Well that's the problem! They're using game devleopers to manage a database project! Will MySQL 4.0 outdo Excel and ship with a First Person Shooter easter egg?

Re:What version?

[be-fan]

Don't forget KDE 3.x beta. I've been running it for weeks, and the only crashes I've had are related to the Qt 3.1 beta I'm running under it. (Specifically, some semantics changed that Konqueror doesn't like, and even then it only crashes when closing the program!)

Re:What version?

[Sloppy]

Heh, I misread that as George Romero, and it still made sense. 17 years since the last "Dead" movie (or 12 if you count the '90 remake)... *sigh*

Re:What version?

[colenski]

Good point - this is a marketing issue. Really, if you guys go to Fry's or Best Buy or whatever and you saw "Rip and mix CD v .98 beta" next to "Rip and mix CD 2.5" which one are you going to buy? Microsofties in da house (and I know there are more than a few, like me, who read /.) remember that MS stirred up some controversy when NT was released in '93 - they have it the version number 3.1 when it was actually 1.0 - the official MS line was that it was in keeping with the nomenclature of Windows 3.1 - of course, we know total B.S. but again, if you are MIS or PHB for a Fortune 1000 and Microsoft wants you to switch to version 1.0 of a new OS, are you gonna feel better if there's an ominous version number of "1.0 build 2192" or nice fuzzy "3.1 build 2192"??

Makes me laugh about this "New AOL 8.0 vs New MSN 8.0" crap - is it a full point upgrade (nope) or is it just Marketing getting freaked out because someone else is shipping something that says 8.0 - life imitates Dilbert more and more every day.

Re:What version?

[scott1853]

Will MySQL 4.0 outdo Excel and ship with a First Person Shooter easter egg?


That's the problem. I hear the easter egg is going to be Daikatana. Apparently Romero is desperate to get somebody to install it.

Re:What version?

[ttfkam]

And by that time, PostgreSQL 7.3 will be out of beta. Maybe even Linux kernel version 3.0!

If all goes as planned, MySQL 5 will be stable by 2007.

*sigh*

What would this world be like if software reviewers reviewed actual, released software for a change instead of all of these developer wishlists that may (or most likely not) get released sometime in the future?

Re:What version?

[drinkypoo]

They (the developers) are all playing betas of Duke Nukem Forever.

A question from the ignorant

[nugneant]

This does seem like a pretty big blow to GPL in general - but I figured if anyone would know of good alternatives to Netware, it'd be the dudes at /. - so, honestly - is this the beginning of the end for GPL, or will Novell "correct" their "mistake" (both in quotations, as I don't think I know enough about the behind-the-scenes detail to make a subjective decision like that) with a future update?

Re:A question from the ignorant

[mmacdona86]

This is not really a big issue one way or the other for the GPL. MySQL is available with a GPL license, for use in GPL applications, or with a different license for non-GPL applications. Novell thought that some of their customers might want to build a non-GPL applications with MySQL and Netware, so they gave them that option by supplying the non-GPL license for MySQL. I mean, this makes sense; I would think that adding MySQL with the GPL license to Netware isn't much of a value add.

Re:A question from the ignorant

[mr_z_beeblebrox]

but I figured if anyone would know of good alternatives to Netware

Call it a flame if you will, but I've worked with Netware. That said, allow me to reccommend ANYTHING else.

Re:A question from the ignorant

[the_womble]

MySQL is available with a GPL license, for use in GPL applications, or with a different license for non-GPL applications

What stops you building a non-GPL application with GPL software? You can not make a non-free derivative of the software itself, but there is nothing to stop you building propreietary systems on a GPL platform.

Re:A question from the ignorant

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? MySQL is a SQL database engine, Netware is a Network Operating System, these are two completley different system, what the hell are you talking about?

Re:A question from the ignorant

[mr_z_beeblebrox]

Then you must be a moron, if you can make Netware sing, you don't deserve to TOUCH a server. May I suggest you get your MCSE laminated, cause you're nothing but a PAPER TIGER

You may suggest anything you want. If you can make Netware sing that is wonderful. I wanted a good, secure server not a singer that is why I learned Unix. Yes I could learn how to "button down" a novell server or as you guessed an NT Server (I am an MCSE and they come laminated thank you) but why go through the work that your vendor should have done (this paper tiger prefers non MS networks) I prefer Unix which is MOSTLY secure out of the box. I will for you recant my anything comment though. Performance wise (as a file server) Netware was better than NT. However the Playstation is also approaching that benchmark.

So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too)

[swb]

I loved Netware 4.11 and think that NDS even then is better than the next two iterations of Active Directory could hope to be.

However, Novell has been doing this "Me too!!!!" thing with bundling stuff for years. Perl, the whole Netscape server, some IBM web thing, etc and it means nothing.

I hate to agree with the trolls, but Novell is dying. There was even an article in the WSJ last Friday about companies trading *below* their hard asset valus, and guess who was on it? Novell was! The Wall Street logic apparently was that trading below asset value was the sign that you were a dead duck and that investors not only didn't think you would do well now, but thought you'd likely go bankrupt, too.

Novell needs better marketing

[Charlton Heston]

I dislike marketers as much as any programmer, or for that matter, anyone who's had their dinner interrupted by a phone call. But Novell needs better marketing in general. They've got really neat technology, but nobody knows about it. I think that if Novell discovered cold fusion they wouldn't tell anyone. The most they'd do is but a little paper sign on the door of the laboratory saying "cold fusion inside - don't tell anyone."

So, without the proper marketing, I doubt anyone will ever discover that Novell can be a web services platform, or that there's a built-in database that's ready to use.

Re:Novell needs better marketing

[L33t-Geek]

I dont know if you have ever heard of BrainShare but if you search it online you will see that many people are fully aware of the power of Novell. My company installs novell servers for clients frequently and I have noticed lately that Novell servers are starting to be added to new networks and even mixed with NT Servers' networks. So i must say that the release of Netware 6 while not advertised widely definitly didnt go unnoticed. -Geek

Re:Novell needs better marketing

[Anonymous Coward]

How about a Beowulf cluster of marketers

Re:Novell needs better marketing

[banzai51]

You guys have it all wrong. Novell's problem isn't marketing. The problem is that damn few applications run on Novell. That means if you implement Novell, you'll still end up running Microsoft servers for your apps. Novell is far more expensive to license than Win2k. Pretty soon it dawns on someone that everything you're doing with Novell you can do with Win2k, but not vice-versa. Then the migration to AD is on. Plus there is Novell's client. Want to make a Novell end user's jaw hit the table? Uninstall the Novell client then log him in. The Novell client is buggy and slow, and only the most important piece for getting the clients connected.

Re:Novell needs better marketing

[askegg]

With Netware 6 you can connect to the server using any platform without any client software at all.

Why bother to ship MySQL at all?

[Anonymous Coward]

Postgres does everything you could ask for, and it's BSD style licensed?

Don't get me wrong, MySQL is a great piece of software, but if they have a problem with the GPL, I don't think that it's worth buying a commercial MySQL license, when you could use Postgres free of charge.

Re:Why bother to ship MySQL at all?

[Anonymous Coward]

you forgot to mention that mysql is the ms-access for linux.

In Related News:

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft announced that Cardfile would be bundled in their next version of Windows.

Re:In Related News:

[CakerX]

w00t, damn the one feature I missed from 3.1 is back. Now due to the fact that MS OS's seem to rise in file size for no reason other than its the next "version" with little extra features, we can expect it to be somewhere around an extra 50 megs

Re:In Related News:

[Anonymous Coward]

'I notice you're trying to create a relational database for a web-based application! Click here to start the create-a-relational-database-for-a-web-based-appli cation wizard!'

Re:first post

[Anonymous Coward]

It's GNU/Linux not Linux!

Oh, and it's actually really good.

Here it is.

[FreeLinux]

Here is Novell's press release on the matter. (man their new web site sucks) It appears that earlier reports of PostgreSQL were inaccurate.

Now, what the press release doesn't say is if Novell plans to remove Pervasive/BTrieve from Netware. Netware has always been deeply steeped in Btrieve (an abomination, in my opinion). Indeed Netware 3 through 6 even use BTrieve for the TCP/IP stack. I can't imagine why but, they do.

Re:Here it is.

[ghjm]

I have not used Netware 5 or 6, but I have certainly done installs of Netware 3 and 4 that did not require btrieve. I think under Netware 3 the documentation (folio) system might have used btrieve, so you got it automatically if you installed any package that contained documentation (including TCP/IP). But btrieve is certainly not required for the actual TCP/IP stack.

