Slashdot Mirror


Novell Still Runs Windows

daria42 writes "Despite Novell's internal migration to Suse and OpenOffice.org, the company admitted today that up to 3000 of its 5000 workers still had dual-boot installations with Microsoft Windows. These users are likely to be migrated to pure Linux boot systems in the next year or so." From the article: "Hovsepian's remarks indicate Novell will have at most a few months' experience as a complete Linux and open source desktop shop behind it when, according to the vendor's predictions, the software starts taking off in the mainstream." Update: 04/11 13:25 GMT by J : At the closing OSCON session, August 5, 2005, Miguel de Icaza talked about Novell's progress. My notes read: "novell's moving 5500 employees from windows to linux. first stage, office->openoffice, is complete. second stage, windows->linux, is 50% complete, proj. 80% by Nov."

191 comments

  1. Re:fisrt prost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    and still not laid...

  2. Zenworks or what? by mrak_attack · · Score: 0, Troll

    I always wonder how you should manage the office of Linux computers without AD and policies.

    1. Re:Zenworks or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Just use LDAP, or even NIS.

    2. Re:Zenworks or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      When I was in High School, we just used NIS (and NFS-mounted home directories). When the school decided to "upgrade" (after receiving a contract with Dell) to new WinXP/AD boxes, we actually had an easier time "breaking the rules." The complex system of policies was easily circumvented, although this was all moot since a virus (which, as of my graduation, was still not completely resolved) knocked it all down anyway.

    3. Re:Zenworks or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      *nix has been managable across a network longer than Windows has even known what a network is. *nix was designed with the network in mind...

    4. Re:Zenworks or what? by Dan+Ost · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? You can do the same things with LDAP and/or Kerberos. For
      you old-schoolers out there, NIS and a carefully structured environment will give you most
      of the same advantages.

      If you serve all your binaries over the network (nfs, snfs, sshfs, afs, etc) and do the same
      with home directories and shared data directories, then managing an office of Linux machines
      is an absolute breeze. All you've got to do is make sure each machine boots and knows where to
      get authentication information (LDAP, NIS, Kerberos). Add netbooting, and you only have to
      worry about having a boot image for each hardware set.

      Now, if you're talking about an office of Linux computers where each user has root access to
      his machine and is allowed to do whatever, well, then it's pretty much like running an
      office of Windows machines with no AD and policies in place.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    5. Re:Zenworks or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fucking hate that response whenever anyone mentions AD. Just use LDAP for what exactly? It's just a directory service. You don't get any managment tools[1], no centralised management, replication is a bitch to set up properly[2], you get very few objects that are useful (No "Computer" object exists in the standard LDAP schema, for example), no pre-configured OU, and last but not least, you get no integration. The best you can do is to maintain all of the information manually and configure PAM to authenticate against your LDAP server. Big whoop; you're still only about 50% of the way to doing what AD can do. If you begin to try and add things like single sign on with Kerberos and then get it to work seamlessly with it all..good luck.

      [1]: I am aware of things like Fedora Directory Server and the tools that come with it. It's about the most basic managment interface possible.
      [2]: It might always be easy with ADS either, mind you.

    6. Re:Zenworks or what? by Glamdrlng · · Score: 1

      Zenworks for desktop management + red carpet for patch management.

      --

      Yes, my only tool is a hammer. And you're starting to look like a nail.
    7. Re:Zenworks or what? by Kennon · · Score: 1

      Zen 7 does a fine job of managing Linux desktops and Servers.

      --
      "All those moments, will be lost in time...like tears in rain..."
    8. Re:Zenworks or what? by ezs · · Score: 2, Informative
      AD and policies - hahaha.

      Novell uses Novell ZENworks Linux Management internally to provide updates and patches to servers and desktops running Linux.

      http://www.novell.com/products/zenworks/linuxmanag ement for details.

      --
      Evil ZEN Scientist
    9. Re:Zenworks or what? by Black+Copter+Control · · Score: 1
      MS weenies complaining about Unix/Linux not having network admin support are kinda like the way that they 'complained' back in the '80s that Unix didn't have an IDE.

      Unix geeks would cross their eyes, scratch their head and wander away mumbling about "what do you need that Windows crap for anyways?" I mean, Unix is an IDE. Most of the Windows IDEs back then were little more than a limited-environment port of some subset of the standard UNIX development tools.

      I've had 'login anywhere' Unix experience since the '80s and cross-platform login support in the early '90's (IBM's AIX was the worst back then for cross-platform admin work).

      --
      OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
    10. Re:Zenworks or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For windows, Zenworks Sucks -

    11. Re:Zenworks or what? by grahamlee · · Score: 1

      Why does the incorrect get marked as insightful, I wonder? Because it better matches the prevailing groupthink than the truth does? Unix was developed on a standalone PDP box, and it wasn't for ages that a network was glued on. And then it wasn't redesigned with the network in mind, the network support was designed with an extension of the s[tream|ocket]s-based IPC in mind. If you want an OS designed around the network, try looking at UCB Sprite.

    12. Re:Zenworks or what? by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1

      What do people need policies for?

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect in the vast majority of cases it's so that they can still use ActiveX but not get viruses from untrusted sites, or so that badly written applications can run as Administrator without the user having to have full administrator access.

      iow I've always had the impression that people complaining about Linux's lack of AD and Policies was in much the same category as people complaining that Linux doesn't have any decent antivirus or antispyware or disk defrag applications.

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
  3. Obvious? by minginqunt · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since a fair wodge of Novell's money comes from selling Windows software, I comfortably predict that this won't happen any time soon.

    1. Re:Obvious? by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      Evidence, please? As an investor in their stock I've looked at their financial statements and I have their annual report on my desk here. Yet I only see them lowering sales of software for Windows.

      Also, why are a few thousand desktops needed to develop and test Windows software for a primarily Linux company? They would only need a small subset of that.

    2. Re:Obvious? by mysticgoat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since a fair wodge of Novell's money comes from selling Windows software, I comfortably predict that this won't happen any time soon.

      Since Novell has a fair wodge of business savvy, I agree. The Windows licenses are sunk costs and removing Windows completely would only add more cost to that, with no measurable benefit. So long as the Windows partitions don't get in the way of doing work, it would be a bad business decision to get rid of them.

