Slashdot Mirror


Novell Under Pressure From Investors

UltimaGuy writes "The pressure is growing on Novell Inc's management to make major strategic changes after a regulatory filing revealed a Novell shareholder has joined Credit Suisse First Boston in calling for change at the identity management and Linux vendor. The steps proposed by the investment firm include cutting costs by targeting Novell's two corporate jets, its 'overstaffed' R&D department, legacy products, and its 400 NetWare engineers, as well as selling non-core businesses to enable funds to be redeployed."

214 comments

  1. Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by jg21 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe there's truth in the notion then that Sun might buy Novell. If it doesn't buy Red Hat first, as Mark Hinkle here seems to think it might.

    1. Re:Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would Sun buy Novell if it prefers people to buy Solaris? Even to buy openSolaris helps Sun along better than to buy, say, RHEL.

    2. Re:Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by MoralHazard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How does that relate to the issue of shareholders pressuring Novell to shape up? I didn't see anything in the article talking about a buyout happening anytime soon. Can you explain where you make that connection?

      I mean, sure, it's possible in the future that they might get bought, but Novell is talking about a 2+ year plan to reshape themselves... Not exactly sounding like "sale", there.

      What kind of time frame are you talking about, anyway?

    3. Re:Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by jg21 · · Score: 3, Informative

      It dates back to a Marrill Lynch report last year that The Reg reported on, calling for Sun Microsystems to acquire either Red Hat or Novell in order to get themselves taken seriously in the Linux server market. The impetus would be coming from Sun, then, not necessarily from Novell itself. Does that make a bit more sense?

    4. Re:Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think IBM should buy Novell or Sun. Even though IBM can look like (and probably is in some regards) a giant gorilla whose hands don't know what the other is doing, they still deliver excellent and innovative products, and have got a worldwide support chain second to none. I would *so* like 'IBM Linux'...

    5. Re:Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think IBM should buy Novell or Sun.

      Of course I meant IBM should buy Novell or Redhat, instead of Sun :)

    6. Re:Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by hostyle · · Score: 0
      1. Link to speculative opinion piece
      2. Announce it as being relevant to a tangential /. story
      3. Profit!
      --
      Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
    7. Re:Sun Could Possibly Buy Novell? by MoralHazard · · Score: 1

      A little context would have been nice. Otherwise, talking about Sun is a total non sequitur.

  2. Overstaffed R&D by aapold · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess it just doesn't pay to do your own research these days.

    --
    "Waste not one watt!" - CZ
    1. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That depends on whether you're looking at it from the perspective of a greedy money grabbing investor (share-holder value and all that), or someone who enjoys doing a job well.

    2. Re:Overstaffed R&D by madman101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not when one of your basic products is given away free. Novell isn't like IBM where the goal is moving hardware.

    3. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Trigun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, and Novell's goal isn't to go out of business either. They made a few choice acquisitions, then went into an R&D cycle, and are now going into their sales cycle. Unfortunately the stock traders wanted it to happen faster.

      Novell is doing great things for linux. Their integrators are second to none, and soon you'll see tools from both Novell and Red Hat that shape the linux server and desktop market. Novell's Hula project (thanks to whoever posted that link in the Groupware roundup), Red Hat's directory server, and the management tools that both of these companies have released under the GPL are set to create an easily managed platform without the prohibitive start-up costs of a pure MS platform for the SME market.

    4. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem I see here is the problem with business in America these days: Why are we allowing investment firms (who are not intimately acquainted with the specific business) to dictate how companies are run?
      I do NOT see this as a good thing.
      I'm so tired of seeing companies meet their earnings projections, yet their stock price drops because Fred at Smythe Blarney thought "they should have done better". No! They know their business, they know their pipeline, and they projected based on that, and they hit their mark, but because some asshole who thinks he knows better writes an article criticizing them for not doing as well as his tea leaves said they should, their stock drops. What crap!

    5. Re:Overstaffed R&D by 'nother+poster · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but not all investors are like that. I prefer that the companies I invest in have a healthy R&D budget. That means that they are , hopefully, working on things that will make more profits in the future that will translate into dividends. Only short sighted morons, corporate raiders, and shills for other companies want to kill off a companies future potential.

      BTW wasn't CSFB one of the investors/shills in the SCO fiasco a few years back?

    6. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      >then went into an R&D cycle

      What R&D cycle?
      It's assembling a distro from GPL code, for Christ.
      How many R&D staff did SuSE have before they sold out? Probably like 100 or so. How many non-Linux developers Novell has now? Probably several thousand.

      >Unfortunately the stock traders wanted it to happen faster.

      Pleeeese - they had a great OS (SLES8) for multiple CPU archs to begin with, and what did they do?
      They chose to SIT (not "shit") on it and wait for almost a year until SLES9 was out so that they can tailor it (the so-called R&D) to fit their Netware and what-not legacy apps and Netware channel partners' plans.
      And not only that - because they didn't want to touch SLES8, they had to rush kernel 2.6 which, SuSE being a follower, few wanted to support until RHEL 4.0 came out in Q1.
      Do you know that EMC PowerPath for SLES9 came out only last month? A year after their GA.
      In short, they fucked up.
      At least they should have started giving SLES8 for free big time (as they didn't plan to sell it anyway) to grow their installed base.
      SLES9 is a nice product, but Novell has too many (and not all are nice) products - I don't think they have time to focus on core products.

      >set to create an easily managed platform without the prohibitive start-up costs of a pure MS platform for the SME market.

      Come on, we've been listening about these MS/Exchange killers for years now.

    7. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Brunellus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      R&D is something you can't skim on, and HP found that out hopefully.

      Wishful thinking. R&D pays off long after the investors have sold off their shares; so the investors really don't give a fig about R&D that doesn't bear immediate, marketable fruit.

    8. Re:Overstaffed R&D by stevesliva · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're pretty far off base on the claim that IBM doesn't make money on anything physical. Sure, it may not be anything close to "most" of IBM's revenue, but IBM's hardware revenue for a single quarter is larger than Novell's market cap. Even after the sale of the PC division, it still had $5.5 billion in hardware revenue for the 2nd quarter with higher margins than the $12 billion in services revenue. link.

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    9. Re:Overstaffed R&D by skarphace · · Score: 0

      If you think Novell makes their money off of consulting and their R&D is useless, then you need to check out NetWare 6.5.

      --
      Bullish Machine Tzar
    10. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is that? Because all open source software is given away for free, or because patenting the software to protect your investment is considered not done?

      Just joking, at least partially ;)

    11. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why are we allowing investment firms (who are not intimately acquainted with the specific business) to dictate how companies are run?

      Uh...maybe because these people own part of the company? Novell chose to be a public company, and with that comes the price of letting people who might be completely disinterested in your long-term technology in favor of present returns. Sometimes it's about instant gratification.

    12. Re:Overstaffed R&D by bmcmurphy · · Score: 0

      They should just concentrate on their core competency: changing horses in midstream

    13. Re:Overstaffed R&D by lgw · · Score: 1

      Revenue != profit. Does IBM actually make money on anything physical any more? I'm sure they do on mainframe sales.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    14. Re:Overstaffed R&D by timeOday · · Score: 2, Funny
      I guess it just doesn't pay to do your own research these days.
      Then obviously we need stronger IP laws! (ducks)
    15. Re:Overstaffed R&D by stevesliva · · Score: 1

      I know, which is why I explicitly said the hardware revenue had higher margins than the global services revenue.

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    16. Re:Overstaffed R&D by sgtrock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Um, not to be too pedantic or anything, but IBM still makes a fleetload of money on selling mainframe hardware.

      (Yes, I know, they now make far more on support, services, and software licenses. They /still/ have a profitable hardware division, though.)

      fleetload == many many boatloads. :)

    17. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Aphexian · · Score: 1
      How many R&D staff did SuSE have before they sold out? Probably like 100 or so. How many non-Linux developers Novell has now? Probably several thousand.

      Oooh, hey I wanna play - I like this game.
      How many R&D staff did SiSE have before they sold out? Probably like a million or so. How many non-Linux developers does Novell have now? Probably like 3.

      Talking out your ass is a fun game!

      If you think they are just assembling a distro from GPL code, you really haven't seen their server platform at all, have you? How do you think they got edirectory and all the netware code running on there? A glue gun and silly putty? How about the NSS storage module for EVMS? Am I confusing you, since I know what I'm talking about?

    18. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      >How many R&D staff did SiSE have before they sold out? Probably like a million or so. How many non-Linux developers does Novell have now? Probably like 3.

      Nice try.

      >Talking out your ass is a fun game!

      I see you like that game, too. The difference is your guess is uneducated.
      When Novell acquired SuSE, SuSE had less than 400 employees. Novell has about 6000 employees. My figures were close enough.

      >If you think they are just assembling a distro from GPL code, you really haven't seen their server platform at all, have you? How do you think they got edirectory and all the netware code running on there?

      That's exactly my point - instead of dicking around with those applications they should make sure they can make and sell a good bare bone OS.
      The R&D overhead comes from those apps and burdens their progress in OS sale and development.
      If Red Hat can make it (sort of) work with 740 people in 27 offices worldwide, why would the SuSE part of Novell need more than 400?
      If you look at RHEL OS, very few people buy it because it supports Red Hat apps. No, they buy it (or pay for support) because they like it, or it works good for them, or it's recommended by their ISV/IHV, or they're used to it, etc. Customers who say "OK, I want [a rh application] and by the way, give me a few of those RHEL OS licenses as well" must be a very small minority.

      Why would it work differently for Novell?
      But it does - with Novell it's the opposite - people buy SuSE when they want to run Novell apps. That's screwed up. OS isn't sold like that.

      >How about the NSS storage module for EVMS? Am I confusing you, since I know what I'm talking about?

      No, I am familiar with it and not too impressed. LVM is the open source standard (it also sucks, but if I had to learn one, I'd learn LVM; usually if I notice either, I disable/uninstall it right away. I use and recommend commercial software VM or hardware-based volume managers as those provide proper reliability, scalability, stability and features required by enterprise users.
      Like most IBM-released GPL code, EVMS got released to the community when IBM saw no future for it. That's all one needs to know about EVMS.
      NSS - why would anyone be familiar with NSS? Except Netware fanboys and people involved in legacy migrations, that is.

    19. Re:Overstaffed R&D by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is being argued in a few of my classes as the primary weakness of capitalism. Is there anyone anywhere addressing this in a manner that could bear fruit? R&D has become just D, and the D needs to "bear immediate, marketable fruit." Hence, Toyota's 10 years developing hybrid cars vs. GM's...what? I'm not trolling, I really would like to see suggestions. The US won't ever (I don't think) adopt japan's state directed industry model ("government intervention = market inefficency"). Nor does the european mixed socialist model sit well (despite increased standards of living.) What then is the answer? A strong military and IP laws that "grant" us a slice of all worldwide production? No, but really...