Re:Here it is.

[FreeLinux]

Better check again. Try typing unload btrieve and see all the errors about; Must unload TCP/IP first, must unload IPX/SPX first.

Additionally, BTrieve is also used for the Installed Products databse. On Netware 4.11 load install.nlm and the change back to the console to see the BTrieve already loaded messages. INETCFG too. Also, look for a module called NWMKDE (NetWare MicroKernel Database Engine), I can't remember for sure if 4.11 has this but, it is another name for BTrieve.

Re:Here it is.

[DigitalAdrenaline]

I believe Btrieve was killed off in Version 5 several years ago. It might be available as an add-on, but it isn't there out of the box.

Re:Here it is.

[malraid]

Some services rely on Btrive, DHCP server and the BorderManager cache off the top of my head.

Re:Here it is.

[vodka2112]

Now, what the press release doesn't say is if Novell plans to remove Pervasive/BTrieve from Netware. Netware has always been deeply steeped in Btrieve (an abomination, in my opinion). Indeed Netware 3 through 6 even use BTrieve for the TCP/IP stack. I can't imagine why but, they do.

BTrieve, IIRC, is used for their i18n databases. If a module (including TCP/IP stack) spews out any messages or logfiles etc, it needs to use BTrieve to access these messages.

BTrieve has been around in netware since the beginning of time, and it will most like remain there till armageddon, both for backward compatibility and because it's "tried and tested".

Also, translating messages into different languages costs a fortune. Those interpreters charge by the word, and even then they come up with stuff like "All your base are belong to us".

Moving away from BTrieve might mean that they will have to re-translate all messages. Considering their financial situation, that doesn't seem to be too good an idea.

BTW, there are amazing netware goodies available inside Novell. When I worked there, we used to port all sorts of stuff to NetWare, "just to see if can be done". The ported NLM's (netware loadable modules) are available on their intranet. I believe an NLM I posted there is still available.

Re:Here it is.

[Anonymous Coward]

Btreive was WRITTEN by Novell, so it was the common platform until 4.1, when it was an option.

Novell spun off Btrieve when they formed Pervasive and the rest is history. BTrieve is still alive and kicking, but is not a core Netware component and hasn't been for several releases.

Re:Here it is.

[ttfkam]

Information has to be held somewhere; why not a database? The common misconception is that Btrieve and MySQL (or other relational databases) are equivalents. They are not. Btrieve is closer in concept to BerkeleyDB and variants.

Apples and oranges. And the network data has to be stored somewhere.

Re:Here it is.

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't call Mysql a relational database ;-)

PostgreSQL almost yes, not Mysql by far..

Re:Here it is.

[Anonymous Coward]

Btrieve has been included with NetWare for many, many years now; since Novell bought the product of course. IIFC, it first appeared as part of NetWare/386 and was loaded as a VAP before evolving into an NLM.

Btrieve was bought back from Novell some years ago by it's original creators: Pervasive Software (http://www.pervasive.com).

Novell continued to ship Btrieve v6.10 (the last version they ever produced) for some years after this. Btrieve v6.10 never got any code updates and therefore lagged behind current OSs. For example, it supported only SPX while NetWare gained TCP/IP support and it never got a 32-bit Windows interface.

Under it's new owners, however, the Btrieve product has evolved further, including a name change to Pervasive.SQL. It is now also available for other platforms including NT/2000 and Linux.

Pervasive and Novell finally cut a deal to include the latest version with NetWare 5. NetWare 6 not only includes Pervasive.SQL, but also uses it as part of it's TCP/IP stack (I think to store things like routing tables).

So, there's a quick histroy lesson... ;)

Why is this a blow to the GPL?

[Mustang Matt]

Did I miss something?

This is neat-o keen, but.

[Asprin]

This is neat-o keen, but exactly how does this convince people who are running NT or Linux servers (and who therefore can *already* get MySQL for free) to go with NetWare?

If I were Novell, I'd be more interested in developing a Samba-style SMB server NLM to try to replace NT file and print servers -- look in any current virus catalog under "Klez" for more details...

Re:This is neat-o keen, but.

[eMilkshake]

NetWare 6.0 comes with Native File Access, and it's available for NetWare 5.1. It supplies CIFS/AFP/NFS access to NetWare servers.

As much as I used to agree with those who sound the "better product" drum, as a former Novell sysadmin (primary NDS admin for a state university and developer of a YES approved NLM), Novell has lost it. They have too much development in Bangalore (yes, I have participated in a conference call with Bangalore engineers, and yes, they did speak English well, but didn't quite get some concepts on failover I was trying to explain as required) and too much turnover among developer staff. Couple that with a core kernel that's too small to extend (flaws in the kernel prevented effective multi-CPU work are documented on their developer site -- look for NKS) and you have a lean, mean server OS that rocks on a 486, but looks as out of place today as big hair and belts over large sweaters.

Re:This is neat-o keen, but.

[That Bajan Guy]

They already did. Netware 6, Native File Access. Netware servers look like Windows servers to Windows, Appletalk servers to Mac.

Combined with Perl being available, and fully integrated with NDS, as well as a full Apache and Tomcat suite, life is nice. It means my talents extend to yet another platform.

Hell, the Netware 6 boot sequence looks like the init sequence from a linux box.

Re:This is neat-o keen, but.

[eGuy]

As far as a samba server, NetWare 6 also bundles what they call Native File Access Pack. It makes your server appear as a Windows server(CIFS) to windows clients, Mac(AppleTalk) to Mac client or Unix(NFS) to Unix clients. It's also a free download for NetWare 5.

Re:This is neat-o keen, but.

[kelzer]

If I were Novell, I'd be more interested in developing a Samba-style SMB server NLM to try to replace NT file and print servers

I've heard a lot of people making that suggestion, including members of the Samba team. The problem is that NetWare's file services are superior to NT's, so Novell isn't so anxious to emulate an NT server.

For example, NetWare has their "salvage" capability, in which deleted files can be restored. It's so powerful that it's been called "poor man's version control." Note for those who are security consious: the deleted files keep the same ACL they had before deletion, so they are never recoverable by somebody who didn't have rights to read them before they were deleted. Furthermore, individual files can be flagged as "purge immediate", and directories can be as well. Finally, the entire feature can be disabled.

Another advantage of NetWare file services is inherited rights, and the inherited rights filter. "Inherited rights" means that if you have a 50 GB disk that's got 175,000 files on it, and you want to grant one person read-rights to every file on the disk, you just grant them the read-right to the root, and you're done. Unlike NT, you don't have to wait 15 minutes for the rights to propagate through the entire filesystem. And if there's a branch of the directory tree that you don't ever want rights to flow into, you can add an inherited rights filter to prevent this from happening.

NetWare drivers also tend to be much more intelligent when copying files across the network. With NT, if you open up a folder that's on a server across the WAN, and copy a bunch of files to another folder on the same server, NT tends to pull the files across the WAN to your workstation, then send them back to the original server. Novell's been aware of and avoided this issue since the mid 1980's, when they first built NCOPY.EXE to avoid the problem in DOS.

If they implemented Samba, they'd lose some of their perceived technical advantage over NT, and they can't really afford to lose what little advantage they have.

Re:This is neat-o keen, but.

[FatherOfONe]

Wow! You are on it in so many ways.

1st - Having development major development done over in another country should warrant your company name at www.fuckedcompany.com

2nd. The kernel needed to be replaced years ago, and Ray Norta (mis-spelled) knew this. He had Novell heading in a UNIX direction and would have probably been known as a hero now if he would have had his way. Granted the purchase of Word Perfect was a bad idea...

Also, there has been many issues with the boys in California and those in Utah. The California people (in my opinion) wanted to head in the right direction years ago, but they were not allowed.

I have said it before and I will say it again. What if Novell dumped NetWare, or let it die a slow death, in favor of becoming a Linux distro. They could bundle all the crap they currently make and still charge for it. They would have all the source code, and I don't know of any NetWare shop that would switch off of them. I know a few that would strongly consider them.

I do agree that this should probably be some new company because of the bad name Novell has left in MANY I.T. departments.

Re:This is neat-o keen, but.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's been available for a while now (over 1 year) and is known as the NFAP (Native File Access Pack). It is an add-on for Netware 5.1 and native in Netware 6. Full support for almost all clients including Windows, Mac, Unix, Linux with full grandular File access rights.

http://www.novell.com/products/nfa/

I'm really surprised...

[FreeLinux]

I'm surprised that GNU/RMS hasn't rallied the GNU/FSF and explained the GNU/GPL to them.