      TFA is pure FUD. It might be useful to know how many Novell employees still mostly use Windows, but there is no value in knowing how many have dual boot capability.

      Oh wait... a lot of businesses making the switch to Linux will be dual booting for some time. Looks like Novell is well positioned to provide them with experienced technical support. I wonder if that is accidental or deliberate <sg>?

    3. Re:Obvious? by minginqunt · · Score: 1

      ...a fair wodge of Novell's money comes from selling Windows software... ...I only see them lowering sales of software for Windows...

      These two statements are not incompatible. The fact that Novell is suffering a death of a thousand cuts at the hands of Active Directory doesn't make it any less true that Novell makes not insignificant sums from an albeit-dwindling Windowsish installed base.

    4. Re:Obvious? by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      Dying because of Active Directory? What is this, 1992? You need to read their business plans and marketing strategies. Directory services are only one drop in a big bucket.

    5. Re:Obvious? by minginqunt · · Score: 1

      Novell can wave as many marketing strategies at me as it wants; Unfortunately, this is business, and all that matters are those cold, crisp dollars.

      The only place Novell is making any money at all is in its vain defence against the Windows Server encroachment. Okay, so it's not just AD that's killing NDS; There's also Exchange killing Groupwise, SUS killing ZenWorks, and Everything killing Netware. It remains to be seen if they can make money on anything else, Linux included.

    6. Re:Obvious? by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      You're still way behind on the facts. They have linux maintenance contracts with governments. That's a cash cow. Novell isn't all about selling software. They didn't buy a linux distro for the green logo.

    7. Re:Obvious? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Just look at "storm" created by "Boot Camp" (AAPL) in Mac community.

      I hate to admit it but (near) everyone is really happy to be able to run Windows on their Macintoshes. Except me, remembering Linux gaming effected by Dual boot and OS/2 stuff.

      Having people running Windows rather than "I hate M$, I am 133t!" people is a better thing for a company health. :)

    8. Re:Obvious? by hobbez · · Score: 1

      TFA is pure FUD.

      FUD=Fear, uncertainty, deception?
      Novell is not spreading fear or uncertainty...deception maybe, yes, if they don't commit to get rid of Windows.

      Unless you see a world without Windows as a world to be feared?

  4. Still develops products for windows by DataPath · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Windows will probably never completely go away, or at least not for a very long time, since they do still develop products for windows.

    --
    Inconceivable!
    1. Re:Still develops products for windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That, plus the simple fact is they have already paid for these Windows licenses. I do not think Microsoft is going to refund their money. So, there is not any real big reason to remove the extra capability unless the workstation user wants the extra disk space or to remove the stability/security risk posed by Windows. If I were an enduser at Novell, I would probably keep the extra Windows partition until I got my next hardware/machine upgrade. Even then, they should probably have some machines they can VNC into for testing purposes.

  5. Windows? Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work for Novell, and of course I have a windows machine. I develop software that has to run on Linux, OS X and Windows. All of our developers are in the same boat. If they don't have Windows code, they have NetWare code that needs to be built on Windows. Very few developers don't have code that needs a Win32 box either for development or for testing.

    But ask me what machine I use to read my email, surf the web, write code, etc. It's my Linux box. And most of the developers on my team are the same way. And Novell as a company has been WAY better than anywhere else I have worked about having every business app I need on Linux supported by the IT department, and I even used to work for a company whose main business was their Linux distro (no, it wasn't SuSE).

    1. Re:Windows? Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me that's not true... please tell me you don't develop anything for OSX, really. It's one thing to be moving away from crud like Windows, but moving towards something equally as bad & oppressive in OSX is like jumping out of the frypan into a freezing lake.

    2. Re:Windows? Duh! by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I as going to say that Novell should keep some Windows systems no matter what. Think about things like Samba or if they want to contribute to OpenOffice they might want a few Windows systems running Office to check compatibility.
      Frankly I would love to hear that Novell has a few Solaris systems, a few BSD systems, and maybe even a VMS system or two.
      I am all for open standards and supporting as many different OSs and ISAs as is practical.
      BTW was the other company you worked for the one that is now unspeakable?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:Windows? Duh! by BoaZaur · · Score: 1

      But why Double booting? It is such a wast of time and space.
      Use crossover for MS-Office, IE and what have you, at the same speed or better than Windows. Use VMWare for anything else that does not run on Wine. But spending a full partition on Windows, and completely booting into Windows?? why?

    4. Re:Windows? Duh! by GundamFan · · Score: 1

      IANAD (I Am Not A Developer) but I have some experience with testing software for desktop use.

      To have a truly fair test you need to replicate the exact (or as close as you can get) environment the end user will deal with, so it does little good to test in WINE or VMWare (less so but still) because you can't say conclusively "X will run on a windows box" because you have never done it, even if you are 99.9% sure it will.

      And anyway at $.50 a gig or less and drives up to 500GB in size... what is the big deal with 40 or so gigs of windows siting there minding it's own business?

      --
      I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
      Mark Twain
    5. Re:Windows? Duh! by misleb · · Score: 1

      Actually, VMWare is nearly ideal for testing because it is trivial to maintain multiple configurations and reset them back to "pristine" or not so pristine (depending on what kind of system you're trying to test) state to test again. Also, it seems to me that a company the size of Novell would have labs for testing. I doubt that the developers' desktops are the final stage of software testing.

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    6. Re:Windows? Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for Novell
      So are you really getting a kick out of these replies or what?

    7. Re:Windows? Duh! by BoaZaur · · Score: 1

      Duh! 3000 test machines, right!
      The all double booting is for Novel management to cover their ass. Since it is clear they are all using Windows, and the Double booting, Linux is the Bastard OS. it goes like this:
      "Boss I played with Linux all morning, can I get back to work now?"

  6. Windows - Necessary Evil? by AMindLost · · Score: 0, Troll

    Is this proof that regardless how evangelic you are about linux, Windows is still a necessary evil in a commercial desktop environment? Switching to Open Office only gets you so far. After that your choices for replacement software become more and more limited. I think this is fairly obvious and although I'm a huge fan of Linux on servers, I still don't think it's ready for the mainstream desktop market regardless of the never-ending promises that "this is the year". My companies systems are all run on Linux (Debian) but I don't have ONE desktop which I could fully kick windows off.