    20. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Aphexian · · Score: 1
      > My figures were close enough.
      For you perhaps. Not for me. My examples were intentionally inflated to demonstrate a point. And I know you got the point, so I'm not going to beleaguer you with it.

      > instead of dicking around with those applications they should make sure they can make and sell a good bare bone OS.
      You are changing your stance to suit your pre-decided ideology. Is Novell destroying a good OS? Or developing a good OS? Did they buy a good OS and destroy it? Did they buy a good OS and enhance it? They shouldn't do anything with it? Just let it fester and not integrate their technology with it? Something tells me you're not CxO material.

      > If you look at RHEL OS, very few people buy it because it supports Red Hat apps.
      Let me inject my ideology. Redhat sucks, run don't walk away from it. They were smart enough to become the biggest and that's why everyone latches on to them. Simple. And reminds me of another large OS company. What's the last major innovation that came out of RH? Let the community bug-test and develop for us? You want to talk about "just assembling a distro from GPL code"? They're the freaking masters of it.

      >people buy SuSE when they want to run Novell apps. That's screwed up. OS isn't sold like that.
      1) Novell doesn't make apps. Not anymore anyway. They make infrastructure software.
      2) I'm thinking of the largest OS maker on the planet. They work EXACTLY like that. Can you guess who I'm thinking of?

      >I'd learn LVM
      Your loss. I might go for LVM2... But only because LVM2 runs as a module under EVMS. You do realize that it's difficult to grant you any credibility here when you admit you've never learned how to use the technology, right?

      >NSS - why would anyone be familiar with NSS? Except Netware fanboys and people involved in legacy migrations, that is.
      NSS is not legacy, it was released in the Netware 5.0 timeframe. It was a journaled filesystem before Linux even had one. Do your homework before you speak to me again. And don't ever imply that I am a fanboy. You don't know me. And you don't know what you're talking about.

    21. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Stopher2475 · · Score: 0

      Strong, Strong, Point.

    22. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep the engineers...Novell is transitioning them over to Linux anyways. Ditch the planes and roll a hand grenade down the executive offices in MA. That is where the real "expense" is, especially Jack Messman.

    23. Re:Overstaffed R&D by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      >Let me inject my ideology. Redhat sucks, run don't walk away from it.

      I know that and I myself don't use and/or recommend RH. I just stated a fact.
      And unfortunately they're still growing at a faster rate than SuSE (compare their number of new enterprise Linux subscriptions in recent quarters) which tells me that there's something wrong with Novell.
      SuSE: good product, sales.
      Red Hat: bad product, sells well.
      Obviously quality of SLES is not the reason. It's how the product is positioned, or sold, or marketed, or supported.

      >What's the last major innovation that came out of RH? Let the community bug-test and develop for us? You want to talk about "just assembling a distro from GPL code"?
      >They're the freaking masters of it.

      Exactly. That's why I refuse to use Fedora and I use CentOS when I have to try something out on RHEL.
      But, what you say proves my point - despite all the bullshit, they're still #1 and fastest growing.

      > You do realize that it's difficult to grant you any credibility here when you admit you've never learned how to use the technology, right?

      Wrong - I said I know how to use the technology (I use commercial volume manager products), I just haven't bothered to learn this particular product/implementation because I don't think it is superior to commercial volume manager that I use.
      If it does become better, I might use it, but I don't want to waste time (or risk data loss) on figuring that out - I'll wait until it's a known fact.

      Anyway, I see you feel strongly (to replace the term you didn't like) about Novell so I don't think we can agree on much (except that RH sucks).
      We'll see what happens with Novell. I wish them well but they really seem to be stuck in some kind of endless loop.

  3. While I can possibly see... by cnelzie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...cutting costs by eliminating Corporate Jet Expenses, a technology company shouldn't be cutting its R&D Department because some MBA Holding Investment Firm thinks it is overstaffed.

        Granted, if the firm discovered that 80% of the R&D staff isn't actually doing anything outside of playing QuakeIII or something, then yeah, they should be cut, a little...

    --
    If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    1. Re:While I can possibly see... by jmcmunn · · Score: 5, Insightful


      I completely agree. They are never going to release an innovative product for the future if they fire the engineers and cut R&D. Corporate jets, however, are simply not necessary in a world where anyone can be across the country on a commercial airline at the drop of a hat. They could even (gasp) fly coach to save money like the rest of us.

    2. Re:While I can possibly see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why not just ditch Miguel de Icaza and the mono developers?

    3. Re:While I can possibly see... by dnoyeb · · Score: 1

      True. I just hope people realize when companies are pressured to do things by 'shareholders' its usually by only a few that hold $$$ worth of shares. And usually they are part of the company's management.

    4. Re:While I can possibly see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, what have those R&D people actually come up with in the oh... last ten years? They bought SuSE - so no innovation there. The bought (and sold) Wordperfect. Novell died the day Microsoft came out with AD, the corpse just hasn't stopped twitching yet.

    5. Re:While I can possibly see... by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      Not to to sound like I'm defending the idea of having two corporate jets, but keep in mind that the real value/purpose of a corporate jet is not to fly around your own executives - it's for your big clients! Do you really expect to get multi-million dollar contracts if you flying the client over coach?

    6. Re:While I can possibly see... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      No you dont, but its a hell of a lot cheaper to hire a Boeing Business Jet or an Airbus Executive Jet or even something smaller as and when you need it, rather than paying for the fulltime upkeep of two aircraft, which cost money even when they are sat in a hanger somewhere doing nothing. Unless you fly that aircraft every day on paying routes, its simply bad business to maintain a fleet of any size.

    7. Re:While I can possibly see... by Korgan · · Score: 5, Informative

      I disagree. eDirectory and DirXML (Now called the Novell Identity Manager) are both very excellent products that fit in to places that many other products don't go. Especially DirXML.

      On job I did a few years ago required synchronising a Mac OpenDirectory network with an Active Directory network. Getting the two to talk together natively was a mission and never gave us results that were worth the effort. Putting DirXML in between solved that problem. Adding eDirectory in to the equation allowed us to then add in products like their SAP based ERP services and several other applications. This provided for a very smooth, extremely easily managed service that went far beyond just synchronising their OpenDirectory and Active Directory networks.

      I have not yet seen another platform like DirXML that is as slick and as easy to implement while at the same time supporting such a large number of products out fo the box. And its modular design makes it even easier for developers and solution providers to add support for their own products.

      AD didn't kill Novell. Anyone that takes the time to seriously use eDirectory will understand that AD doesn't even begin to offer the same flexibility. Not to mention that AD is not cross platform where as eDirectory (and pretty much all their products) will run on Linux, Solaris, HP-UX, Netware, AIX... Oh, and that nasty Microsoft Windows product too.

    8. Re:While I can possibly see... by Korgan · · Score: 1

      BTW, I do not work for, nor have any association with, Novell or any of their partners.

      I do, however, extoll the virtues of good products regardless of which vendor releases it. I may not like Microsoft as an entity, but I do acknowledge when they release a good product.

    9. Re:While I can possibly see... by Bastian227 · · Score: 1

      Granted, if the firm discovered that 80% of the R&D staff isn't actually doing anything outside of playing QuakeIII or something, then yeah, they should be cut, a little...

      I agree. Quake 3 sucks.

    10. Re:While I can possibly see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They are never going to release an innovative product for the future if they fire the engineers and cut R&D.

      But how will I get my BorderMangler patches and CornholeOne updates?! Oh the humanity!

    11. Re:While I can possibly see... by cHiphead · · Score: 1

      maybe you missed it, but mechanics are striking and major airlines are going bankrupt left and right. i'd rather have a corporate jet or two that I pay mechanics well to make sure I dont fall out of the sky.

      quite frankly, if I were novel, id give said investor the finger for trying to decimate R&D.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    12. Re:While I can possibly see... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Actually, some companies DO make money on their corporate jets, by renting them to other companies for executive flights.

      I don't know if Novell's jets are fully paid-for (however, Novell says it has "zero debt" so they may be) but if so, their upkeep may cost considerably less than a half-dozen executive tickets every month, at a couple grand apiece. You don't hire your own mechanic for that, you know -- you use the company (or one of several at a big airport) that does maintenance for private craft at your home airport.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    13. Re:While I can possibly see... by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      You've never owned an aircraft, have you? Buying an airplane is relatively cheap. You can get a good one for what you'd pay for a luxury car. The maintenance will kill you though. It seems like any problem you find will require you to tear the whole engine apart to fix it to the FAA's satisfaction.

      Just a few hours of operation of a jet aircraft will cost more than the first class airline tickets.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    14. Re:While I can possibly see... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      You don't even need to got to that extreme.

      You can own a partial interest in a jet, get much of the benefit of having your own jet while paying significantly less for it.

      This is something that is cheap enough for individuals, nevermind corporations.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    15. Re:While I can possibly see... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      No, but a friend's husband and his dad run a maintenance business at an airport. And I'm aware of stuff like ADs and the insane cost per minute for jet aircraft.

      Another thing, tho, and probably more to the point than upfront costs, is what it does for corporate image when you're trying to land a multimillion dollar enterprise contract. At that level, a private jet's upkeep costs might become a trivial marketing expense.

      My real point is that these shareholders are not looking beyond this week's almighty bottom line. Maybe the jets are a stupid and needless expense best dispensed with; or maybe they're marketing's #1 tool for swinging the most lucrative deals. We here at /. don't know, and I'll wager neither do the shareholders; all they see is that it's an item in the expense column.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    16. Re:While I can possibly see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked at Novell in the 90's. We saved a TON of money using the Jet as a shuttle bus between Utah and San Jose. Money and time.

    17. Re:While I can possibly see... by slash76 · · Score: 0

      I couldn't agree more. AD = flat directory, eDirectory = hierarchical directory
      Yes, I know you can create child directories in AD; but, it you plan on using Exchange you are back to a flat directory.

      --
      This signature intentionally left blank.
    18. Re:While I can possibly see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah, losing corporate jets is several orders of magnitude worse than any number of people losing their jobs. In the heads of those who make the decision at least.

      So, It should be no surprise if jets do stay and R&D does not.

    19. Re:While I can possibly see... by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``AD didn't kill Novell. Anyone that takes the time to seriously use eDirectory will understand that AD doesn't even begin to offer the same flexibility.''

