Novell to Make Linux Robust and Reliable

An anonymous coward writes: "It seems the folks over at Novell have the answer to making the "immature" Linux OS more "robust, reliable and scaleable" according to this Computer Weekly article. We have a lot more problems to use and keep running our NetWare 5 and 6 servers at our University than we've ever had with any of our Linux servers. I can't wait for Novell to help us out here."

Comments

Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[dtolton]

"It hasn't had somebody like Novell worrying about making it
robust, reliable and scalable. We think we can bring that to the
Linux kernel."

I guess IBM, HP and the like are peanuts compared to Novell.

While his comments are certainly brash, and probably overly
self-important, Netware really did make a good system.
Ultimately they just got crushed under the Microsoft marketing
machine. I've run both Microsoft and Novell networks and I
definitely thought Netware was by far the superior product. As
we've consistently seen in the IT world though, a good product
isn't the only thing you need.

In a sense he has a point about Linux being an immature
operating system, although that point seems a bit overstated.
Personally though, I'd love to see Novell contributing to Linux.
The beauty of Open Source and in this case the GPL, is that
Novell can contribute to the development of Linux, but they
can't hijack it. Having more good companies contribute to
making it reliable and scalable is a good thing. I can't see a
downside to having them make contributions to the project.

Ultimately the point is that Linux is catching on. Even
companies like Sun and Novell that have their own operating
systems are seeing the value and are beginning to support it.
With broad industry support, Linux could supplant Microsoft as
the dominant OS.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

And banyan vines was better than novell. Banyan was actually unix based, I'm surprised they hadn't begun using linux, but I guess they are probably dead by now, having partnered with m$.

Street talk was the shit.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

> Ultimately they just got crushed under the Microsoft marketing machine.

Definitely. The fact that Microsoft added certain features that people want to their server OS has nothing to do with it. And we all know the only reason people use Apache is because it's free. </sarcasm>

Yes, MS is far from perfect, but I don't think Novell is/was perfect either. You make it sound like Microsoft is the only reason nobody cares about implementing Novell anymore. Nobody implements Xenix either...

PC, Nice word-wrapping. My browser wasn't doing a good enough job, so thank goodness you did it for me.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[n1ywb]

In a sense he has a point about Linux being an immature
operating system

Immature how? Granted Linux isn't an ideal operating system, it has it's rough edges. But IMO it's rough edges are fewer and smoother than almost any other OS available today. Overall it's actually quite mature, compared to many many other OSes. Windows is still playing catchup to Linux in some areas (although Linux is trying to catch up to Windows in others, like GUI desktops). Anyway one of the nice things about Linux is that for the most part everybody is aware of and open about the rough areas, and they're on the task list to be eventually addressed.

I think that if you look at the 2.5 kernel from a OS theory standpoint, you see the most mature OS available. The scheduling improvements alone are really quite amazing, and IMO will catapult Linux far ahead of the competition.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[pyrrho]

another take on what happened to Novell and it's good system:

They kept Novel Certified engineers prices high. They kept the net cards priced high. They kept everything as expensive as possible and pissed of everyone because for about a decade they were the only player that made sense for a lot of people, especially PC people.

SO: they set themselves up for the fall Microsoft is also trying to make.

(1) piss everyone off.

(2) cost so much that when the competition finally outprices you it's not by a little bit, $1 or $5, but really better, like 1/10 of what you charge.

But don't worry, there are always people that got so hooked they will be good customers until their machines rust.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[SealBeater]

I made a comment earlier degrading Novell, as I remember many a merry day
hacking the Novell servers at my colledge, but I do have to say this, I never
met a Novell engineer who wasn't extremely smart and well trained. I know the cost was high,
but they usually were worth very high salarys, IMO, not like the MSCEs and even
the CCNAs recently that I've seen.

SealBeater

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[evilviper]

Granted Linux isn't an ideal operating system, it has it's rough edges. But IMO it's rough edges are fewer and smoother than almost any other OS available today.

Let me guess, you've never used anything but Linux and Windows...

Other OSes available today smoother than Linux: FreeBSD!!!, Solaris, Tru64, OpenVMS, pretty much any commercial Unix today is far better than Linux in many ways. Granted, they all have their own flaws (excluding FreeBSD) but Linux couldn't hope to replace any one of them.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[Herkum01]

I got Novell certification so I do speak from experience even though it not never my primary product that I supported.

Netware was incredibly stable but when it came to setup and configuration it was overly complicated. Windows took over the market not because it was a better product, but because it was more accessible. They concentrated too much on things people, who were casually trying to get involved with it, did not want to learn. MS basically proved that you don't need to be a genuis to set-up file and print sharing which is what Netware was geared for.

In many area's they were ahead of their time(Directory Services in 1994 is a great example), but if they had paid a little more attention to how people would like to work with computers instead of making it act like a mainframe they would not have been whipped so thoroughly in the market.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[gmuslera]

Immature in the way that it have a lot of space for fundamental changes and improvements. Other "mature" systems maybe are difficult to improve in such ways as Linux did in each major version including 2.6.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[someonehasmyname]

Not flamebait! Flamebait would be saying that you guys don't use FreeBSD because you're too stupid to use the text-based installer. FreeBSD is *much* better than Linux as far as stability goes. Maybe I can't use bleeding-edge hardware, etc. but my servers *never* go down, unless I issue "shutdown -h now."

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[bsharitt]

I have to agree, Solaris(on SPARC hardware at least) is much more mature and elegant than Linux.

(off-topic)
BTW, the parent wasn't flaimbait
(/off-topic)

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see...
Currently the kernel is single threaded.
No pre-emptible kernel.
No controlling entity to keep the distros sane
199,000+ files on my redhat 8
No stability! Especially network wise.
When connecting a network cable causes the machine
to lose it's routes it lacks robustness. When
network cards randomly unplumb themselves it lacks
robustness. When my pager goes off because it
died again I just want to scream.
I will probably get flamed for this but as I see
it linux has four things going for it.
1. It's free (Beer & Speech).
2. It has a lot of religous bigots who tout it as God's on OS.
3. It has a lot of apps available for it. Of
course 90% of these apps just barely meet the
"It's good enough to work...sorta"
4. No Microsoft.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

as I remember many a merry day
hacking the Novell servers at my colledge

Maybe you should have spent less time in the server room and more time in English classes.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[evilviper]

Welcome to slashdot... Anyone that doesn't use every other line of their post to say that Linux is the perfect, be-all-end all Operating System, must be a terrorist threat! Mod them down!

The parent post is not flamebait, nor a troll... Linux does a good job, but it doesn't have the enterprise features that commercial Unix systems do.

Ironically, with all of their boasting about their support of Linux, IBM has made no attempt to give Linux those very features which their own OS (AIX) has, and IBM uses to market their systems.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[j-pimp]

Definitely. The fact that Microsoft added certain features that people want to their server OS has nothing to do with it. And we all know the only reason people use Apache is because it's free.

Perhaps not the only, but a major reason. The SMB protocol was originally written so linux machines could talk to DEC machines. Later MS embraced and extended the protocol and that spurred samba into becomming what it is today. How come samba (or what it was called back then) or DEC didn't instantly become heavy hitters in the file serving world. Well Samba did need some work and now is getting acceptance due to grassroots marketing and newer features, and DEC just never marketed a product as a server fro windows machines. Sure there would have to be new code written to add some spit and polish, but lack of marketing was why it never competed with MS.

Sure DEC probally never wanted to get in the business of making file servers for windows, but nonetheless it could be done. There probally were a few people that knew it could be done and did it on there own because they had old DEC machines lying around with hard drive space to spare. The point is yes being windows NT server was made to be a file server made it the best tool for the job at the time compared to every other SMB solution. However, it was arguably not the best file serving OS in general that could somehow be made to serve files to Windows clients. However, regardless of the quality o Novell MS marketdroids created the appearance of a superior product in NT and that sold. Even while most people concede that NT was better for fileserving to Windows machines than DEC it was definatly the total lack of marketing that prevented DEC from becoming a noteable contender in Windows file serving.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[stephanruby]

Speaking of which. Count me in as someone who is too stupid to install FreeBSD. I bought the packaged distribution (which included a manual), bought an additional book on FreeBSD, and I looked for additional documentation online. I noticed and noted all the discrepancies in the installation docs, I partitioned and reinstalled FreeBSD everywhich way I could, and I still couldn't manage to get FreeBSD working on my home-assembled two-year old system.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[drinkypoo]

I think that if you look at the 2.5 kernel from a OS theory standpoint, you see the most mature OS available. The scheduling improvements alone are really quite amazing, and IMO will catapult Linux far ahead of the competition.

I think if you look at the 2.5 kernel from any standpoint, it's still just a kernel, and not an operating system. Linux does not an operating system make, though one additional binary with it could make it an operating system if you had all the necessary libraries, or compiled them in. (It's tempting to replace init with emacs just to prove it would be useful, but I'm not going to learn to live within emacs for a joke.)

The other major operating systems (Solaris, AIX, Windows NT, Novell even, you know the drill) are far more polished. They've already gone through their growing pains. Linux (as an OS, not a kernel) grows uncontrollably and more or less randomly due to the number of organizations and individuals working on the various Linux distributions. As such, there's always some "crucial" part of the OS that's unstable. Of course you could go with debian, which focuses on stability, but then you have to make do with yesterday's features.

The linux kernel is an amazing piece of work and really impresses the hell out of me, but no linux distribution is polished enough to be a no-brainer when you have to decide what OS to use for something that can be done on just about any of them. I'd say it lacks maturity.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[jedidiah]

Note how Netware is conspicously absent from that list.

However, you are grossly underestimating Linux. Linux is certainly quite capable of replacing Solaris in many deployments and has been so capable for some years now. Immaturity of Intel hardware is far more likely to be a probem than the 'immaturity' Linux.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[slux]

I'm tempted to mod you but I'll reply instead.

There's nothing wrong about saying that Linux isn't the best operating system out there, but what really is wrong with your post and what makes it tempting to mod it as a troll is that you list a fair number of operating systems that in your opinion are in some way better than Linux but then fail to give any reasons as to why this might be the case.

Saying just that FreeBSD is better in every possible way is worth nothing.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[netdudeuk]

I've been talking about this myself recently. Our Novell servers just ran and ran. They were great. But, Novell just took their eyes off the ball and went from the total market leader to someone who hardly ever even gets compared with Microsoft anymore. Linux has their place now.

They look at office suites, etc, and let it all slip through their fingers.

It looks like they're courting Linux to try and get some of the 'glory' rubbing off onto themselves.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[TheOrquithVagrant]

"No attempt" indeed. I guess you are right, but only because IBM hasn't "attempted" to give Linux missing enterprise features, but rather simply DONE it.

Or did we all just hallucinate EVMS, the port of jfs, and the work IBM have done to help better SMP scalability on large systems? Sheesh.

There are VERY few "enterprise features" that commercial UNIX's have which linux doesn't, by now. Massive SSI multiprocessor scalability still isn't competitive with Irix or Solaris. AFAIK, there is still no support for hot-swapping memory in linux, even on hardware that supports that featre. But apart from that, I really can't think of much in the OS itself. Maturity of _documentation_ on the other hand is an area where some catching up is needed.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

The SMB protocol was originally written so linux machines could talk to DEC machines.

Lets get it right, shall we? Samba was written so Linux machines could talk to DEC machines. Samba did not invent SMB the protocol.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[ibpooks]

In many area's they were ahead of their time(Directory Services in 1994 is a great example)

There were a lot of ways Novell was behind the times too. They were very slow to support IP, and even slower to support IP server applications like proxy and web servers. None of that was stable until at least Netware 5. And BorderManager? That thing was AWFUL! It crashed constantly and was way outperformed by squid and even MS proxy.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[higuita]

have you tried slackware?

today features, stable and with the bonus of being fast

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[mgv]

Maybe I can't use bleeding-edge hardware, etc. but my servers *never* go down, unless I issue "shutdown -h now.

I presume that you include a reset button in the "bleeding-edge hardware" category

Michael

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Novell was slow to support IP because they didn't need it. IPX was working just fine, thanks. They did definitely miss the boat with web-integration and bordermanager is a steaming pile of shit, but for file and print services, NDS absolutely rocks. And for application delivery, zenworks is untouchable.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[operagost]

I don't know where you're getting your information from. The SMB protocol was developed by IBM around 1985, before Linux even existed.

Also note that DEC/Compaq/HP has/had a product called Pathworks which supports SMB over DECNET or TCPIP. It has been renamed Advanced Server, last time I checked.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[j-pimp]

http://www.iar.unlp.edu.ar/~fede/revistas/lj/Magaz ines/LJ7/2858.html

Apparently my information was slightly mixed up. Refer the the above interview. While SMB was not developed by IBM, it was an open standard implemented by several parties that were trying to jump on the "hey lets sell our uxix boxes as PC file servers" bandwagon. Well Andrew originially wrote samba as a "clone" of Pathworks for a sun he needed to mount fileshares on becasue for some reason his PC-nfs implemtation could not run at the same time as his pathworks client software. Later on he found out how useful his software was for other peopel and eventually the samba project became what it is today.

Re:Overstated but could be beneficial to Linux

[evilviper]

but then fail to give any reasons as to why this might be the case.

Ah, so if you oppose Linux, you need to provide absolute proof, while if you support Linux, just saying it is great (no reasons needed), you should get modded up to +5... Sounds perfectly fair to me...

Work on desktop usability instead

[Jason1729]

Linux already is very rubust and stable. Where it's weak is in how difficult it is to set up to do anything; like set up a printer driver, offload pictures from a digital camera, get samba to work right. It seems like anything you want to do takes days of painful work.

I still use linux on my servers, but that's why I switched back to windows after having linux on my desktop for over 2 years. I can install something in 10 minutes and then be enjoying using it for the next few day. The one time I couldn't get a piece of hardware to work in windows, I just had to call up the hardware vendor and they solved the problem in under an hour. If I were trying to get it to work in Linux, there's nobody to call.

Jason
ProfQuotes

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux calls for the time when... Men were real men and wrote their OWN hardware drivers!

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[zulux]

Six months ago - I would have agreed, but after playing with the new version of Mandrake Linux, I'd say that out of the box, Mandrake has more support for hardware than Windows.

I have an old SoundBlaster/Ensonic sound card, a N2000 compatible network card, Martox 400 (Dual head) that all require driver donloads for Windows XP but in Mandrak - they all worked right away.

So yes, manufacurers do suport Windows more, but out of the box, a good Linux distribution just works better.

(This is ingnoring the fact that it's impossible to get Windows XP to work on Alpha, VAX, PowerPC, ARM, etc... Linux has got MS beat to a pulp in hardware support in this respect.)

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[Daniel Phillips]

I can install something in 10 minutes and then be enjoying using it for the next few day.

I typically spend much less than 10 minutes installing each new package on Linux - one minute is more like it, using Debian apt-get.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[Billly Gates]

I disagree.

KDE is quite equal to Windows/Macos. The installers are up to par as well.

What Linux's core market is is in the server room. WIthout a directory service it can not totally replace Windows. With Windows in the picture its more tempting for IT managers to standardize on Microsoft.

Novell is great to administer and does things that Unix/linux can not do.

Its not an apps server but really a network service provider.

Linux is missing directory services, enterprise journaling( not the ext3 hack), administrative utilities, and the ability to manage profiles for desktops easily.

I think this is what Novell might of meant. There is more then just not crashing.

