Slashdot Mirror
Novell Not Pushing Ximian Onto SuSE
dhunley writes "According to TechCentral, a recent story on Novell's plans following the acquisition of both SuSE and Ximian comments that 'SuSE will continue (to operate) as a business unit of its own', according to John Phillips, Novell's corporate technology strategist for the Asia Pacific region. 'We don't expect to make Ximian the default user interface, and for the medium term KDE will remain the default GUI on SuSE Linux'."
No point trying to merge by force. Novell understands you can't take two things, and make them come together by force. I figure that eventually Novell will have SUSE using Ximian, but it won't be immediate. They may have made some bad decisions in the past, but Novell has learned.
Once they merge, we can finally see S-imian, the new user-friendly desktop monkey butler!
Well what do you expect? You really think Novell is ready to actually do anything? They are probably currently revamping the whole company, working hard on getting thier services completly linux integrated, and figuring out what the hell they still want and need to do.
Dont expect anything revolutionary from Novell in the middle term. In the long term, expect suse to disappear into novell completly and have a really tightly integrated set of OS+Services+GUI.
I think the biggest problem companies have in making linux profitable is how to mix free software with software you have to buy, and how to make the user comfortable with their choices. The problem is that it is hard for them to justify buying something when it is freely available.
I have always loathed working with Novell, in a business environment just because it complicated most things. Everything works easily on Windows but on novell well there were all these extra steps or dead-ends. When I heard someone had novell I cringed. Now, however, it would seem I'm hoping people end up with novell linux so I can do the linux side of things I could never do before. So I really did used to hate it but now I'm wishing for it.
As a loyal SuSE user, I'm happy because KDE default appeals to me (mostly cause its a more mature project). Sure, its a couple clicks during install to switch, but its good that Novell looks at the SuSE crowd and keeps SuSE like it always has been.
Of course, YMMV.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
I am sad to see that SuSE will not have to improve their support for GNOME. SuSE has great features in their distribution, but their support for GNOME has been constantly lagging behind others. I was hoping that by being encouraged to put Ximian as the default desktop, their support for GNOME would improve.
I am trying to set up all my systems without Qt (I don't mind KDE, but I don't want Qt and for the moment this means no KDE either). Unfortunately, all basic GNOME libs in SuSE depend on Qt (same for the basic X11 setup). This problem has existed since 7.2, I think. Ignoring the dependencies gives me a working system anyway, but I hope that they will fix this soon. I had high hopes when I saw Novell acquiring both Ximian and SuSE, but it looks like I will still have to wait a bit...
now that's something I want to see soon. That way those moronic teachers at my college will have to learn Linux or stop telling the world that Netware is the safest and most used Network platform.
A psychopath can't tell the difference between right and wrong. A sociopath knows the difference - he just doesn't care.
'SuSE will continue (to operate) as a business unit of its own'
I hope so. I have seen Novell buy and ruin several software packages. Probably the most notable (in my memory) was WordPerfect. WP was not as good as it should have been to start with, but it was awful after Novell got done with it.
Another was DR-DOS. DR-DOS never really recovered from Novell's influence (which was before Windows 95 came out, so there was time to undo the damage).
The idea of Novell owning SuSE makes me uneasy. Right now, I like SuSE - been my distro for a while. Might have to change distros, however, if Novell starts playing with it.
Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
I understand that it is probably good for Novell to not rock the boat too much rught away. But, can someone with a little more market savvy explain what is in Novell's best interest in the long run? Give the users lots of choices with loose integration? or eliminate some of those choices and work on more tightly integrated line?
considering the support and work SuSE put in KDE in the past, it'd be a shame to become Ximian-centric.
Now, all that's left is for SuSE to integrate with Ximian as well as it does with KDE. And then, well frankly, there will be no opponent to SuSE domination on desktops.
Now if only SuSE were to have a ports-like package management tool and taking NDS from Novell for granted, there will be no competition, from the Linux world or otherwise...