      Well, just because AD is an inferior product doesn't mean it can't kill the competition. In fact, most of the well-known Microsoft technologies have killed off competing ones that were better.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    20. Re:While I can possibly see... by Korgan · · Score: 1

      Maybe so, but in this case its still wrong. eDirectory is still being sold and is available on a massive scale. Its the foundation of SuSE Linux Server products as well a Novell's Netware products. It is available for all platforms in popular use today, including Windows. And the cost can't be beat.

      For example, get a copy of Whitebox Enerprise Linux 4 (http://www.whiteboxlinux.org/ -- RHEL4 for free) and stick eDirectory on it makes for one exceptionally cheap, stable, supported directory server platform. At a price not even Microsoft can compete with.

      Also, don't forget that now the Netscape Directory is back on the market and about to get a new injection of life as well. Then theres the SunONE suite.

      I don't think Microsoft in this case is going to be able to own the directory services market in the same way the own the desktop market or the office suite market. I also think that if Novell were ever smart enough to license eDirectory at a $0 cost, they'd rapid gain massive market share. They don't have to open source it, just remove the price for adoption. Doing so would effectively provide an instant viable, user friendly, alternative to OpenLDAP for most $0 IT budget businesses and allow them to compete directly with Redhat's FedoraDS when that is finally fully GPL.

      I've played with the FedoraDS and compared with eDirectory, I'd much prefer eDirectory. However, the price of FedoraDS is right and both are far more userfriendly than OpenLDAP.

      Active Directory has never given me anything but headaches and while OpenDirectory has some excellent tools, its not the same without the Aqua gui ;-) SunONE is just... well... Bloated. :-)

      Sorry, way off the original tangent... But you get that.

  4. Re:Merge! by LazyBoyWrangler · · Score: 1

    This kind of stuff is why a lot of people tire of reading /. Not funny, not a contribution to the discussion and pointless karma whoring.

  5. I hope they don't... by astrashe · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope they don't keep the planes and fire the R&D people. But that's sort of what I expect they'll do.

    1. Re:I hope they don't... by Vermyndax · · Score: 1

      If they do that, then they deserve whatever Fate hands them.

  6. Why does it have to happen...... by amodm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    that investment firms and R&D don't go together well......

    I know that not everyone in R&D is a brilliant scientist, but in the long run, its the R&D that helps the industry move forward

    On a side note however, anything worthwhile coming out of Novell's R&D these days ?

    1. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a few months ago, in a Slashdot linked article, Novell was discussing releasing their Directory Services system on Linux in a very open way.

          There was significant talk about how nifty the Novel Directory Services GUI is and other things like that.

          I didn't dive deep into the article, but I am looking forward to giving that a go on my servers, once it is fully released for Linux.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    2. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Novell mail/calendar server and clients are quite good, comparable to Microsoft's Office Suite and portable to other systems. Perhaps their involvement with SuSE can give them a good platform to sell their products with, especially if they fire everyone who had anything to do with the YaST management tool and replace it with
      Webmin for almost all its uses.

    3. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by cpthowdy · · Score: 3, Informative

      What do you mean, fully released? eDirectory has been running on Linux for like 5 years now...

    4. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by richlv · · Score: 1

      "Novell was discussing releasing their Directory Services system on Linux in a very open way."

      i think that emphasis is on "very open way" in this case

      --
      Rich
    5. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the current trend is let little companies do R&D and survive or not. If they do well buy them out.

      Of course what ends up happening after they buy out is like picking a flower, it tends to kill what once made it bloom in the first place.

    6. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by mmport80 · · Score: 1

      but in the long run, its the R&D that helps the industry move forward

      In the long run we are all dead - shareholders too, believe it or not.

      It is easier to see how improvements for the short term (e.g. cost cutting) can benefit a firm's bottom line, than R&D.

      That's why investors go for short term bets - it's flawed I know, but understandable and logical - less risk is involved.

    7. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by Trepalium · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you look at all the proposals in that article, none of them are really for Novell's benefit. A $500M share repurchase program would push the share prices up, while depleting Novell's cash. Divesting their divisions would largely hurt the company's integration between their products. But again, it would raise money for the company, and bolster the stock prices.

      The entire "proposal" seems to me is an attempt bump the stock price up so they can sell off. I seriously doubt they have the best interests of the corporation in mind. Their proposal has shades of recent HP management -- hitting short term goals (Profit!!), while ignoring the long term health of the company.

      As for Novell R&D, they've got iFolder, Hula mail and calendar server, and Mono. There's a few other things on Novell's Forge site, but they're not as "sexy" or even as useful as those other projects.

      --
      I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
    8. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      I believe the article was talking about releasing it as an open source or completely free release, hoping to make up money in consulting and support fees.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    9. Re:Why does it have to happen...... by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 1

      Sell your assests, fire your engineers, use the money to buy back stock...yeah, that will increase shareholder value (if you sell off at the right point.) Seems like this sort of obvious pressure to direct a companies actions to the benefit of a few should be illegal, doesn't it? Finance shouldn't be about the gutting of infrastructure for the pillage of a few.

  7. "its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by starseeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know about Novell, so perhaps they do have too many people, but I must say I'm rather alarmed the article mentions R&D being overstaffed and no other department. Most companies don't go all out hiring R&D folks to begin with - that's one of the things that makes Google so unusual - so they don't tend to be overstocked in R&D in the first place. I wonder if this fits in with the recent trend in corporate America to view R&D as a luxury and money sinkhole. Since the benefits don't show up next quarter, chop them off to look better in short term costs. Never mind five or ten years down the road when you need new products to stay competitive and don't have any.

    Does ANYBODY in the US think long term anymore and still have influence in corporate or government circles? Maybe they're all thinking that if everybody else is also dumping R&D, everyone will still be competitive, and it will only be the consumer that gets stuck with static technology and gradually decreasing quality. (Price wars with no quality differential do that, since consumers tend to be bad in the short term at distinguishing good products from bad.)

    --
    "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
    1. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh just buy out some startup that spent its cash on RD and developed something cool. Why think for yourself, thats hard.

    2. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Current trends seem to indicate that R&D is best "procured" rather than done in-house. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways, but mostly, they just buy the small companies and individuals that make cool new stuff and call it their own. Kinda sucks how parasitic the corporate worlds have become.

    3. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by unother · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's more pernicious than that, even, when looked at directly:

      Company A slashes its research budget. Stock price rises in response.

      Two researchers bootstrap a new research effort and eventually win venture capital. No longer in control of the enterprise due to the need for greater capital for their effort, it begins to bear fruit.

      Company A comes back in, and "buys" the startup from the venture capitalists with their inflated stock.

      As you can see, in this admittedly terse example, the financiers win in every sense of the word here. The researchers are forced into a fight-or-starve mode, and they do not get much overall benefit from their research. "On the books", however, it's a win-win scenario: for the original company, and the intermediary financiers (the VCs).

    4. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Decameron81 · · Score: 1

      Innovation is not a priority anymore for many companies. Marketting, arrangements with competitiors, patents and several other beautiful things provide them with alternate and easier routes to the same goal.

      Just my 2 cents.

      --
      diegoT
    5. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Otter · · Score: 1
      Kinda sucks how parasitic the corporate worlds have become.

      I work in R&D (actually, in D) at a Huge Corporation that prides itself on having a large internal research effort and ridicules competitors who in-license most of their stuff.

      But, really -- beyond bragging rights, who cares? It's not obvious to me why giving money to inventive people after they make something is so much more shameful than giving it to them while they make something.

    6. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by csteinle · · Score: 2, Funny

      Admit it. CompanyX is HP, isn't it? ;-)

    7. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by fungai · · Score: 5, Informative

      Cutting costs to satisfy short term profit/cash flow to the detrement of long term profits is a management strategy called harvesting. It's usually a sign of a company in serious decline. Now you know where HP's heading.

    8. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by __aajwxe560 · · Score: 1

      You are not far from the truth. It appears that our economy is driven more towards large companies now simply churning out product at the most competitive rate possible, probably because of increasing global pressures on the bottom line. Historically, American companies would churn out product, but also budget departments to come out with many great new innovative ideas in-house. R&D will affect this bottom line. When you spent $50 million dollars to research a new idea, and then bring it to market, shortly afterwards a Chinese knockoff shows up that costs 1/3 the price, and they never even had to put any money into R&D. To compete against this notion, there is the desire to eliminate the R&D from the budget to make your pricing more competitive. For example, Dell does not innovate, it simply churns out product. Compaq at one time would innovate and come out with new ideas, yet Dell has continually been taking away marketshare from them. Another example, Toyota and Honda market their own internally designed hybrid vehicles. Ford has not kept up on this with their own R&D, and so instead is licensing the hybrid technology from Toyota.

      Innovation these days instead comes from small companies, whom are promptly snapped up at the sight of a great new design. The modern economy where large companies dominate most factions of the corporate landscape prevent these small companies from ever competing on a level playing field, so for many of them, the ultimate success/goal is to get bought out. It can be argued either way whether this is better or worse. For example, the found of Amgen, a drug company, founded his company after becoming frustrated with trying to perform some cutting edge R&D work at another large corporate drug company. Many of that particular company's processes and procedures inhibited the ability for many scientists to freely think. He seized the opportunity to instead start a small company in a less desirable area, and created an atmosphere that was very open and really promoted new developments as its core purpose. Surely this is a more efficient use of money towards R&D. Instead of these same scientists needing to jump through various corporate hoops to meet strict company requirements, they had an open lab atmosphere and were able to do some pretty amazing things.

    9. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by infochuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Does ANYBODY in the US think long term anymore...

      To be perfectly fiar, it's not 'poeple in the US'; it's investment banking firms in the US.

      "Best Idiot Making I"

    10. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Live_in_Dayton · · Score: 2, Informative

      This system also means that a talented researcher can go start a company, develop an innovative product(s) and then sell the company. The entrepreneur should make far more money this way than working as a researcher their whole life. Capitalism works!

    11. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NEVER, huh...wow, that's a bold statement. I mean, you put it in all caps. Good thing a visionary like you is at the helm. NEVER. Wow.

    12. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Reziac · · Score: 1

      And looking at the prices some companies are paying to acquire other companies, many of which then go entirely to waste (even if they weren't bought for the express purpose of killing them), it occurs to me that over the long term, it is probably more cost-effective to have your own in-house R&D.

      But that benefits neither today's shareholders nor tomorrow's speculators. -- What happened to benefiting your customers for today, tomorrow, and the future, so as to have a steady and predictable income??

      As I mention in another post, I think it would behoove companies to look seriously at going back to being privately held, to avoid being at the mercy of shortsighted investors. Yeah, so they won't have the piles of investors' cash to play with, but lacking that slushpile, maybe then they'd be more interested in attracting loyal *customers*.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    13. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost every company does... regardless of how stupid many slashdotters seem to be. It's a matter of how many R&D dollars and where and when to spend them. These are called *choices* which you have to make in business.
      "corporations" are run by you and me.