    1. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only reason that Linux isn't viable on the desktop is because Microsoft locks people into their proprietary standards. If you have a bunch of documents in MS Office, or you exchange documents with those who use MS Office, then you can't really get rid of it. You can't expect OO.o to be 100% compatible because they had to reverse engineer the file format, and there's no way to get it right. Microsoft can't even stay compatible with itself across versions, how is OO.o supposed to get it right? Same thing goes for many other things locking people in, like Exchange to name one. The software on Linux is great, and would be a lot better if we didn't have to spend half our time reverse engineering Microsoft's file formats, and implementing proprietary extentsions that Microsoft has wedged into the few standards it chooses to even recognize.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by plazman30 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Novell is a company that develops Windows products, as well as Linux and Netware. They are ALWAYS going to have Windows workstations there. We have a number of Novell DSEs at our company and they ALL run NLD or Suse 10 on their work laptops, and use Vmware to run Windows as needed.

      Other Novell support staff needs Windows boxes around to support customers.

      I don't think it's possible for them to be 100% Windows free. Their business demands that they run some Windows boxes.

    3. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Zphbeeblbrox · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Exactly which piece of software can't you live without? You said after OpenOffice the choices were limited but for the life of me I just can't think of a single business app without a linux runnable replacement. Perhaps you work in an unusual environment but I'm just a little curious what these mysterios apps are.

      --
      If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
    4. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Da_Weasel · · Score: 1

      FUD FUD FUD!

      For any mainstream application there are 5 applications of the same type to chose from in any given Linux distro. Most of the software available for Windows are "crap" utilities or program that don't live up to the hype printed on their boxes. If there is an application problem in Linux it is that their are too many applications to chose from...

      I'm not knocking Windows though....i'm a Windows Developer. I'm also a avid and experienced Linux user...who always has his FUD radar on...

      --
      If you must!
    5. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by mysticgoat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is only another proof that successful companies don't waste money on removing facilities that are no longer useful but don't get in the way.

      An emerging migration strategy from Windows to Linux is

      1. Dual boot
      2. Mothball Windows partitions
      3. Replace desktop hardware with Linux only boxen at end of service life
      4. Maximize profits all the way along

      Oh wait... you know that. You're only trolling, right?

      [too early-- need more coffee...]

    6. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by myxiplx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Er... mysterious apps? Just because you don't know of any doesn't mean they don't exist. For example:

      AutoCAD - yup, very mysterious this...

      StruCAD / XSteel - not quite so well known pretty much the only choices for 3D detailing in this industry.

      On top of that we've got our CAD/CAM control software, can't see us moving to a Linux version of that. You need dedicated software to run well over £600,000 worth of machinery, taking data from the above packages. Can't see that running on anything but Windows for the forseeable future.

    7. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by AMindLost · · Score: 0

      Our accounts runs on Sage Line 50. Our business banking has windows only clients (2 seperate programs). We have an old bespoke export documentation package which uses Lotus approach of all things. Of course we could re-write it in something else but where's the benefit? There are numerous small programs and utilities which, although users could do without them, why should they? For new businesses, Linux on most of the desktops is possibility. For existing businesses, the hassles and costs far out-weigh the benefits.

    8. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by imikem · · Score: 1

      I've just one small suggestion for an edit: Leave out the "Necessary" from the subject line.

      Come to think of it, that leaves you with a redundancy: Windows/Evil.

      --
      Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
    9. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Svartalf · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You don't see very far into the future, do you? ;-)

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    10. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by jbolden · · Score: 1

      I don't know about StuCAD/XSteel but the home platform for AutoCAD used to be AIX. It ran really well on IRIX. It was a very long time before it could run on a PC at all.

    11. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by myxiplx · · Score: 1

      Hey, no fair! How come you get a higher score than I do... I mean the original post I replied to wasn't even talking about the future... :-p

      To be honest, even if you do look to the future I don't see the situation changing much - our environment is going to be a tough one for Linux to break into. Ok, office applications are covered, e-mail is covered, our intranet will need converting (time consuming but doable). The problem lies with the specialist packages.

      Now here, you've got an entire chain of processes, each using a dedicated program, and we're not going to be the only company with processes like this. For us the process is design, CAD detailing, production scheduling, and then to the CAM software on the shop floor.

      Now each of these steps has it's own dedicated software, some steps use literally dozens of packages all working together, each step is reliant on the data coming from previous ones, and every single one is a windows package. In addition, you usually have 2-3 competitors producing software for each stage. Put all that together and it's going to be very difficult for any one company to justify the extra expense of developing for a new OS. Why should they when their entire market is running windows and all their competitors are developing for that same market?

      It's a catch 22 - without an established user base running Linux and needing their software, there's no market for these companies to develop for and hence no benefit to them doing so. However without them to develop the software, that market won't get chance to develop since it's stuck running windows.

      When windows first arrived on the scene all those years ago, it didn't have all these problems to contend with. I'm not going to argue that on a technical note, Linux is more than ready for the desktop, but it's facing the same kinds of problems that kept OS/2 and MacOS as niche products for years. The problem is that it's got to break into an already established market. That's a tough nut to break any way you look at it and I think you'll find it's one of the main causes for the slow adoption of Linux.

      Now for a traditional firm to combat this would be nigh on impossible. The advantage Linux has and the reason it's been the only OS to really present a threat to MS is Open Source. Quite simply Open Source software doesn't have the traditional costs & risks for developing software. It doesn't need an established market, just a few interested folks to get things started. Development costs can be distributing across hundreds or thousands of interested parties, and can be distibuted across time too. Without Open Source I doubt Linux would even be in the position it is today, but with it, slowly but surely a user base is building.

      Eventually we'll reach the stage where it breaks that catch 22 and there's a big enough market to attract the traditional software houses.

      Of course, one extra bonus is that Linux is an ideal environment for software development, so it's possible that many of these traditional developers will already be running Linux themselves by the time they start to develop for the platform.