Novells problem is they use an ancient kernel that is not memory managed that well. This is from the 286 days and it does crash. Reliablity is a problem. WIth a linux kernel that can be fixed.

The networking services addition from Novell would rock and they would cream Redhat or any other vendor if they had it. Deffinetly Novell Linux would be the pick from any corporate manager for this reason over redhat.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[cdc179]

What are you smokin? not supose to smoke seeds.

What's this about nobody to call? There is no reason to have to call anybody. With 5 mins of searching you should be able to find linux info on just about anything you are interested in. If that doesn't work there are LUGs with people that actully know what's going on.

It's not rocket science and don't see what all these problems you are refering about. Nothing has ever been dificult to configure here.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[Anonymous Coward]

It used to only take me under 10 minutes to install packages too... but ever since Mandrake came out with 9.1, it has been taking much longer...

*/me clicks retry once again*

DAMN them for releasing what I would consider their best work yet. DAMN THEM!!!

*clicks retry again... and again*

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[__past__]

Please don't ask Novell of all companies to work on desktop usability. If you would ever have had to use Groupwise, you would understand.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be a fool. Mandrake and its ilk of prepackaged gui-ed up Linux distros are merely linux installs with kernels capable of supporting EVERYTHING that linux had a driver for when it was made. These kernels are loaded up with all these drivers and that is how it can do this. However the point of Mandrake and its ilk is that its supposed to be easy for non techies. But wait till the second that you have to compile a kernel yourself to support some brand spanking new hardware that has no driver since some hacker has yet to slap one together. That is why windows has better hardware support since there actually are drivers on the manuafacturers site, Windows doesn't have to include them since they at least exist.

Another thing you overlook is the complexity involved in recompiling your kernel to have all the support for things it already did since unfortunately make menuconfig doesn't probe for hardware or pick up a signature of the currently running kernel and what it supports, two things I would really like since that would mean it already flagged all the proper drivers for my hardware for me.

So in short, Windows does have better hardware support.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[Anonymous Coward]

To Windows yes, but not to MacOS. If you have used the MacOS you would be aware that even windows falters in GUI-GUI comparisons. What you meant to say was that KDE is windows for linux. Every part of it has been designed to look but not necessarily act like windows. Fromt the save dialogs to the start-like bar at the bottom, right down to the shutdown/logout/sleep buttons.

So as you can see, the comparison to windows is true however it is nothing close to the MacOS, especially since Nautilus is so much better than Konquerer.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[InfiniteWisdom]

I dunno abt you, but when I want to install something, all I need to do is "apt-get install foo"

This downloads the software, all its dependencies etc., installs it and is all done in seconds (without subjecting me to any "wizards")

I'm not wild about RPM, but I certainly think apt is far superior to anything Windows has.

RedHat's "printtool" makes it easy to install printers too. (Its GPLed of course, so its available on most distros)

When it comes to getting pictures from my digicam, and samba, however, I agree with you. Ditto for hardware support, although that's really a vendor problem. So long as you have third parties writing drivers, its always going to lag. For example imagine how unusable windows would be if you were restricted to drivers that come on the WIndows CD. Get hardware that's newer than the windoze version, and you're screwed.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[JohnFluxx]

First off - if your hardware isn't supported out-of-the-box in, say, mandrake 9.1, then is most not supported at all - so try to get drivers for it is pointless.
Secondly, assuming a driver was written, there is no reason that I can think of that the driver module couldn't just be put into an rpm and urpmi'ed.
I have no idea if mandrake does this, but if it was important hardware, they would probably do this for you if you asked and were a member.

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[Anonymous Coward]

> enterprise journaling( not the ext3 hack)
Ever heard of JFS or XFS?
Both are available under linux and, from my experience, work just fine (while supporting bigger filesystems on linux-ia32 than say VxFS on 64bit operating systems)

Re:Work on desktop usability instead

[tokki]

The problem with Linux installs from any of the vendors is that it works great for some hardware installs, but awful for others.

I installed RedHat 8.0 on my system, and it found my AC97 audio, and a bunch of other stuff. Didn't work at all for my scanner, and spending days trying to get it to work was frustrating. Also, compiling in NTFS readability with a RedHat source kernel is not my idea of fun, especially when the compile fails.

Mandrake 9.1 found my scanner, but didnt' see my audio, so I had to go an manually compile the drivers, and if you switch kernels from the distro's kernel, lots of desktop issues can crop up (not so with a server).

RedHat 9.0 found my scanner, found my audio, but the install itself didn't like my video card. I've got an nvidia geforce ti 4200, and it tried to use the VESA driver with my LCD display and choked. No way around it, so I had to do a text install, and install the nvidia drivers via text. Not a big deal, but it's not something most consumers would be willing or able to do.

So when you say "it works great for you", remember there are millions of other computer users with various configurations. Linux desktop installs lack the flexibility to work right on too many systems.

Linux advocation needs to get rid of the myiopic view of "it works great for me" as the end-all argument.

They will be sued by SCO

[Anonymous Coward]

Just look at what trouble IBM got into
by making Linux more robust!
Now Novell wants in on being a SCO target!

Confused Philospher says:

[confused philosopher]

"Robust and Reliable"

Aren't those just buzz words used by dying companies, in order to make them sound like they know what they are doing?

Re:Confused Philospher says:

[ruriruri]

You're fired.

Re:Confused Philospher says:

[Anonymous Coward]

mod both these guys up. good point and also a good Simpsons reference.

Hey! More great news!

[fireboy1919]

I guess Linux is just going to be getting better and better!

I hear that Microsoft will be helping out to improve the open source nature of Linux, and Sun will be working hard to make sure it works perfectly on x86 systems!

Surely good days lie ahead of us with this collection of hardworking, selfless, and competent companies backing us up!

I remember Novell...

[SealBeater]

Bye Novell.

Re:I remember Novell...

[Anonymous Coward]

BUY NOVL

Re:I remember Novell...

[ddimas]

I bought a novel! It's called "The Lord of the Rings" by some guy named JRR Tolkien. I like it!

Re:I remember Novell...

[grayantimatter]

Yeah, I've only being hearing wit and rhetoric like that for a decade or so now... Do you guys ever get tired of being wrong...

All the companies selling nothing but linux distro's will die long before Novell.

The CEO of Novell is Jack Messman

[Anonymous Coward]

And he hasn't done SHIT for Linux. Check out what he did to his last company Cambridge Technology Partners.

If you think that SCO dude was a piece of work, this guy is even more of a cheezy fuck. What Messman really means is that he's going to put his marketers on the job of fixing up Linux right away, pump up the Novel stock a couple dollars, bail out, then watch the company spiral into the mud from his ample parachute.

Re:The CEO of Novell is Jack Messman

[Jim Norton]

That's great and everything, but the guy who really has his hands on the reins of the products' direction is VP Chris Stone. He has already mentioned many times in interviews that he wants Novell to focus on being services-oriented rather than a "Network Operating Systems" company and the adoption of Linux looks to be a step in that direction.

Re:The CEO of Novell is Jack Messman

[Anonymous Coward]

Novell rules. But you suck you fucking poser. I remember you. I will always revisit you and see you lying and talking shit about stuff you know nothing about.

You fucking liar.

Come on aboard!

[Tip]

There's room on the bandwagon for another struggling company. I think it is great to have another contributor, that's what open source is about, everyone contributing. And if they can make a business marketing their Linux products that's great. Maybe they can bring better directory service and management to Linux.

MmmM IPX/SPX

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe Novell will also do away with that pesky TCP/IP and replace it with a more "robust and mature" protocol!

Re:MmmM IPX/SPX

[guanxi]

Just in case someone thinks there's a kernel of truth in what you say: TCP/IP has been the native protocol in Netware since v5.0, ~5 years ago (?) and before Windows.

Re:MmmM IPX/SPX

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. Five years ago nobody had even HEARD of TCP/IP. Novell sure was a trend setter.

BTW, Microsoft LAN Manager ran native TCP/IP in 1990 or so.

Re:MmmM IPX/SPX

[Anonymous Coward]

You are an idiot, IPX/SPX has been working just fine for most of the people running Novell, So if you had a cheapernet coax running, why on earth would you need TCP/IP. I could go on but why waste more time on a AC

Re:MmmM IPX/SPX

[guanxi]

Wow. Five years ago nobody had even HEARD of TCP/IP. Novell sure was a trend setter.

I didn't say they invented it. But they did make it the primary, default native protocol of their NOS back then, which was not common IIRC.

IPX is ancient history for them.

Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Novell who? I vaguely remember someone with a name like this long ago, that had an OS that would only run a small number of proprietary programs on very selective hardware. Do they really still exist?

Re:Who?

[turbod]

So I would suppose that you on the other hand would set up a 99$ PC, drop a ULTRASCSI card and Linux on it, connect it to a coupla terabytes of drive space and run a company on it?

You would stake your reputation on that, right? Right?

Why whatever would he have gone running to the hills for?

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I'd call Dell, Sun or IBM and speak to them about providing a pre-configured Linux server and pay appropriatly for their support.

What do Novell know about Linux?

Can't hurt

[jcast]

If their stuff sucks, it won't get included (or will be quickly reverted). So, only whatever positive contributions they can submit will be included. So they should help some.

Who Needs Them?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, Linux already kicks the shit out of Netware in every regard except directory services. This is a dieing gasp, nothing more.

Buzzwords

[Nikkos]

This sounds like Novell is replying to it's customers concerns by:

A. Using buzzwords like "robust" "reliable" and "scalable" - the things Novell customers are concerned about,

B. Using the hottest buzzword in computers today "Linux" - The platform Novell probably the most worried about losing it's customers to.

Methinks Novell's focus is trying to keep it's customer base, not linux philanthropy.

Nikkos

Re:Buzzwords

[Sentry21]

B. Using the hottest buzzword in computers today "Linux" - The platform Novell probably the most worried about losing it's customers to.

I don't know if this is necessarily the case. I've been working on developing a solution for a problem that I've been having - distributed logons - with Linux, and have so far come away delightfully unimpressed.

First, we installed Samba, and got that working as a PDC with our W2K machines. Then, we got it working together with roaming profiles. Ok, fine, but then we went to Samba-TNG so we could use an LDAP directory backend. That'd be great, if there were any decent LDAP HOWTOs for Linux. The ones that there are are horrid, and you have to assemble them all in your head to make any sense of it. Once that was done (with the poor LDAP browsers available), we tried to move other services to it, which is a nightmare. Most of the LDAP-authenticating software we have (proftpd-ldap, etc.) just plain breaks, or doesn't work, or 'works' but doesn't (fails silently), or a myriad of other things. Figuring out how to do any of this stuff in the first place was a nightmare, and then trying to figure out what's wrong without having to source-dive is just a waste of my time. Once I finally got PAM working with LDAP, we have the problem of it asks for passwords twice, instead of automatically falling back. PITA. Then, if we wanted other systems to authenticate, we'd have a whole new bag of worms.

People say Novell is a bitch to configure. They say it's hard to learn. Yeah, but you know what? There's ways to learn. There's documentation. There's manuals. There's courses. There's books. When it comes down to it, there's $150/hr freelance CNEs or the consultants that installed your network in the first place. When customers move to Linux and try to do anything that's great about Linux (i.e. assembling their own solution) they quickly find that it may be cheaper, and it may give you more of a sense of satisfaction, but when you have to manage an entire corporate network, you don't have time to migrate everyone to Linux just because 'it's cheaper'. It's not. For the price of my time as a Linux admin, setting all this up, testing it, re-testing it, making damn sure it's not going to blow up in my face, I would suggest a Novell solution, because I know that if I set it up properly, it's going to freaking work, and if it doesn't, I don't have to worry about my boss bringing the hounds of hell down on me, because there's a support contract.

Linux is only a challenger in small business, and Novell's offering their small business starter pack for free (contact your local CNS for details). Larger business will go for solutions that they don't have to worry about. You pay for some staff to get their certification, keep them up to date, and that's it. With Linux, you only have their word that they know what they're doing, and when things explode or you have to find someone else, they have to figure out what's going on, and when the system's a melange of PHP sites calling perl scripts to manage LDAP databases of user data for the patched daemons running on colocated servers, better men than I have threw in the towel on the first day. Businesses are finding this important point out: anyone can learn 'Linux' - you can train a kitten to play with the keyboard and administer a Linux system - but when it comes down to the crunch and you need to build your own system, unless you keep excellent, centralized, readable, updated documentation, you can't just hire some Linux admin off the street - you need the guy that worked there before, and hopefully he left on good terms.

Microsoft and Novell are not out there because they're corporate whores. They're not popular because they lock people in. They're not even popular because managers have heard of them. They're popular because if I'm Novell certified in the relevant products, I can walk into any Novell business and sit down and administer the network. It's consistant. It's coherant. It's easier to just get to work, because if you know it you know it. Until Linux gets this, it won't be popular.

--Dan

Re:Buzzwords

[lparosii]

There is some pretty good documentation on Samba and LDAP here:

http://www.idealx.org/prj/samba/index.en.html

atleast I found it very easy to get running and I had never used OpenLDAP before. After a quick test install, it took a few hours to roll out on all my servers and get all services to use LDAP for authentication. I havent experienced any problems.

However I havent been able to find a decent LDAP browser tool, I've used GQ a few times but mainly use the commandline tools. (there are some smbldap-tools on the idealx.org site)

Hey wait a second

[vivek7006]

It seems the folks over at Novell have the answer to making the "immature" Linux OS more "robust, reliable and scaleable"

I thought IBM had already made linux more robust, reliable and scaleable, by stealing code from SCO.

Re:Hey wait a second

[Mistah Blue]

And now SCO is releasing their own Linux (based on UnitedLinux). Too bad the judge doesn't sanction them for a frivolous lawsuit and kick them out of his/her courtroom.

Woah!

[spoonist]

Okay guys, let me get this straight...

Novell is still around!?

And they want to "help" us with Linux!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I thought they were deader than SCO.

SCO and Novell dropped off my radar at around the same time about 10 years ago.

I must say, I'm blown away...

Oh, just for fun, let's take a look at their stock prices:

NOVL: $2.40

SCOC: No such ticker symbol. D'OH! That's gotta hurt.

Re:Woah!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, its SCOX. $3.01

Prediction

[oldmildog]

I foresee an abend for Novell in the near future.

Old news

[mao che minh]

I submitted an article detailing Novell's CEOs statements concerning this and other related future Novell strategies like 2 weeks ago. This is so old news:

2003-04-07 19:51:07 It's official: Netware is dying, going Linux (articles,os) (rejected)

More lies!

[Tuxinatorium]

Linux does not exist. It is a fabrication of some unemployed geek infidels to slander our glorious Microsoft. There are no bugs in Windows, never! Bill Gates has forbidden bugs, therefore there are none! Do not believe them!

Re:More lies!

[boy_afraid]

Lies! Your lie is a lie! Linux is great! Bill Gates will roast in hell and Linux will be great, with the blessing of Allah himself. All free people of the world, including free Iraqis, will be able to enjoy the freedom on Linux! Doe not repeat the lies of the devil Bill Gates!

Re:More lies!

[ddimas]

INFIDEL DOG! There is no OS but Microsoft, and Bill is its PROFIT! ;)

Tempest in a teapot

[AndyDeck]

Slashdot is a bit late to this story, actually. Messman pretty much just stuck his foot in his mouth, if he was even quoted correctly. Check out Bruce Peren's comment, and a response from Kristopher Magnusson (chair of Novell's Open Source Review Board) at http://lwn.net/Articles/28988/. Novell does seem to understand that Linux already has value, they just want to bring their value to the table.