    14. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...and how many startups have you successfully launched: visionary?

      Now, at my previous startup there was a guy doing the "CEO thing" while the founder and "visionary" just kind of supervised everything. The CEO type was an ex-VP from IBM. Your attitude towards VC's would probably send him to the floor giggling hysterically.

      He would always tell us that you always have to count your fingers and toes when after dealing with VC's. You can't just jump at them like they're offering free money. There's usually a very nasty catch.

      IOW, you have to be sure to remain in control. It may be better to turn them away.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    15. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      Kinda sucks how parasitic the corporate worlds have become.

      So instead of being paid salaries, the brilliant researchers get chunks of startups that get bought out. Yeah, it sucks to be a researcher!

      Big companies have always been parasites, but being the "host organisms" isn't so bad. Lather, rinse, repeat.

    16. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good guess, but no actually. Johnson Controls, in the controls division. Siemens started taking all our contracts and hired around 5 of my bosses in 2 years. Not sure if siemens does their own R&D though...

    17. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by jafac · · Score: 1

      Never mind five or ten years down the road when you need new products to stay competitive and don't have any.

      then, you just buy your "bloated" competitor, sell their preoducts, and lay off their R&D, and open a call-center in Pune. When the execs are fat on inflated stock options, and sales start to decline again, buy another competitor. Repeat until you're a monopoly.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    18. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      In most cases, it's better to let it sink, get an Angel investor, or pass the hat around to smaller investors. VC money very often has all kinds of gotchas associated with it- and you more often than not get FAR more than you'd ever realistically need.

      The only time VC money's really of any use is when you know you're going to be paying back the "loan" quickly and you're in something that will end up being capital intensive. That'd be the case with my company that's working on getting their funding via that route. Most businesses should NOT be seeking this money and probably ought to NOT be taking it if it's offered to them anyway.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    19. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Sivaram_Velauthapill · · Score: 1

      R&D and Marketing are usually the first one to go when companies are in trouble... Ironically, these two are the most important in most organizations yet cutting them is more common than cutting SGA or management pay/perks...

      --
      Sivaram Velauthapillai
      Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places ;)
    20. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by unother · · Score: 1

      Yes, admittedly so. However, they're called "Angel Investors" for a reason--they fly in from a little place called Heaven... if you're blessed.

      As for wealthy relatives, well--hopefully you have a wealthy relative.

      I think it's safe to say that, if the options were great, VCs wouldn't even exist. The worst thing of course is knowing that the money exists because of extensive insider financial pyramiding. The system is frighteningly stacked.

    21. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by unother · · Score: 1

      And looking at the prices some companies are paying to acquire other companies, many of which then go entirely to waste (even if they weren't bought for the express purpose of killing them), it occurs to me that over the long term, it is probably more cost-effective to have your own in-house R&D.

      Ah, were that so in the wonderful world of finance. But of course it is not. Staff costs are overhead, and paid out of current income. Thus it behooves a company to reduce its capital costs, i.e. the costs generated by its consumption of capital. In-house labor is one of those costs--and it is a significant one. As an asidem this reminds of someone's recent statement on here that waxed on about the seemingly beneficial effects of drug companies endowing universities with research grants. Well... when you consider the stipulations attached, and the ultimate beneficiaries, and the financial shell game that is being played--suddenly that "Rich Uncle" looks a little more like "Uncle Scrooge".

      But that benefits neither today's shareholders nor tomorrow's speculators. -- What happened to benefiting your customers for today, tomorrow, and the future, so as to have a steady and predictable income??

      I'll tell you what: speculative finance.

      Simply put, with the way the game is played today in the US of A (and by extension the world at large) is that it is, on the balance sheet, more beneficial for a company to reduce costs; and then borrow at low cost to buyback stock; and then use its inflated stocks to buy competitors and potential future competitors.

      This speculative finance games includes a thousand-and-one balance sheet maneuvers which can be used to further buttress--again, solely on the balance sheet--a company's fundamentals, and thus be used to further the appearance of being some economic colossus, increasing its net power.

      The only difference between what happened to WorldCom and Enron, and the way most other companies play the game, is merely a matter of degree.

    22. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Oh, like in the "Merchant of Venice"?

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    23. Re:"its 'overstaffed' R&D department?" by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Excellent explanation. Sad to say you're entirely correct. -- I've about decided the stock market is [hyperbole] the root of all evil [/hyperbole] because of its influence on corporate behaviour... and I say that as a small stockholder in several major corporations. I'd prefer to have lower stock value and better products, but my piddly votes don't count for much against the will of the megaholders (not to mention some CEOs' greed).

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  8. Public company must do the best for shareholders.. by Pecisk · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...news at eleven. I actually RTFA and yeah, there are some issues about management, but is more like communication problem between shareholders and management, and I guess it will be soon cleared out.

    I repeat, it is NOT about finansial problems in Novell, they have some loss, but they are doing quite fine in large perspective.

    --
    user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  9. Cut through the BS by bigtallmofo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    targeting Novell's two corporate jets, its "overstaffed" R&D department

    I wonder by cutting its overstaffed R&D department if they really just mean move them all to China?

    I guess the execs will need those corporate jets to fly back and forth to China in style so they can visit their lower-paid works occasionally.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
  10. The slashdot angle by bfree · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From the article (emphasis mine):

    The investment firm (Blum) has also called on Novell to increase its investment in Linux and open source software through partnerships and acquisitions to move "further up the stack".

    Blum's proposal is broadly similar to CSFB analyst Jason Maynard's suggestion that Novell should focus on software services rather than consulting, increase its emphasis on open source software, and repurchase company stock

    So at least the pressue isn't on for them to dump Suse/Linux which was my initial fear on reading the slashdot post. In fact if anything they aree being encouraged to place more focus on it showing even these (presumably) hardened business types can finally see the long term value in FOSS.
    --

    Never underestimate the dark side of the Source

    1. Re:The slashdot angle by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Or it could be an effort to have them dump the more profitable divisions and be stuck with divisions that provide no revenue in the short run in order to kill them.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    2. Re:The slashdot angle by bfree · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, I'm sure that is what an investment firm with a 5% stake is after. Those jets are certainly one of the more profitable divisions.

      --

      Never underestimate the dark side of the Source

    3. Re:The slashdot angle by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Oy, veh... I reeeally shouldn't make comments first thing in the morning. You make me wanna moderate down mine own comments.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  11. Re:Merge! by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

    no, karma whoring is putting up something informative or interesting to improve my karma score, making a tacky crap joke may gain a few funny mods, but it usually ends up with a net loss of karma (due to the inevitable overrated mods).

    I type whatever crap comes to mind at the time of reading, if others laugh or are informed, good, if not, then I don't care but I've at least contributed to the discussion in my own way.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  12. Overstaffed R&D? by erroneus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Novell is still in a changing state in finding itself again. Microsoft's taking over the server market has left Novell perpetually staggering. While Novell still has a server stake and their stake is being re-situated on a Linux base, they need to apply all they can on R&D in order to get themselves wedged into the desktop market. For shops that are already Novell, adopting a strong and maintainable desktop environment based on Linux would be less difficult that convincing an all-Microsoft shop. They have a foot in the door but they need to apply a lot more R&D to make another step.

    These damned short-sighted share-holders, while on the short term build captial and value in a company, seem to be the long-term downfall of creativity and improvement. (Not to mention the driving influence in removing ethics from business practices to the point of criminal acts.)

    1. Re:Overstaffed R&D? by WetCat · · Score: 1

      I do not agree. Overstaffed R&D at the expense of sales is not a good thing. Especially for a company which can (and really should!) thrive and use the R&D from linux contributors, a good way may be even to reward the actual projects teams instead of having engineers hired, by donating to projects directly, for example using sourceforge system of donations.
        They need good marketing and sales, what worth R&D with nobody using their (superior) technology because of ignorance and lack of info.

  13. F/OSS, meet Wall Street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't imagine two more disparate mindsets. There is no way Wall Street's greed and F/OSS's idealism can be simultaneously realized. If the managers at Novell had any spine, they'd tell Wall Street to take a hike, and instead worry about running the business. You can have a healthy profitable business without being obsessed with the cancer of promising ever-increasing returns to investers. If Novell wants to survive, they should go private, focus on making their customers happy, accept reasonable pay for their work, and not feel inadequate for lack of achieving world domination. Or they could do what every other Wall Street whore does, promise the impossible, sacrifice quality an people's lives in the process, build a lot of sand castles, and ultimately add nothing of permanant value to the world.

    1. Re:F/OSS, meet Wall Street by Brunellus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Once you have tasted the fruit of the Tree of Public Investment, never again will you enter the paradise of telling the Street to get stuffed.

  14. 400 NetWare engineers?? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't suppose that means 400 CNEs.... they must be talking about 400 software engineers working on Netware.

    Since they're proposing to cut 400 guys, that must mean that the actual Netware development team is some number larger than 400. Why so many guys are still working on a dead-end product with no future is beyond me.

    1. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by bonius_rex · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Why so many guys are still working on a dead-end product with no future is beyond me.

      I think Novell is in a hard spot wrt Netware. I admin about 50 Netware servers. *I* know that I can do everything I need on Open Enterprise Server. There is no technical reason to carry on with Netware, but convincing my higher-ups that Linux is no longer "just some hippie hobby thing" takes time.

      I'm afraid that if Novell were to discontinue support for Netware today, my management might decide it would be just as easy to migrate to Windows as to OES.

      Novell has to keep Netware support rolling along, while at the same time convincing PHBs (like mine) that Linux is perfectly acceptable for large scale mission critical deployments. Dropping a significant number of Netware engineers could cause Novell to lose customers if they are not very careful.

    2. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      That makes companies make sure to invest in Novell products as they are still supporting a "dead" product.

      How it is dead and why Novell is pronounced dead on Slashdot everyday I have no clue.

    3. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Novell has to keep Netware support rolling along, while at the same time convincing PHBs (like mine) that Linux is perfectly acceptable for large scale mission critical deployments.

      I always thought of Netware as a product, rather than an OS.

      If the next version of Netware looked exactly the same, could still run the NLM's you have, but the kernel was replaced with Linux, and there was no perceptible difference, would anybody care? (OK, I haven't run Netware since Linux became stable so I don't know if there really are NLM's anymore)

      Would the next upgrade then be an easier sell (but sir, we're already running Linux...)?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      This makes me think that Novel should rollout an upgrade to Netware that is simply a rebranding of OES.... if they took enough time to port over the look and feel and made sure it 'behaved' the same way as the previous Netware but was actually an OES would anyone care...??