Re:I'm really surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

No, not GNU/RMS, but RMS/GNU, since it's obvious that there would be no GNU without RMS. Hence RMS/GNU :-)

(for the humor impaired, it's just a joke)

Re:I'm really surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

which in turn would mean that we should call linux RMS/GNU/Linux
However, without Marcella Stallman, there would be no RMS, and this is where really start to develop a problem, I am sure no one wants to call it MS/RMS/GNU/Linux.

Re:I'm really surprised...

[nizo]

Wow, and what suprised me most was the fact that Novell still exists and is shipping software. Perhaps this article of doom fits into the same category as the "BSD is dead" articles?

Re:I'm really surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

Who knows - perhaps RMS's problems all stem from the fact that his mothers initials are MS. Who knows - perhaps EMR's father is Ian Brian Mercado?

Perhaps a new name: Improvell

[laetus]

Sorry to say (and this is not a flame) but the name Novell brings up connotations of losses in the server OS market, losses in the office suite market, etc. Too bad MySQL will now be associated with it.

Maybe you're right, they need better marketing. And I'll start with the suggestion of a name change. Call it: Improvell!

Re:Perhaps a new name: Improvell

[warpSpeed]

Sorry to say (and this is not a flame) but the name Novell brings up connotations of losses in the server OS market, losses in the office suite market, etc. Too bad MySQL will now be associated with it.

I guess that depends on your view of MySQL...

I, for one, do not see this as a problem. Yeah the database is not too bad, but the lack of a clear license is a huge draw back. No thinks, I'll take the truly free alternative.

It's not marketing

[jACL]

Oh, sure, they don't have flashy David Bowie television commercials, etc., but they do a decent amount of marketing. The problem isn't marketing -- the problem is lack of developers.

A couple of years ago, Novell held a developer contest for the best product integrated with NDS. This was at the height of the dotcom boom. The best integrated application award went to a contextless login client extension -- something to make their file system client work better. This was the best showing?

Novell needs developers. They've recently been trying to fix this -- they purchased Silverstream Software to add Java development and business logic to their directory service. Their DirXML and Account Management products are expected to benefit the most from it. Hopefully someone will notice...

Re:It's not marketing

[vasqzr]

Chicken and the egg

Why are there no developers?

You can't get developers when you don't have a large marketshare...

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[FreeLinux]

These financial results show that although Novell is trading below their values, as you said, they are still strong and perhaps on the road to recovery.

People have cried the Novell is dead/dying mantra since the release of NT 4.0 yet, their still plugging along. Don't count them dead yet.

What IS Novell??

[xtremex]

I remember needing DOS to install Netware, and it just added networking to DOS apps, etc.
Now, why would somebody use Novell now? Is it a REAL OS? Does it still need DOS/Windows to run? What am I gaining/losing by using Novell instead of a *NIX?

Re:What IS Novell??

[Magorak]

Novell has been around a long time and will continue to be around a long time regardless of what any Linux/NT/200 people may think.

The company I work for is a pure Novell shop. We run Groupwise for our email, and plenty of other Novell products and we do extremely well. In fact, Novell even powers our web presence. We will be upgrading from Netware 5 to Netware 6 this year.

It IS a real OS. Standalone server sits in my server room and runs all of it's apps very well. It's a hell of a lot more stable than any 2K/NT box and in many ways, just as stable as a Unix box. I won't say better, but I will say it does a good job.

I hate it when people say that Novell is dead and dying. They've been around a long time and they are still around because they always make a decent product and require very little maintenance, unlike the MS OSes out there.

Re:What IS Novell??

[Mantrid]

It's a network os for servers. And a damn fine one at that. Can't compare it to Linux as I don't have experience with it. But I know I really felt it when we went NT4; the bulk of that changeover was a long string of "what do you mean we can't do 'X' now?"

Re:What IS Novell??

[krammit]

Netware in its current incarnation is a top notch server OS. It's got one of, if not the best LDAP implementations available (NDS, eDirectory) that offers integration with all of its products for very easy administration. (Groupwise is an excellent Exchange replacement, minus the constant virus problems). Once its setup, that's it. It does not require constant attention like other server OSes *cough*. It does still load on top of DOS (for reasons I can't understand) but it is in no way a DOS based OS. In fact, it seems to have borrowed quite a bit from Unix in versions 5 and 6.

What you gain: dead easy file/print administration, extensible LDAP framework built right in, excellent reliablity/stability, can be easily (if you read the documentation) performance tuned

What you lose: application support and expensive licensing.

For small to mid size businesses, you could do better with a WinNT or *nix solution, but for large enterprises with massively distributed networks, Netware is an excellent way to go.

Re:What IS Novell??

[sputnik73]

Is your statement that Netware is "a hell of a lot more stable than any 2K/NT box" based on any type of empirical study or just your personal observations from, what I assume, years of using Netware?

I'm not trying to criticize what you've said but instead just want to get a handle on how you're measuring stability and such. I'm curious because I've found that even an old and antiquated system (i.e. my development box) runs quite stable with 2K. Granted, I don't put a tremendous server load on it and so that may be the reason I am seeing more stability in 2K than you are. This has always been the problem with trying to discuss the stability and performance of operating systems with people - everyone uses their systems differently and so you really can't compare performance without some benchmarking, a few charts, and perhaps a POWERPOINT presentation. ;-) These are things I don't take to cocktail parties and thus I am forced to resort of vague hand-waving.

Thanks for any thought you might have on the subject.

Re:What IS Novell??

[nolife]

The company I work for is a pure Novell shop.

So WAS the company I work for. We are currently about 50% of the way through a company wide conversion to Exchange/AD environment with W2K severs. I can only hope that our current stability problems are because we are in a transition or a temp lack of admin experience with W2K servers.
I know we NEVER had problems with our incoming mail when that headless Sun box was handling our regions SMTP...

Bottom line is any system will only be as good as those that are maintaining it.

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Netware still requires DOS to run - hence it runs on DOS.

Re:What IS Novell??

[T-Ranger]

As for loading on top of DOS, the reasons now are somewhat historical, but there were very good reasons at the time. I suppose from way, way, way back its because Netware started on non-Intell machines and the little DOS wedge gave Netware a chance to work quickly with PC BIOSes.

From at least as far back as NW 3.x you should think of DOS as a cross beteween, ie, Sun BootProms, and LILO.

Re:What IS Novell??

[demonlapin]

Groupwise is an excellent Exchange replacement

On what planet? Sure, it's theoretically capable of the same stuff. But does Exchange really do the insane, boneheaded crap that Groupwise does? Try sending out a weekly reminder to everyone to run a virus scan on their system.

Notice that every person on the system will receive 52 separate notices, all at once, each of which must be accepted or rejected. If you accept them, then it will remind you at the proper time.

Not only that, it does the same thing if you try to set up a recurring weekly task for yourself.

And don't get me started about trying to export archive Groupwise mail to, say, mbox format. Groupwise might be great on the admin side, but it's hell for your users.

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

ONLY at Slashdot could some mindless retard who is too lazy or stupid to do any reading on his own get moderated up for a question that is this impossibly dim. And this from a collective who will generally shout about TFM at any opportunity.

Hey, I need the karma too! What IS linux? What IS the internet?

Re:What IS Novell??

[jerkyjunkmail]

Kind of like how people have been saying Apple is dying for the entire 7 or 8 years I've been using a mac. as in "Oh, you use mac, mac is going out of business." who the fuck is mac anyway. last i know the company's name was apple.

Re:What IS Novell??

[xtremex]

You know, I was more than willing to download a trial copy of Netware and install it to see why colleges still teach novell for networking classes (Every bank still has CNEs on the payroll) I played with a Netware 5 beta way back when I worked for EAB and it had a Java XServer type thingie. I ALWAYS questioned why they used Novell when they had 3,000 UNIX servers at the same time.I did a LITTLE research online, and found not much good info on google (like a quick synopsis).So, after scanning the web, and reading the replies on Slashdot, Netware is a super powered DOS with SCO code.(I think they bought SCO at one time.) No trial version of Novell exists, so I guess I'll never experience the "power" of Novell, or wonder why Novell has never been an option for a company besides a bank...

Re:What IS Novell??

[Jim Norton]

Except for the fact that it DOESN'T actually run on DOS. That's just like saying someone who boots Linux using Loadlin runs Linux on DOS...

Re:What IS Novell??

