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."

62 of 214 comments (clear)

  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 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?

    2. 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?

  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 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.

    5. 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
    6. 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)
    7. 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. :)

    8. 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...

  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 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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 cpthowdy · · Score: 3, Informative

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

    2. 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.

    3. 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.
  6. "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 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.

    2. 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).

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

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

    4. 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.

    5. 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"

    6. 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!

    7. 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.
  7. 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!
  8. 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.
  9. 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 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

  10. 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.)

  11. 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.

  12. 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 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)
  13. 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.
  14. 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 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

  15. 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.
  16. 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.

  17. 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
  18. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  19. 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.

  20. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  21. 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?

  22. 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
  23. 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.

  24. 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.
  25. 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

  26. 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
  27. 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!"
  28. 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?
  29. 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
  30. 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?
  31. 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.
  32. 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.