I've almost got to believe that Jack Messman was trying to make some kind of joke about the SCO/IBM lawsuit in this comment, and has just been horribly mis-understood.

Re:Tempest in a teapot

[robbo]

Me == shakes head.

I think Bruce's comment is funny: Oops, that was a faux pas, never fear boys, I'll set them straight-- and then he does! It's like Bruce is this little angel sitting on the suit's shoulders reminding them to play nice or the linux zealots will skin them alive.

What's most interesting is that Bruce calls it a faux pas. Is that because the linux user base would be offended? Surely he's not protecting Linus' or Alan's fragile egos. Is it written somewhere in the OpenSource definition that thou shalt not make disparaging comments about the product?

Re:Tempest in a teapot

[urmensch]

Is it written somewhere in the OpenSource definition that thou shalt not make disparaging comments about the product?

It's just common sense.
If your going to try to sell something that relies on a product, don't offend people that use it. Bite the hand and all that...

Novell's mistake: speed over safety

[PylonHead]

We all remember when lan filesharing meant Novell. Their protocols were fast; their server was solid. They used to brag about the number of assembly language instructions between the time when a file request hit the server and the time it was being sent out.

Part of this speed came from having a very simple, unprotected operating system. Any process on the server could bring down the entire server. Novell's code was very well debugged and very stable.

And then networking started to mean something other than just filesharing. People started developing client/server applications to run on servers.

The company I worked for developed
NLMs (netware loadable modules) back in the day. It was a pain in the ass. Our code had to be flawless, because a single mistake would "abend" the server, taking down not only our services, but the lan filesharing, and everyone else's services too.

Mind you, we tested our code, we did everything we could to make it flawless, but that's a difficult standard to obtain in a complex piece of code.

Novell eventually tacked on some memory protection to the OS, allowing some NLMs to run at ring 1. But it seemed like too little too late.

Developers were realizing that it was a lot easier to develop and deploy server code on protected operating systems (Unix and Windows), and the speed bonus that Novell got by writing a down and dirty operating system was becoming less critical as machines got faster.

The same thing will happen with Palm OS vs Windows CE and Linux for the handhelds. The miserly memory handling and power consumption features of Palm OS will not be needed in future devices, and modern operating system features will win out.

Re:Novell's mistake: speed over safety

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, when Windows NT came out it was this big buzz. You can share files AND run server applications. WOW! said the CIOs.

Novell responded by buying UNIX from AT&T -- perfectly positioning them for the upcoming wave of Internet-based server applications. Then ... they didn't do jackshit with it. Apparently they thought "Ring 1 NLMs" was just as good, and sold UNIX off at a big loss to SCO.

Re:Novell's mistake: speed over safety

[RighteousFunby]

The same thing will happen with Palm OS vs Windows CE and Linux for the handhelds. The miserly memory handling and power consumption features of Palm OS will not be needed in future devices, and modern operating system features will win out.

What a pile... People don't care about what low-level functions their PDA does. They want to use their address book program. Palm OS does this perfectly. Plus it's nice,fast, and has plenty of free apps (which users love). It's free of pointless graphical shit too. Though I have to say, the Zaurus' interface is just as nice.

Re:Novell's mistake: speed over safety

[afidel]

And that is why my Palm IIIxe may be the last pda I buy. I don't want my pda to be a jpg viewing, movie watching, mp3 listening song and dance that lasts 4-6 hours per charge. I want it to keep my contact information, remind me of apointments, and keep track of my hours and expenses. I also don't want to have to have a cradle near by to recharge the batteries. With my Palm I get 4-8 weeks on good high energy rechargables. Basically unless it has a real AI avatar there is little an "upgraded" pda can do for me. Yes wireless access and running admin tools on a iPaq is cool, but when it comes down to it the heavier, shorter lived device really isn't more usefull.

Re:Novell's mistake: speed over safety

[cpeterso]

and now SCO is hocking Linux as their new product, too!

Re:Novell's mistake: speed over safety

[samdu]

The same thing will happen with Palm OS vs Windows CE and Linux for the handhelds. The miserly memory handling and power consumption features of Palm OS will not be needed in future devices, and modern operating system features will win out.

This is a mindset that escapes me. Efficiency should always be important. Take the Amiga for example. Even the new (real soon now) version of the OS will run in as little as five or so megabytes of RAM and as little hard drive space. Does the fact that RAM and hard drive space have come down to never matched low cost change this fact? No. Does it make it less important? Only if you don't value your resources. The same thing applies to Palm. That it is an efficient OS only gives it more room to expand its functionality more efficiently. Efficient is good. It will always be good (or should be).

Re:Novell's mistake: speed over safety

[grayantimatter]

Yeah, when Windows NT came out it was this big buzz. You can share files AND run server applications. WOW! said the CIOs.

Which was always frustating since Netware, even 3.12, functioned great as an email and database server. The problem was NOT that Netware could not function as a database server. Or that Windows was faster in any way. The problem was that I have NEVER actually met someone that writes NLMs, but every junior high kid with a PC can (and does, which explains the quality sometimes) write windows applications. There were just so many more applications available for Windows, good or not didn't matter, they were there.

Novell bashing?

[Anonymous Coward]

All I can add is the following :

I have used Windows, Linux and Novell on the File server side.

Give me Linux over windows for up-time, and Novell over both for up-time, scalability and
ease of admin.

The early version of Netware 4.x blew chunks,
but from 5.x on I have not had any problems.

I have 3 netware servers currently up and running
for over a year without any problems whatsoever.
This includes file, print and groupwise email.
I am also running both IP and SPX.

When their edirectory product integrates better on the Linux side
I would be tempted to move to everything to Linux, but until then,
screw the marketing dweebs who blather about market share, etc.

Better to use what works than what is popular IMO

As a bonus for not running the "hot thing" in NOS,
our servers have never been affected by virus problems.

Re:Novell bashing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, Novell can run TWO network protocols now without abending? It sure has come a long way in the last decade.

Re:Novell bashing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm yeah.

My point was ease of administration.
It's one hell of a lot easier with novell than
Linux.

Troll on baby!

Re:Novell bashing?

[grayantimatter]

That's just stupid. I ran a Netware 3.12 box as a an IP and IPX router for four LANs almost 10 years ago. It was flawless. And this was on a high volume, 500 user, file and print server.

Maybe the problem was not the OS....

An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

It might be a good time to remind that although here on slashdot we know what an operating system is, many people out there still have different notions of it. I think he's more talking about network operating systems (an old 80's term) more then computer operating systems which we more identify as Linux.

Most of what Novell does is rather mature on that level. Much more so then Linux, but probably not as much as he thinks. It has great directory, authentication and network file systems. A good AFS, LDAP, Kerberos run Linux domain is perhaps less of a polished product then Novell, but it is not far behind.

But thats only a part of what a NOS does. Consider Groupwise, ZenWorks and other products inherent to a Novell network and you'll quickly realize that there is nothing near as mature on Linux right now. (note: Ximian just recently put out Enterprise Red Carpet, which I haven't evaluated.)

So while I may agree that I wouldn't have chosen his terms, its still important to understand his use of them before critisizing them

Re:An operating system != operating system

[Anonymous Coward]

A good AFS, LDAP, Kerberos run Linux domain is perhaps less of a polished product then Novell, but it is not far behind

"Less polished" has to be the understatment of the year. A bunch of tarballs and FAQs/HOWTOs floating around the internet isn't even in the dimension as Novell or MS's directory services stuff.

In a lot of ways, Linus isn't really a NOS (in the 80s sense) -- it's more Internet server platform. Or at least that's how it's packaged and marketed -- the closest thing to NOS features out-of-box is almost NT4.0-comaptible networking, and legacy crapola like NFS/NIS.

I'd love to see "RedHat Enterprise Network Linux" with all of the directory, file/print, and management goodies. But I don't see it happening for a long time.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

Not so true. LDAP provides much of the directory services for ADS, NDS and it can for Linux through nsswitch-ldap, and pam-ldap. All of those either come with the major distros. Its much improved over NIS.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[dublin]

Most of what Novell does is rather mature on that level. Much more so then Linux, but probably not as much as he thinks. It has great directory, authentication and network file systems. A good AFS, LDAP, Kerberos run Linux domain is perhaps less of a polished product then Novell, but it is not far behind.

Sorry, but Linux isn't even in the same league when it comes to network services. NetWare has its warts, but so far as NOS capabilities they are in a class of one. (Although Banyan was interesting, are they still around?)

The fine granularity of file permissions in NetWare is an absolute dream, and matches and supports real-world needs *far* better than those of Windows, or especially Unix-derived servers. (I've been dealing with the brain-dead Unix file permissions for 18 years now, and the whole system is a major dog's breakfast.)

ACLs have been grafted onto various network filesystems in myriad incompatible, incomprehensible, and unmanageable ways, but that's really no substitute for a just having a reasonable set of permissions capabilities in the first place.

Further, NDS is far and away the best directory service available today - it's really a shame it hasn't taken hold in the Unix/Linux world, as we need it badly if there is ever to be any hope of holding AD at bay. (Those that don't do serious enterprise work fail to comprehend that it's AD that makes it virtually impossible to pull Windows out of an organization - this is the *real* Kool-Aid, and if your organization has drunk a long draft of it, you're poisoned, bucko... Raw LDAP is not really an option in most environments, as the staffing required to manage it that way exceeds the available talented labor pool in most places...)

You're right that all the apps built on these network services have no real equivalent at all in the Unix/Linux world, and only shabby imitators in the Windows world, but even at the server-only level, NetWare in unequalled. I hate the way you administer it, (it's intentionally obtuse to encourage CNE certification), and it has some weaknesses as an application server, but it works and works well.

It's well-engineered, too: As a protocol jock, I say that with real knowledge - compare the rock-solid reliability, wide area bandwidth efficiency, and latency insensitivity, not to mention advanced features and security of NCP to *anything* else, and I think it will come out *way* ahead. I've built worldwide remote site networks that have to have transparent file access back to civilization via a satellite telephone, (the worst latency environment within three planetary diameters) and only NetWare and NCP are capable of operating in such an environment. Nothing else is - not NFS, not SMB, not whatever, just NCP.

Gee, this sounds like a Novell ad - It's not, I haven't even touched the product in two years, but what they do, they do well.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[Anonymous Coward]

And your name is spelled wrong. It should be "erroneous".

Re:An operating system != operating system

[MaxQuordlepleen]

I've built worldwide remote site networks that have to have transparent file access back to civilization via a satellite telephone, (the worst latency environment within three planetary diameters)

err, wouldn't a message in a bottle have worse latency?

Re:An operating system != operating system

[UncleFluffy]

"Capitalization and all other things seems to be in good order except. "

Pot, Kettle.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a big fucking difference between NDS/AD and nsswitch/pam.

I agree that the infrastructure is out there, but nobody's built a product on top of it.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[oingoboingo]

From experiences on our own LAN, GroupWise is fucking awful. Our NetWare GroupWise server needs to be restarted several times a week, and the robustness of the IMAP support is a joke. I don't know if this is true for all GroupWise installations, or if it's just a local problem here, but things have taken a definite turn for the worse since we had it forced upon us about a year ago.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[opkool]

You can't be serious here.

Comparing OpenLDAP to NDS/eDirectory is wrong. OpenLDAP is there, yes... but pales in comparison with eDirectory/NDS.

Novell was already delivering a very mature and advanced directory services (NDS) when Linux's OpenLDAP was very beta and Microsoft Directory was... well, vastly improvable ;)

Linux *now* is pretty good. But Novell already was much better some years ago.

If Novell puts its knowledge into GNU/Linux so we all profit (Novell grows, Linux gets waaaaaaaaay better, Novell admin tools become GPL and we all improve them) then we all win, and win big.

P.S.: I'm a former Novell Admin, turned into Linux Admin as Microsoft Marketing Division pushed away Novell. I'd love to work with GNU/Linux/Novell systems :)

I'm excited!

Re:An operating system != operating system

[unitron]

"err, wouldn't a message in a bottle have worse latency?"

Not if it's a bottle rocket :-)

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

Sorry, but Linux isn't even in the same league when it comes to network services.

Not to counter-rant, but I never said it was. There are some services that can go head to head with Novell services, and some that are entirely vacant. As a whole integrated package, the synergy just isn't there for Linux.

Nothing else is - not NFS, not SMB, not whatever, just NCP.

You will want to look into AFS then before making such a judgement. It may not change your opinion, but for file serving there is very little lacking.

Further, NDS is far and away the best directory service available today

I'd believe its the best. No need for hyperbole.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

Comparing OpenLDAP to NDS/eDirectory is wrong.

I regret to inform you then that NDS/eDirectory is LDAP.

If Novell puts its knowledge into GNU/Linux so we all profit.

Unlikely. They may build on linux, many of thier utilities run on it already. How they will "improve" linux remains to be seen, and honestly I can't see how. Perhaps they can get the NetWare kernel module up to task for a start.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[hc000700070007]

AD is where MS implemented its proprietary extensions to Kerebos, right?

Re:An operating system != operating system

[shippo]

(Although Banyan was interesting, are they still around?)

No, long gone.

Microsoft purchased part of them in around 1998 or so, and from then onwards Banyan tried to migrate their customers over to pure NT networks, ostensibly going via their StreetTalk for NT product.

At that stage, though, Banyan's market share was falling dramatically, and some nasty bugs (particularly long-filename support with European codepages) and reluctance to support some client OSs didn't help either.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[Phil the Canuck]

Local problem. My GroupWise server hasn't been restarted in about a year.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[opkool]

NDS/eDirectory is based on LDAP. It's not OpenLDAP.

GNU/Linux ships OpenLDAP, an open implementation of the LDAP protocol implementation. It's still very rough, though.

On the other hand, Novell ships eDirectory, which is a much improved, time-tested implementation of LDAP protocol.

Believe it or not, NDS/eDirectory is much better than OpenLDAP. Work with both, for at least a year, with scores of hundreds of users... and then, you tell me.

As for what can Novell bring to GNU/Linux... well, IBM has helped improve GNU/Linux. Sun has helped improve GNU/Linux. Oracle has helped improve GNU/Linux. HP has helped improve GNU/Linux. SGI has helped improve GNU/Linux...

We cannot know for sure, that's right. But a reasonable assumption, with the knowledge in hand of what has already happened, there's a good chance that GNU/Linux will benefit from Novell.

Why some people are affraid of companies investing in Linux?

Re:An operating system != operating system

[grayantimatter]

I regret to inform you that you have made it PAINFULLY obvious that you have no clue when it comes to directory services, and you probably should not take part in discussions that are so far over your head.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

Silly grayantimatter...

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

It's like saying that Joe's Online store is the same as Amazon because they are both "HTML".

Not so correct. They are not just HTML. It would be okay to say that Amazon and Joe's Online store both have the features of SSL, credit card payments, and books online. Then you say they are both "online stores". As such, its okay to say it is LDAP.

True ones user experience is more refined and capable with Amazon (which I say only because that is I think the point of your analogy.

NDS has a big pile of features and tools that are entirely seperate from the "core" implementation of LDAP.

Sure it does. You and I know them, but think if the casual lurker in this thread. So far the Novell appologists have just alluded to these things. Perhaps you could help and spell some of these out.

But as you do I'm afraid it will be evident that thes VA features are just VA features.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

NDS/eDirectory is based on LDAP. It's not OpenLDAP.