[askegg]

The licensing is not that expensive when you look at the big picture. With M$ you license the server, each client accessing it and each method of access (SMB, WAP, HTTP. etc). Add this up. With Novell you only license the user that is going to connect on the LAN. You can install as many servers as you like with no additional cost. You can easily get apache to check username/password against eDirectory without consuming licenses. The directory can be partitioned, replicated and filtered across every platform in your organisation for speed, reliability and redundancy. With DirXML you can pull data from any source and add it to your directory, then push it back out when it changes. Sysops - imagine what you can do if all users on the network have the one ID! If you are looking to web enable your business you can't go past Novell, especially now they have purchased Silverstream!

Re:What IS Novell??

[askegg]

Trial version? Try http://www.novell.com/products/netware/nw6_eval.ht ml Next time do some research...

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that NetWare does require/run on DOS; remove DOS (or remove just command.com for that matter) and NetWare will not boot, period. No if, ands or buts, NetWare will not boot without DOS. Hence it requires DOS to run. I dont know about you, but I have a whole bunch of Win32 programs that will not run without Windows, so it would be logical to say that they run on Windows... NetWare runs on DOS, plain and simple. If the Novell folks could make NetWare run without DOS, they'd have done it by now (just like the xBSD, Linux, Solaris, and SCO folks did years ago). Hence, NetWare runs on, and requires DOS to function.

Re:What IS Novell??

[themurray]

yeah, but novell does not require the maintenance of win2k or nt will. I know of a netware 2.2 box that is still working after 10 years of not being touched.

Re:What IS Novell??

[stinky wizzleteats]

Novell is not a real OS, but DOS has nothing to do with that fact. Novell is an answer to a question which is no longer being asked. Novell is the best file server system that has ever been created. Period. It is a secure, stable, high performance file server. The user administration features under NDS exceed any modern definition of the word "scalable", and its reliability is legendary.

As I mentioned, however, no one wants a file server anymore. File servers are commodity items, in the form of Win2k servers in closets, and the core of an enterprise network these days is not the file servers, but the application servers. This is where *nix (the only real operating system(s) in existence) and windows (a brightly colored omnibus driving off a cliff) have taken over.

Novell's good if you have an enormous need for enterprise wide file services. Just don't try to print (at least with NDPS), and for God's sake, don't do anything while Console One is loading. And no "cons" discussion related to Novell would be complete without mentioning the seething hell that is NLS or SLP problems. But, if you need enterprise wide file services, it's because you've implemented enterprise wide applications which run on desktops via shared database files, which means you have much bigger problems that anything I've described here.

It was a good idea, and I hope the NDS concept takes hold elsewhere (so far it hasn't - AD is not a directory), but all in all, Novell is irrelevant. That is why I put down my CNE and picked up Linux.

Novell, if you're reading this and wondering how and when you lost it, I just want to say it WAS the case 87 NCP fiasco. Well, okay, and the fact that I couldn't request Pink Floyd's "Time" while on hold with Novell Support Connection Radio. May your death be prolonged and gentle, may you fade quietly away into a copyright holding company who makes good money with the occaisonal lawsuit, and, long after Brainshare is no more, know that I will show up every so often in the Spring to raise a Wasatch brew to the glory that was Novell.

Re:What IS Novell??

[erth64net]

I'd say it's hell for the admins, more-so than the users. See the discussion here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=38496&cid=4128 927

Re:What IS Novell??

[haggar]

NetWare uses DOS just as a bootloader. It has nothing to do with DOS. In fact, NetWare is a scalable multiprocessor, memory protected OS. It has as much to do with DOS as Linux has with LILO.

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

I dissagree! For small to mid sized businesses Netware for Small Business is great! You get all the apps and only have a 50 user limit. I can't count all the times I've installed Netware for Small Business.

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

Here! Here! *clink*

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that NetWare does require/run on DOS; remove DOS (or remove just command.com for that matter) and NetWare will not boot, period.

No if, ands or buts, NetWare will not boot without DOS. Hence it requires DOS to run. I dont know about you, but I have a whole bunch of Win32 programs that will not run without Windows, so it would be logical to say that they run on Windows... NetWare runs on DOS, plain and simple.

If the Novell folks could make NetWare run without DOS, they'd have done it by now (just like the xBSD, Linux, Solaris, and SCO folks did with their own boot-loaders years ago). Hence, NetWare runs on, and requires DOS to function.

Re:What IS Novell??

[askegg]

Yeah - and remove lilo from linux and it does not boot. So it is fair to say that linux runs on lilo by your logic...

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

No, lilo is a boot-loader, DOS is an operating system. There's a significant difference between a boot-loader and an OS.

Even so, if I removed lilo, I'd just install something else like grub - I have choices...

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, there is a difference, a significant difference; a DOS partition on a NetWare server needs to match the amount of memory in the server - now I have 256MB-1GB (or more) of otherwise wasted disk space in the server - just to support the 20MB+ of data that is on the DOS partition (server.exe, its supporting drivers/binaries, and the DOS programs). Where Lilo on the other hand, is just a boot-loader, which by design does not require a seperate partition, and manages to fit nicely within the MBR of the disk - where a boot-loader should sit...

In addition, lilo is removed from memory once the OS loads - where NetWare on the other hand; when you shutdown the NetWare server, you are returned to a DOS prompt - therefore DOS is never removed from memory (hmm, that reminds me of Windows 3.1).

Re:What IS Novell??

[askegg]

You only need a DOS partition the size of RAM if you want to do a core dump of memory for diagnostic purposes.

You can unload DOS from memory using "secure console"

Re:What IS Novell??

[Anonymous Coward]

You only need a DOS partition the size of RAM if you want to do a core dump of memory for diagnostic purposes.

True, and considering the min hardware requirements are 256MB of RAM - you understand where I got my measurement. The fact is though, you cannot resize fat16 or netware NSS based partitions easily, and I've had more than one case where I've had to send a core dump to Novell. So hence, the extra and otherwise wasted space is necessary to setup at the time the server is setup.

You can unload DOS from memory using "secure console"

Uhh, no you cant, and "remove dos" was removed from the OS in NetWare 5.x and newer. In addition, when DOS is removed you cannot backup the files on the C: drive anymore, and the abend.log file does not get updated when an abend occurs. Where have you been these last 4 years?

Either way though - using Linux, Solaris, xBSD, SCO, Win32, and just about any real enterprise class OS - I can use the partitions that already exist for other production related tasks - meaning the free space can be made as needed, and not reserved and otherwise wasted the rest of the time.

Look at Netware 6

[FreeLinux]

I were Novell, I'd be more interested in developing a Samba-style SMB server NLM to try to replace NT file and print servers

Netware 6 already has this. I forget their name for it but, it goes under the guise of Any Client or some such. With this feature, Microsoft clients can connect to the Netware 6 servers without the previously required Novell client. The Netware 6 server looks to the client, like a NT server. Netware 6 also supports an NFS like export that allows *nix clients to also connect natively, without the use of Novell client software.

Netware 6 has a lot of really powerful features. What's more, I think that Linuxers would like it because it has a similar feel, even if the commands are different. Hell, it even runs Xwindows with the IceWM.

Re:Look at Netware 6

[tensai]

True. Netware 6 and 5 (don't know about before) offer native CIFS (that's SMB) and NFS services. It works all right but you have the draw backs of those services, which is that they suck. So does NCP, though. I haven't found a really good network fs yet.

I think Linuxers may have a hard time with Netware since just about all of Novell's software is designed for a Microsoft environment. ConsoleOne, iPrint, iFolder, GroupWise. None of them work great from Linux. Not that they couldn't, but they just haven't focused on it. Novell does have some really neat technology, but that company has serious issues. I've given up all hope.

Re:Look at Netware 6

[askegg]

You're on drugs. ConsoleOne is a java app - so runs on any platform. Novell are moving ALL their management utilities to iManager - a web based utility. Some features are already available with this tool, so you can manage your server from anywhere.

Re:Look at Netware 6

[Anonymous Coward]

Ohh boy, a java app. That means nothing when Novell has to release a seperate plugin for each platform, and to add to that - they have not released plugins for most of the other platforms that apparently ConsoleONE runs on. In short, ConsoleONE runs on many platforms if you want to do nothing but change passwords, and create new users. If you want to use it to also administrate GroupWise accounts, or just about anything but just the simple stuff - you have to go back to Win32...

Re:Look at Netware 6

[askegg]

Can't argue with that. Novell's (almost) complete lack of non-windows management tools for Groupwise, Border Manager, NDPS, Zenworks (version 4 maybe?) and others is criminal for a company touting cross platform abilities. I can only hope the move towards the web-based iManager is company wide and completely implemented. Let's hope the acquisition of Silverstream expatiates this migration....

not quite sure but...

