Novell to Help Port Applications to Linux

An anonymous reader writes "eWeek is reporting that: "Novell announced the program at its European BrainShare 2004 tradeshow in Barcelona, Spain." "Under the initiative, leading software and hardware vendors, including Hewlett-Packard Co., IBM, Intel Corp., Oracle Corp. and Scali Inc. will work with Novell help their software partners deploy their platforms and solutions on SUSE Linux, according to Novell Inc."

Comments

saw this coming...

[MachineShedFred]

What, did you think that Novell threw all those millions of dollars at SuSE for fun? Oh no, SuSE is the core of the next NetWare.

color me n00b

[WormholeFiend]

but arent linux apps supposed to work with all major distros? and if not, why?

Re:color me n00b

[robla]

Because the major distros come with different:
* versions of X Windows
* versions of GNOME or KDE
* versions of glibc
* versions of the ABI
* package management systems

When you are distributing your software in source code form for developers to compile themselves, it's no big deal. When you are trying to release a binary that works in a supported way, it's a hassle.

This hassle isn't limited to closed source software. For example, look how many download options Abiword has. Regardless of what "should" work, there's been enough hassles in the past that most folks want binaries tailored to their specific platform.

Rob

Re:color me n00b

[Lando Griffin]

...Linux "fragmentation" is mostly hype.

Perhaps, but Oracle's decision to support their products on SuSE and RHEL most definitely is not hype. Good luck getting support if you insist on running on Sarge!

Re:color me n00b

[johnhennessy]

Yes, I would have to agree - fragmentation is mostly hype. But there is one difference. Support. Fine, your latest XYZ product might run on Redhat and Debian but more than likely when you ring up tech. support with a problem on your Debian system you'll probably get a "not supported" reply.

Which is possibly fine, imagine the costs a ISV would have to incur if they had to support every single OS/distribution out there. In one way, they are probably happy with the MS monopoly.

On the other hand, this is more less the product of their thinking and business model for recent history. If tech. support people actually knew something about computers instead of just reading scripts then maybe supporting many platforms wouldn't be a hasstle. If programs were written using proper Software Engineering skills (no, VB does not count) then maybe applications would be portable in the first place.

From what I can see, the only thing that distinguishes linux platforms would be the libc implementation or for hardware related software the version of kernel. If I missed something, let it rip, but more or less everything else can be provided as a shared object or compiled static as part of the install process.

Let's stop breaking Linux up.

[garcia]

"But this is also aimed at Windows software vendors, Unix software vendors, or vendors who'd developed for other flavors of Linux but who'd like run on SUSE Linux, too," He said.

I love the fact that Linux has the flexibility of having multiple flavors but I really think that making the flavors incompatible is a roadblock for wide acceptance.

People who develop for Windows are going to look at Linux and say, "but if we want to reach everyone we have to deal with RedHat, SUSE, Foo, and DoubleFoo."

Shouldn't companies that want to support Linux as a viable alternative be pushing for a standard to be followed?

Re:Let's stop breaking Linux up.

[Moraelin]

Disclaimer: I'm a bit of a Windows fan, so your mileage may vary.

That said, you know, actually they're not that incompatible.

I've ran for example WebSphere and Eclipse on SuSE, Gentoo, and a coleague installed them on RedHat too. My brother runs them on Mandrake. Binaries too, no recompiling needed. No problems there. I also don't recall having to get a different binary version of, say, OOo for different Linux flavours. It runs just as crappy on them all.

It's not yet perfect, yes, but differences tend to be minor. E.g., where they put their scripts or some config files, or whether KDE and Gnome go into /opt or into /usr. Nothing that a desktop application really needs to know about.

Linux still has compatibility problems of its own, in the form of the DLL hell. (Well, .so but same idea.) Each F/OSS app seems to want its very own version of some library, which in turns requires a bunch of other libraries to be in a whole other version than what you have on the system.

But that's hardly something that has to do with distro fragmentation. You're just as likely to run into that problem on any distro.

note it says suse linux

[minus_273]

not all linux. Dont get this confused with open sourcing everything.

logical next step after acquisition of SuSE

[nomad63]

Somehow, someway, Novell needs to make money out of the deal. By basically giving away their product, it is not likely to happen anytime soon. But if they add an arsenal of software which is certified to run on Linux platform, the landscape drastically changes and these changes will favor Novell.

A big round of applause for this novel (pun intended) idea of Novell...

Re:Who could use some help

[SunPin]

Screw Office. Everyone uses office for one reason: The Microsoft marketing department.

Excel, Powerpoint, Publisher and Access--especially Access--are not valid reasons for parting with your money.

Microsoft represents everything wrong about the world consumers have to deal with. Since there's no profit in a _solved_ problem and a _stable_ solution, everything in this country is built to break.

How about a program that "helps" hardware vendors

[Featureless]

...release specs and/or open-source device drivers, and become "Linux compliant"?

I guess if the big companies want to lend a hand, that'd be my suggestion.

Let's be serious, drivers are one of the biggest issues, crossing all of the common uses of Linux. Why are we, in 2004, still stuck in the 1994 mentality, still begging most hardware manufacturers for specs and open drivers, and still reverse-engineering? I mean, it's probably fair to say Linux is over the hump in terms of name recognition at this point.

Sure, it's a lot better than it was, but our mindshare in the PC hardware world is abyssmal compared to what it should be. Even hardware vendors that "support" us still often do so with binary drivers; often shitty, scary ones that never get rev'd.

Can the myth that closed-source drivers, or secret specs, are somehow good for a hardware business still be thriving in 2004? Is it really that much more important than the sales you miss out on when your competitors embrace Linux before you do?

Re:Who could use some help

[timmyf2371]

I almost agree with Access, but in honesty it's perfect for those small database-enabled functions I require without having to spend ages setting up the relevant database and access pages using PHP/MySQL (which I use for larger database projects.

Now, let's look at Excel - Excel in my opinion is a fantastic application. It's great for calculations, supports copy and paste from other applications with figures etc, and is a really handy application to have around - possibly even more useful that Word itsself.

Powerpoint is the bain of my existance. Suffice it to say, it empowers PHBs with capabilities to create huge, annoying, awful-looking documents with information which could be distributed in a two-line email.