OpenLDAP is fully LDAP v3 compliant. If there is something missing, I don't deny there may be, its not something we've needed in setting up network directory services at our company.

which is a much improved, time-tested implementation of LDAP protocol.

Embrace and extend...

Work with both, for at least a year, with scores of hundreds of users... and then, you tell me.

Whats been funny is the Novell appologists who've crept up in this thread have been so defensive. I never said it wasn't better, yet thats been the point of offence for them. Read the statement again, Novell is given its due credit no need to worry.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[grayantimatter]

regret to inform you then that NDS/eDirectory is LDAP.

Ok...then defend that one cheif...it just doesn't work...

Re:An operating system != operating system

[grayantimatter]

But thats only a part of what a NOS does. Consider Groupwise, ZenWorks and other products inherent to a Novell network and you'll quickly realize that there is nothing near as mature on Linux right now. (note: Ximian just recently put out Enterprise Red Carpet, which I haven't evaluated.)

And the problem in a Novell environment like that, from what I have seen, is that Groupwise, ZenWorks and other Novell products are rarely implemented properly. You can't fault Novell for that, but it seems to be a recurring problem in Novell sites that I see. The common answer people toss out when that happens is to change the operating environment, but changing from Netware to Windows to Linux to BSD to whateverOSandauthenticationsystemyouwant doesn't fix poor admin practices...

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

Reading around the thread I see that everyone else here acknowledges that eDirectory is an LDAP server, and uses LDAP for its own means. Did you think otherwise?

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

Who are you replying to? I never "faulted" Novell for anything Groupwise or Zenworks. In fact, its rather clear in the text that I'm saying the compeditors in the Linux arena are completely absent.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[Anonymous Coward]

I just read that Novell has somewhere announced that there will be a Linux client for Groupwise ... and they've long pushed for connectivity to all possible workstation OS.
Bringing Zenworks to Linux would be a substantial boost to Linux in the coporate markets, in terms of using Linux for office servers rather than just web/commerce servers.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[dublin]

Nothing else is - not NFS, not SMB, not whatever, just NCP.

You will want to look into AFS then before making such a judgement. It may not change your opinion, but for file serving there is very little lacking.


I first used AFS back when it cost a zillion dollars from Transarc and you had to deploy the whole stinking Athena environment to even use it. (This was years before IBM bought Transarc, but the prices are still ridiculous...) I looked at it hard again last year. It's interesting, and certainly improved, but I'm still not sure it's ready for prime time, especially since there are big chunks of functionality and platform support that are simply MIA.

I really don't hink it's possible for any third party network filesystem to have a major impact these days, since unless it's embedded in the major OSes, it's DOA. If Sun and Microsoft could work togehter for once, we might finally get a decent network filesystem for the 21st century, one with things a good distributed lock manager and fine-grained permissions. Oh, well, I can dream, anyway... :-)

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

we might finally get a decent network filesystem for the 21st century

Mark my words, for the computing paradigms we have today, we've pretty much hit our limits. Don't hold your breath, any real improvements are 20 years out.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[dublin]

Mark my words, for the computing paradigms we have today, we've pretty much hit our limits. Don't hold your breath, any real improvements are 20 years out.

And we might as well just shut down the Patent Office, too, because everything that can be invented has already been done? :-)

Seriously, I think you're *way* off base here. The technologies to build a kick-butt distributed/networked filesystem have existed for years, but there has been no economic incentive to bring them all together. AFS/XFS/Coda/etc. show that there are a lot of interesting avenues for such development, but this is an area where open source may not be able to lead in terms of wide-scale adoption of such systems. On the other hand, if Microsoft, Sun, and say, Red Hat got togther to build an NFSng that all would put in their products, we'd have a *real* revolution.

The barriers to next-gen filesystems are primarily political and economic, not technical.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

And we might as well just shut down the Patent Office, too, because everything that can be invented has already been done?

Ad-absurdum does not amuse me.

Re:An operating system != operating system

[On Lawn]

On the other hand, if Microsoft, Sun, and say, Red Hat got togther to build an NFSng that all would put in their products, we'd have a *real* revolution.

I'm not saying at all that innovation isn't happening. Its not happening and any of those companies mind you, but I didn't say it wasn't happening.

Sure you'll see some polishing here, and some integration there. These things I feel are where you will paint as "major improvements", and others here will laugh at you and say "we could have done that 20 years ago.

And they would be right.

Novell had a lot of things going for it

[SuperBanana]

Netware really did make a good system.

I agree, but realize Novell had a lot of things going for it:

• They tightly controlled what was Novell certified, and what wasn't. Admins didn't buy hardware unless it had that little red sticker on it that said "Novell Certified". When you limit the subset of hardware and software, you make QA infinitely easier, and your operating system's reputation isn't tarnished by some guy selling video cards out of the back of his truck that cause novell servers to die(people constantly confuse OS reliability with hardware stability). It isn't just simplifying your hardware/software base though- Apple had(well, ok, still does, to some extent) this theory, except that the quality of code and QA -before releases went out the door- was piss-poor; even today it's pretty bad; case and point would be 10.2.5, which is reputed to be causing a lot of kernel panics related to USB. They have the same problem with hardware- almost everything they ship is defective in at least a half dozen ways(some of them minor, some of them very much not so.)
• Novell never had to worry about making a desktop OS; in the server world, #1 priority is reliability, and so you don't have to worry about adding the latest this-or-that. Servers are simpler than desktops; they're asked to do a limited number of things, comparatively, but just do it on a big scale. It's like the difference between -most- Linux distros, and OS's like OpenBSD; do one thing(network/serving) and do it well. The big boys(and even the little guys) only cared about keeping their fileserver up 24x7x365. Novell could do that exceptionally well. Remember, you can't make everyone happy all of the time, so why bother trying? I wish linux distros would grow up and find their market segments instead of trying for everything. Even Apple has recognized the need for separate desktop and server "distros".
• Network services back in Novell's hayday were a hell of a lot simpler than they are today. It used to be all you really had to handle was logins to the network from a workstation, printing, and filesharing, and chances are you could do it with a limited amount of hardware. That was it. Nowadays, networks are far, far more complicated and decentralized, AND at the same time you've got people who want to run a NATing gateway, print server, SMB, mail, web...and slice their veggies, all with one box.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[sydb]

Remember, you can't make everyone happy all of the time, so why bother trying? I wish linux distros would grow up and find their market segments instead of trying for everything. Even Apple has recognized the need for separate desktop and server "distros".

Don't be stupid. Server operating systems and desktop operating systems are similar. The fundamentals are the same. The differences are in the fine tuning.

Debian produce probably the most stable (in all senses) Linux distribution. They don't have a Server distro and a Desktop distro. When you install the operating system, you choose the components that form the type of system you are creating. What is wrong with this?

Returning to your final comment about Apple, their strategy of releasing two different OS's for desktop and server is a marketing decision, not a technical one. There is no difference between the two OSs so huge that the decision cannot be made at install time, instead of being brought forward to CD-burning time.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[SuperBanana]

Returning to your final comment about Apple, their strategy of releasing two different OS's for desktop and server is a marketing decision, not a technical one.

Oh for chrissakes...no, it's not just marketing. For example, system updates are released entirely separately for OS X client and server- and often contain drastically different updates. The server updates come almost always after the client updates, and rarely have I heard of the server updates causing nearly as many problems as the client side updates.

Don't be stupid. Server operating systems and desktop operating systems are similar. The fundamentals are the same. The differences are in the fine tuning.

...and believe it or not, that "fine tuning" is a little more complex than "picking which set of packages to install" and "how we market it". Novell is, in fact, the perfect example of the power of a ground-up, purpose-built server platform. Linux's weakness is that it has NO equivalent; your precious Debian has no core, ground-up focus on being a server distro and ONLY a server distro.

Case and point- there simply isn't a way to use Novell as a desktop operating system(at least, it's not as easy on any other OS). It is ONLY for serving, and as a result, has a clear path in all regards, from development, to QA, to marketing. Do one thing, do it well.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[Durindana]

Since you go off-topic to make erroneous points, I'll go off-topic to shoot them down. Quote: It isn't just simplifying your hardware/software base though- Apple had(well, ok, still does, to some extent) this theory, except that the quality of code and QA -before releases went out the door- was piss-poor; even today it's pretty bad; case and point would be 10.2.5, which is reputed to be causing a lot of kernel panics related to USB. They have the same problem with hardware- almost everything they ship is defective in at least a half dozen ways(some of them minor, some of them very much not so.)

Sorry, no. Your point is well-taken; making the whole widget (as Apple always has, excepting the silly 'clone' years) or licensing the parts of the widget (as Novell did) makes QA easier. What sets Apple apart, and what you got wrong (told you we were OT here) is they did a much better job than Novell, or most any other tech vendor you can think of. You're painfully mistaken about 10.2.5, which has eliminated a number of issues and not caused any that the major Mac boards have pointed out. Where did that come from, the trolls in the /. Apple ghetto? And you clearly don't know what you're talking about if you think any x86 vendor can compete with Apple on fit-and-finish and customer service. Their hardware just works, and just lasts.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[nucrash]

As I would see it, Linux's main advantage over these operating systems, both Windows and Novell, is that it can be configured and re-compiled to fit a specific task, and is there for more flexible in design than proprietary OSs. However, everyone refuses to acknowledge this and stick with the philosophy that Netware is a File/AppServer by Design, and Windows 9x/NT/2K/XP is a Desktop by design, and Windows NT/2K/2K3 Servers are all App/File servers that don't work for shit but are prettier and easier to configure. True, when Linux was originated, it was just a pet project, look at how far it has come, sure it is immature, but if people would take time to optimize the system, and set a Linux Box to a certain set of tasks, then they would realize, that Linus's Pet Project is a little more mature that they were lead to beleive. As far as the turn-out for Novell, good to see so many faithful to that NOS. Netware is still Superior in the area of file serving, perhaps with this initiative we will see some growth with the App server area. I hope that anyone reading these posts will take note and try to get their departments to pick Novell back up and return Netware to its rightful throne as NOS. I myself have been working with Novell for two years now, and have been far impressed with it over my NT Stations, and yes, Cringe, even better than my AIX boxes.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[I_redwolf]

...and believe it or not, that "fine tuning" is a little more complex than "picking which set of packages to install" and "how we market it". Novell is, in fact, the perfect example of the power of a ground-up, purpose-built server platform. Linux's weakness is that it has NO equivalent; your precious Debian has no core, ground-up focus on being a server distro and ONLY a server distro.

Are you aware that you're talking out of your ass? I'm not a debian user, I've used it before and simply can attest that it's a server capable distro. They are in a constant state of testing, infact so much so that people trying to use it for desktop purposes feel the pinch of having to get all of their packages from an unstable branch. Also if i'm not mistaken, feel free to correct me but didn't Novell run ontop of dos? I mean, dos isn't really a desktop operating system to begin with.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a debian user

Then SHUT THE FUCK UP. Another know-it-all clueless newbie giving their worthless opinion on Slashdot. Thanks.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[caouchouc]

Also if i'm not mistaken, feel free to correct me but didn't Novell run ontop of dos?

It did and as of Netware 6, still does.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[Anonymous Coward]

You're obviously on crack.. Moderators must be on crack as well. If Debian isn't a server distro I don't know what is.

stay off the crack mods.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[Anonymous Coward]

It simply uses dos to load the Netware OS, dos is then unloaded. It has nothing to do with providing Netware Services.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong, it's run ontop of dos, netware then loads modules that you can use but it's still ontop of dos.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[drinkypoo]

Uh, Windows is not a desktop-oriented operating system. The reason Windows has become so successful is not simply Microsoft's anticompetitive practices, but also that the server and the desktop looked the same even when they weren't, which made it easier for bozos to administer it. It is designed to be a GUI OS from the ground up, however. If to you, GUI means desktop, then you have a lot to learn, because you can expect graphic interfaces to only become more and more common (and complicated) over time.

Windows NT, like Linux, can be used for a variety of applications, whether client or server, or even embedded. (Sure embedded NT is a different distribution with a different cost but it's the same damn core.) The linux kernel does more than the NT kernel, but I find that NT works very nicely as a server. If you don't run a bunch of fruity crap, any version of NT from about 3.51 on can be quite reliable, at least if you install the appropriate service pack. It's when you're running three instant messengers and a bunch of other little applications written by someone who didn't care about using the Windows APIs properly that it becomes troublesome.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[Anonymous Coward]

24x7x365 What weird system are you looking at? Shouldn't that be 24x7x52?

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[TeraCo]

It unloads DOS after it has finished loading itself, so you're not quite right in that respect.

Still, you do need some way of getting the system into memory, this way works as good as any other.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[sydb]

For example, system updates are released entirely separately for OS X client and server- and often contain drastically different updates.

If you create specialised OSes then specialised updates are simply a logical outcome, not a benefit.

The server updates come almost always after the client updates, and rarely have I heard of the server updates causing nearly as many problems as the client side updates.

Simply a logical outcome, not a benefit. If I install a minimal Debian system, my updates will be minimal, and will cause fewer problems (although Debian updates tend not to cause problems anyway).

...and believe it or not, that "fine tuning" is a little more complex than "picking which set of packages to install" and "how we market it".

You've bought the marketing, and you aren't actually presenting an argument. You're just makeing statements. In fact, fine tuning at this level is exactly "picking which set of packages to install" given that the available packages cover your tuning profiles. Anything else is configuration of those packages; surely you're not be telling me you need separate operating system distributions to cover all the various configuration scenarios. That would be insane.

Novell is, in fact, the perfect example of the power of a ground-up, purpose-built server platform.

Is it? What about the ridiculous proliferation of Novell products? Couldn't it be case that Novell has simply painted themselves into a corner by specialising, when the market is demanding generalism, and their nebulous product range is their doomed attempt to assuage this?

Linux's weakness is that it has NO equivalent; your precious Debian has no core, ground-up focus on being a server distro and ONLY a server distro.

No. Linux does have equivalents. The Linux market is full of specialist distributions which occupy diminishing niches. They won't last.

Debian doesn't need to focus on being a server distro. The choice is made at installation time, rather than at CD burning time. I can make a Debian install more minimal than any Netware install, and run it as a secure firewall, or I can make it a full-blown workstation. The choice is made through package selection, i.e. "fine tuning".

Case and point- there simply isn't a way to use Novell as a desktop operating system(at least, it's not as easy on any other OS). It is ONLY for serving, and as a result, has a clear path in all regards, from development, to QA, to marketing. Do one thing, do it well.

This may be an advantage for Novell but how is it an advantage for the end user? And it's the end user that counts, isn't it?

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[operagost]

DOS is only used to bootstrap the kernel. Netware doesn't run on top of DOS any more than Linux runs on top if you use the DOS boot utility to start it from a FAT partition.

Re:Novell had a lot of things going for it

[Anonymous Coward]

dos kernel stays in memory. Novell talks to the hardware through it and loads its own OS modules to reveal its api to running code.

How long?

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

How long before Novell goes under? They seem to be having leadership problems like Sun and I doubt they have the cash reserves Sun has.

Re:How long?

[cpthowdy]

You want to know how long? If Novell stopped making money today, they would be able to continue business for THREE YEARS without missing a beat. Why? Because they have ZERO debt, and a fat mountain of cash in the bank. And trust me, they aren't going anywhere.

Re:How long?

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

Well, that answers my question. I'll just shutup now.

It sounds to me...

[dacarr]

It sounds ot me like some PHB's at Novell got their hands on some ten year old documents on Linux.