[b17bmbr]

does anybody actually use netware anymore?

Re:not quite sure but...

[Anonymous Coward]

After a college internship in their Streets Department, I discovered that the City of Philadelphia still does. They scrapped a lot of their Unix servers and set everyone up with a Windows 95 desktop (some of the higher ups have NT4). Everyone has a Novell client, and the network is set up as several NetWare Trees. They don't seem to take advantage of any of the system's features, though, so I'm not sure why they use it instead of the native Windows networking (except perhaps for ease-of-management). But then they invest in bloated Information Management software from Lotus and Microsoft SQL Server databases to replace the old Sybase stuff (while still doing everything in MSOffice 97).

Basically, a city that bleeds money prefers ease-of-use over value, and retains a staff of about a dozen IT people to tread water.

Re:not quite sure but...

[Anonymous Coward]

over half a billion licenses for eDir out there my friend... remember they are still a billion dollar a year company.

Re:not quite sure but...

[b17bmbr]

only reason i was asking was because they are losing market share to linux and windows. plus, my school district uses novell on top of the win9x clients, and it is a huge clusterf**k. of ocurse it is probably due to the inability of our district level peple to find either cheek, with both hands AND an anatomy book!!

half a Billion? really?

Re:not quite sure but...

[zak_greant]

I am always stunned by the number of hardcore netware geeks that I talk to at conferences. Novell has some pretty freaky staying power.

Re:not quite sure but...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2002/05/p r02042.html

Re:not quite sure but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Over half a billion? No, under half a billion, more closer to 420 Million accounts. Are you an accountant with Enron?

Either way, that's not NetWare usage, thats eDirectory usage. NetWare is a network operating system, eDirectory is a x500 based directory service (kinda like LDAP). The eDirectory licenses include such users as the 150,000+ users on Novell's free email service (www.myrealbox.com), and the millions of users using CNN online edition.

Re:not quite sure but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dont forget the 250,000 free eDir licenses for any developer or OEM who wants. That counts into Novell's half billion licenses as well.

Hmm, 100 developers/OEMs makes 25,000,000 eDir licenses. 1,000 makes a quarter billion...

Samba on Netware.

[DigitalAdrenaline]

Ummm. The samba NLM has been around for half a decade. Developement would hardly be news...

ftp://ca.samba.org/Binary_Packages/novell/

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[Tablizer]

(* People have cried the Novell is dead/dying mantra since the release of NT 4.0 yet, their still plugging along. Don't count them dead yet. *)

Novell is the Apple of Networking. (Well, except for their esthetically ugly screens.)

Too many companies rely on them. Their cash cow may shrink, but will probably never die any more than 360-based mainframes will. At worse, another company will purchase them (IBM? Computer Associates? Some European tech company?)

If Wall Street hates Novell that much, then perhaps I'll purchase some stock...........wait, I have no money for stock purchases due to the last stock poppage and sour tech econ. Bummer.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[IAgreeWithThisPost]

Novell is dead..I was a long time Novell homer....hated NT when it came out..Thought 4.x trounced it every which way..but i realized eventually that Novell was losing quickly..I trashed all netware servers and went 2000.

AD isn't quite NDS, but it works fine..better than what NT offered..and the group policies, when done correctly, are sensational. Tied in with GP software installation and RIS(again, when done correctly), and you can have your shop running smooth as a baby's ass. The biggest problem is having to repackage products for wininstaller..obviously not as many companies are jumping on board as MS had hoped..but it's not a difficult thing, if you do your homework;learn the msi format...too many idiots try and just use the repackaging software and think that's all there is too it.

it puts zenworks to shame that's for sure. and whatever happened with novell's big push to have a java gui(that was slow as molasses). they've failed every way they could, and you can't make mistakes against a powerhouse like MS.

Re:first post

[PDHoss]

LNGNU/Linux (Linux is Not Gnu is not Unix/Linux is not Unix).

Head explodes. Film at 11.

PDHoss

Re:first post

[Anonymous Coward]

this was modded offtopic?

Re:What version? free software vs. commercial soft

[d3xt3r]

Here lies the differentiation between free software and commercial software. Free software isn't release or production quality until the software developers feel that it is 100% stable. Commercial software is production quanity when the big boss says it's time to make more money with another release.

For example, Win2K was released with 100,000 known bugs. Apache Software Foundation was running their website w/Apache 2.0 beta for over a year before the code went "gold". This is the fundamental difference. Just b/c Microsoft calls it SQL Server 2000 doesn't mean it's gold code.

MacOS X 10.2 Server ships with MySQL too

[didiken]

Hey by the way, MacOS X 10.2 Server ships with MySQL too !

Re:first post

[Anonymous Coward]

I pee with the Forrest Newmans ...

Film on your local 10:00 news!

Be Be Boop Boop Be Be Be Boop Boop!

This is because Oracle for Netware is gone?

[kirkb]

For years, Novell Netware included a copy of Oracle. Didn't Oracle recently announce that they aren't porting to Netware anymore? That's probably the only reason that Novell has moved to support MySQL and PostgreSQL.

Re:This is because Oracle for Netware is gone?

[IdleTime]

Yes, Oracle has discontinued porting of new versions to Netware. Most likely due to no sales. Besides, who is stupid enough to run a database on a Netware Server? Geez. I have been supporting Oracle on Netware for 10 years and it is a pain. Netwrae was NOT designed to run server software, but to be a file and print sharing, networking OS (which it does very well) and not an all-round server platform. If you can't afford to get a *REAL* server to run your database on, you should reconsider what you are doing and find a different business platform. I got drunk the day Oracle announced that they were discontinuing the Netware platform. It was a happy day!

Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Novell was the best at what it did years ago. Have you ever used Novell at the higher levels of networking? Levels other than creating user accounts and loading net files into memory? It still rocks and has a really large installed user base. And you KNOW that CNE's get laid all the time. Unlike Linux weenies. CNE's have fancy cars, unlike Linux weenies and , drum roll please... CNE's probably are your bosses to this very day! They were playing with UNIX before Linus first got laid. Amazing stuff.

Or a reforming troll.

[Soko]

Actually, let me make an educated guess here.

I think they've seen the writing in the wall as far as NetWare goes, and are thinking of taking the best parts of it and porting those parts to Linux. This story on E-Week shows that they've re-organised thier engineering units to make a "Cross Platform" group with Linux as a specific target. MySQL on NetWare may be the first step in a wholesale change at Novell.

If they can pulll this off, they'll survive - quit nicely too, I think. Dunno if I'd mortgage the house to buy thier stock, but they seem a survivor in the IT world.

Soko

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[Ringlord]

Sp what if they are doing a "Me to!!!!"? It is better than "Me not!!!!"!

And, as you say NDS really rocks.

Regards,
Ringlord

Novell Dying

[toby360]

I'm currently a sysadmin for a Novell/Win2k Network. I'm glad to see Novells finally got a SQLish server option coming out, but really now... Companies like mine already have a sql server running (hence the 2000 part of our network). We're happy where we are, and were not going to migrate to MySQL any time soon because of this. Honestly Novell does this with every single darn thing out there. FINALLY in GroupWise 6 are they supporting NNTP, outlooks been doing that for years! Same with "proper" html email viewing.

Novell's going to die because:

MS Products are actually becoming more secure

Novell has been playing catchup for the last 5 years (yea nds is great, thats it tho.)

Nobody Else creates "novell ready" applications/services like they do for unix and win2k OS's.

MS just integrates better with MS products.

Their patching system is RETARDED, even 3rd party novell applications are half ass. Patches take forever to come out.. One of their patches for a "bug" in groupwise was over 50mb in size.. something is a miss here.

Novell is doomed doomed doomed...

Re:Novell Dying

[Billly Gates]

moderators take note.

Thank you.

Re:Novell Dying

[chez69]

What does the latest netcraft survey say?

Re:Novell Dying

[laptop006]

You're obviously incompetant then.
Novell have had SQL on netware for YEARS, (Oracle, and IIRC Sybase at least)

Hate to say it but GW5.5 did very good HTML e-mail sending & recieving.

Re:Novell Dying

[toby360]

I was referring to MIME encoded emails (binary) from clients using hotmail as an example. I should have been more specific, usually this involves an HTML page. When you recive one of these in GW 5.5 you just see it as an attachment with a mime extension and often files with .001 extension. You need extract the attachemnt, download the file and change the extension just to view it, any binary data included with it is not viewable (unless you want to go through the trouble and extract that).