/. Where the truth
QT is open source and a good library. The only major issue is that it's GPL instead of LGPL like GTK. Depending on your view not being able to link comerial apps for free may be a good thing.
IANALBIPOOGL (I am not a Lawyer, but I play one on GrokLaw.)
I don't believe that if GNOME support would really "improve" if SuSE switches to GNOME as a default. In fact, that would only make me worry for the health of KDE. GNOME is already the default on RedHat/Fedora, so it has a major player backing it. And with the decision of Perens to use GNOME with the upcoming UserLinux, GNOME will probably pick up a good amount of additional development, especially if UserLinux succeeds where its meant to: the corporate environment.
Given the general efforts by freedesktop.org and the like to improve interoperability between the two largest free desktops, isn't the so-called desktop war is really a mute point? Sure there are two complete systems, but even as a die-hard GNOME user myself, I still want all the KDE desktop available even if only to occasionally try out some KDE app or feature.
I think keeping both desktops as strong and competitive as possible is the best for all of us. In fact, my concern down the road is that through general merging of functionalities and core libraries (even allowing for C v. C++ differences), the whole thing may become one big homogenous effort prone to stagnation. (The wheel gets so big, it gets harder and harder for the community as a whole to re-work efficiencies or pursue dreams beyond current capabilities.)
Perhaps the (justified) business concern of trying to do too much without focus applies here, but why can't the KDE effort simply fork and find supporting funding if abandoned? If the demand is there, no one business can ever kill off Free Software. Maybe how Novell decides to treat KDE (or Ximian) really doesn't have as big an impact as we think. Does corporate funding really prove to be the most significant factor in a desktop's success or effectiveness?
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
I saw Novell's CTO speak at a conference after this announcement and he specifically pointed out that Novell wanted Mono and RedCarpet when they bought Ximian. Sure, there are tons of other reasons why you would want to own and work with Ximian, but those two seemed to be the main point.
The SuSE acquisition was slightly different. They want to port the Netware server functionality to Linux in the short term and possibly replace Netware in the long term. However, they are not creating a Redhat clone company. They intend to make money the old-fashioned way... by licensing enterprise software.
I don't feel the same way about this long-term transition to Ximian, from SuSE. SuSE is my distro since version 5, and one of the main reasons is like it is it's KDE-centric stile. Besides, SuSE is one of the main sponsors at th KDE League. I don't like the way things are going between Novel, Ximian and SuSE.
In other words, on the long term KDE will not remain the default GUI.
This reminds me of the recent article on deconstruction where the author analyzed the affirmation "JFK was not a homosexual" to be a proof of the inherent homophobia in our society. But he was being absurd on purpose.
-- Repeat with me: "There is no right to profits".
...MS Bob. Wonder if they can hire Melinda Gates as a consultant?
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
I recall working on native Novell products about 10 years ago don't relish back in the day of creating and managing Netware 2.x or 3.x user accounts on each server (with each server requiring its own login authentication). When Micro$loth introduced the NT domain model that raised the bar significantly for NOS'es. Following that Novell came out with Directory Services. That was the first and seemingly last great advance that they made.
As is echoed in other posts on this topic, most of Novell's headlines have involved mismanaging acquisitions. WordPerfect, UNIXWare, ad nauseum. I am almost afraid to see what becomes of the Linux companies they will be absorbing into their quagmire.
Look at how they could take a stable, logical product like NetWare and fail to market it effectively enough to grab what it deserved. They finally moved beyond unstable NLM's crashing and core dumping but what new customers noticed?
My worry is that SuSE will be stong-armed into dropping OpeneXchange Server in favor of Novell's own groupware suite....
[ insert your own witty .sig here ]
And I'll say it again,
"Ximian, SuSE and Novell will continue to deliver projects to the community where it makes sense," he said.