      Now, if you really want to speed up adoption of Linux what we need is a really, really good application development environment; one that can compile for Linux *and* Windows. It's not going to be easy, but if enough people can get behind a project like this and make it good enough, you could get to the stage that it's easier for developers to write software that runs on both platforms than it is to develop just for windows. Create that and you could turn the entire situation on it's head.

      Hmm... it appears I've done an about turn while writing this. Ok, I'll admit it: in time it may be possible for Linux to break into this market, but this is going to be a long, slow process. For now, just be grateful that progress is being made and that open source just may be the thing to do it.

      Myx

    12. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by kimvette · · Score: 1
      I just can't think of a single business app without a linux runnable replacement.


      Quickbooks Pro.
      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    13. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by adolfojp · · Score: 1

      If MS Office were to disappear completely Linux still wouldn't become the standard desktop operating system.

      Graphic artists need their Photoshop and Engineers need their Auto Cad. Grandpa needs a machine that will run the new craptastic greeting card software that he bought at the local XMart and junior likes to play games on the computer. I like to have the ability of going out and buying any computer on the market and know that all of its hardware will have Linux drivers.

      Linux might be getting better and better, but it is still very far of being a desktop OS for the masses.

      For hardware and software vendors to support Linux it needs to be profitable. It will not be profitable until Linux becomes a mainstream OS. Linux will not become a mainstream OS until hardware and software vendors support Linux.

      It is not Microsoft's fault. In fact, had they made a better OS with better licensing Linux wouldn't be as widespread as it is today.

    14. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by howlingmadhowie · · Score: 1

      i wonder how much your company would have to invest to develop similar software for linux. if you think about it, let's say this company has 100 computers, all running windows and this specialist software. specialist software tends to be expensive costing many hundred dollars per license. windows comes with the machine, but upgrades are expensive. anti-virus software costs a certain amount each year. software upgrades cost a certain amount. could not some of this money be invested in developing free software (in collaboration with other companies in similar fields)? how long would it take, and how much money would have to be spent? would it be possible to develop it using a couple of full time programmers and a bounty system?
      i can't see this not saving money in the long run.

    15. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Zphbeeblbrox · · Score: 1

      erhhh.... no that has linux replacements. see here for a list.

      http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/269/

      some of those are even commercial.

      --
      If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
    16. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by myxiplx · · Score: 1

      Far, far, far more than it's worth.

      You're coming right back around to the old system of everybody running bespoke software. You just end up with a huge internal team troubleshooting and bug fixing your own releases.

      The reason these software companies exist in the first place is simply because we don't have these kinds of skills. It's far cheaper for us (and our competitors) to pay our money to these companies and have their development team do all the work.

      Even if I was interested in doing this, I doubt I could get our competitors interested, and even if I could, Management would throw a fit at putting a team together for the sole purpose of working with competitors...

      Nope, I don't see anything happening until our software providers releasing versions for Linux.

    17. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Zphbeeblbrox · · Score: 1

      hrmmmm again there are linux replacements for Autocad. Not sure about the controlling software. Thats a specialized case though that many businesses in America don't need to worry about.

      http://www.linuxcad.com/
      http://www.ribbonsoft.com/
      http://www.adina.com/
      http://www.lx-office.com/LX/products/architektur/i ndex.html/

      So far the only responses to my question seem to be making the mistake that industry standard software means irreplaceable software. That's not what I asked though. Still waiting for someone to name a windows business app that doesn't have a working linux replacement.

      --
      If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
    18. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by myxiplx · · Score: 1

      Huh? So how exactly does industry standard software not equal irreplacable? And how is the software I mentioned not a business app that doesn't have a working linux replacement?

      Our business cannot work without these CAD packages. Yeah, sure there are alternative CAD packages to AutoCAD - now show me the steel libraries our suppliers produce for these. They don't exist, and since we're not big enough to force our suppliers to write software just for us we're stuck with AutoCAD.

      Ditto StruCAD and XSteel. Since when are these not irreplacable? Sure, they may be a specialist case and most businesses don't need to worry about them, but that doesn't mean it's not an answer to your question.

      You seem to be making the mistake that industry standard software does not mean irreplacable software, well sorry but sometimes it does.

    19. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by howlingmadhowie · · Score: 1

      this is one of these things which amuses me. i sometimes do some freelance work for a foundation building company in town and am amazed by the number of computers sitting about the place. everybody has at least one. even the secretaries at the front desk have two each. i haven't yet worked out what a secretary needs to do with a computer apart from read and answer e-mails. i don't believe that secretaries have become more productive since the computer became common-place. i know that if you give a secretary a new word processor, their productivity will go down sharpy for a long time while they are trying out the fonts and pretty colors and stuff.
      what i'm trying to say, is, that using computers can be a two-edged sword. yes, it is nice to have a huge database programm helping the office workers look stuff up, but don't be surprised if their memories get worse and they forget how to work efficiently.
      another thing i'd like to say, is, that in certain fields development of proprietary software results in software which is under a beautiful surface far worse than open source stuff. i recently had the chance to compare the print-outs of finale with lilypond. now lilypond hasn't even got a graphical user interface, but you can write music for it to set using any text editor you want and you can read the files it saves (it's a sort of mark-up language in ascii 7-bit). finale on the other hand has the most beautiful graphical user interface i have ever seen (apart from some problems with updating backgrounds after you've moved a window, which probably have more to do with windows than with finale). when you save a file it gets encrypted and zipped. when you print it it's full of mistakes. lilypond's print-outs are often indistinguishable from a generic handset print.
      finale employs full time a team of many hundred and the software costs many hundred dollars a shot. lilypond employs a team of i think it's five people part-time and the software is free.
      my point is, software is not necessarily difficult. yes, operating systems are difficult. if you want to do everything multi-threaded, that's difficult too. but a cad application which you can train an educated, knowledgeable person to use to help them design whatever it is they design - that's not impossible. lilypond of course stands on the shoulders of a particular giant (latex). i don't know anything about the field of cad. where would one start? a development of vector graphics? i dunno.
      try to understand how the software you use works. once you've understood that, you can in theory write it yourself.
      howie

    20. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Zphbeeblbrox · · Score: 1

      no it doesn't. You could find a different supplier perhaps. I don't know as much about the structural steel industry as others that's true. However it has been my experience that the software is never a deal killer.