I was a bit too hasty with my wording on assuming SQL wasn't available for netware, a good reason why companies often don't use the netware sQl clients is because of 3rd party companys requiring they database be setup on a more mainstream SQL server such as MS Sql server..etc.. At least that is the case with our accounting software.

oboy

[Anonymous Coward]

Now that mysql has been announced, are they going to port access next?

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[afidel]

Novell's single sign on may be their saving grace. Their OS business is on hot idle and has been for almost a half decade. They don't have much hope of being a large ecomerce/.net framework type player and their is no compelling reason for people who are not already Novell customers to take up the platform so where do they go from here? Maybe they have a future as a convenienve/IT streamlining application vendor but other than that I don't see where to company is headed and neither can the market.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[alistair]

One of the main problems Novell have is that the market, and customers to a large extent, always associate them with Netware, which most corporation are activly retiring.

Yet if you look at their full product range they have products such as;

• Zenworks, probably the best NT / 2000 Desktop managememnt and application installer out there.
  
• DirXML - A fantastic meta directory product which has been fully based on XML and XSLT since long before they were fashionable.
  
• eDirectory - A fully featured and very capable multi-master directory which runs on NT, Solaris and Linux and knocks AD into a crooked hat yet is fully LDAP complient (more so in many ways than Netscape / Sun's Directory Server).
  
• A very nice suite of WEb Services products they recently aquired from Silverstream.
  

I could go on but the message is clear, the company is packed with good products which it doesn't know how to sell.

Last year I ran an evaluation of all the Meta Directory software out there and DirXML was the clear winner. We bought it and are very happy with it's performance, it certainly should be looked at by anyone who has looked at the Sun ONE or Siemens "equivelents".

My advice to Novell would be that they need to spin off the Netware business to continue developing this and keeping their many millions of existing users happy. The remainder of the business should then be refocused as a Directory Services company. They already almost give away eDirectory, they should make this more official and then when organisations are hooked sell them all the value add products which integrate so nicely with this.
This would also be welcomed by all the organisations who are concerned about Active Directory's single platform nature and the high cost of the Sun ONE Directory and their on|off support for Linux, which Novell have always been very committed too.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[erth64net]

This is just a me-too tatic by Novell. Many of Novell's previous me-too's have fallen by the wayside as well. One exception at present is Perl.

NetWare ships with Perl 5.00307, an almost useless and stripped down old version (released October 1996 by the Perl folks, and released November 2000 by the NetWare folks) - where you cannot compile your own Modules without a Windows NT machine (95/98 will not be sufficent) Microsoft Visual C 4.2 or later, a CodeWarrior compiler and linker, the "NetWare SDK", "NLM & NetWare Libraries for C" and "NetWare Server Protocol Libraries for C".

To put it as breifly as possible; Perl for NetWare is poorly supported, and does not support basic things such as fork(), chown, syscall, chroot, alarm, and about 20 other functions that are standard with a real, and current Network Operating System (ie: Unix based systems, and to a lesser extent, Win32 systems).

MySQL users on NetWare will very likely fall into the same unsupported trap... History speaks for itself, beware!

Yes, NetWare is still being used.

[Don Keehotay]

Of the ten largest IT shops in my area, Novell NetWare is in at least six.

This is an odd thing...

[circusnews]

There are some very good reasons to use Novell, and there are some very good reasons not to use it, but the availability of MySQL as a reason either way just seems odd.

There is (and has been for a while now) a MySQL NLM for Netware that is under the GPL (sorry, I can't find the URL at the moment) and I recall seeing a PostgreSQL NLM on a 4.11 server a while back as well. While I applaud Novell for adding MySQL as a part of there base package, as it adds some additional out-of-the-box functionality, I don't see this making a dent in there slow decline.

Now, Novell does have some VERY interesting tech, but they don't sell it well, they never have. Lets take GroupWise as an example. It could be an Outlook Killer. It has just about all of the features of Outlook (and Exchange), and in many a better product. However, they don't push it, and they don't encourage people to try new things with it. I would LOVE to see them take a really bold step and release a version of that in the same way Sun did Star Office (OK, like Sun but without all the associated problems...). OOo plus Groupwise plus an easy to use SQL database front end would be a real alternitive to M$. It would also shine a bright light on Novell for a long time, one that could then be used to help them grow again if they played their cards right.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[swb]

I think that the info tech world, except for a few places, has largely written them off the same way that Banyan was written off. Wasn't Vines/Streetalk lightyears ahead of anything else at the time?

Novell may have a barely positive operational cash flow (sales revnue - sales cost), but I'd almost bet that they have an overall negative cashflow, especially considering their investment holdings are probably taking a pounding.

I seriously doubt that there will be a Netware 7.

*I* think they should have ported the Netware file/print system to other OSs. Clearly Netware-the-OS tanked when the Internet got hot and people wanted a general purpose OS to run arbitrary server apps (db, web, ftp, mail, etc etc) on. Netware as an OS failed miserably (we tried!) to do those 'other' tasks well, so people bought NT/Unix.

They they found that NT/Unix did file sharing "good enough" and stopped buying Netware. Pretty much end of story.

Novell also fucked over Mac users with NW5, which is why we're on 2k. As awful as it can be, its better than what Novell had at the time for Mac support.

A comparison

[randomErr]

How many people Minix as compared to to people who use Novell?

I would image it would be about a 1:1 ratio.

Re:A comparison

[krammit]

Really? Do you think CNN uses Minix? Check the bottom of the page...

Re:A comparison

[randomErr]

Okay, we have 1.

Re:A comparison

[Anonymous Coward]

more accuratly 0:0 ratio I think.

MyRealBox

[Ratbert42]

Novell also offers a free email & directory service, MyRealBox, as a combination marketing and testing platform.

Check Out Novell Connection

[foo fighter]

Novell Connection magazine is really an excellant rag. http://www.nwconnection.com/

It's short, which means you can find time to read the whole thing each month.

It has informative articles about Novell products, not lame marketing-written crap. It's worth keeping up on what Novell is doing because most of their products are truly kick-ass.

You can probably qualify for a free subscription.

The killer feature is the monthly column on packet filtering and traffic shaping. Awesome. Probably the best regular column out of the dozen or so IT/Networking mags I get each month.

Re:What version? free software vs. commercial soft

[ttfkam]

And if they're not 100% sure, why are they touting it? For the same reason that commercial companies release before it's time: mindshare.

Yes, we know that an open beta from Apache is as good or better than an initial release from a commercial developer. We know that the stable releases from Apache are akin to the third (or so) patch release for a commercial product.

What's the difference? Quality? Not necessarily. The difference is in semantics. Some open source entities produce bad code (have you looked around on Freshmeat lately?) and some commercial software houses produce good code.

How can we tell which is better? Cutting the crap and testing the products in question. If having the source available is important to you, obviously the open source software will win out every time. If only package functionality matters to you, waving a banner won't determine the best choice.

As far as "gold" code, you're wrong. "Gold" code simply means that it's going to be released. It designates that a particular snapshot of the codebase is being burned onto CDs and put into a shrinkwrapped package. "Gold" refers to a baseline, not the quality of the baseline. If you replaced "gold" with "good", I'd agree with you.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[swb]

One of the main problems Novell have is that the market, and customers to a large extent, always associate them with Netware, which most corporation are activly retiring.

It's fairly recently that you could run their products without at least one Netware server around. I think even eDirectory was like that initially.

If they had *started out* with platform-independant products that had full functionality without Netware, they'd be in good shape. Unfortunately their early strategy was very MS-like and appeared designed to sell Netware licenses.

Compilation

[ttfkam]

This has always been the case for compiling programs for Novell: a DOS/Windows box with compilers. This is nothing new or special with regard to Perl.

Just to share blame, why not address the issue that a large portion of Perl modules that use native code aren't portable outside of UNIX (and even then...).

Perl for NetWare is poorly supported, and does not support basic things such as fork(), chown, syscall, chroot, alarm, and about 20 other functions...

Ummm... Of course this is because NetWare itself doesn't have these functions. Current operating systems? UNIX is *how* old? NetWare by your metric IS the current operating system. As for network-wide security and administration, I'm sorry but Novell's offerings are superior and have been superior for years. NIS+? LDAP? Active Directory? Pshaw! NDS was already better than these years ago and eDirectory widens that margin.

Why does Novell need to update Perl? Because they bundle it? Why doesn't the Perl community maintain the port just like they do for every other operating system ? Or is Novell special on your shitlist? It's not like Novell controls the Perl source.

Re:Compilation

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to be ignorant that Novell at one time owned UNIX -- all of it, and their roadmap said that it would replace NetWare.