Not the Message at BrainShare

[Kur]

Oddly, I'm currently at BrainShare and he did not make those sort of comments during his keynote this past Monday. In fact, he even made fun of Scott McNealy's penguin suit and set a positive tone about Novell's interaction with Open Source. He also made a point about Novell being slow to listen to market changes and how that was being changed (he used IPX as the example).

The actual product roadmap came from Chris Stone, the vice chairman. Unlike the arrogant comments by Messman in the linked article, Stone seemed much more humble. He talked about the various Open Source technologies shipping with the next version of NetWare (6.5), including MySQL, Tomcat 4, Apache 2, and PHP 4. Finally, he announced that Netware 7 would run either the Netware kernel or the Linux kernel. He made it clear, however, that Linux was the ultimate destination. There wasn't any dismissal of Linux, especially since they expect to base all of their products on top of it.

Does Novell have anything to contribute?

Well, they claim that they've contributed back many improvements to PHP, Apache, and MySQL. Some, they said, were still forthcoming but that they would be available to the larger community.

As far as their products go, they still make a surprisingly large number of good ones. Many of the services that do run on Netware, including iPrint, iFolder, NetStorage, etc. would be a welcome addition to any operating system. eDirectory's already available cross platform, so nothing is new is gained there. Provisioning and user account management with Netware/eDirectory is still superior to many alternatives and makes administering a large number of users very easy (especially for support folks).

So, I think Jack Messman's comments are regrettable, but I don't really care what he thinks. I'm here at BrainShare to speak with the developers of the products we use and they, almost universially, get it. In nearly every session I've attended, they've highlighted solutions available from Freshmeat, SourceForge, CPAN, and others. I think it's especially helpful since most of the attendees here are not Slashdot readers. They're old school Novell admins working in a range of industries, from very large corporations to small business consultants. Despite the bravado from some CEO, Novell's participation should be welcomed and encouraged. After all, if they're contributing something useful, why not?

Re:Not the Message at BrainShare

[Twid]

I think you hit the nail on the head. Novell is giving NetWare a future using Linux, not giving Linux a future using NetWare.

Along the way, they will probably contribute some useful code and leverage towards Linux adoption in the mainstream. So yes, it sounds like a win/win for both sides assuming Novell commits actual resources to the issue and it isn't just a press release. As I said in a different post, this will be the 2nd time Novell has announced the porting of all of NetWare's services to *nix, so we'll see.

A few places where novell could help...

[Anonymous Coward]

From what i've seen, one of the thing that Novell could improve is the network client. One of the thing i liked in the network course i took at school is how easy it was to connect a computer to a Novell server. All we had to do was install the client, and login. On a network with win95/98/2k/XP computers, Netware was the easiest to setup, and we weren't able to find how to make a Linux server that did the same as our Windows or Netware server. I'm not saying that Linux isn't good, but when compared to Novell, it's incomprehensible. We were able to install the Netware server with only a few instructions we had in our network book, and we were able to guess most of the commands we needed. But with Linux, we weren't able to find anything... If Novell developped something similar to the current Netware client, i think it could really help. A lot of people in my class lost all interest in linux after a bad first impression, and i think this is the kind of thing that can really hurt an OS. (What annoyed most people was the names, and the lack of clear error messages directly on the screen.)

Hrm.....

[sharph]

Those were some pretty modest things he said comparing Linux to Novell.

In all seriousness, I feel that Novell should do its linux thing, and if the stuff they do is crap, the Darwin theory will come in to effect, and people just won't use it.

In all honesty, I would be suprised if Novells stuff turned out better than what we already have, and I think the fact that Novell wants to lead Linux is much like the blind leading the people with 20/20 vision.

His remarks about the linux OS were just trying to make Novell look strong.

Microsoft is already defeated!

[bill.sheehan]

Well, I guess we know what happened to Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf.

Come to think of it, has anyone ever seen the CEO of Novell and the Iraqi Information Minister in the same room? Aha!

Novell? Improve things?

[RighteousFunby]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Linux is fine on its own. I'm trying to instil a "Linux is great" ethos in this family, and the presence of Novell is going to do nothing for it...

Still, better than Microsoft "donating" money...

Re:Novell? Improve things?

[Anonymous Coward]

Famous last words?
Fine on it's own?

You seem to forget all the problems a new customer have. What distribution should they choose? Are they all the same? Are there incompatibilities between different distributions? Where is Linux going? What's it's roadmap? (I'm sure you know the answers to these questions but where can a new customer find it? Can a new customer trust it?) The FUD thing is not all bullshit, it's a serious problem. Linux is a great piece of software, no doubt. But fine on it's own?

I'd thought you would embrace further enhancement from someone who is not going to assimilate or destroy? Are we not all interested in the future of Linux?
If the major hardware and software vendors turned away from Linux, where would it be in ten years? Don't tell me it will do fine on it's own, IMHO it would be somewhere next to the Amiga OS, or as Brad Pitt stated in Se7en: "a f*cking T-shirt at best" in the major corporations point of view.

The reason Linux is doing so great is that Hardware and Software companies embrace it, and the reason that Hardware and Software companies embrace it is that Linux is great. But it's NOT "fine on it's own".

Second. I have read the quotes from Messman, and I agree that he was out of line. He has apologized for them.

Ray Noorda=Novell=Caldera=SCO=Lineo

[Arch_dude]

Watch out! these are all really the same people. Ray Noorda made his money at Novell and used a small fraction of it to start Caldera, which spawned Lineo and changed its name to SCO. All of these companies are in or Linden, Utah, which is the name of a small unit of the strip city along the Wasatch Front in Utah. So, if you are thinking of boycotting SCO because of their UNIX lawsuit, you might consider boycotting them all.

Re:Ray Noorda=Novell=Caldera=SCO=Lineo

[david duncan scott]

Well, if by "changed its name to" you mean "bought the company", then yeah, I guess. The Santa Cruz Operation was founded in 1979, fifteen years before Caldera.

Re:Ray Noorda=Novell=Caldera=SCO=Lineo

[Anonymous Coward]

All of these companies are in or Linden, Utah, which is the name of a small unit of the strip city along the Wasatch Front in Utah.

The actual city name is Lindon not Linden...So make sure you boycott the companies that are in Lindon. I would hate for the good "Linux respecting" companies in Linden to suffer the wrath of slashdot : )

A view from inside

[Twid]

I worked for Novell until about a year ago, and I have to agree with a previous poster who said that this strategy was all about customer retention. Show customers a direction towards Linux, a little bit of open source, and toss in some buzzwords and customers might keep their license agreement. It's a good strategy financially and not unlike what Microsoft has done in that arena.

Netware's list price is over $100 a seat. Even if MySQL, Apache, and anything else ported over worked perfectly, no one is going to buy a linux-based Netware as a linux replacement. eDirectory runs about $2 a seat list and has been running on Linux for a long time. The announcement of a free UDDI server is nice, but I don't see long term how Novell will get a piece of anything in the Web Services space with that. It's more of a developer tool, and Novell isn't a developer tools company, they make money selling to big corporations. Yes, they recently acquired an app-server company, but that's an ever worse competitive mess than the LAN arena.

I think Novell's main problem is too many products. There are still just as many products at Novell as there were two years ago, but there are probably half the engineering staff to maintain them. Products like iChain and DirXML are incomprehensible to most people, and too narrow in scope and low in sales when most of their competition are rolling their products up into big do-all authentication suites. Also, there haven't been installation or adminstration console standards at Novell for years and years, so getting two different products from different groups running is quite a challenge.

While I'm a little bitter over some of the specifics of my departure, I think overall Novell has good people and still has a large user base. It's hard to turn a big boat like Novell towards new technology when the old stuff is still raking in hundreds of millions of dollars. Hopefully this won't end up like the two previous major efforts towards *nix, the first being the purchase of AT&T Unix and the "SuperNOS" strategy and the second being a major alliance with Red Hat that never really went anywhere.

Good luck, guys!

Re:A view from inside

[dublin]

Another thing that Linux folks should remember, but most of them couldn't spell Linux at the time:

Novell played a pivotal role in making Linux an option to be watched and considered. For those of you that don't know, so long ago that it's hard to find documentation of it on the web, Novell's then-CEO, Ray Noorda, had a skunk works project within Novell to build a revolutionary OS built on a strange free operating system called Linux. (IIRC, it was code-named "Corsair")

This fundamentally changed the course of Linux forever:

• Corsair *was* revolutionary - a modern desktop OS with the strength of Unix(Linux) and another feature that had never been integrated, or even bundled with the OS at that point: a web browser. This was big, visionary medicine in 1994!
• That little skunkworks project was given a fair amount of press coverage, and for the first time, the concept of Linux was widely spread in the PC newspapers and magazines of the day. The fact that this was a pet project of Noorda's only added fuel to the interest and speculation. Many of us who had been looking to promote Unix/Linux systems used this buzz as a door-opener in many organizations. (Server versions with much of NetWare's functionality were expected to result too - but it seems we're just now getting those...
• When Noorda retired, Bryan Sparks and Ransome Love approached him to fund Caldera, the first serious commercial Linux company, giving the OS another shot in the arm and yet more credibility as possibly having more potential than the average Finnish student's hobby. Red Hat was very small, and not really taken seriously by anyone other than a few hobbyists, at least partly due to one of the goofiest names to hit the industry since that wave of fruits in the 1980's.
• Caldera in many ways is probably the most important and influential Linux company ever. Even Red Hat, which preceded them, I think, owes much of what theier product is today to Caldera. For one thing, the Caldera folks were the first to recognize that Linux needed an installer. Caldera had the first Linux installer, the first graphical installer, and the first integrated text and graphical system administration tools. (LISA is still better at some things than mmost of what we live with today...) We old-timers remember when Linux was a little more than "some assembly required" - even if you knew what you were doing (and almost no one did, as fast as things were changing back then), getting everything assembled, installed, running, and properly configured could take dozens of hours. Caldera was the first to make a serious attempt to make Linux accessible to non-masochists. They deserve a lot of credit for that.
• Finally, it was Caldera that showed the world that open source software could offer good value: For the unheard-of price of $99, you got a Linux that was easy to install, included a graphical web browser environment, a serious OS, and a web server. Although it's hard to remember (now that Apache is everywhere) this set of capabilities often cost thousands of dollars back then.
• Finally, Caldera very nearly hired that young Finnish student, Linus Torvalds, and history (and Slashdot) might have judged Caldera very differently had they done what it took to get him there. (He reportedly turned down a great offer because Caldera would not guarantee that Linus could remain purely on the technical side, as the University of Helsinki did.)

Anyway, it seemed to be worth pointing out to those that don't know or remember how Novell and Linux have been related for a decade now, and why it's very good news to see the two renewing their relationship. As Rick said to Captain Renault as they walked in to the mist in Casablanca, "Louie, this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship..."

Re:A view from inside

[Twid]

Another thing that Linux folks should remember, but most of them couldn't spell Linux at the time

Insulting your audience on the first line is rarely a good way to get your point across. :)

Your history is a bit revisionist. Corsair never saw the light of day in any usable form. Corsair was heavily dependent on OpenDoc, making it a dubious "revolutionary" technology. And Frankenberg killed Corsair, thus helping launch Caldera with some of the cut team members, so it's a bit too much "spin" for me to claim that Novell was somehow responsible for Caldera's success by firing people.

You say in one bullet that Caldera was the first serious commercial linux, and in the next bullet talk about Red Hat preceding them. By the time I played with Caldera 1.0, Red Hat was pretty well established. Red Hat shipped their first version in '94, Caldera formed in '94 and didn't ship until some time after.

eDirectory for Linux has been around for a while, I'll give you that, and Novell has a long (and sad) history with *nix. I'm not sure that the history of Novell and *nix is something to be proud of, however. That would be like talking about how qualified Novell is to contribute to the future of word-processors. :)

Re:A view from inside

[dublin]

Another thing that Linux folks should remember, but most of them couldn't spell Linux at the time

Insulting your audience on the first line is rarely a good way to get your point across. :)

It's really not an insult - there's more than a little truth to it - some of the people so ardently reciting the Linux party line here really *couldn't* spell Linux back then. The Linux community is great at creating converts, but very bad at giving them any historical context, or even acknowledging that (gasp) Linux may not be the world's best OS in some respects. I just thought that was kind of amusing...

You say in one bullet that Caldera was the first serious commercial linux, and in the next bullet talk about Red Hat preceding them. By the time I played with Caldera 1.0, Red Hat was pretty well established. Red Hat shipped their first version in '94, Caldera formed in '94 and didn't ship until some time after.

Red Hat was first, IIRC, but I stand by Caldera being the first *serious* commercial Linux. Red Hat was an early integrated distro, but they weren't viewed (and perhaps didn't yet view themselves) as a viable Linux vendor for the enterprise early on. Unfortunately, Caldera never articulated a really viable business model, and it sickens me to see them abandoning that work in favor of SCO.

Oh well, thank Bill Joy (and Theo de Raadt) for BSD!

eDirectory for Linux has been around for a while, I'll give you that, and Novell has a long (and sad) history with *nix. I'm not sure that the history of Novell and *nix is something to be proud of, however. That would be like talking about how qualified Novell is to contribute to the future of word-processors. :)

No question, there's been some exceptionally bad management and really bone-headed decision-making at Novell in the past decade. They certainly should have done much better given the ooprtunities they've had. (I think largely that's because they've never come to terms with the need to move to a Unix/Linux style OS as the preferred product platfrom, so even though part of the company recognized they should change, another part was too comfortable to allow it.)

Mainly, though, I just wanted to point out that Linux and Novell are more connected than many people may think at first...

Re:A view from inside

[jedidiah]

You're simply full of it. Most of what you attribute to Caldera was achieved by other earlier distributions and done better as well. Caldera made a weak attempt at best. If anything, we should feel lucky that Caldera didn't fatally harm the reputation of Linux.

Re:A view from inside

[jedidiah]

Caldera was no more serious than RedHat. They were just better at putting on airs. Caldera did SQUAT to enhance the reputation of Linux in the enterprise. Until Red Hat (or someone else) is truely on par with IBM or SUN, the only people that really make a difference in that area will be the kernel developers.

Caldera is and always has been just a bunch of wannabes.

Caldera enhancing the enterprise viability of Linux? Puleeze.

Re:A view from inside

[dublin]

They sold almost nothing, so in that sense they failed miserably. What they *did* do before Red Hat did it, was make it possible to say "Linux" in a meeting with a CIO and be taken seriously. They deserve some credit for that, even if reality didn't match the perception...

And in related news...

[linuxwrangler]

Corning is going to make glass clear
Chevron is going to make gasoline inflammable
and
Debeers is going to make diamonds hard.

Pretty keen of Novell to jump in and "make" Linux what it already is.

Re:And in related news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Inflamable means Flamable? What a country?
- Dr Nick, The Simpsons

Re:And in related news...

[fgb]

Chevron is going to make gasoline inflammable

That'll certainly make gas stations a lot safer...but it might be a bit harder to start your car.

Re:And in related news...

[Anonymous Coward]

tard

Could Netware's kernel be replaced?

[Billly Gates]

Novell has some cool stuff for administration but its kernel is quite unstable and proprietary. This has to do with legacy code from the 286 days.

Linux would be great not to mention if Novell ports all of their software it would be doublepluss good in newspeak.

They might actually own the Linux market and could re-enter the application server market which they left. Novell only runs fileservers and NDS servers these days since it was too proprietary and unstable compared to Unix and WIndows.