      I'm curious though what exactly do these steel libraries do? Are they custom models already completed with structural and density variables programmed in? If so is there a possiblity you could work a deal where you provided the supplier with those same libraries in return for a break on product? There is always a way. What your really saying is that you just don't like the other options and prefer the windows route. That's perfectly fine but don't justify it with "I have no choice." Because that's just not true.

      --
      If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
    21. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Those are comparable to Quicken or M$ Money, not Quickbooks.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    22. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      You're correct about PhotoShop and AutoCAD - until someone finally developes the equivalent on Linux, which is inevitable at some point (and not that many years from now.)

      As for the crap bought at CompUSA, that stuff will eventually disappear as more developers realize they can do the same crap as OSS or shareware and distribute over the Net.

      Hardware drivers are an issue, but s declining one except for wireless devices and of course the latest and greatest video cards most people actually don't buy unless they're gamers. In fact, the gaming issue is probably the biggest holdback for Linux. That will fold too eventually.

      The only issue on all this is when, not if.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    23. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by moreati · · Score: 1
      The only reason that Linux isn't viable on the desktop is because Microsoft locks people into their proprietary standards


      Nonsense, Microsoft's proprietry lockin is one of the reasons that Linux is yet to make it on the desktop. There are others such as inertia, lacking hardware support & lacking software support.

      Of course all of this depnds on your idea of 'the desktop' and 'make it'.
    24. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      "Put all that together and it's going to be very difficult for any one company to justify the extra expense of developing for a new OS....Eventually we'll reach the stage where it breaks that catch 22 and there's a big enough market to attract the traditional software houses."

      You don't get OSS, do you?

      "Ok, I'll admit it: in time it may be possible for Linux to break into this market, but this is going to be a long, slow process."

      Okay, maybe you do. Just remember there's a difference between "long, slow" and "never."

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    25. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > They are ALWAYS going to have Windows workstations there.

      but with tools such as WINE, VMWARE, and cross compilation they could get that number down to an extremly small percentage. (Support staff mostly need good clear and detailed documentation so they can reset and correctly setup software for windows. Actually diagnosing the problem is rare, real customers dont have the time and want to get back to work.)

    26. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by adolfojp · · Score: 1
      The only issue on all this is when, not if.
      I couldn't agree more. :-)
    27. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Until someone with an itch sits down and scratces it and replaces your two banking clients with one Linux client that does both...I could probably replace your export documentation package in a couple months using modern software.

      There's nothing rocket science about any of this. It's merely a matter of someone deciding to do the software. After that, it's a matter of when the moron in charge of using the software realizes that free and updateable is better than expensive and fixed.

      Nobody said it was easy, given the morons in charge of using the software. But "not easy" is different from "never".

      It's pathetic how few people can comprehend any change.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    28. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Until five minutes later when someone decides to replicate its functionality...

      This isn't rocket science. People are assuming this crap is somehow magical software that can't be reproduced.

      Maybe Adobe PhotoShop is tough to reproduce, as the GIMP isn't doing it (yet), but especially business software is usually pathetically easy to reproduce since all it does is shuffle dollars and cents around. Any decent programmer could reproduce QuickBooks in six months using modern software tools and libraries. It's the marketing end that would slow adoption - in other words, how long would it take the moron in charge of buying QuickBooks to realize there was a better alternative.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    29. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Tongo · · Score: 1

      It's funny how little linux fanbois understand that employees HATE change, not just managers.

      I write fairly simple software for an accounting package we sell. This sytem has a DOS version and a windows version. For one customer, we ported the DOS version to windows a few years back and there were people contemplating retirement rather than learning the new system.

      When the software you use is a tool and not your life, people don't give a rats ass what it is, as long as it doesn't change. I've seen it over and over again with various customers and in our own office. They don't want the look of their windows to change, their icons to change, or their frickin' wallpaper to change. Now you take them into an enviroment where nothing is familiar and you'll have morale problems and decreased productivity.

    30. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by myxiplx · · Score: 1

      Nope, there's no alternative supplier for some of this stuff. Where there are alternatives, they all work to the same systems.

      And I'm afraid in this industry, the Design and CAD software *is* a deal killer. We have a legal requirement to ensure the safety of the buildings, that means calculating the loading, stresses and strains on hundreds of tons of steel, right down to the last bolt. Now that's not possible without either specialist software or laborious hand calculations. Doing it by hand would make us uncompetative and would quickly put us out of business.

      It means we have a very limited choice of software available, and all of it is currently written for the windows platform.

      You're about right about the steel libraries - they mean we can import the exact details into the CAD program. Problem is we don't create the library, nor the CAD program, we're wholly reliant on the steel suppliers producing the data in a format the CAD software can import. They realised quickly that they'd do more business if they provided this data, so they simply provide it for the most popular CAD systems in the industry.

      You suggest we could work a deal where we supply the libraries?? How? We don't produce the library nor the software, we're an end user in each case.

      And it's not that I prefer the windows route, I'd love to move us to Linux here - I've had to lock down every workstation to prevent us getting infested with viruses & spyware. The problem is that there is no way at all I could achieve it right now.

      To move us to Linux would mean funding development of specialist CAD software for Linux, would mean providing financial incentives to our suppliers for them to provide steel libraries for that software, would mean checking compatibility of dozens of programs, re-training all our staff... The simple fact is that the costs of doing this would put us out of business.

      This is what I was getting at with another of my posts - individually it's very tough for any company to move to Linux. My hope is that with Open Source, given time these specialist applications can be developed by numerous companies across the globe. Once that barrier to entry's gone I'll gladly start our move, until then I'm afraid I do have no choice, not if I want to keep my job.

    31. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Zphbeeblbrox · · Score: 1

      I concede then. In your case Windows does make more sense. I do notice that no one in any other industry has raised a valid point however.

      --
      If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
    32. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      "When the software you use is a tool and not your life...Now you take them into an enviroment where nothing is familiar and you'll have morale problems and decreased productivity."

      What's contradictory about these statements?