Instead of the much easier task of porting NDS to UNIX, they chose to basically rewrite UNIX on top of NetWare, thus spending years to come up with a obscure and poorly supported app platform that ISVs have just about 0 interest in.

The reason there's no external maintainers for Perl/NetWare is probably pretty fucking simple -- nobody uses it! Netware is still firmly in in the file/print box. Hell, even Perl/Win32 is fairly widely used and Microsoft pays for the port, not the "Perl Community".

Re:Compilation

[ttfkam]

On the contrary, I did in fact know that Novell bought the UNIX trademark and original source from AT&T. And a lot of companies' roadmaps are different today from what was planned several years ago. If you really want to take a trip down memory lane, remember that Microsoft made a port of UNIX called XENIX. It was on XENIX that a lot of their internal development was done in the early days. The division that developed XENIX was sold to SCO, a company in which Microsoft still owns stock to this day. Novell later sold their UNIX holdings to SCO. So when you really think about it, Microsoft owns a fair share of the UNIX trademark. Kinda makes you proud doesn't it?

NetWare has been a file/print box, but services can and have been written for it. I know. I worked for a software company that has a NLM version of their flagship product. Truth be told, the NLM version came out before the NT port (mostly because NT hadn't been released yet when they started on the server product). It could have been better, but then so can writing Windows device drivers and nice UNIX GUIs. But people do it. People still use NetWare. People still pay to have NetWare services rendered. It's not going anywhere anytime soon. It is in fact too well supported in many organizations for it to simply disappear. Interest > 0.

As for Perl/Win32, much of the work was done by ActiveState, but a sizeable chunk was done by the community. These two Win32 ports were merged a while back, but to say that the community had nothing to do with it is an overstatement to say the least. Also, Microsoft didn't pitch in the funds until after ActiveState had done quite a bit of work already. Microsoft currently helps fund the port. They most certainly didn't pay for it to be made.

Re:Compilation

[Anonymous Coward]

...old to SCO, a company in which Microsoft still owns stock to this day...

Huh, how can you hold stock in a company that does not exist? SCO was sold earlier this year to another company...

Re:Compilation

[erth64net]

This has always been the case for compiling programs for Novell: a DOS/Windows box with compilers. This is nothing new or special with regard to Perl.

You're correct, but that's my point; no other enterprise NOS that I know of requires a completly different platform in order to compile and link its binaries.


Just to share blame, why not address the issue that a large portion of Perl modules that use native code aren't portable outside of UNIX (and even then...).

Funny, I've never had that problem with the more simple perl modules. With NetWare I'm talking about simple things such as rsync for perl, or even most of the tools as implemented in the Perl Power Tools.


Perl for NetWare is poorly supported, and does not support basic things such as fork(), chown, syscall, chroot, alarm, and about 20 other functions...
Ummm... Of course this is because NetWare itself doesn't have these functions.

Correct, NetWare does not have these functions. You made yet another point of mine. For example; NetWare has a cron binary (NLM) - it is not possible to run two cron jobs at the same time. For example: I have one job that starts at 8:55am, and takes about 5 hours to complete, and another that runs every hour on the hour. What happens is that the first job will start at 8:55, but the second job will be unable to run until the first one is complete. That's five hours later, not every hour on the hour...

Current operating systems? UNIX is *how* old? NetWare by your metric IS the current operating system.

Hmm, I must have confused you here. By current, I meant an OS that kept up with what EVERYONE else was doing (ie: implementing simple things such as fork()), not in regards to actual age.


As for network-wide security and administration, I'm sorry but Novell's offerings are superior and have been superior for years. NIS+? LDAP? Active Directory? Pshaw! NDS was already better than these years ago and eDirectory widens that margin.

Security, oh god you're one of those. I never mentioned security in my post, but all NetWare die-hards have to include this bit in their argument. Well, I bite: NetWare has a horrible track record for communicating with their customers regarding security issues. Novell needs to grow up, and stop acting like a two-year old when they have a security issue. Their security website (only a few months old I might add), is sketchy, and does not outline all of the security issues encountered with their products. For example, the buffer overflow in the GroupWise GWIA that was discovered back in June/July; Novell still has not noted the issue, or posted a specfic patch to the issue. This is not the only example, but I quite frankly dont want to dig up the others right now...

When I talk to Novell techs about when/why I should have to apply a patch, they basicaly tell me that they have poor change control and documentation procedures for their code, and many times, fixes for bugs and security issues get placed into production code, without it ever being documented. Oh great, now I, as the customer, have to guess when a security issue is going to bite me, and/or when a feature is changed - because Novell cant be bothered to tell me about them... The fact of the matter is, from an administrative standpoint, when you really take the time to look at it, NetWare is looking less and less secure.

Oh, and dont get me started on the security of NetWare itself - what idiot runs all of their processes at root-level on Unix systems. I sure dont, but with NetWare you dont get a choice, if an NLM crashes, it abends the server, if an NLM has a security issue (like the recent Apache one), youre server gets rooted. If the process crashes, the crash most likely shuts down the service that was running under the NLM, and very likely requires a reboot of the server in order to get that process/service back online (unlike Unix, where under 99.9% of the cases, you simply start the process again). I dont know about you, but I dont fully trust all of the software that comes from my software vendors, and I'd rather see it running at a level that is not likely to shutdown or takeover the entire server (ie: as "nobody", or a normal user with less-than root access to the server). On Unix this is dead simple to do, with NetWare I dont get that option...

While I'll agree that NDS is an excellent product, developers for it are as scarce as the products that integrate into it (ie: they are far and few between). Afterall, if Novell's GroupWise folks cant make GroupWise work with NDS natively, how can they expect anyone else to make their product work. The GroupWise folks have only been promising full NDS integration for around 4-6 years. Sure LDAP support is getting there, but it's not native NDS support, and not even the GroupWise folks have gotten LDAP support fully working yet.


Why does Novell need to update Perl? Because they bundle it? Why doesn't the Perl community maintain the port just like they do for every other operating system ? Or is Novell special on your shitlist? It's not like Novell controls the Perl source.

Yes, if they bundle it, they should update/maintain it, just like the other vendors do... I dont see Novell providing an enviroment where the perl developers can connect to a NetWare server and compile/update/patch/test the code (oops, you cant do that with NetWare, you need a seperate Windows/DOS system to do that...). Most of the other ports are written because the perl developers have access to a system they can test/develop on...

NetWare is an excellent file and print server. Novell is trying to make NetWare into an application server, something it has never done well at...

Re:Compilation

[swb]

When I talk to Novell techs about when/why I should have to apply a patch, they basicaly tell me that they have poor change control and documentation procedures for their code, and many times, fixes for bugs and security issues get placed into production code, without it ever being documented.

Netware service packs for NW4.11 were always a kind of Russian roulette; IIRC, SP5 had at least three iterations. Breakage of the backup environment was routine; I think there was a period of 6-8 months where you couldn't patch a server running Arcserve due to conflicts between it and whatever was in the service pack. Given that Arcserve was *the* industry leader in a fading field of NW backup solutions, it was kind of stupid.

Re:Compilation

[ttfkam]

Yeah, they were bought (stock swap if memory serves) by Caldera. Caldera now owns the UNIX trademark. It is now Caldera stock that Microsoft owns. Microsoft still owns shares in the company that owns the UNIX trademark.

Re:Compilation

[askegg]

Update? Maintain?
http://developer.novell.com/ndk/perl5.h tm

Version 5.8, no doubt...

Re:Compilation

[erth64net]

Intresting, the last time I downloaded unsupported developemnt code from Novell's developer site (it was perl) - it abended my server frequently - wheras the same perl scirpt using the older production-level version of perl did not abend the server. I dont know about you, but I'm not willing to run unsupported development binaries on my production servers, which frequently causes them to abend. Espically when NetWare has such poor process/memory isolation - ie: when an abend occurs, it's near impossible to get abended services back online without a restart of the entire server.

WTF?!!!

[io333]

In all seriousness: can someone please explain to me why this was modded down as as troll? I just do not get it.

Re:WTF?!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Bill gates was moderating? ;)

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[Etcetera]

Yet if you look at their full product range they have products such as...

They even owned WordPerfect for a while, too!

Re:This might have helped Novell three years ago

[Anonymous Coward]

How much will you bet?

NetWare has PERL 5.8 and it can be compiled
from the sources at cpan.org

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the main problem Netware had was it was too good. until a couple of years ago i still ran servers on Netware 3.12 for some smaller companies. It was cheap and it did what they wanted. Why should I shell out the money for an upgrade? I was a very satisfied customer but I did not generate them any new revenue.
MS on the other hand by releasing poor quality product and killing it off every couple of years keeps you updating and constantly buying new.
more money for them. I was an unhappy customer but I ws still generating them revenue.