Re:Could Netware's kernel be replaced?

[NonSequor]

This is in fact what Novell intends to do. Netware 7.0 will have a Linux version and a traditional Netware version.

This would be Novell's way of.....

[Anonymous Coward]

sticking it back at Microsoft for all the code which Microsoft stole from from Novell and was bastardized into Windows over the years....

Marketing

[WindBourne]

I am guessing that they brought back their marketing team from when they were a mainframe company. Hopefully, somebody inside is quietly doing side work that will allow the company to survive the coming bankruptcy.

What apache server?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID =612209964

Its about time

[Anonymous Coward]

Its about time someone took Linux beyond the hobby stage and turned it into a real OS. Maybe Novell can make Linux a viable alternative to Microsoft, if for no other reason than to make Microsoft reduce their prices for the real world.

Moderation of Story

[Anonymous Coward]

Moderation totals for story: -4 troll, -3 flamebait. Total: enough to warrant getting posted to the front page... Yeah, I'm sure this is technically trolling, but it's sadly true.

There already IS

[TerryAtWork]

a robust and reliable Linux out there - its called OpenBSD.

No need to spend any $ at al....

Re:There already IS

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe the article mentioned a word quite foreign to the OpenBSD folk, Scaleable. Thanks and come back when ya got a functioning SMP kernel!

Re:There already IS

[brainkiller]

umm.. since when is OpenBSD Linux?

Novell does build low maintenance servers

[3ryon]

I've never used them, but this is pretty much the ultimate in hands off maintenance.

A couple of weeks late...

[whoppo]

April Fool's day was over two weeks ago... this story is just a little bit late, doncha think?

Novel? Reliable?

[mistermund]

The main Groupwise servers at our university sometimes have to be rebooted 3 or 4 times a day. The dept I manage of ~500 users runs entirely on Linux on commodity hardware, and I've never had to reboot any of our machines unwillingly (changing harware counts as willingly) in the 16 or so months I've been in the position.

This is not a statement to belittle Novell - if they can make Linux more stable it should benefit everyone in the end. Let's hope their recent commitment to Linux is more like IBM's than Sun's (well, yeah we are, or maybe we arent) or, God forbid, Corel's.

Re:Novel? Reliable?

[cpthowdy]

Ok, first of all, it is NovelL. TWO "L's" people. I mean, come on. Second, the ONLY reason that those GroupWise servers are being rebooted is either a screwed up configuration, or flaky hardware. Trust me, when any Novell product is configured properly, it is ROCK SOLID.

Re:Novel? Reliable?

[Anonymous Coward]

No groupwise is more like mushy rather than
solid. Abend is a common word in a Novell environment.

Re:Novel? Reliable?

[grayantimatter]

I've seen netware servers with uptime over five years and groupwise servers over three....

I just can NOT get over the idea that there are people out there claiming to reboot a server 3 - 4 times day. How about maybe someone get off their ass and do their fucking job and FIND THE PROBLEM AND FIX IT. Rebooting is not fixing. There is OBVIOUSLY a hardware issue or a config issue. If someone has servers taking a giant shit three times a day, how the fuck do you: 1. Stay employed and 2. have time to bother with /.

No, this -is- accurate...

[Anonymous Coward]

linux isn't reliable and mature like DOS is.

How robust is linux?

[bigberk]

I'm as much a linux fan as any other geek, hell I rely it on for my home, business, and university servers.

But anyone who has run a linux server as a true multiuser system (i.e. with other people users, who have standard userlike weaknesses) has discovered that the linux kernel isn't as robust as say the BSD kernel. It's easy to bring a linux system to its knees with malicious or even accidental user scripts that fork bomb etc.

Slightly different angle now, but check out this developer's response to the latest ptrace vulnerability: "it's a local root hole, and there are still tons of those left out there to squash". And once those are squashed, there are lots of EZ denial of service glitches to correct too.

I would love to see the linux kernel made more robust, like the BSD kernel. Now, whether or not Novell are the people to do it, I don't know. Personally I think that linux is still better than any Microsoft or Novell "enterprise grade" solution.

I seriously doubt large companies have the ability, or the interest, in making any operating system truly robust. But "we" can do it I'm sure, because we know what we really want.

Re:How robust is linux?

[Laika]

Inspired use of ulimit should help your user-mitigated woes...

Re:How robust is linux?

[jedidiah]

Your business and university servers are not likely to be running as a "true multiuser system". You simply don't let people treat production servers as a playground.

And as robust as you might like to think something like BSD or Solaris to be, there will still be bugs that will end up having the same effect as a user spawned fork bomb.

Re:How robust is linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Erm, what exactly makes a BSD kernel more "robust"? What the hell does "robust" mean? Do you have any factual information to back such statements up with?

I can bring a FreeBSD box to its knees just as easily as a Linux box (actually, doing NFS testing with iozone, it's even easier. FreeBSD just locks up solid, no kernel panic.)

I have no idea what the "anyone that has run a linux server" crap is. No, I don't know that. Nor have I ever seen that. Maybe I buy good hardware? Who knows.

And I can't say I've found FreeBSD to be all that stable, reliable or "robust". I've had problems with every release since 4.5. From non-working keyboards to kernel panics in ffs on boot. Not a single release has worked properly. That's just my experience though.

If my Linux box stays up for 500 days and your BSD box stays up for 500 days and they both handle the same kind of load, then they're just as "robust" and reliable as each other.

I run many (about 60, actually) "true multi-user" Linux systems, and I can't say I've had many "robustness" issues.

I don't know much about NetBSD, so I can't comment on that. And nothing makes OpenBSD somehow magically secure.

Meh.

NDS

[WCMI92]

The one thing that Novell could REALLY bring to Linux that'd revolutionize it would be NDS.

Of all the network directory services, I FAR prefer dealing with Novell NDS than I do Active Directory (a poor MS clone of NDS hacked onto NT 4's way of doing things that debuted with Win 2K server). An open source implimentaion of NDS on Linux would make Linux THE file server of choice...

The underlying Netware OS is horribly obsolete, still a DOS relic of the 1980's, but Novell Directory Services is the REAL gem Novell has left.

Re:NDS

[Anonymous Coward]

Well you can buy NDS to run on Linux. Not the same as free, but it's an alternative to buying Active Directory to run on... just Windows.

Just like UnixWare...

[Mindjam]

Just like they did when they formed Univel and coughed up UnixWare (before SCO picked it up). They took a perfectly good SVR4 Unix platform and hacked in hooks to make it talk to Netware. Talk about a buggy piece of shit... I can see it now: Linuvel LinuxWare!

NetWare migration path is to Linux

[mj01nir]

If you came away from this article thinking that the big news was Novell 'dissing Linux, then you've missed the bigger point.

...Linux would serve as the migration path for the company's flagship NetWare network operating system. Afterwards, in an exclusive interview, he explained the move.

With Novell planning for NetWare 7 to be a set of services running on both the NetWare kernel and the Linux kernel...

And there you have it. NetWare is giving way to Linux. NetWare 7 will be the migration path to Lin. Will NetWare 8 simply be Novell's Linux distro? So what will those services that run on NW and Lin be? eDirectory, GroupWise, and ZENWorks mainly. Plus newer stuff like iChain, iFolder, Portal Services, DirXML, et. al.

This really isn't a huge surprise. NetWare 6 shipped with Apache/Tomcat and 6.5 will include MySQL. So Novell has been getting tighter with OSS for some time now. And then there is the sad story of SuperNOS from back in the day.

Even if none of you run any of this stuff, this still has to be considered a win for Linux and OSS.

Links of interest

[sharph]

Novell Forge, Novell's Source Forge like thing. Some propoganda from Novells site.

ha

[mmphosis]

I liked that Novell at one time a long time ago provided software for something called a file server and also if you wanted they had software for something called a print server. Now I see they are going to provide something called Linux. Sounds very interesting, please keep me posted on these innovative developments.

April Fool's Day

[jdhutchins]

Wasn't April Fool's Day over two weeks ago?
At my junior high, we had some novell stuff. It didn't work very well. At my high school now, we have a network of Win* boxes, with win98, win2k, and probably some win95. It runs much better than the junior high novell network ran.
Who does the Novell CEO think he is?

Eat it

[Anonymous Coward]

Just eat it!
Eat it!

If it gets cold, re-heat it!
Eat a big pussy, have a whole rack
If it's over 60, you can't send it back!

Just eat...eat-it-eatit...

Banyan

[slaker]

As someone who has in fact worked with Banyan in the last two years, I can tell you, without a shadow of a doubt, that it rides the short bus in the network operating system world.

Sad thing is, I made the mistake of putting Banyan on my resume, and now I actually get calls for it:

Recruiter: "Says here you're an experienced Banyan admin..."
Me: "Yup."
Recruiter: "So do you work with Banyan full-time?"
Me: "No. Mostly I point at it and laugh."
Recruiter: "So you aren't interested in the only Baynan job I've run across in 10 years of recruiting? Pay is... uh, you'd get paid!"
Me: "Not unless I get paid to point and laugh."
Recruiter: "So what is Banyan, anyway?"

I took it off after about the fourth call I got like that, but I still get some desperate bastard calling me about every three months.

Re:Banyan

[nbvb]

That sounds SOOOOOO familiar ....

I had the same problem -- I ended up removing Banyan from my resume as well!

Last time I was "on the market" was March/April of 2000. Neat stuff. I had built a pair of Beowulf clusters at the time (before it was fashionable, mind you...) and I can't tell you how many headhunters picked up on that too. I ended up dropping _that_ from my resume as well......

--DM

Re:Banyan

[curtisk]

hahaha, one guy that works in a sister agency is one the the last Banyan "gurus" around, and anytime anything goes *pffft* guess who gets called to fix the mess....

Ironically, I was just moving over the last two printers on our network that still run off Banyan Vines, 3 terminals to move and its history....we're gonna party and they'll be smiles all around when we cut the power on that server for good!

Re:Banyan

[Anonymous Coward]

I still get some desperate bastard calling me about every three months.

Well, since you didn't take the job, they still haven't filled it ...

Re:Banyan

[IBANYAN]

Banyan VINES (and it's related cousins StreetTalk for NT and ENS for NetWare/UNIX) was certainly way better than NetWare (even when 4.x came out) and certainly better than the re-packaged OS/2 LAN Manager, Windows NT and Domains. I started working with VINES in 1989 and even worked at Banyan Systems (now called ePresense and no longer selling actual networking products) and I can safely say that it was the best NOS around. Best direcroty service and best use of a Directory Service, not to mention the excellent protocol (that IP has now pretty much ripped off) VINES-IP. The sad part about it was that Banyan Systems never did any marketing (well not much anyway), and when they finally woke up, it was too late and Microsoft was already pushing NT with all the FUD cranked way up, and people switched like lemmings. Operation Desert Storm was fought entirely on a VINES network, and it was totally secure and used a great directory service way ahead of its time. Pity Banyan Systems gave up on its original dream and sold out to Microsoft, and turned themselves into another down and out consulting outfit. Out of the two Directory Services left out there, many speculate that one of Banyan System's founders, Jim Alchin, who is now the NT main man at Microsoft, has slowly worked all the good things about VINES and StreetTalk into Active Directory, and so now at least we get to use StreetTalk under its new name "AD". Novell, I like to say, is slowly becoming Banyanized. It is following the same death-rattle as Banyan did, but just a few years later. Didn't Novell see that Banyan already tried eDirectory (Banyan called it StreetTalk for NT and ENS for NetWare and ENS for UNIX) and nobody bought it? Is that a flame I hear coming on ... :-)

Novell as usual

[too_bad]

After working for Novell for 3 years one thing I learnt was that, anything Novell lays their hands on, just keep away from it. Now they put me in a fix :( Seriously, Novell is one of those places which strives to keep alive by clinging to buzzwords. There was a time where any dept. not related to Intranet was afraid they would get the boot. Then came the time when some developers *actually* tried to write Netware drivers in Java. Yes Java was the buzzword and all of us were supposed to pass Java exams from Sun ! Now that they ran out of buzzwords some bright brain in Novell stumbled on Linux. Tsk tsk ... what a horrible thing to happen to Linux.

ZenWorks for Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Novell has one product that no administrator with a network full of Windows machines should be without, Zenworks. Maybe they'll finally be able to end the Linux desktop war and bring something like Zenworks to Linux.

Novell, who were going to make UNIX better.

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember back to when Novell bought UNIX.

The pitch was:

UNIX is filled with cryptic things like grep. We'll be getting rid of grep and all thoes cryptic things.

So, personally, I'll just sit and wait for those earth shattering improvements in whatever Linux fork they are going to do.

MARS_NWE Forever

[Anonymous Coward]

What can 350k do for you?

Where's the shell?

[plieb]

I'm a great NetWare fan and use it for the main file and print services at the Univ where I work. I also love Linux so this is a win win for me.
One area where Linux is a much more mature product is in the shell. NetWare has no real shell and no security at the console. Remote access to a NetWare box uses a single password and no user level authentication. Having NetWare services running on top of a secure box with a shell that you can actually do stuff in will be great.
l

Re:Where's the shell?

[cpthowdy]

Some suggestions for the short term: First, one should make it a point to physically secure the server and limit access to the hardware. Second, you can lock the console, which will require the admin username and password to unlock it (configure the console screensaver). Three, you don't use rconsole or RconJ. You use AdRem's Remote Console (and remove access to the built-ins), which does use user-level authentication (and encryption). And if all of that doesn't float your boat, you can run Bash on it.

Re:Where's the shell?

[plieb]

Yeah we do all that, but we shouldn't have to. Novell should have taken care of all of this by now.
Bash for NetWare is certainly intriguing, as is the aunixnw ( a unix environment for NetWare) project. Still when you think of the thousands of shell utilities Unix systems have NetWare will have a long way to go. Of course it already has Perl so in one sense what else could it need!

Have you even tried it?

[cpthowdy]

OK, I really think that anyone here that is bad-mouthing Novell has yet to actually sit down and play with a NetWare server. Wait, make that a PROPERLY CONFIGURED NetWare server. If that could happen BEFORE the flame-fest, I think that we would only be seeing half of the comments in this thread.

Re:Have you even tried it?

[jedidiah]

The product should be reasonably robust out of the box. If you need to be a Grand Wizard of VMS, it rather defeats much of the point of an OS's niftiness.

Besides, screaming "user error" sounds a little too much like the common NT shill retort.

Re:Have you even tried it?

[grayantimatter]

The product should be reasonably robust out of the box. If you need to be a Grand Wizard of VMS, it rather defeats much of the point of an OS's niftiness.

Ok, so you've made your point that Linux and BSD aren't viable. Thanks. Really, has anyone EVER actually taken an 'out of the box' installation of Linux or BSD and used it as a production file/print/db/messaging server? No, they haven't. At least not if they have the SLIGHTEST CLUE what they are doing..

Now what every one needs to do is shutup, and go check out CERTS and tell me which OS has had fewer critical bugs found in the last five years. Linux or Netware. Yep, that's right, it's Netware. Heaven forbid you use something that actually work.

Netware. The OS that anyone with an IQ over 50 (which eliminates 90% of the worlds sys admins) could install and manage. You know why over zealous (and ignorant) techies don't love Netware? Because it actually works. You do your legwork up front, install and configure, then walk off and don't touch it for five years. Linux crackheads want something they can fingerbang twice a week, so a Linux server works...

Re:Have you even tried it?

[cpthowdy]

Amen brother!

don't forget...