The first sign that I see of Novell trying to pull a Redhat Fedora on us SuSE users I'm going to switch to Debian for good. I know I'm probably reading too much into this but I can't help it, I'm cynical by nature and when I first read about SuSE being acquired by Novell that was the first thing that crossed my mind. And still does. I should probably look into what kind of effort would be required to maintain a some what custom Debian release of my own based on stable but with newer packages from testing or unstable. That was the main reason why I originally went with SuSE, stable releases with more recent packages. Otherwise it would be Debian all the way.
I'm sorry - I must take exception to these "hate" comments -
People who are trained exclusively on Windows should not be *expected* to get Novell, just as people who are trained exclusively on Linux can't see the bright spots in Windows. Novell is a very top-down system--because of this, it takes more time, more thought & more design to really get the system built properly. But as in engineering, the harder it is to build a system the harder it is to tear it down. Contrasted with Windows which grew from a bottom-up approach--it has its strengths, but scalability & mission-critical reliability was never a design goal. Ease of use was.
Windows has gotten a LOT better in the past few years--so much so that the differences between Netware & Windows have become, at least on the surface, negligible. We have many clients running pure Microsoft networks... but for me, I'm clinging to Netware & GroupWise for my own network as long as there's still some life left in those products--they give me tons of features and none of the headaches associated with supporting a pure-Microsoft environment. Their software is *still* better-engineered than most of what else is out there. It just takes time & effort to understand it--you really have to dig into it and get an idea of WHY they made certain design choices--once you do, you can set up a Novell-based system that runs rings around any Microsoft-based network. Compared to Windows, where things are just slapped together & pushed through until they work "well enough."
What ever happened to the "geek" mentality for going out and finding this information on your own? I see lots of blanket statements about how "Novell sucks" or "Microsoft sucks" but usually not a lot of concrete evidence to back these claims up. Everything has its purpose--if you have a knee-jerk reaction to something maybe it's a sign that you need to go invest some time in learning about it before letting the rest of the world know you don't have all of the information?
And yes - I think Novell, maybe, can do a bang-up job with these recent aquisitions. I just hope they don't screw up the marketing end of it like they have so many times in the past.
Since SuSE is controlled by Novell, it is highly likely that SuSE will drop KDE at some point in the future. Novell might already be on the path to phasing KDE out. Novell may deny any such plans, but name one corporation that has publically admitted something that may be criticized by users.
;) ). If you don't think so, come back in 2006 and we'll see who is right (I'll be around)...
It makes no sense from a business point of view to support two desktops. CEOs will certainly notice the extra costs of supporting two. Chopping one desktop may be the fastest way to generate extra profits. Of course, it will happen over a long period of time (say 2 years).
I predict that KDE will be dropped from SuSE (and other commercial linux distributions) by 2006--you heard it here first (ok maybe not
What's MY opinion on this? Well, there are advantages and disadvantages--like all things in life. KDE is the better desktop on linux. It is more polished, has more features, easier to use, similar to Windows, etc. Dumping KDE will mean the loss of those advantages (although Gnome would catch up in 2 years once Novell pumps resources into it). I personally like KDE better than Gnome (it is also the default in Mandrake Linux).
The upside is that linux will have ONE solid desktop (other window managers don't count). Some may dislike the lack of choice but splitting resources across multiple projects is a complete waste. Instead of having applications for one or the other, future developers will be able to write applications tailored for Gnome. This should significantly improve the quality of desktop applications. Right now, one pretty much has to use both KDE and Gnome applications. I use KDE (Mandrake 9.1) and probably 20% of hte applications are Gnome, 50% KDE, rest are neither*. This creates inconsistencies, poorer quality, more documentation, and so forth. If everyone used one desktop, it would eliminate this**.
* When I say neither, I'm basically counting applications that don't have a Gnome or KDE "look". Some of these applications actually use the libraries for Gnome and KDE (so technically it belongs to KDE or Gnome).