      The issue is quite simple: motivation and training - neither of which corporations do worth a squat, admittedly.

      First of all, it is a known fact that ANY change in a working environment INCREASES productivity, not decreases it. This has been known in industry for the last seventy-five years. Even painting the walls increases productivity - for a short time.

      Any company can make the switch - it's been done. The only problem is how to make it with the least agony. That's a business problem like any other.

      People saying NO change is permitted are just itching to go out of business - but business processes change ALL THE TIME in any common business in reaction to new business goals, competitor actions, new regulations, the economy, etc., ad nauseum.

      I work for City College of San Francisco - the epitome of "we will never change no matter what". Still, they do, occasionally, when enough pain is applied to make it happen. Usually this requires external regulatory activity or internal politics - but it does happen.

      It's bullshit that people can't be made to change or that this reluctance inevitably means that one way of doing things will always remain on top. It's simply counter to the entire thrust of human history and is a really stupid concept.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    33. Re:Windows - Necessary Evil? by Zphbeeblbrox · · Score: 1

      oh really did you read all the way down the list or just scan the first 3? Cause I saw a whole Accounting/CRM/ERP package on there and I'm pretty sure that neither Ms Money or Quicken have that kind of functionality.

      --
      If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
  7. Re:Not to be dense or anything by metricmusic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Novell's shift from Windows and Office to open source software was first begun in March 2004, while microsoft's honey pot was only released on the 3rd of this year?

    --
    http://www.livejournal.com/users/metricmusic
  8. The high cost of continous stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as a windows user, you sure make the right choice of linux. redhat.
    so, I did redhat once. Never again. I did windows long time ago. Not going back.
    my personal opinion, redhat is as retarded as windows. when you have hundreds of linuxes to choose from not to mention all nice *BSD's...

  9. Whine, whine, whine by justindz · · Score: 4, Funny

    They make Windows sound like a controlled substance. "Oh man, we're working night and day to get these employees off such a nasty habit. Please don't let this affect your opinion of Novell as a Windows-free workplace."

    Windows is a million times less addictive than nicotine. I kicked the habit on my personal computers in junior high while my peers were just *starting* to smoke.

    --
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
    1. Re:Whine, whine, whine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a nasty habit, costing the company thousands of dollars while they have the cure in house.

  10. No way by JonJ · · Score: 5, Funny

    You're trying to tell me that a large corporation with 5000 desktops, who develops Windows software might run Windows on a lot of them? I'm shocked I say, shocked.

    --
    -- Linux user #369862
  11. Re:I'll tell you why: The high cost of training by wurd · · Score: 1, Interesting

    i'd generally agree, but this should be less relevant in a business setting (it's a safe bet that those 3000 people are sticking with windows for quake 3). like they said in the article, things like porting macros from MS office probably aren't worth the immediate effort. along with that, any office i've worked in would be stuck with a bunch of legacy MS Access databases that would have to be converted too, and as far as I know there wouldn't be any easy way to handle reports or forms from Access using open source tools.

  12. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No kidding. People at Redhat dual boot too for this reason. Development/testing.

  13. Re:I call bull by Rekolitus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    However, Linux is closer to desktop readiness this year than ever before.

  14. They should just migrate to.. by MS_Word · · Score: 1

    ... Quake III Arena. There is a linux version of that available.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quake_III_Arena/

  15. Worth checking out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    FWIW...

    We've just had a vendor pitchfest for a replacement OS for an elderly unsupported RH release in use on about 4000 servers (my employer's a dotcom with piles of machines in many remote datacentres round the world.) We've had Sun pitching Solaris, Red Hat on RHEL and Novell/SuSE. I must say the Novell/SuSE pitch was the most unexpectedly impressive; Crispin Cowan's AppArmor is really, really good (I'm biased: I'm a security geek) and seems to be much more usable than SELinux. Xen also seems to be happier on SuSE than RH.

    Sun had a good story now they can say Solaris is really Free, but they seemed very defensive (spent 30 mins showing us balance sheets marked "Sun confidential, internal use only" emphasising they make lots of money and aren't about to go bust. But we would definitely be a relatively small customer for Sun, whereas I'm more convinced that Novell would be prepared to go the extra mile to keep us happy.

    Personally I'm going to be trying SLES out on at least one machine at home, alongside OpenBSD and Mandriva, regardless which OS our beancounters plump for.

    1. Re:Worth checking out by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1
      AppArmor is interesting. Having played with both, I'd say that for the case of locking down a server running a few must-protect apps, AppArmor is probably a lot easier.

      AppArmor has another advantage over SELinux at least for desktop machines: SELinux requires an incredible slow "relabel" process every so often, as Red Hat push out updates to the policy. It takes places at bootup and you may as well go get lunch whilst it occurs. The idea is that every system object that may be confined has a unique label and then the centralized policy defines how objects with those labels interact. One of the top SELinux NSA guys has said "pathname based security considered harmful", though I forget exactly which list he said this on ...

      Anyway I think it's a good idea in principle but in practice real world SELinux implementations like in Fedora (and I guess RHEL as well) actually are pathname based .... they have a massive list of regular expressions that match pathnames to allocate labels to things. AppArmor uses paths directly. So it boils down to something similar.

      That said, SELinux is theoretically more powerful and I think it'd be easier to use it to implement some interesting security scenarios - for instance you could use it to totally eliminate prompting for root passwords whilst still having a more secure system at the end. SELinux has been integrated with other services like DBUS and X11 so you can restrict what programs can access each other via X and so on .... so it's kind of more "solid" in that sense. But that stuff doesn't matter much if all you want to do is restrain apache.

    2. Re:Worth checking out by G+Money · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more. For anyone who hasn't tried out AppArmor I highly recommend giving it a try with the distro of your choice or trying OpenSUSE as all of the newer SUSE products (SLES/NLD 9 sp3+, OpenSUSE 10+, OES sp2+) have it integrated with a stupid simple YAST interface for using it. I'm definitely biased as I've been friends with the Immunix crew for quite some time and work closely with Novell but having used a variety of MAC products (Argus Pitbull, SELinux, and AppArmor) I can say that AppArmor is the only tool that doesn't require weeks to configure. People who say MAC is difficult just haven't tried AppArmor yet. It's really quite easy to get a very high level of security by profiling the few applications of concern (anything running as root, anything that talks on the network, user apps like Firefox, Evolution, Kmail, Konqueror, GAIM, etc....).

    3. Re:Worth checking out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I keep hearing about how SELinux is a far more comprehensive system... which is probably true. I read SELinux blogs that claims that AppArmor is only a partial answer, that it doesn't provide boot to shutdown security etc etc. However, having used SELinux I can honestly say that I just don't give a damn about that.

      SELinux was conceived and designed for an environment where no-one trusts anyone -- Spooks, basically. The entire world is divided into minute levels of trust. Documents are treated like gold bars... and you have to have a background check before you can look at it, and a full-body search with anal probe before entering the building.

      No-one with a PC wants that level of security. No-one wants their PC to be run like a maximum security prison. It's miserable. I struggled through FC2, FC3, FC4 with SELinux... and when I upgraded to FC5 and found that Red Hat and widened the scope of SELinux even more and broken even more apps, and made my life even more like a gitmo resident... I finally gave up and disabled it.

      Now AppArmor... I like the sound of. Less of an all pervasive prison guard, and more of a security tool.

    4. Re:Worth checking out by TheNumberless · · Score: 1

      No-one with a PC wants that level of security. No-one wants their PC to be run like a maximum security prison.

      No, you don't want a PC with that level of security. That's all fine and good, and a majority of PC users probably feel the same way, but don't assume everyone's needs are the same as yours.

  16. I call meta by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Face facts folks, Linux still isn't ready for the desktop, and Novell, despite their loads of marketing, knows it.

    If Linux isn't ready for the desktop, there's no such thing as "ready for the desktop". I see absolutely NO criteria of "desktop readiness" that (a)applies to Windows, (b) doesn't apply to Linux and (c) is an attribute solely of the operating system.

    Where Linux adopters run into trouble is C. The problem is what economists call "network effects": if you need software X, and provider of X only targets Windows, then you need Windows.

    The point of a company like Novell migrating to Linux is to help create a Linux market for X, or its competitor X'. But until X or X' is available on Linux, then you're stuck with dual boot.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:I call meta by bwalling · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If Linux isn't ready for the desktop, there's no such thing as "ready for the desktop". I see absolutely NO criteria of "desktop readiness" that (a)applies to Windows, (b) doesn't apply to Linux and (c) is an attribute solely of the operating system.

      Well, see, as of a month ago, I still had to hand edit a text file to get wireless working on my laptop. That gets filed under "not ready for the desktop". While it may seem simple to you to type 'apt-get update' and 'apt-get upgrade' you have to keep in mind that *average* users don't ever want to see a command prompt. You're also correct about (c). You can't get Quicken for Linux, and GnuCash doesn't magically talk to my bank for me.

    2. Re:I call meta by AngryDill · · Score: 1

      That gets filed under "not ready for the desktop".

      No, technically speaking, that gets filed under "not ready for the laptop."

      But seriously, if the measure of "desktop readiness" is being able to support every conceivable piece of hardware without tweaking some obscure setting somewhere, then even Windows falls down. Many times, I've had to fiddle with the Registry on my wife's Windows box to add or change a setting, and that's no more straightforward (less in my opinion) then using a text editor.

      You can't get Quicken for Linux

      You're right, and I used to keep an old Win95 box on a KVM switch for exactly that purpose (I don't like to dual boot). Just over a year ago, though, I discovered and bought Moneydance. It's a cross-platform personal finance manager implemented in Java (I was skeptical that it might be sluggish because of that, but it seems to be more responsive than Quicken). The program isn't really "pretty", but it does everything I need it to do, including the "killer feature" of being able to download transactions from all my banks.

      I was then able to kick the KVM "habit" and go Linux full-time.

      -a.d.-

      --


      I'm Erwin Schrodinger and I approve of this message, and I do not approve of this message!
  17. Some of the migration problems are subtle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some software functions are hard to duplicate. For instance, many law firms still use WordPerfect. It differs from Office in many small ways that result in a huge saving in time in a law office. One example is the way that WP does a word count. It meets the requirements for legal documents. Office does its word count differently so if you're using it you actually have to do a manual word count. Getting the word count wrong could get you in trouble so, yes it matters.

    Another issue is Excel macros. Lots of accountants rely on macros that are hard to port over.

    I'm sure there are lots of similar examples that keep people on Windows. Of course for a substantial number of companies, the version might be 3.1. The same things that keep people from going to Linux also make them unwilling to upgrade their Windows.

    If upgrading to Vista is a huge pain, people will stick with XP. We may find many companies going to Linux (single or dual boot with XP) for their new computers because it will be less painful than upgrading to Vista. It should also expand the market for VM.

    1. Re:Some of the migration problems are subtle by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      "Lots of accountants rely on macros that are hard to port over."

      For whom? The accountant? Any programmer who knows any macro language can probably do it in minutes.

      This is why the real issue is IT policies. Mission-critical stuff should not be done in macros on a proprietary platform. It's just fucking stupid.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  18. Who cares? by sethadam1 · · Score: 1

    I get it - they aren't fully converted. But then - they do DEVELOP software that runs on Windows. And their tools will only succeed if they can integrate into a Windows environment.

    The accomplishment is that they are all dual boot and they use OpenOffice.org. Period.

    1. Re:Who cares? by winse · · Score: 2

      when I worked there 2 years ago, I wasn't dual boot. I just had 4-7 machines all the time with a kvm. I always had at least one windows machine depending on what I was doing, but the good hardware was always running linux. The culture there seemed to be: "MS took our lunch money years ago, and now we're going to face them armed with very little, but at least we're going down swinging." Of course some of the most accomplished technical people that made Netware what it was are long gone, but there are competent people still there.

      --
      this sig is deprecated
  19. Re:Games... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course they're dual-booting windows - how else are employees supposed to play the latest games?

    WINE? Cedega? Or how about na-tive?