      For 'higher-ups' it would be a lot more comfortable ie: the new name wouldn't scare them off. "Oh it's an upgrade? Great, that's way better than switching to some unproven platform! Buy it."

      Novel could create documentation that looks just like Netware, etc. to complete the pseudo-illusion.

      If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

      Nice to know you Netware, Long live Netware!

      voila... problem solved. (though Legacy Netware engineers may still lose their jobs if they aren't up to speed on OES).

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    5. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      400 NetWare engineers!? What dark orifice did they pull that number from? While there is still active development on NetWare and the services that comprise it (most of which are also being ported to work on other platforms), there's nowhere near that many guys & gals that you could consider "NetWare" engineers here at Novell... Sheesh. Clearly these "analysts" have no interest in the long-term viability of the company and are looking more like day traders.

    6. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      Well, if you are running two physcial servers, then the next version of Netware does look exactly the same, can run NLMs, and somewhat be replaced by Linux. Open Enterprise Server, which is the upgrade path from Netware, is your typical incremental services changes, except that those services can run either on a Linux (SuSE) or Netware kernel. Linux and Netware servers can co-exist in the same cluster (2 way clusters being included in the base price of Netware since 5.0, and still with OES), including sharing Novell Storage Services resources.

      So you just run all your old legacy NLMs on a Netware OES server, and everything on a Linux OES systems. Actually, the licensing is somewhat tricky: its per user; you can run an infinite number of Netware servers, but some ratio of users :: Linux systems, so you might want to run everything on Netware except for some Linux specific things on Linux.

      I say you would need two physcial servers to have a NLM and Linux able Netware, but Novell is working on getting Netware running on Xen, to the point its been a (staged) demo. So you can have a Linux OES system with Netware running under Xen, with the very few remaining NLMs you need.

    7. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      Well, OES is an upgrade from Netware. Netware customers with support contracts have already payed for OES.

      You seem to be confused with what OES is. OES is all the services of Netware (improved as they are, same deal as any major version upgrade) that runs on either Netware or SUSE. You can run OES with out any Linux at all.

      Novell has previously released many of the services that traditionaly came with Netware on Linux. NDS has been multiplatform for damm near a decade. The released a bunch of these services in a packaged and polished sytem as Novell eNterprise Linux Services a couple of years ago; NNLS could happly work inside a generally Netware/NDS operation... OES takes this to the next step - managing OES/Netware and OES/Linux is exactly the same, save for the very low level OS stuff. And most of that has all been polished available via a common management interface.

      Netware administrators have little to worry about.. Netware itself requires very little maintanance - the 99% of their work which doesnt involve Netware proper will work exactly the same under OES/Linux (at least as similar as any major version change). As of NDS, Netware 4.0, cira 1993, you dont manage servers; you manage the network; what OS network services run under is almost entirely irrelevent.

    8. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      I guess my point is more along the lines of... they need to market OES under the Netware name if possible so that executives don't immediately balk... I know it's just a name, you know it's just a name but execs tend to think that a new name means a different product... in this case it's working against Novell, they attempted to inspire companies to buy the new and improved Netware via a new name that sounds better (it has the word Enterprise in it)... but it's apparently flown back in their faces by creating doubt as to it's maturity and stability as a product.

      I'm not confused BTW, just ignorant ;-p

      thanks for the education.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    9. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Okay, i also see that OES comes in two flavors, Netware and SUSE... so my marketing plan falls apart when the CIO looks at the config specs for the migration upgrade and says "Hey this is Linux, not Netware... is Linux good enough? How much will this cost us to migrate to Linux?" even though it will look and run the same... yeah, they just have to roadmap a planned stop to support for Netware and make sure the customers know that they have X months or years to make the switch if they want continued support, and stop selling the Netware option.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    10. Re:400 NetWare engineers?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are missing an important point.

      Yes, the Netware KERNEL itself is sort of dead-end in the long-term (as of now they still keep its development at the same speed as they have for the last several years).

      However, the SERVICES that ran on top of it (filesystem, file&print server, clustering, management tools, etc.) were all ported to Linux and are not dead-end at all. They will be developed for quite some time and will work on both OSs. I guess most of these 400 engineers work on these services, not on the NetWare OS.

      Btw it seems that most Linux folks have the impression that the Linux strategy means that Novell will abandon all that they have developed in the last 20 years and will offer its customers solutions based on OpenLDAP, Samba, vi, shell scripts, etc. That's not really the case.

  15. Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down. by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just yesterday I was cycling through the KVM on a rack of machines in a server room, and one of the boxes, apparently untouched for over 3 three years, had puked just that morning (on a RAM hiccup, or something similar), and did the old Novell equivalent of a BSD. The funny thing (other than the timing) was that no one with any interest in the infrastructure could come up with the slightest idea what that machine was actually supposed to be doing. Right now the plan is to leave it off until some dev guy screams (or, payroll doesn't go through, or another equally dramatic land-mine type event).

    But the point is, that machine would appear to have gone from Important To Somebody Who Really Liked Novell to, well, Complete Obscurity in a pretty short time. Not entirely representative of Novell's current corporate state of affairs, but in retrospect, the whole thing was sort of poetic. Plus, the users in question are now about to pay for an audit of what the hell actually is running in their server room.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  16. Re:Merge! by Gherald · · Score: 0
    no, karma whoring is putting up something informative or interesting to improve my karma score, making a tacky crap joke may gain a few funny mods, but it usually ends up with a net loss of karma (due to the inevitable overrated mods).
    Overrated mods do not affect karma any more than funny mods do.

    The IIIs are (+) karma, and Flame/Troll/Red. are (-) karma. That is all.
  17. Set it up for a sale... by MosesJones · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Cut back the corporate trappings, strip down to a core offering and get ready for a sale. Stripping down R&D to just what the market wants will help with that as well.

    IBM to buy Novell?
    Sun to buy Novell?
    Private Equity to buy Novell?

    Or alternative, Novell to flounder as they loose sight of any strategic direction while they look for a market exit.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Set it up for a sale... by jg21 · · Score: 1, Informative

      LinuxWorld's Mark Hinkle doesn't think Sun will buy Novell by the look of it, he thinks they'll buy Red Hat. Or maybe IBM will buy Red Hat. Looks like Novell isn't at the head of the line for takeover yet.

    2. Re:Set it up for a sale... by Flounder · · Score: 2, Funny
      Or alternative, Novell to flounder as they loose sight of any strategic direction while they look for a market exit.

      Well, if I'm gonna take Novell, I'll have to talk to the home owners association about parking spaces for those jets. And I've got room here for maybe a few dozen netware engineers. The rest will have to go in storage.

      --

      No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

    3. Re:Set it up for a sale... by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      IBM buys Novell...

      SUN buys Redhat...

      it fits, considering their characters...

      --life is a bitch, you either become one or get killed by one...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  18. Re:sounds pretty shady by killeena · · Score: 1

    Before we go and fire off some letters to Congress, I would imagine it would be a good idea to have some proof of these misdeeds. Unless this is supposed to be sarcasm, and in that case, haha.

    --
    Freedom would be not to choose between black and white but to abjure such prescribed choices. -Theodor Adorno
  19. Re:sounds pretty shady by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is about time to write to you Congress rep to asking that Congress demand that the Justice Department investigate this abuse of the courts to stiffle competition

    Um... I don't think "pressure from investors" is quite the same as "abuse of the courts."

    Since we (pretty much) know MS...

    Yes, they were also behind the fake moon landings, and are really Halliburton's Seattle office. *sigh*

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  20. What about Mono? by MobyDisk · · Score: 5, Informative

    I hope this doesn't harm the Mono project, which Novell has been a vital part of. I have great hope for this project. But I'm not sure how it helps Novell's bottom line, so it might be the kind of thing that goes on the chopping block.

    1. Re:What about Mono? by fputs(shit,+slashdot · · Score: 1

      should leave fuding of patent poison to company it serve teh best.... Microsoft

      --
      I am the bastard of base minus 12! Turing was the ejaculate of my complete machine!
    2. Re:What about Mono? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, in an important sense Mono cannot go on the chopping block. It is GPL project.

  21. Because slashdot hates corps doing R&D by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or at least, article summaries that completely miss the point about true R&D costs get a lot of screen time. When large companies engage in expensive R&D, they cover those costs by (gasp!) charging people for their products. True for new AMD chips, true for super-duper antibiotics, and true (however indirectly, and not obvious to a lot of people) for Google, too.

    Does ANYBODY in the US think long term anymore and still have influence in corporate or government circles?

    I think the better question is, do many companies still have the balls to explain to their customers why fancy new products cost what they cost? And, does the nitwitted consuming end of the culture, so saturated with the pernicious concept that every company charging them for a product or service is "evil," still have the intellectual honesty to look at the larger picture? Calling it like it is has become so unfashionable that we're just sinking in a swamp of mediocrity (or trying to, it seems) rather than teaching basic economics in grade school, where what's left of critical thinking might still be salvaged. By the time people become consumers and investors, they're so disconnected from causal relationships that they can't connect the dots between investment, innovation, time, risk, and cool new technologies.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Because slashdot hates corps doing R&D by demachina · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Chinese have developed some really slick solutions to this problem:

      A. Reverse engineer products developed at great expense by Western companies and then undersell them at a fraction of the price because you don't have any R&D expense and your labor is cheaper. Reverse engineering costs something but nothing compared to what original R&D costs.

      B. Place conditions on Western business who want access to your markets that they transfer manufacturering and R&D to China and employ Chinese workers. Inevitably all of the companies IP is transfered in the process, plus all the new IP will be developed in China by Chinese workers and engineers, at the expense of the Western companies. Once the Chinese are up to speed they quit and start their own company doing exactly the same thing and put their former benefactors out of business.

      The only flaw in this plan is eventually all of their Western benefactors will go out of business and they will eventually have to start paying for their own R&D. This is probably OK because at that point they will own the world.

      --
      @de_machina
  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. well maybe by suezz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ""We are disappointed in not only your failure to consider our proposals but also at the clear lack of urgency in implementing a strategic plan,""

    Gee maybe if they weren't busy trying to defend their business in frivolous lawsuits like sco then maybe they could concentrate and spend money on their actual business.

    Sounds like to me just a blowhard that either sco or microsoft or sun got a hold of to distract the company from the issues at hand.

    I fully support Novell in what they are they doing. Just because their busines model doesn't meet the standards of a convicted monopolist doesn't mean a thing. I got some of the longest uptimes on my servers from SUSE linux. To me that is what makes a business model. Fricken reliability - what a concept.

    Their NDS still rocks and runs on any platform. It blows Microsoft AD crap away.