[ecalkin]

two other points for novell:
a) novell also has an outstanding educational program that promoted general purpose technical education. the Networking Tech class was a pain in the arse, but when you were done you knew the 7 layers in and out and up and down. Service and Support made you understand hardware in such a way that you could use this knowledge even in non-netware environment. and finally, they taught troubleshooting, regular patching, and that a network manager was responsable for managing non-technical things such as users and password management.
b) Novell plays well with others. lots of opportunities there and you can believe that novell will probably not turn around and stab you in the back as a developer.

you would not believe how much time i've spent in the last 4 years telling poeple items and concepts from the above post, just to hear someone say: 'but ms says....'

arghhhh!

eric

Re:don't forget...

[spiny]

i agree with this post.

Novell seem to provide support above and beyond that that Microsoft offer. I'm no Novell expert and as such I make quite a lot od use of http://support.novell.com and i can say without a doubt that i've got more sense out of that site than any of the Microsoft support sites.
This isn't a go at Microsoft, I don't thisnk they're as bad as made out on this site, it just seems that Novell appreciate customer service a little better.

Maybe while their at it....

[nhavar]

Maybe while they're at it they can get that POS Silverstream to run on it and make it (Silverstream) a real enterprise application server. Maybe they've got a blue fairy in a jar somewhere.

Really???

[Pig Hogger]

I thought that Novell didn't exist any more... At least, we don't hear much about them...

Abends don't bring down the server

[sethadam1]

While abends frequently cause performance problems, it's not likely that an abend will bring the server to it's knees. I've maintained a Novell tree with over 30 servers in a mixed environment - an abend just meant we bounced the server at the end of the workday in most cases. When the performance was servely affected - multiple abends or an NDPS gateway that was unabvle to function, we properly restarted the server nearly every time. While I completely understand what you're saying, let's make sure people don't think abending is the end of the world, because it certainly isn't. Adam

Re:Abends don't bring down the server

[OSgod]

It isn't? More often than not any significant app that abended took the server down in my 10 years experience. It meant loosing hours of production in some cases. Part of it was the vendors faults (i.e.: Btrieve) but the core issue was that Novel was not protected enough to be able to survive bad software.

MS, for all their warts, actually does that better -- not perfect but better.

Re:Abends don't bring down the server

[grayantimatter]

My experience is...

12 years ago on Netware 3.x, you're correct. Any abend killed the entire server. Today, that's not the case.

Another issue, my experience in Netware environmetns is that several services would be offered by a single server, something that just doesn't happen in the Windows world. 10 Years of Windows Admin and I see it ALL THE TIME. New service for the network, means a new server. So if a single application crashes, does it impact other services? No, because those other services are on different servers. That explains 90% of the Windows environments I've seen. A serious application fault in Windows is a BSOD. Tell me again how you recover gracefully from that without interupting any service other than the single offender?

The Plan: Encumber Linux!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the way to make Linux more "mature" and stable!!! Yeah!!!! And then, sue the pants off of Torvalds and Co! Those Novell bean counters are really on to something.

Novell to make Linux more mature

[Ridgelift]

Hmm...funny, but I've checked the mlist.linux.kernel list, and I don't see any Novell staffers contributing to the kernel.

How are they going to mature Linux? Make lots of outlandish marketing promises to the general public? Oh wait, no, it's Novell we're talking about here.

reliabilty=publicity stunt, expect useability

[jago25_98]

interesting, I thought Novell would be adding functionality. I expect they've claimed `reliability` as thier thing because then we're all talk about it and thus free publicity.

yes, I like Novell but not for reliability.

properitory - may beat on useability

oss - may beat in engineered aspects

I'm told linux does kinda lack things that make Novell alot easier and _quicker_ to use, especially regards groups, linux is well engineered but less usable; good in some situations, hard going in most.

I'm sure Novell would love to improve linux in the Networked-Desktop area but I don't think they have the balls, they probably think it's easy. Theyt aren't welcome.

beta

[Anonymous Coward]

the public beta of netware 6.5 is available at http://beta.novell.com.

Banyan

[GarryOwen]

Banyan died on the vine...

operating systems

[stevejsmith]

Wow..and the "operating systems" image is still stupid.

Novell = Proprietary Crap

[t482]

DirXML - the company I consult with spent $2 Million trying to implement it. Crashes constantly. They are probably going to scrap it and stick with OpenLDAP and ActiveDirectory.

NLM - This nightmare has taken forever to go away. ABEND is the name of the game. Add some TN3270 gateways and you are ready for a big headache.

IPX/SPX - fairly fast on local area networks, but way to chatty. Why didn't they do "open" to start with.

Netware Client (Windows). - Has never been seamless. Whether you were loading drivers from autoexec.bat or the latest client. Ironically Microsoft's client, while lacking features is easier to tame.

It is hard to believe Novell was once king of the hill - much like Cisco now. Man did they ever blow it. Tapping into the marketing hype around Linux isn't going to save them. The nail in the coffin is the Microsoft Select licensing plan + Active Directory. Get customers to pay for their access, whether they like it or not and tie authentication closely into windows so there is no choice. Instead of taking pot shots at Linux they should be grabbing the linux life preserver like every one else is. Kill their children and make a kick ass migration tool to Linux.

the "immature" Linux OS? ... Yes!

[Skapare]

It seems the folks over at Novell have the answer to making the "immature" Linux OS more ...

I paused at that statement. My first thought was where would they even find a copy of an immature Linux OS. But alas, not all is lost. It seems our friends over at ibiblio.org have archived a number of different versions of immature Linux, ready for download. Check it out:

• Debian 0.91
• Redhat 2.0
• Slackware 1.1.2
• SLS 1.05

There are others here.

Re:the "immature" Linux OS? ... Yes!

[sharph]

How is this flamebait?

All operating systems were immature once.

Mod parent up: Underrated.

I don't see the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

COme on guys, let's ignore all the marketing nonsense addressed to pointy haired bosses and braindead shareholders. Novell products will run on Linux, and that's just fine. Linux IS a stable and reliable OS, and it is a great application platform. I'd be happy to run my Groupwise baby on cost effective Linux servers and keep my Netware for what it can do best: The directory and the file and print services.
That's quite all from the admin point of view :-)

Re:I don't see the problem

[jedidiah]

Yeah, but these marketing idiots are likely giving the PHB's the wrong impression about Linux. It's the classic problem faced by any new commercial Linux vendor that want's to set themselves apart (Caldera, XiG). They need to trash talk Linux so that they can claim to come to the rescue. However, the fact remains that they're trash talking Linux in the process.

i like how

[m1chael]

people like the falsely stigmatise linux and perpetuate it to the unknowing masses.

Yeah, I guess it's better...

[fireboy1919]

As long as you don't want your system to be nifty (what I would call elegant) in any way.

Forget having modern extensions and X11R6 applications. You can't have them.

And color terminals? Add them yourself! And forget about user support! You'll pay them good money if you want support!

What about advancing the gnu tools to the current level? You want recursive grepping? Color "ls"? Tar support for bzip2 and gzip? These are only the common ones that I've noticed are subpar compared to linux - I'm sure there are many others that I don't use. Wait until the next version of Solaris and maybe it'll get added.

The hardware will be great, though - for only ten times what you pay for commodity hardware you get reliability (just ignore the fact that if you buy quality hardware for PCs that cost about twice that amount you'll get the same level of quality).

I've yet to see that Solaris is elegant. It works, but it sure ain't pretty - not even compared to Linux. What they offer is reliability that comes from good hardware.

And don't give me any stuff about not rebooting for 4 years - you can do the same with flavors of Linux designed for that. There's more to it than software stability now.

Re:Yeah, I guess it's better...

[bsharitt]

Okay elegant wasn't the right word

Re: Yeah, I guess it's better...

[sfsp]

Additional features Solaris lacks:

Command-line completion (I keep hitting TAB and getting _TAB_, dammit!)

Command line history (I keep hitting UP-ARROW and getting some escaped-garbage-text)

Where are the tools? gcc? make? less? _top_, fer gossake?

Once you're used to Linux and the embarrassment of riches it offers by _default_, it's tough to go back...

Re: Yeah, I guess it's better...

[Anonymous Coward]

>>Command-line completion (I keep hitting TAB and getting _TAB_, dammit!)
>>Command line history (I keep hitting UP-ARROW and getting some escaped-garbage-text)

Obviously that's the operating system and not the default shell or anything.

>Where are the tools?

http://www.sunfreeware.com
There's the gcc.

Re: Yeah, I guess it's better...

[fireboy1919]

You can blame your sysadmin for missing gcc, less, and top. Solaris does give the option of including those tools rather easily. Of course, you won't get a modern version of any of them.

As far as a better shell, yeah, it would be nice if they added the bash-completion package to Solaris since the default package is Bash, but tcsh is available on most Solaris systems and it does that stuff.

Re: Yeah, I guess it's better...

[sfsp]

Well, I never used the term "operating system". I simply noted that the default Solaris installation doesn't have the features I mentioned. The fact that the "default shell" is deficient, was, I think, my point.

However, the pointer to sunfreeware is useful. Thanks.

Re: Yeah, I guess it's better...

[sfsp]

But, as I said, in Linux they're there by default. Sun should be embarrassed to charge money for Solaris ;-).

Nobody needs to reply to this--I know I look like a troll.

"intentionally obtuse to encourage CNE certif..."

[Futurepower(R)]

You said, "NetWare in unequalled. I hate the way you administer it, (it's intentionally obtuse to encourage CNE certification), ..."

Back when Novell had 85% of the file server market, it seemed to me that Novell's adversarial behavior toward its customers (the administrators) would eventually kill the company. That was a prediction that came true faster than I imagined.

Isn't this Jupiter?

[Futurepower(R)]

What, aren't we on Jupiter? Oh, well then, never mind.

what Novell really does these days

[FirstEdition]

On a related topic, there is an interesting article here with one of Novell's top guys in Asia/Pacific.

He says that Novell has refocussed its entire company onto two issues: "secure identity management" and "application integration". He also says that they are not interested in taking on XP as a competitor because that's one they can't win.

Quite an interesting read.

Novell could bring...

[Chicane-UK]

Novell should attempt to bring over NDS & create a working Novell Netware Client for Linux. I'd seriously be ditching Windows on my work PC if I could get that, but as it is, I cannot get my job done without it.

They are a bit too big headed about their importance though.. they say they haven't had someone like Novell to support the Linux kernel? Oh? So we'll just have to make do with support from companies like HP, SGI and IBM. Some of those guys have been in the industry a lot longer than Novell so their experience & support is more than enough for me! :)

Amazing....like Giant Space Hamsters

[Anonymous Coward]

Top ten issues concerning Novell stability and direction;
10. Changed CEOs more times in the last ten years than I changed underwear in one day that time I drank the water in Mexico

9. Developed more miserable business plans than Bill Clinton stories about sexual exploits

8. Changed management interfaces (ConsoleOne, Denim, etc. etc. ) like the whole Mexico fiasco

7. WordPerfect, they owned it, they blew it

6. AT&T Unix source code, boy what a bargin!

5. IPX, What a great protocol! To hold onto FOREVER

4. Failure to release full NDS API in a timely fashion to developers. Gee we didn't need that to develop NDS aware applications. Forced/facilitated migration of 1000s of loyal NetWare shops to NT.

3. ZenWorks, pick a version they'll abandon it in a less than timely fashion

2. Bundled utilities, damn if it's too good we better pull it and sell it stand alone

1. Direction, what kinda company are we again?

Novell could have been great, but they are greedy and stupid. What services does the 'mature' meandering midget have to offer Linux? If Linux is such an immature OS then how the hell did we surpass NetWare in the server market? Novell should do us all a favor, take Caldera (a Novell offshoot) or whatever they're calling themselves this week and find a nice rock to crawl under and die quietly.

Re:Amazing....like Giant Space Hamsters

[Anonymous Coward]

The AT&T Unix source code is another perfect example of Novell buying something and never taking it in a potential marketable direction.
This all happened back on Dec. 20, 1992 Novell sold the code in 1995. Pathetic! It's little wonder that the CEO makes references to undelivered promises, the company has been doing that for years.

I've used NetWare since 3.x and I love it, it's stable and despite what some may say simple. The modular base architecture of NLMs (Netware Loadable Modules) leaves little to be desired, NDS was soooo good that Microsoft jumped to copy it's functionality. Novell has always missed the boat on extending the NOS to encompass a service rich enviroment. Take NDS for example (the later versions, early versions left much to be desired) had Novell been more supportive of developers it would be entirely feasible to have easily extended NDS into databases and web services as a native method of administration and design.
It's notable that this has partially happened in the last few years but it was too late, other companies had already beat them into the market and stolen their share of users. Novell could have been top dog if they had just met us half way with an API that was well documented, instead they released something that for YEARS went thu a state of monumental flux (varium et mutable - fickle and changeable). We forced ourselves to keep everything so simple (NDS aware application/service integration) that it could take the regular beatings that were delivered from the parent company, sorely limiting functionality.

The tale of Novell is a sad one, the wasted brainshare, the lack of a singular defining vision.

It really makes you wonder, sure some of the past CEOs were booger eating morons but not all. I cannot help but wonder as to what is/was in the anatomy of this fundamental failing. Does/did upper management really have such a lack of control on the technical/development arm of the organization that engineers were in fact left to their own, pitching products to sales without a defining vision? How did this continue thru numerous CEOs? There is actually much to learn from the ailing midget in retrospect.

What happened Novell?

Kewl

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe Novell can write a network card driver for my xircom pcmcia networking card. Make themselves useful, like.

Re:More lies! *yawns*

[Anonymous Coward]

Please stop with the Iraqi Information Minister posts. Your first few were good, but we're bored now.

Score -1, Flogging Dead Horse

[Anonymous Coward]

please don't tell me this is the new "In Soviet Russia..." post

stability... wha?

[Anonymous Coward]

See I just didn't understand this article, cause, well, OPEN-SOURCE!! I mean, jeez...
It's made by hackers! That means they make it, test it, improve it.... and whenever bugs are found, they're FIXED. Also, it seems like the main idea is that Linux is behind in file sharing, etc. etc.
This is a _software_ issue. As far as the system goes, it's ready and waiting for _YOU_ to write good software for it. So do.

The beauty of the GPL

[pork_spies]

Well, don't get annoyed by the rhetoric think of the facts - a big, powerful and wealthy company (still) is going to point developers at Linux and because of the GPL, we'll all see benefits.

Kudos to Stallman, flames to /dev/null

Novell, even more irrelevant than Microsoft.

[Moderation abuser]

Seems to be their claim to fame these days.

They are simply, unnecessary, and have been for a good few years now. It'll take them a while to work through their financial reserves, but eventually they will wither and die like the dinosaurs they are.

Open source is like the asteroid which smashed into the earth destroying the ecosystem the dinosaurs needed to survive. It's literally pulling the financial flora out from underneath them. What will rise up in the aftermath? Mammals. Small, fast and flexible companies which can thrive on resources which wouldn't have fed a dinosaur for a day.

Just keep out of their way as they go through their death throes.

Re:Novell, even more irrelevant than Microsoft.

[kelzer]

Nice troll.

Ok, I'll bite. So what you're saying is that OpenLDAP just blows the doors off of NDS/eDir? It'll be 10 years before OpenLDAP has the reliability, scalability, and portability that eDir has today.

Will Novell (and Microsoft) be irrelevant one day? Probably. I don't doubt that free software will take over for the most part. But calling them irrelevant today is a bit premature.