Do those guys still exist???

[juliao]

Netware? Do those guys still exist??? And what on earth are they selling now? Gee, you don't say! A vaccum cleaner with MySQL installed? Wow!

Re:What version? free software vs. commercial soft

[zak_greant]

Mindshare is a very important reason why we promote the software - we want people using, testing and developing with it. :)

We label the software as alpha, beta, etc. not just to err on the side of caution, but to present developers with an accurate view of the software.

With the 4.0 beta code, we don't want people to blindly put the code into production without finding out why it is labeled as something other than stable.

In many cases, I feel that alpha MySQL code is better than a lot of proprietary stable code. It gets used in heavy production scenarios very successfully. This does not mean that it is mostly bug-free yet. When we close all the open bugs, then we label a branch stable.

Re:What version? free software vs. commercial soft

[mgkimsal2]

Thank you - doesn't clear it up too much, but thanks.

Any approximate time frame on when 4.0x series might be deemed 'stable'?

FUD in article

[zurab]

I do like Novell's strategy towards OSS, porting their tools to Linux, NDS, etc. I've used NDS, Groupwise, NES on Netware, and now NDS on Linux but following is just FUD.

From the Infoworld article:

Novell will embed the commercial version of MySQL, enabling developers to build applications without requiring use of the restrictive General Public License agreement, as is required of the open-source version of MySQL.

Failing to state what exactly it is that Novell's license will allow that is restricted by the GPL. Anything short of Novell's decision to let everyone and anyone redistribute their software freely without any restrictions I don't see how this is possible. Especially if you read the next paragraph that reads:

Developers can, for example, build a Web site with a database providing dynamic content on NetWare, according to Mickos.

<sarcasm>
You're kidding me!!! Who should I praise for this innovation? Thanks to Novell, hundreds of thousands of websites will now be able to provide *dynamic content*!! Just think of the possibilities - online shopping, searching the web, personalized news; virtually no limits! Think of all this as opposed to the old-style, static-web, restrictive licensed GPL-ed software.
<sarcasm/>

C'mon now. Who are they fooling with these kinds of comments?

Did someone say Netware is Dying Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is official; Netcraft confirms: Netware is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Novell community when IDC confirmed that Netware market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that Netware has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Novell is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict Novell's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Novell faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Novell because Netware is dying. Things are looking very bad for Novell. As many of us are already aware, Netware continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

Corel Netware is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Corel developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Netware is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Netware Admin leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of Netware Admin. How many users of ConsoleOne are there? Let's see. The number of Netware Admin versus ConsoleOne posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 ConsoleOne users. Caldera Netware posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of ConsoleOne posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Caldera Netware. A recent article put Novell Netware at about 80 percent of the Netware market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Netware users. This is consistent with the number of Netware Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Word Perfect, abysmal sales and so on, Caldera is going out of business and will probably be taken over by Novell who sell another troubled OS. Now Novell is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that Netware has steadily declined in market share. Novell is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Netware is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. Netware continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Netware is dead.

Fact: Netware is dying

Re:Did someone say Netware is Dying Troll?

[askegg]

The problem is that people are still thinking Novell = Netware. While Netware has traditionally been the cash cow of Novell, it is not where their future lays. The acquisition of Cambridge and Silver Stream completes Novell's direction into web-based services. Couple these with eDirectory, DirXML, Zenworks and Portal and you have a very powerful solution to overcome many problems facing large enterprises. BTW "failing dead last [samag.com]" has no reference to Netware at all and Kreskin [amdest.com] is a dead link. I have no idea how you get OS statistics from a web server survey and who the hell is "Theo" on which you base wild guesses into the number of Netware *administrators* (not users!)?

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey one of the companies that bought into UNIX bigtime was Novell themselves -- as in they bought the whole UNIX SVR4 Operating Environment and all the engineers.

Some of use were pretty psyched to see that Novell was going to push UNIX down to PC space, go TCP/IP, tie it into NDS for easy management, and kick NT's ass as an application platform.

Except Novell didn't do that, and it's been pretty much Game Over for them ever since.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[Anonymous Coward]

The GUI isn't java, it's XFree with a stripped down fvwm2 window manager. If you browse the sys volume, you'll find the various files and directories associated with it. In fact, while learning Netware 5.1 is school, I grabbed the xpm for the GUI splash screen, edited it with Gimp on a Linux workstation, and pasted a toilet over the big red N.

But nevertheless, it's still slow as hell, and with NW 6, there's no way around it since they did away with nwadmin, nwconfig, and all the other old school utilities in favor of ConsoleOne and the GUI utils.

Novell has been playing catch-up since the mid 90's as far as ease of administration is concerned, and now it gets worse.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[drinkypoo]

I could go on but the message is clear, the company is packed with good products which it doesn't know how to sell.

Maybe they should buy Amiga, and perhaps Palm will let them have Be cheap, and then all such software packages can be in the same place.

Shouldn't it be...?

[Hugonz]

I'm sorry, but I think you really mean GNU/MySQL...

No, seriously, I'm annoyed by /. misleadingly speaking of the "commercial" version of MySQL instead of talking about the "other license" or "proprietary"

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[Openadvocate]

Well I have several Novell certifications and have decided,like so many others, not to maintain them anymore.
Everywhere I see sales people sell MS products even to Novell users. So it have been hard to keeping your hopes up.
In my last job, I started to shift my focus away from Novell, because I, like everybody else, can see that their customer base is getting smaller.
I like Novell and their products, they have not managed to convince me that I should keep my focusing my career on Novell. I fear that I would end up with at lot of skills for product that is not wanted.
The "fun" thing is that many techs are running away, so it is easy, where I live, to find a job if you are a skilled Novell tech. with Certifications. But who wants a job that focuses on a skill that might not be there in the future.

"NetWare 6?"

[CrystalFalcon]

Talk about a corpse that refuses to die. Yikes, this is even worse than IBM's debacle about insisting on keeping OS/2 alive...

Novell needs to reinvent themselves seriously. (Shipping a database with the server does not count as reinventing seriously.)

So that's why Microsoft was attacking

[SgtChaireBourne]

That seems to explain why Microsoft was attacking MySQL so much a few weeks ago.

More marketing getting in technology's way

[leandrod]

Why oh why they don't just support a real SQL DBMS?

As always people coding to MySQL will have to code around all sorts of limitations that wouldn't be there with real SQL DBMSs as Firebird, SAPdb or PostgreSQL.

Their code will be more complex, less reliable, their databases will get all sorts of inconsistent data due to lack, or underutilization, of integrity constraints and transaction control.

And once they go over three concurrent users, performance will suffer... then they will have to recode to ANSI SQL, because MySQL isn't standards-compliant at all, and will never achieve the level of elegance that SQL provides -- and that is already less than a truly, but not yet widely available, fully RDBMS could give.

Re:So what's new (and a Novell is dying troll, too

[cpthowdy]

No, their saving grace is their Directory Services. They are the leader in directory services over M$, Sun, and whoever else thinks that they are a player in that market, according to a recent poll I saw somewhere. NDS (now eDirectory) is the end-all of directories.

Re:What version? free software vs. commercial soft

[zak_greant]

Weeeelll, it goes something like this:

What year will the 4.0 series of MySQL become stable?

In the year of our lord, two thousand and three, no wait ... two thousand and foooooooo......

Novell uses FLAIM now

[fooguy]

My understanding is that FLAIM has depricated BTRIEVE for low-level storage in Netware. FLAIM is used to store all the records in NDS, though technotes about Novell's license service make reference to a choice between FLAIM or BTRIEVE for that.

Re:This might have helped Novell three years ago

[Anonymous Coward]

True, if you have the money and time to spend on setting up a development system on a completely different platform (a WinNT/2000 system)... I quite frankly would like to use the tools already in front of me - such as what I can do on Solaris, Linux, xBSD, and any other real Network Operating System, not this POS that requires DOS to boot, and Windows to compile any code for...

Cool thing...

[lyonchik]

That's a cool thing about Novell, at least Novell users are now given more chance to choose what to use in their work.

Re:This might have helped Novell three years ago

[Anonymous Coward]

No actually he's not lying. Though he only gave half the story - 5.8 is unsupported developer code, and it is very unstable, in addition, NetWare ships with perl version 5.003_07 - which was originaly release by the perl folks back in 1996...