    I am still waiting on sco's response to novell which I believe should be coming up real soon.

    1. Re:well maybe by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1
      SCOX has responded to Novell (check groklaw). Though the response is creative and not founded in reality, SCOX continues their fine tradition of shooting themselves in the foot by contradicting themselves in their own documements.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
  24. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  25. The real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is Novell making money? Ignore the stock price, that has little to nothing to do with if Novell operates at a profit or loss. If they are making money, tell the MBA's to go take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut. See also: Costco.

    1. Re:The real question by java.bean · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry, that's uninformed.

      Public ownership means the corporate executives have a duty to the shareholders to maximize their value (i.e. keep the stock price high). The shareholders are, after all, the owners. You don't tell the owners to go take a flying fuck.

      Even if they're making money, are they making enough money? Are they making the right strategic decisions? The shareholders invested a ton of capital in Novell, are the executives making the best use of it?

    2. Re:The real question by thunderbee · · Score: 1

      That of course is the problem (meaning I agree with what you wrote).

      Shareholders want to maximize immediate profits. This has little to do with the company's long-term interest. It probably goes against the company's long-term best interest as most "good" (for the company) decisions have only long-term results.

      --
      In my opinion, Scientology is a cult you should avoid.
    3. Re:The real question by rossifer · · Score: 1

      Public ownership means the corporate executives have a duty to the shareholders to maximize their value (i.e. keep the stock price high).

      That's simplistic, and if you understood the real, more complex answer, you'd realize how deeply you misunderstand what companies must do.

      There are plenty of companies who put other interests above the stockholder's interests. As long as these other interests are clearly described to potential shareholders (usually in the corporate charter, the corporate bylaws and mentioned/described in financial statements), the investors (owners) can pound sand.

      Even if they're making money, are they making enough money? Are they making the right strategic decisions? The shareholders invested a ton of capital in Novell, are the executives making the best use of it?

      With some broad caveats, it's not their call. The shareholder's decision is to invest or to withdraw investment with rare "confidence/no confidence" votes decided by an actual majority of outstanding share (not the 5% piping up here). Most shareholder lawsuits are about fraud or are part of larger power plays. Very few have to do with the quality of management and even fewer of those end up winning.

      A lot of people think that because shareholders are owners that all decisions must be made in accordance with shareholder desires. Management has been hired to fulfill one or more promises to various groups, those promises being spelled out in the corporate charter. If short-term shareholder gain is in the charter, then managment had better step up. The long-term interests of shareholders is much more common and much tougher to nail down to a few decisions in the here and now.

      Novell management will be able to argue quite convincingly that the proposals being mentioned here are not in the long term interest of Novell shareholders, but only in the interest of a few shareholders who wish to sell their stake. Acting in the interest of owners wishing to sell against the long term interest of all owners is the kind of behavior that will get you in very deep trouble very quickly.

      Regards,
      Ross

  26. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  27. Re:HELP! I JUST CAN'T STOP TROLLING SLASHDOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My first thought was to suggest you commit suicide, but then I realized that a weak willed loser like you might take the suggestion serriously instead of the joke it was meant as. So seriously, seek counseling. That help?

  28. Pirates ahoy by FishandChips · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, glad to see /. is keeping up with traditions as this one has been well covered on osnews.com for a day now.

    I guess a few ghastly, greedy "investors" fronted by teenage analysts are now circling Novell, scenting blood and booty. My understanding is that Novell is nowhere near profitability and the gap between declining Netware revenue and new Linux revenue is alarming. But Novell does have quite a lot of cash in hand and is entangled with IBM via the SuSE acquisition. I'd guess some of the Wall Street greed merchants are hoping for a takeover or a dismemberment, with IBM being greenmailed into picking up a very large tab on the Linux side because losing SuSE would be too painful for them.

    Of course, the little shits don't pitch it like that, just calling for better management.

    --
    Las qué passoun
    tournoun pas maï
    1. Re:Pirates ahoy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all of us read osnews thank you.
      At least on /. I can disagree with *cough*someone*cough* and not be flamed or banned.

    2. Re:Pirates ahoy by Sylven_1969 · · Score: 1

      I know hardly anything about the Linux OS still, even after five years of tinkering with it here and there. However from what I have seen, heard and tinkered with, SuSe is easily the Linux company that's in the best "position" to make a killing if they'll simply stretch themselves out into the MRP/ERP, CRM, BI and other true "business" programs. They should be pushing the hell out of SuSe Open Exchange Server as well cause as far as I can tell it's easily the best replacement product out there for MS Exchange Server.

      --
      Jay Dale "If you're not living on the edge then you're taking up too much space!"
    3. Re:Pirates ahoy by rm69990 · · Score: 1

      Ummmm...Novell had an overall profit over something like $30 million last year and $2 million this year. Yes, their revenue is declining, but they are not "nowhere near profitable" as you say. Are you sure you're not the teenage analyst?

  29. Dead End? by alistair · · Score: 4, Informative

    I can't agree that Netware is completly at a dead end. To be sure it isn't a rapidly growing market but it isn't shrinking so fast either, the last time I met my Novell salesperson he said they still had over 400 Million Netware user licences under maintenance. Even if they lose 10% per year that still deserves heavy R&D.

    Novell has a clear strategy here, with the latest Netware you can run either the Netware or SuSE kernel. My guess is that eventually Netware will ship with a Linux core by default but a number of people will continue to buy it for all the value add features. Within 5 years you will then see a single core O/S sold and you will then be able to buy services such as eDirectory, file and print management, Zenworks etc. as the value add profitable services.

    Novell simply can't move out of Netware quickly, many infrastructure systems rely on it (I know of one airline booking systems and 2 cash machine networks in the Uk which still rely on it and I'm sure there are many, many more).

    IBM made a huge mistake in abandoning OS/2 with nowhere for its customers (especially embedded system / POS customers) to move to. Novell has proved once again the value of their maintenance contracts by fully supporting all their existing OS customers until they have a smooth migration plan to SuSE.

    1. Re:Dead End? by lgarner · · Score: 2, Informative

      "To be sure it isn't a rapidly growing market but it isn't shrinking so fast either"

      It is shrinking. There are few, if any, shops converting to NetWare from another NOS, but there are a lot moving away. The only increases are likely to be within organizations which alreary have NetWare and need to expand.

      "with the latest Netware you can run either the Netware or SuSE kernel"

      That's OES that people are talking about. Novell can change it's name to NetWare if they like, but when discussing R&D and product lines, remember NetWare is a different animal than Linux.

      "My guess is that eventually Netware will ship with a Linux core by default but a number of people will continue to buy it for all the value add features."

      Exactly. Then, you have an OS with all the good parts of NetWare and without all the technical shortcomings.

      "Novell simply can't move out of Netware quickly, many infrastructure systems rely on it"

      True, and they should continue to provide paid support for some time, but that doesn't mean that they need to devote R&D resources to improving NetWare. Leverage those resources to getting Linux (OES) up to speed so it can be a drop-in replacement for NW. I don't expect support for Win95 these days, and at some point I won't expect it for NetWare.

      "IBM made a huge mistake in abandoning OS/2"

      Unless that line was losing money, as I suspect it was at the end.

    2. Re:Dead End? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      At their recent seminar, Novell said that they plan to kill the existing Netware line and replace it with a linux core, so you're dead-on there -- especially since most of those services you mention *already* run on linux. Personally I think killing Netware as we know it today is a mistake, but Novell's objective is to wind up with only one core technology to have to support, and they felt that they were best off with an end-to-end product line that offers everything from server OS to workstation desktop -- hence the move to linux and SuSE. Also, as I mention in another post, this move is intended to recapture the x86 server market. (They said that they already have 90% of the non-x86 server market, which is why they're not hurting for business.)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Dead End? by yukonc · · Score: 1

      400 Million Netware User Licenses? Let see, that would be 1 for every person in the US and the UK. Somehow I wouldn't trust that salesman for anything. One of the other posters said it well, I don't know anyone or have heard of any company that is migrating to Netware or OES. Only companies moving away from it. One thing the business world continues to demand is cheap and plentiful labor. Good Netware and Groupwise Engineers are hard to find, and the good ones want to make a lot more money than most Windows Engineers. This in itself is what drives a lot of companies away from Netware and Groupwise.

    4. Re:Dead End? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It is shrinking. There are few, if any, shops converting to NetWare from another NOS, but there are a lot moving away. The only increases are likely to be within organizations which alreary have NetWare and need to expand."

      Currently that's true, but I think the Linux core gives them a chance to change that. They are currently winning quite a few big customers outside the netware installed base with unix-to-linux migrations and identity management projects. Since Novell is now already a key vendor for them, it makes a lot of sense for these customers to look at the same company for more solutions (such as OES, GroupWise and ZEN), especially now that Novell has a much more full range of products than 5 years ago.

  30. Re:Typical network admin by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So you see if it makes a problem for someone to fix rather than ask first?

    Please actually read all of the words in a comment before jumping to that conclusion. We asked. Everybody. No one knows what role the machine is playing. No one working there has any Novell experience, and can't imagine actually choosing that platform for anything.

    And since the machine was crashy, we sure don't want to leave it cooking when it might be corrupting (or losing) data. Man you are the typical network admin

    No, I'm there to clean up after the "typical network admin" who let that machine into the rack, undocumented, with no information about what it does, for whom, if anything. Better to let some dead-end machine, with an unknown security arrangement - possibly including credentials from long-gone employees, hum along on the network, crashing sometimes as it sees fit, just keep doing its mysterious thing? The end users had no idea that the machine was there or might need attention, and they hadn't budgeted for any forensics work along those lines. The consensus among the users of the network was to power the machine down until more became obvious or could be discovered in a round of calls/e-mails to now-absent users.

    Nice smear, though! Did I really need to go into all of that just to make a point about creaky old Novell stuff lingering on a network? Have a swell day.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  31. Re:Merge! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This kind of stuff is why a lot of people tire of reading /. Not funny, not a contribution to the discussion and pointless karma whoring.
    As opposed, of course, to the countless droves flocking to ./ to read the non-funny, non-contributing bitching about about non-funny, non-contributing karma whoring :)

  32. Worrying for the future of Novell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like the investors want to run the company into the ground for short term profit.
    Sadly this is typical of Anglo Saxon capitalism.

  33. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this probably highlights the fact that you need to document what every machine in the server room is actually supposed to be doing. Spending a bit of time setting up a wiki or something and just documenting stuff will save you all a big headache in the long run.