It sounds like Novell is going to do what IBM should have been doing for the past 3-4 years. There's still a stigma attached to Linux in a lot of organizations - it's still being snuck in the back door. I haven't seen too many (any?) large corporations adopt it on a large scale yet.

Instead of bashing Novell, how about you support them? If Novell can give Linux a little more polish, and inspire a little more confidence in CTOs and IT management, maybe Linux can start being used for more mission critical purposes, rather than just the SMTP server running on an old Pentium/166 sitting over in the corner.

So did you really expect...

[Allnighterking]

...them to say.
"We plan to bring the same problematic and unrealiable quality you've come to know and love to the Linux world?"

OSS Client ?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about an open source NDS Client ? Like nss_nds, for Unices supporting name service switch.

Sure, NDS can export LDAP, but hey, even Microsoft has a documentation how to connect a Unix Client to AD, so a "native" NDS client wouldn't be bad for either side.

Well fuck you Slashdot.

[Openadvocate]

What idiot would publish this bashing?
This is the company that had Directory Services up and running before Microsoft got the idea to put the word Directory after Active.(and still haven't understood what it should to).
Also they have worked on integrating Linux and UNIX systems into their services, having them work together instead of trying to kill it.

And finally I'd say if you have trouble keeping a Netware server up and running, perhaps you should look at the skills of the people operating them. The same stupid comment goes for people changing to Microsoft from UNIX.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

NetWare is actually pretty stable...

[samdu]

I used to work at a place that had NetWare 4 on the server and the usual Windows (this was during the transistion from 3.1 to 95) on the desktop (I was running OS/2 on my machine, but hey, that's just me being me ;). NetWare was the single most stable piece of software in the entire organization. If something did happen to go wrong with the servers, it wasn't exactly a cakewalk to fix, but it rarely happened. I've messed around with NetWare 5, but found it to be on the slow side. I have a two user copy of NW 6 sitting here with nothing to install it onto yet, but I'd like to get my hands dirty with it. It won't replace my Mandrake server, but it should at least be fun.

ah....Certification is SUPER

[hswerdfe]

I got Novell certification so I do speak from experience

I will now make fun of you...=)
don't take it personal...
dilbert on certification

Re:ah....Certification is SUPER

[Herkum01]

*HAHAH*

Wipes a tear from my eye...

So true, so true!

you replied to the wrong post

[Anonymous Coward]

you're on crack

The Network is dead; long live the Network

[Anonymous Coward]

The Network (as Novell conceives it) is dead - viruses, worms, hackers, spammers, and malicious and clumsy users have made sharing without protection virtually impossible, even in small groups.

The new Network is the Internet: everyone is on it and everyone has or should have protection. To share information on the new Network, make a directory visible; to share privately then use SSL or other encryption methods and force users to login.

If Novell can make NDS work in this newer context then companies will buy that product. But to claim that Novell's NOS will survive in other than niche applications is misleading.

Re:The Network is dead; long live the Network

[grayantimatter]

If Novell can make NDS work in this newer context then companies will buy that product.

You mean the wan CNN.com uses NDS eDirectory to manage all their subscribers worldwide?

Novell? I thought you were dead...

[Anonymous Coward]

Crap on a cracker, is Novell even relevant anymore?!!

Does anyone that knows what they're doing actually pay for Novell?

Re:Novell? I thought you were dead...

[Bedouin X]

Does anybody who knows what they're doing actually pay for Microsoft?

Seriously, NDS rules directory services. There is no question about that. If Novell can bring a good, stable NDS implementation to Linux then Linux will gain a LOT in the Enterprise.

The Zenworks imaging app (atg least the one in Zenworks 3) uses Linux and there is a concerted effort to port all of their utilities to Java so a backend conversion to Linux may be in the works.

Re:Novell? I thought you were dead...

[Red Rocket]

If Novell can bring a good, stable NDS implementation to Linux then Linux will gain a LOT in the Enterprise.


That happened three years ago. They've also ported it to Windows, Solaris, and AIX.

Get your download on and try it out.

Microsoft and Novell

[zerofoo]

They're popular because if I'm Novell certified in the relevant products, I can walk into any Novell business and sit down and administer the network.

Good point...you also missed a big one.

Companies also want to be able to point an finger and blame someone when something goes horribly wrong. I've actually had Microsoft write me a fix for a product bug in under 24 hours. It solved my problem, and was included in the next Windows 2000 service pack. Why did they do this for us? Because we PAY.

The OSS community says: "Gee, you could've written the fix yourself with our products." - That's not the point. I'm a network administrator, and even though I have a CS degree....I do not want to fix someone else's products.

Volkswagen doesn't expect me to fix my own car; why should the OSS community expect me to fix my own operating system?

-ted

Re:Microsoft and Novell

[boots@work]

This is an old and boring fallacy: commercial != proprietary != well-supported.

Buy a support contract from HP, and they'll answer your questions regardless of whether you're using Linux, Windows, or HP-UX.

If you're spending enough money to get Microsoft to jump when you call, then I suspect you'll get pretty damn good service from anyone else.

Being commercial isn't a guarantee of good support anyhow. What happens when the vendor drops the product or goes broke? Your good experience with Microsoft is stacked up against fifty other people who were stuck on the phone to a monkey for hours.

Okay, I'm game for some flamebait

[jsupreston]

Chris, this story is at least a week old...I know because I submitted it either last Fri. or on Monday. So, flame on, I've got Karma to burn.

Anyway, as I said in my post, as a former NetWare admin/engineer, I am glad that Novell is looking this direction and will hopefully give M$ some competition again, especially since NDS 10 years ago is far better than Active Directory right now. If only they will get rid of that Java console that runs on the server (like a server needs a gui), they will be much better off.

That's my rant for the day.

Re:Okay, I'm game for some flamebait

[grayantimatter]

If only they will get rid of that Java console that runs on the server (like a server needs a gui), they will be much better off.

Don't load it. Do you load up a GUI console on your Linux servers? Probably not, because you don't have to. You don't HAVE to load the GUI console on a Netware Server either. And you shouldn't, the thing is god awful...

Re:Okay, I'm game for some flamebait

[jsupreston]

I forgot to mention, that's the first thing I did whenever I would setup or work on a 5.x server...comment out the dang java crap from Autoexec.ncf. Unfortunately, the M$ guys I worked with couldn't comprehend the fact that you installed network apps to the server from a workstation, and you administered a server (or servers) from a workstation using the tools provided and wanted it loaded in case I wasn't around. I tried the console (Console 1 if I remember correctly..it's been a couple of years since I've touched NetWare) on a brand new, top of the line server from Dell, I was setting up one time...dual processor, plenty of ram, and it was so slow I couldn't stand it. Five minutes later, the java engine was disabled as I said above, and the server was rebooting.

As you can probably tell, I agree with you that putting the GUI on the server was a big mistake on Novell's part.

Have to do this....

[jsupreston]

Can you imagine a Beowoulf cluster....

"for free" is expensive

[Futurepower(R)]

"Novell's offering their small business starter pack for free..."

The link says, "All you pay for is the services of your Novell partner: They'll set your network up for you without disrupting your business."

"Robust, Reliable and Scaleable"?

[kharris]

I damned-near pissed myself when I read that Novell's chairman said - presumably with a straight face - that they could make the "immature" Linux "robust, reliable and scalable."

Hey Novell, go sit over there on the bandwagon with SCO. You'll recognize it by the big banner on the side that asks "Why are these companies still in business?"

No, I'm saying that NDS/eDir is irrelevant.

[Moderation abuser]

It doesn't matter how good NDS/eDir is, OpenLDAP doesn't have to be better than or even as good as the commercial equivalents, it *only* has to be good enough.

Novell and Microsoft are irrelevant *today*, right now. I don't need them, *at all*. I can replace entire Windows and Novell architectures with a highly available, massively scalable open source/Linux based one *today*, right now.

All of the bug hulking dinosaurs of the last 20 years are irrelevant, they squeezed a little too much and caused a whole other ecology to spring up, one which is consuming them. They no longer control the hardware, they no longer control the networks, they no longer control the operating systems and they no longer control the application software...

Life is good.

could be a good thing

[kamend]

For the people, by the people...
then came Salt Lake

I thought Novell already had a crack at UNIX?

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't they own UNIX and call it UNIXware for a while? Then they sold it to SCO...

Anyone have a "family tree" of XENIX handy?

Seems like they are jumping on the bandwagon now and backpedaling in the process.

"Blew it", means "lost about $950 million" in 1 yr

[Futurepower(R)]

"7. WordPerfect, they owned it, they blew it."

Novell bought WordPerfect for $1.1 billion, then sold it less than a year later for $150 million.

I'm not sure the numbers are exact, but they are close. Buying WordPerfect without a plan about what to do with it was the single most awesomely bad business decision I've ever seen.

Goodness gracious, a damned liar on /.

[briantf]

I dunno, but when I think admin/engineer, I think someone must know *something* about the target of their advocacy affections. Looking back 10 years ago, Novell killed off their domain services for NW3 to push people to NDS/NW4.

Funny thing is, many shops held on to NW3 (even with the "free" upgrade promo to NW4 until they needed a general-purpose operating system and then moved to NT3.5 (and Visine - "gets the red out").

Unfortunately, NetWare 4.0 didn't work AT ALL (if you'd ever installed it, let alone worked with it, you would know that). NetWare 4.01 *barely* worked, which 3Com found out when they tried to implement the marketing speak (oh, yeah, no more than 3700 objects within a container, sorry!). NetWare 4.02 was the direct outcome of the 3Com experience, and it sorta worked (still with monolithic NDS kernel). Shucks, they even gave all those pathetic customers free upgrades to 4.1!! Oh, sorry, 3 weeks after we shipped your upgrade, we released an ndsrepair you MUST run before you upgrade or you will destroy your 4.02 implementation.

Novell screwed their customer base again and again and again and again and again. Microsoft is not a "genius" company, they're just not brain-dead at this point. Novell just shows how long it takes for a moderately large company to
die off in this marketspace.

AD 1.0 shipping in 2/2000 was so much better than NDS for 4-5 revisions that it's not even funny. Again, M$ will charge you for the privilige, but at least you get a kiss before you're bent over. Novell never figured that out.

Regards,
Brian in CA

Re:Goodness gracious, a damned liar on /.

[jsupreston]

Sorry, but I installed and administered every version NetWare from 3.11 through 5.1 (that means 3.11, 3.12, 3.2, 4.0, 4.01, 4.02, 4.1, 4.11, 4.2, 5.0 and 5.1, I went to an all M$ shop before 6 was released) at my shop and clients', and I never really had any problems with NDS that I didn't cause. I agree that for a 1 server shop that NDS is probably overkill, but when you are administering multiple servers (my last NetWare shop had 5 NetWare and 4 NT boxes), you realize how well written NDS is compared to AD.

Granted, NDS had problems early on, which is why you should wait a while before upgrading to the newest OS version. I usually wait at least a year on an M$ product for Service Pack 1. Even so, I would still prefer to administer a NW 4.0 box as opposed to the Win2K boxes I have at my current job or any 3.x Netware boxes. I will agree with you on one point, Novell has shafted their customers and business partners on more than one occasion. I had a friend who lost his Novell Gold parntership (when he owned his own business) because of Novell wanting him to start all over again with his training when 4.x was introduced, instead of a single course/test (if I remember the story correctly--he is now a consultant for M$).

As far as calling me a liar goes, that's your problem not mine...as I recall, Slashdot is a forum for discussion. You may not like my posting(s), but you don't have to take it or make it personal either. I'm not making any assumptions on your part in regards to if you've actually worked with any of the Novell products, so please don't assume that because you don't like what I say that I haven't worked with it myself. For example, I am all for Linux and other alternative OS's, but I really haven't worked with a *nix based OS since I worked on a couple of OLD RS6000's running AIX (back around '96). Therefore, if someone here makes a negative statement about *nix, I don't assume that they don't know what they are talking about or call them a liar.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

Mutual Benefit

[rmcnutt]

Overstated? Not at all. Can Novell make it happen? The sooner the better.

This announcment by Jack Messman shows the growing acceptance and realization of Linux and OpenSource as well as Novell's need for a substantial direction change to recapture marketshare perhaps even just to survive.

To appreciate this statement from Novell, it helps obviously to have a background in both Novell and Linux. Even more importantly, a background in Microsoft. I've had to install and support Windows 3.51 - 2000 servers, VMS, Novell, Linux, and various Unix flavors. Does anyone remember LANtastic and the "Five Star" certification? Yup, did that to.

These days, it is difficult to convince most CIOs to consider replacing Microsoft with Linux for core services. Although some CIOs have seen the light, most still are happy spending corporate dollars on MS licenses so they can get to the golf course early instead of investing a little of their time disussing ways to improve IT services and reducing their bloated budgets.

At first glance, this announcement was very interesting. My first thought was, "Wow! Linux coupled with a Netware File System and NDS (Ok,Ok edirectory)" Augmenting a Linux file system with Novell attributes and ACLs and adding edirectory services would make Linux much more robust. CIOs will have to consider something other than Micosoft now... right...? Ok, unlikely. I can imagine SysAdmins explaining all of the performance and cost benefits to their CIOs only to be asked by the CIO afterwards "Will this Novell edirectory thing allow me to use my Outlook Calendar?".

I think this is a great decision by Novell. Migrating to Linux allows Novell to build opensource alliances while adding to the features of Linux. Although Linux and opensource continue to gain market acceptance on their own, announcements like this only accelerate that acceptance.

The sooner that more vendors line up with Linux the sooner I'll have time to do other things besides chasing Windows event log failures. Does anyone know how to fix a NTDS KCC event 1265?

Robert

linux vs Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

umm.. since when is OpenBSD Linux?
Let's genericize "Linux" (like xerox, kleenex, etc)
If considering that a "linux" (lower case l) is a free open source unix (lower case u), then Linux (upper case L) is a linux, and *BSD is a linux, then OpenBSD (and also FreeBSD) are better linuxes than Linux itself. I agree.

Re:"Blew it", means "lost about $950 million" in 1

[Anonymous Coward]

Novell got Groupwise from the WordPerfect purchase.

ReOverstated but could be beneficial Linux tsarkon

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree ibm has done a lot for linux, please dont mention JFS. XFS is the only decent filesystem for linux. I personally verified how slow JFS is comapred to XFS. Its less than half the speed.

And I think Linus has everything in his power to derail the efforts of IBM and others in terms of getting things into the kernel.

I have a vast amount of respect for Novell, and Sun - because they have served me in ways and on scales Linux programmers rarely see. My impression of most Linux kernel developers is that they have yesteryears single processor x86 hardware and know very little about real commercial software discipline.

I'll stick to the "inferior" FreeBSD for the free software stuff. it is coherent, well documented, includes vinum, contrary to what most people think it also happens to be quite fast. And the scheduler changes in the Linux kernel mostly cater to desktop junkies, not real performance enhancing stuff.

I am also tired of the "stable" linux kernel not building. not -ac, not -marcelo, nothing. It is disgusting to have to deal with a CVS/kitbeeper that isnt buildable.

And please, dont even try to compare Linux to Solaris. Do this: Run linux on a Sun box and see the horrible performance of the Linux kernel on some fo the world's finest hardware. Linux to me isnt the most inconsistent "OS" (Since its a kernel, every ass puts random gcc,glibc, and random userlands on it) across platforms.

And as far as directory services go, and good file permissions, etc - Novell has very good worth paying for solutions. If beer was free, it would taste bad. Same goes for software.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion