Slashdot Mirror
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."
...and to help more people get a crack at running Suse, if you've got some spare bandwidth, fire up a BitTorrent client and head over to The Linux Mirror Project and help mirror the Suse torrent.
The tracker shows lots of leechers for that distro... if you can, hop in and help out!
The Army reading list
Maybe they could help MS port office.
--- http://davidnehme.blogspot.com
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.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
but arent linux apps supposed to work with all major distros? and if not, why?
I have not read the FA, but I do hope they port applications to the LSB rather than just to their distro.
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be
"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?
Developers, developers, developers!
The monkey-boy dance is left up to the end user.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
... is my friend, as the old saying goes.
And so long as they keep the Unix trademark from SCO with the force of a thousand lawyers with lasers strapped to their heads, they're fine by me.
not all linux. Dont get this confused with open sourcing everything.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
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...
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
SunOS4 and SunOS5 are totally different and mostly separate operating systems.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Have you used it lately? I resembles Outlook now.
There are already server and clients of GroupWise 6.5 available for Linux. We have GroupWise as our e-mail system here and wouldn't even think about running anything else.
When you get to hell -- tell 'em Itchy sent ya!
>>"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."
What partners?
It was in the application space that Novell lost it's market and mindshare to Microsoft.
I don't think it's bad either way, just curious as to how it's going to shake out. Any Linux usage is good in my book. More apps available is very good. More alternatives to the bloated wares of Castle Redmondore, priceless.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
...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?
Want to Know How to Cheat the GPL? Read On!
Some might not have noticed, but it seems to be the first topic with the "N" logo from Novell. I don't like the company in particular, but you to admit that Novell is betting high on Linux and open source - although they are not abandoning their closed source software like Zenworks, a strategye they call "shared source".
> 1. All the BSDs are not entirely different, and
> commonly share code back and forth amongst them.
And some of it is incompatable with latest GNU programs. GNU is a flagman of Unix development, why else?
> 2. There's plenty of extra bullshit, but it's
> in ports where it belongs.
Ports exist because of GNU/BSD incomatability. You can't just download a GNU source and build it.
> 3. BSD is obscure when it comes to the desktop,
> but then so is Linux.
Linux is GNU compatable. It has well-developed package managers. This makes it much less obscure
> 4. Solaris does not have its roots in BSD
> exactly:
> 1. Solaris is SunOS plus Openwindows.
> 1. Openwindows has traditionally
> meant Sun's X11 plus the openlook environment -
> which AFAIK still comes with the system.
Solaris is what is called SVR4 which was a big standard back when ATT, Sun, HP, Digital and SGI got together to develop modern enterprise platform.
> 2. Solaris 1.x contains SunOS 4.x, which is based on BSD.
The was SunOS 4.x and there was Solaris 2. Solaris 1 was "invented" later.
> 3. Solaris 2.x contains SunOS 5.x, which
>is based on System V. If you choose to install the
>proper packages you get a bunch of BSD binaries in
>/usr/ucb or something like that.
It is a separate compatability package.
> SunOS4 and SunOS5 are totally different and mostly separate operating systems.
Linux got many ideas from Solaris. Package managers, ELF binaries, etc, etc, etc. In my view Linux is a successor of Solaris and Linux gets all the credit for sparking Unix revolution.
All Unixes should be under one banner because they all came from one that progressed by trial and error. May the best ideas win and be shared across all branches.
Here is a replied I received from the UltraEdit peoples :
Hello Frederic,
Thanks for your message and suggestion. Ian has looked into this and
other tools. The biggest barrier here is that much of UltraEdit's
code is based on MFC (Microsoft Foundation Classes). Because of this
porting UltraEdit to Linux is not a minor undertaking as functions
using MFC would have to be completely rewritten from scratch.
Thanks, Troy
Thursday, September 16, 2004, 5:28:25 AM, you wrote:
fcsb> Hello,
fcsb> is there any plan to port UltraEdit to Linux ?
fcsb> If so, you could for example use the Qt C++ framework
fcsb> from Trolltech (http://www.trolltech.com/) to speed up the
fcsb> process
fcsb> so that UltraEdit would available under KDE
fcsb> (www.kde.org), the Linux's most used desktop system.
fcsb> There is plenty of Linux text editor but none of them has
fcsb> ever reached the level of quality of UltraEdit,
fcsb> so I really think you could gaim some market shares up there too !
fcsb> sheers,
fcsb> Frederic
This is particularly important for companies like Novell who are targeting corporate customers, most of whom run tailored software for their business purposes (as well as the office stuff for their admin, and other general purpose software).
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Hmmm perhaps because Novell _OWNS_ SUSE now?
Regards,
Articulos para gente geek: Poleras, linux, libros y mas
Through some combination of Lotus mis-steps and Microsoft strategy, Microsoft was able to wean the market off their dependence on 1-2-3. OpenOffice is a good start (not quite there yet) in providing part of the alternative.
Some people have suggested that the Linux platform needs to do more than just mimic Windows applications to offer a compelling reason for people to switch. I agree. But OpenOffice is a necessary, if not sufficient, element in making it a viable alternative.
Microsoft? They aren't listed.
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
From the bits and pieces of news and info that I know of wxWindows, porting a MFC app to wxWindows (cross platform) is 98% of the time just a matter of search and replace.
So technically there is no excuse, however they were responding to a QT framework question.
-- I don't buy it, I grow it.
Of course, the KDE project could always write a replacement for Microsoft's MFC. They could call it... wait for it... KFC. [Cue lame joke music, cut to commercial.]
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
Yes It seems it's easier to port from MFC to wxWindows :b rar y/l-mfc/
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/li
I'd love to know how this "porting and migration center" is going to deal with all the desktop software that isn't as easy to port as UNIX server software is. It's not even like OpenOffice can deal with all MS Office documents, in particular the ones where people abuse Excel as a database, have MS Access databases lying around, write VBScript apps in Word etc.