  34. Messman is a Messmaker by tomme_gun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Jack Messman was CEO at the old Cambridge Technology Partners (CTP) before it merged with Novell. Somehow, he became CEO at Novell and has held the position for 5'ish years.
    During his time on the board at CTP, then as its CEO and now as CEO at Novell, company value and performance has gone down. Way down.
    I'm doubt his pay has. Though, his stock options must be underwater.
    Somehow he weathers these storms as he drives these companies into the ground.

    His previous experience was with Union Pacific Railroad, which seems quite different from these here technology companies. If he's in charge of a company then I'd short it. http://www.novell.com/company/bios/jmessman.html

    1. Re:Messman is a Messmaker by FishandChips · · Score: 1

      A doctor writes:

      "A Messman a day
      keeps profits at bay"

      "A Credit Suisse First Boston a day
      keeps ... aaarrgh" ... thud

      --
      Las qué passoun
      tournoun pas maï
    2. Re:Messman is a Messmaker by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 1

      To be fair, the dot-com bust negatively impacted many companies. Evaluation of the performance of a company's leadership should take that into account (which wouldn't necessarily change the conclusion in this case, but it wasn't taken into account at all in your post.)

  35. That Was Our Hidden Tunnel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    into your network.

    Would you please bring it back online again? We're unable to browse your CEO's e-mail without it.

  36. That's outrageous by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

    Yes, they were also behind the fake moon landings, and are really Halliburton's Seattle office.

    We should call Congress immediately!!!

    --
    ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
  37. The Jets make sense, but not the products by Rooktoven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why the hell would they want to sell Zenworks? That's probably still the best mass software deployment engine out there and it has been for over 6 years. Likewise Groupwise is another product that has a huge base and cements a Novell presence in the workplace.

    I'm all for doing more for Linux, etc. But Novell would be stupid to give up a couple of their secondary jewels. (The prime jewel being NDS of course...)

    --

    Acquiescence leads to obliteration
    1. Re:The Jets make sense, but not the products by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I had the same thought. To my understanding, ZENworks and Groupwise are among their major cash cows. One has to question the motivation behind the list of stuff these investors want Novell to ditch -- it sounds more like an exit strategy, or even corporate raiding to me.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  38. Legacy Software by Sylven_1969 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Everyone knows that there are still places out there with Novell 3.12 servers still in place and cranking away day after day. I do agree that 400(+/- a few) Netware Engineers is ridiculous. Keep about a dozen of the best you have to support your legacy systems from now till Hell Freezes over if that's what it takes but don't alienate and leave those that supported the companies beginnings high and dry of tech-support. They should at least offer the rest of those engineers re-training in Linux as apposed to just cutting the guilotine rope and letting it fall on them. Of course the shareholders are only interested in the green bottom line and re-training high dollar employees is much more expensive than hiring in entry level green meat. I think that companies should have a legal responsibility to those employees that stay with them for years through thick and thin. I've seen too many people pour their entire lives into a job/company for 30 years just to be cut loose at a moments notice without as much as an explanation and/or "thanks for your years of loyalty to us". I personally think that it should be a law that for every five years you work for a place they owe you 1 year of salary based on your yearly average over that 5 years. That way if they decide to dump you for no reason you have a year to recover mentally/emotionally/financially from the impact of what can be a very trying time in a persons life. I know we have unemployment but that's not the same, I'm not talking about a percentage paid to you by the company I mean that if I got fired today I would have the next 12 months pay come in just like normal and I could take my time planning my next career move. Oh well , nothing but a pipe dream I'm sure, dreaming isn't so bad a thing though :)

    --
    Jay Dale "If you're not living on the edge then you're taking up too much space!"
    1. Re:Legacy Software by hyc · · Score: 1
      Keep about a dozen of the best you have to support your legacy systems from now till Hell Freezes over if that's what it takes
      The best engineers will be the first to leave for better jobs as soon as cuts start happening. If you're lucky management will be able to identify the deadwood and cut them, leaving just the mediocre people who didn't feel like job-hunting to stick around. But most PHBs are too stupid to recognize deadwood vs productive staff, so you're just as likely to have the mediocre people cut and the deadwood remain.
      --
      -- *My* journal is more interesting than *yours*...
    2. Re:Legacy Software by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      But how do you know a dozen is enough? *Maybe* they really need 400? **Maybe** they really need 600, but have been running lean because they dont really have the wherewithal to do more. We dont know, and neither ( probably ) do those offering the advice from wall street.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
  39. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by infochuck · · Score: 1

    I've been wondering why my account there has been down.

  40. "its 'overstaffed' OSS department?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Current trends seem to indicate that R&D is best "procured" rather than done in-house. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways, but mostly, they just buy the small companies and individuals that make cool new stuff and call it their own."

    Blender. OpenOffice.

  41. Investors want to turn Novell into HP by Reziac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The investors obviously looked at the "success" of HP's gutting their R&D Dept. and decided that Novell should emulate HP.

    Methinks it's time for more companies to consider going back to being privately held (as Corel did), so as not to be at the mercy of investors who can't see beyond today's bottom line.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    1. Re:Investors want to turn Novell into HP by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it would be better if that didn't happen.

          Then young, up and coming startups can reap the rewards of being able to spend the money where they need to spend it and companies that have no R&D can either pay well more then the R&D costs they would have spent to buy the technology from the little firm or find themselves sinking into obscurity as the newcomer overtakes their position as market leader.

          If this happens enough times, perhaps R&D will become a priority once again and possibly spur on a new age of scientific needs in business, thus forcing science into the forefront of learning.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    2. Re:Investors want to turn Novell into HP by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I make that point elsewhere too, that in-house R&D is probably a lot more cost-effective in the long run.

      That's a point, tho -- what if that stocholder money *had* to be partly invested in R&D?? might lead to more successful startups, without the irresponsible cash-flinging of venture capital.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  42. Re:HELP! I JUST CAN'T STOP TROLLING SLASHDOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Just one question: why would you want to stop trolling slashdot?

    I just love baiting the slashbots and bashing janitors.

  43. MBA Speak by Ed+Almos · · Score: 0

    "The letter coincided with a call from financial analyst house Credit Suisse First Boston for Novell to improve its vision, strategy, and execution in order to become a more profitable business."

    OK, let's go through these one by one.

    How does a company improve its 'vision'? We've all seen these lofty vision statements which mean nothing when put to the test.

    I'll give you the second one. Any business deserves a strategy or a plan.

    The final lofty goal, Novell should 'improve its execution'. I wonder who they will kill next?

    This, ladies and gentlemen, is what happens when the world is run by accountants and MBAs.

    Ed Almos
    Budapest, Hungary

    --
    The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacitus, 56-120 A.D.
    1. Re:MBA Speak by mattite · · Score: 1
      Actually, as an accountant, my primary concern is making sure that the books balance. It's the management types that like cutbacks, mostly because they pocket the savings.

  44. and soon you'll see tools... bs by Medicated4Life · · Score: 1

    If I had a dollar every time someone typed the phrase, "and soon you'll see tools from both Novell and Red Hat that shape the linux server and desktop market", I wouldn't be posting on slashdot, or at least I'd be posting from a nice beach somewhere.

  45. Fucking morons! Here's a better idea. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    Fire/lay off 40% of the most unproductive managers and middle managers

    Cut HR by 20%

    Increase marketing/sales half of what HR is cut by (in number of bodies) so that adoption of Linux from Netware can be increased (thus naturally relieving the NetWare burden)

    (If attrition is high) Give a 20% increase in salary to new hires and pay increase to the 50% most productive coders/researchers

    Streamline the organization internally so there is no more than 4 steps from any employee to an executive officer.

    No, you probably won't see the benefits this quarter. But you will see long-term profits increase substantially.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  46. Ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is an MS fanboy shop trying to force Novell into anything?

    1. Re:Ok by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      [tinfoilhat]Well, could be that they end-runned MS's PDC by having a mono presentation down the street..[/tinfoilhat]

      Seriously though, if driven by MS probably has a lot to do with the inroads that mono is making, the progress it has made, and the support from even Google's summer of code..

      MS aside, probably has more to do with investors that expect a >20% profitability each year, dispite the fact that inflation is much lower, and salaries are not in line with real cost of living... You can't have boom economics forever, and the technology segment is no exception, Novell, like IBM is leveraging the F/OSS movement. For good or bad, it's kind of nice, because a lot of what Novell software offers is out there... the down side is, if the investor greed percists, then it could kill Novell in the nearer term.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  47. Novell has the chance to transform. by miffo.swe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Novell has positioned itself to deliver a complete solution from the desktop to the server.

    If they finalize the Novell Linux Client AND make it run on most dists there are many companies who could switch to OES on the back and Linux at most of the desktops in a heartbeat. I assume there are a bunch of people like me out there who want OES but also want a linux client. Ncpfs doesnt quite cut it, neither do pam_ldap.

    I really hope they get their thumbs out, to much waiting and many customers will move to other solutions.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
  48. Novell: "We have 90% of the non-x86 server market" by Reziac · · Score: 2, Informative

    When I was at the latest Novell seminar, they brought up the point that they already have over 90% of the non-x86 server market. They acquired SuSE with the intent of expanding their share in the x86 market (which as you say, they've lost most of what once they had to Windows).

    They also mentioned that they have a billion in cash on hand, and no debt. So Novell isn't hurting, tho it sounds like certain shareholders want to change that. :/

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  49. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by One+Louder · · Score: 1

    Hey! What happened to all my porn ?!?

  50. It's called "the tail wags the dog" by Joseph_Daniel_Zukige · · Score: 1

    Did I read that right?

    5%

    And they think they call the shots? Have a right to define Novell's future direction? Think it means something that they don't like being ignored?

    5% could hurt, I suppose, but it really makes them look like jerks. I wonder if they are buddies with somebody at SCO.

  51. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by 00Dan · · Score: 1

    Let me get this straight- You have a server that ran problem free for about 3 years and your conclusion is it was "Important To Somebody Who Really Liked Novell" Shouldn't that be "Important To Somebody Who Really Likes Servers That Don't Crash Often"?

  52. Drop the planes on SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they should drop the private planes on SCO.

    Maybe put some R&D staff in them before hand. That way they can kill two birds...

  53. Um, no. by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

    The jets can go, IMHO. But by all means keep the engineers and the R&D.

    --
    C|N>K
  54. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Let me get this straight- You have a server that ran problem free for about 3 years and your conclusion is it was "Important To Somebody Who Really Liked Novell" Shouldn't that be "Important To Somebody Who Really Likes Servers That Don't Crash Often"?

    I'm not commenting - at all - about how stable that OS is/was. In fact, I'm fairly impressed with both that, and the IBM x-Series 330 that was sitting there chugging along all that time. Of course, it's possible that was literally doing nothing until some cosmic ray flipped a bit and made it stupid, but otherwise it may not have had a single disk read/write or a single network I/O in all that time. No way to know with lighting it up and spending some time on it.