** Of course, there is a potential that having one desktop could result in stagnation and reduction in innovation. I personally don't think that will be a major problem at this point in time. If linux is successful, that problem wil only be faced 10 years from now, when some developer will be cursing at the desktop and its SDK because the desktop has become a monopoly.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
Namely, to capitalize off Novell's good name. If Novell just intends to push another distro, let it be an unchanged SuSe. If however they want to make inroads on the corporate desktop, first the product should market under the Novell name. Second that product should be break the traditional distro paradigm of overwhelming choice. Overwhelming choice is not a selling point if you are pitching the corporate desktop. Far far better to narrow the range of applications available when going after this market. Not only is the support load easier for yourself and your clients, it is satisfying the market's (albeit wrong) perception that there is an unnecesary amount of choice in Linux distros.
Fighting this resistance with the oft repeated mantra that choice is good has not led to a sweeping corporate dekstop penguination, I suggest perhaps it is time to give consideration to an alternate paradigm. Remove the choice. Hell, even if I don't agree with package x over package y, I don't need to make those selections, nor do I need to worry about custom install scripts, etc. etc. When was the last time Windows was left out of consideration for a desktop OS because of the lack of choices, or even the lack of intelligent defaults?
This notional distro needs to throw out most of the preconceptions distro maintainers have to live with. First, you aren't building a distro for generic_linux_zealot. You're building a distro for generic_company_desktop. The assumptions should be different. GLZ wants his favorite #EDITOR, but since $EDITOR is potentially different for each and every GLZ, you include every editor. Not so for GCD, for this user the text editor isn't nearly as critical, they'll rarely use it. So, the criteria is mutated, rather than trying to meet a given users preference, which led to the proliferation of editor packages in a standard distro, you select a single text editor. I would further suggest that the editor you select be very easy to learn (for the average corporate user, remember, so emacs is out.) and for bonus points, you hack it to honor all the standard windoze keyboard shortcuts, as a tool to ease experienced windoze users into the transition. In point of fact, your biggest detractors among your user base in a windoze shop are the 3% of people who know how to use the keyboard shortcuts within windoze. The rest of the complaints, by and large are fluff. But this compaint isn't, it drastically affects the productivity of users who make use of such "power user" techniques. LISTEN TO THEM, they make a valid point.
Lastly, narrowing the application selection allows tighter integration of the selected applications. This provides another value add to your application selections. Further, it makes feasible development of a comprehensive in-line help program (available through F1, natch) which would give the central help access to all the standard applications on the machine through one unified interface.
The biggest part of the problem is that to the typical linux zealot the requirements are anethma. No, actually the biggest part of the problem is that linux zealots lack an appreciation for the other viewpoint. Your average Linux zealot will tell you (and I'm sure someone will reply to this) that eliminating choices is wrong. Well, if you tell that to the corporate world, all you are doing is telling them that Linux isn't going to work for them. If, however we give them what they think they want, and make sure it operates as we know it should, isn't everyone a winner?
There is a smug superiority in the Linux world about these issues. I'm not saying that those attitudes aren't necessarily correct, once all is said and done. I am saying that those attitudes will keep us from
"Talk minus action equals nothing" - Joey Shithead, D.O.A.
"Talk minus action equals
Its a different company than it was 10 years ago. This isn't just a matter of NOVL trying to tack on a few new side businesses, Linux is literally going to be the centerpiece of the new look NOVL.
That Netware is losing market share at this point is a meaningless argument. Novell has known this was going to happen for years, so they parlayed some of their cash into a new business direction.
You can't compare what Novell is doing now versus what they did 15 years ago.
Way back when, when Novell was "king of the LAN," the computing world was a different place. Even Novell couldn't combat Microsoft and all their tactics.
Novell is a solid company, they've made solid products. I wouldn't brush them off quite yet; Linux and FS has given companies a new avenue to compete in the market once again.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
If the will merge Ximian with Suse into Simian, then they'll have a problem to name their own company: should they call it Knovell or Gnovell after that? Well, as for the new user-friendly desktop, I am sure they'll call it Knome :)
Less is more !