    So, whoever chose that recipe certainly had their reasons, but they didn't leave much of a trail. And regardless, my point is that the use of the Novell platform didn't survive whatever business software/process evolution the users went going through.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  55. Lose not Loose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Lose" not "Loose"

  56. Could there be someone else behind this? by Uncle+Warthog · · Score: 1

    I've just done a bunch of poking around on the web to find out more about CSFB and what I'm seeing is a LOT of references to Microsoft. Could there be some kind of connection here? I'm thinking that MS could be involved in an attack against Novell in the same way they were in an attack against IBM, i.e. whispering in somebody's ear to do so and providing some cash.

  57. Maybe ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe credit suisse boston tea party should buy
    some SuSE Linux from novell.
    it is sad to have a crappy bank meddling in
    computer software business ...

    1. Re:Maybe ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the crappy bank owns lots of stock in Novell, they have every right to meddle in their computer software business. They own a good portion of it. That's business. Get over it.

      But maybe their meddling isn't so bad after all. Most corporate types suck Ma Bill's d!ck. I'm surprised they're pushing Open Source and not Windows.

  58. Would that be the same Credit Suisse... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That in 2003 agreed to pay a $150 million fine to the State of New York for issuing "fraudulent" research reports? Oh, and also set aside another $450 million to pay off the inevitable civil suits? That Credit Suisse First Boston?

    Or pehaps the Credit Suisse that in 2002 was fined $30 million by the SEC?

    Or would it be the Credit Suisse that admitted that they'd hidden funds belonging to descendents of Holocaust victims for over 50 years after the end of WW2. That Credit Suisse?

  59. From a CNE and ex-Novell fanboy by n0w0rries · · Score: 1

    Anybody who is still running netware fits in one of these categories: 1) They are too cheap to upgrade--"Hey, My NetWare 3.12 server still runs, why change it? My Windows 95 works with it just fine!" 2) They have a huge implementation--NetWare 5.1 rolled out to 700+ remote sites--"It will HURT if I upgrade!" 3) They are a die hard loyalist--"The only way bill gates will get my $$$ is prying it from my cold, dead hand!" I remember when I just finished rolling out ManageWise at a oil & gas company and then found out they had 2 engineers working on it! Can you spell EOL? and I loved how once they announced their linux direction, they reassured their customers "don't worry, NetWare won't be going away!" Ya right! and of course it was hilarious that Novell products actually ran better and more stable on Windows and Linux then NetWare--not sure how that made sense. My Novell customers either get migrated to Windows 2003 or Debian.

    1. Re:From a CNE and ex-Novell fanboy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a fuckin moron. Netware is an excellent platform (I'm currently supporting multiple NW OS 6.5 servers and looking forward to OS 7.0 upgrades). They don't have the incredible system requirements of Windows 2003 servers, and have stability second to none. Installation of purpose built servers (NAS, Webservers, etc) is an easy as a click of a button during installation.

      My hat is off to you for your supreme lack of an open mind.
      Putz.

  60. I hope Trolltech keeps this in mind by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I hope Trolltech keeps this in mind and backs off on both considering an IPO and hiring MS staff to the board.

    Once you go public, the company is burdened with a need to focus on short term advantages at the cost of long term development. Quarterly or monthly balances take precedence over longer term plans unfortunately, even if the longer term plans would net more profit.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    1. Re:I hope Trolltech keeps this in mind by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Once you go public, the company is burdened with a need to focus on short term advantages at the cost of long term development. Quarterly or monthly balances take precedence over longer term plans unfortunately, even if the longer term plans would net more profit.

      I agree. What happens is that you get stuck between two groups of people: customers and shareholders. Things that shareholders think are in their best interest aren't always in their best interest.

      A good sized R&D budget is absolutely critical to the survival of a technology company, larger than any other industry.

  61. Cash by cyberformer · · Score: 1

    Being taken over is nearly always good for stockholders in the takeover target, as the acquiring company usually pays significantly more than the the market value of the stock. So it's possible that one of the options they're exploring is putting the company up for sale.

    Takeovers are bad for nearly everyone else, of course. Sun buying Novell would be particularly bad, as Sun is less Linux-friendly and the OS market isn't exactly very competitive. But the stokcholders aren't concerned about that.

    1. Re:Cash by ZenShadow · · Score: 1

      [TinFoilHat]
      Maybe Sun wants to buy Novell so they can force the dropping of Novell's counterclaims against SCO. :-)
      [/TinFoilHat]

      (for the humor impaired, yes, this is a joke!)

      --S

      --
      -- sigs cause cancer.
  62. What this is about by johansalk · · Score: 2, Insightful



    This is about share price. Nothing else. Fire a bunch of people and some similar shenanigans so that the share price would increase and those shareholders can cash in and go off to do the same to other companies.

    It has nothing to do with what's good for the company, just what's profitable in the immediate for those particular shareholder.

    Same thing is happening at Time Warner, with one of the corprorate raiders of the 1980s who's now one of their shareholders and making a noise for them to sell off lots of good stuff and repurchase their shares so that the share price would increase and he would cash in.

    This is the disease of the American economy.

  63. Start with Miguel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please start by killing the Mono project and firing Miguel and every fool that works on it with him.

  64. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

    the whole thing was sort of poetic

    Poetic as in, you and your organization are so short sighted and plan so badly that the only way your systems attract your attention at all is to crash? 3 years of runtime and you think that poetically represents failure? WTF?

    I hope that thing was a print gateway, and that there is a Unix box circa 1983 walled in somewhere under a stairwell that is even now filling its disk drives ip with print jobs.

  65. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    you and your organization are so short sighted and plan so badly that the only way your systems attract your attention at all is to crash

    Where, in what I wrote, did you see me even suggesting it was "my" organization? I'm a consultant. I was there, with no prior exposure to their systems, to help them out of an unrelated emergency problem. I noticed the newly ailing Novell box while trying to understand what was on that side of a firewall chewing up bandwidth. That particular server was something none of them even knew to worry about.

    Further, if you actually think about what I said, it's not the failure I found interesting as I read this morning's news, it's Novell's increasing obscurity to the markets that it not so long ago essentially owned. That, considering the fact that the server had been chugging along all that time anyway, was the poetic part (vis a vis the 400 engineers still laboring away Novell today - well, so far, anyway).

    Wow. I'm not sure what it is about my original comment that seems to make people want to insert facts other than, or beyond those I mentioned. Oh well.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  66. Re:Merge! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    to read the non-funny, non-contributing bitching about about non-funny, non-contributing karma whoring :)

    Now that was a funny, but not informative non-contributing message poking fun at a non-funny, non-contributing bitchy message about the non-funny, non-contributing karma whoring. I laughed!

  67. Novell Bullshit? by DesScorp · · Score: 1

    90 percent of the "non-X86 server market"? Ummm...I don't think they're telling the truth. The biggest market outside Intel/Compatibles is almost certainly Sparc/Ultrasparc, with Solaris as the OS. Besides Sparc, your options are kind of limited...PA-RISC, Alpha, Power....of those, only the Alpha might have any Netware presence. And I doubt there are too many Alphas in signifigant numbers anymore.

    Isn't Netware supposed to be for X86 machines primarily? Did he possibly mean "non-MICROSOFT" server market, perhaps? (Still, I'd even have a hard time believing that...I'd bet Solaris rules there too).

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:Novell Bullshit? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I don't know one way or the other. But I found it very interesting regardless, and indicative of Novell's motivation in embracing linux.

      I would have thought the major non-x86 server OSs might be Solaris and the like as well. [scratching head] Next time I see the Novell dudes, I'll ask 'em.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:Novell Bullshit? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Sorry about the double reply, but an AC responded to me with this, which I thought might be of interest:

      "Remember: Novell owns a large piece of Unix. When you hear Novell nowadays, forget the horrid beast that was Netware, and think "Unix" - remember, Novell is the company which is going to be executing SCO and SCO's executives for fraud, breach of contract, libel, and so forth."

      So maybe Novell has a barrelful of UNIX customers we don't normally think of or know about? I have no idea. LIS, next time I see 'em I'll have to ask 'em to be more specific.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  68. What have they done lately by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

    Layoff's should be easy, just have a contractor interview ALL the staff and ask the question: "What have you done lately?" Anybody who starts their answer with "Ummm..." is slated for the first round of layoffs. Anybody who starts with the "Well..." is slated for the second round.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  69. Re:Abend Condition: Private Jet Has Been Shut Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    did the old Novell equivalent of a BSD

    A little red daemon popped out and declared that Netcraft said the server was dying?

  70. Re:sounds pretty shady by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Fair enough. I probably shouldn't leave comment for general consumption first thing in the morning. Point well taken.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  71. Public company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its too bad Novell is a public company, having to serve the shareholders unfortunately is now going to be their undo-ing.

    equity firms, investors and such care nothing for R&D, and would rather mortgage the future for a rosier bottom line in the next 3-4 quarters

    This will eventually be Google's undoing as they muse serve their masters on Wall Street as their growth is tempered by their size

  72. Re:Novell: "We have 90% of the non-x86 server mark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember: Novell owns a large piece of Unix.

    When you hear Novell nowadays, forget the horrid beast that was Netware, and think "Unix" - remember, Novell is the company which is going to be executing SCO and SCO's executives for fraud, breach of contract, libel, and so forth.

  73. Cow? Meet Free Milk. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why pay for an R&D department when you can get a bunch of OSS coders to look at the stuff commercial (and other OSS) developers are doing (R) and write OSS replacements in their spare time (D) for free?

  74. Inviting the devil across the threshold. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Active R&D is essential to long term success, but any returns on that investment will occur long after shareholders have cashed out and therefore try to discourage R&D.

    A second serious problem is inviting Micro$ofters onto the board to make decisions affecting the long term life or death of the company. Even in the best of situations, MS has no culture or understanding of opensource technologies. In the worst of situations, these could actively or passively monkeywrench Qt. Maybe KDE will have to fork Qt, but even that will cause added burdens and delay that could be avoided by keeping M$ fingers out of Trolltech's decisions.

  75. warm up your bath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If i wanted to sell Novell, I'd push for some near sighted fixes too.

  76. Re:Novell: "We have 90% of the non-x86 server mark by Reziac · · Score: 1

    Ah, THAT would explain Novell's statement.

    Also means linux is hardly an unknown environment for their engineers, given that UNIX and linux are kissing cousins.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  77. Jack Messman is Squatter CEO by Scallawag · · Score: 1

    That guy's ego comes first, and don't you forget it.

    He better never cross my path, i'll demonstrate my Open Source knuckle sandwich.

    --
    Getting old fast, Shit!