  20. What is "desktop ready"? by RootsLINUX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find it quite ambiguous when people debate whether Linux is "desktop ready" or not. What does that mean? I have the notion that it means something different to everyone. I've been exclusively running Linux on my desktop for over 3 years, and exclusively on my laptop for over one year. I have a Linux system at my workplace, and so does almost everyone else on my floor. Are there occasionally problems with running Linux on my desktop (including problems related to the fact that I'm not running Windows)? Yes, of course there are. The amount of problems may decrease, but will never be fully eliminated (IMHO). I can usually find a detour or alternative to the problems that I face now though, so its not a huge deal. And I can state for a fact that the amount of time I spend fixing problems with my Linux desktop is much less than the amount of time I used to spend solving similar problems on my former Windows machine.

    So I consider Linux is already "desktop ready" for me. I think that for the most part, regular people can do just fine if Ubuntu or another user-friendly distro is completely setup for them and they are given maybe a 30-minute tutorial on how to access the web, e-mail, etc. So who are we talking about here? Who does Linux have to be "ready" for to be called desktop ready? Those idiots that call in to tech support asking which key is the any key? The elderly who don't even know what a mouse is? Or just your normal, average computer user? And if so, who is a normal, aveage computer user anyway?

    Sorry for the early morning rant, but this term has been bothering me for quite some time. :p

    --
    Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
    1. Re:What is "desktop ready"? by clydemaxwell · · Score: 1

      mod parent up
      I am also sick of hearing this term when it took me, my mom, my sisters, and so on practically no time getting used to linux. Windows isn't too terribly useful to computer illiterates either!

      --
      Browsing with classic discussion, noscript, at -1 and nested
      no hidden comments and I only mod UP
    2. Re:What is "desktop ready"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why, why, why is it still not possible for laptop makers to open up on ACPI drivers so that linux power management can be made to work properly? Yes, Toshiba, I mean you... and probably all the others too.
      If I were a little more cynical, I would start imagining that Microsoft were having little conversations with laptop makers, suggesting that keeping ACPI closed (and thereby giving Windows a bit advantage for no good technical reason) is a Good Idea... just another way to slow the advance of a competing ecosystem in the fastest-growing part of the market.

      Anyone care to name a maker that has completely open ACPI specs and therefore perfect linux power management? I'd buy one. Or dual-boot a mac :-)

    3. Re:What is "desktop ready"? by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      I find it quite ambiguous when people debate whether Linux is "desktop ready" or not. What does that mean?

      It means that too many people have figured out that "Total Cost of Ownership" is a pile of bullFUD, and it is time for the astroturfers and 'Doze fanbois to move on to some other grand sound bite.

      On almost any other topic, this here post would be flamebait. But the topic is Windows vs Linux, so the only thing that this post will generate is maybe some heat and smoke (no bright light of actual flame, no not any more)

    4. Re:What is "desktop ready"? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      I gave up on desktops a couple of years ago, but I am interested in a laptop ready OS. To be 'laptop ready,' it must meet the following requirements:
      1. It must suspend to ram as soon as the lid is closed. (OS X does this, Windows sometimes kind-of does this, although it has a habit of not returning from sleep. Linux has problems power saving the GPU)
      2. It must suspend to disk when the battery has It must have a consistent UI. (OS X more-or-less does this. A couple of GNUstep environments more-or-less do this but have a limited range of apps.)
      3. It must support encrypted swap and an encrypted home directory, since laptops are likely to be stolen. (OS X and OpenBSD both do this. OS X has a nicer UI for setting it up)
      4. It must fully support 3D acceleration, and wireless networking (both WiFi and Bluetooth via a mobile 'phone). (This varies depending on the hardware).
      5. It must have software that replaces all of my existing tools. (Nothing too strenuous, text editing, email/web, diagram drawing).
      At the moment, OS X comes closer to being laptop ready (for me) than anything else.
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:What is "desktop ready"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While one may like to blame Microsoft for the ACPI fiasco, it's mostly the fault of the manufacturer of the notebook or mainboard, who chose the shortcut to implement just enough to make windows work, and maybe use the Microsoft acpi compiler which is rather sloppy. However, I'd say most of the blame should be laid on Intel for developing a huge, overly compilcated specification which tries to be everything for everyone and making everything optional in the way for those who don't want to implement it, it's not surprising that essentially the only people producing ACPI code for linux are intel engineers.

    6. Re:What is "desktop ready"? by swillden · · Score: 1

      It must suspend to ram as soon as the lid is closed.

      I would say that OS X, Linux and Windows all do this... but only on the right hardware. Suspend-to-RAM works perfectly under Linux on my ThinkPad T40, but is flaky under Windows. On my T42p, it's the reverse. OS X has the advantage that the only hardware that will run the OS is also hardware that Apple has made sure can sleep (though my PowerBook seems to suck a lot of juice while sleeping).

      It must suspend to disk when the battery

      Same story as above.

      It must have a consistent UI.

      Depending on how you define consistent and which applications you choose, all three do, or none of the three do. Yes, Linux also has a consistent UI, if you limit yourself to a subset of the available applications. Freedesktop.org's work is gradually improving the consistency across the GNOME and KDE environments. OS X is generally more consistent than Windows and Windows is generally more consistent than Linux.

      It must support encrypted swap and an encrypted home directory

      I don't know if Windows has encrypted swap, but it can encrypt the files in your home directory. Linux can do both, but it's not necessarily easy to set up. OS X does.

      It must fully support 3D acceleration, and wireless networking

      Windows and OS X do, obviously -- Windows because the hardware vendor can't sell their stuff without Windows drivers and OS X because Apple won't sell the hardware until they make it work. Linux is more complex, but many laptops do work fine. Both of my Thinkpads do, for example.

      It must have software that replaces all of my existing tools.

      All three do this, at least per your specification.

      At the moment, OS X comes closer to being laptop ready (for me) than anything else.

      It sounds like you don't mean "laptop ready for you", but rather "fully supported on your laptop hardware".

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:What is "desktop ready"? by Trelane · · Score: 1
      Linux has problems power saving the GPU
      At this point in time, I've heard that Intel's graphics chips work 100% (unfortunately, I've an ATI card and cannot personally verify this, but I will tell you after I've had a chance to upgrade. ;)
      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
  21. guinea pig farm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol ... novell's own guinea pig farm.

    Their upper management has really high expectations for NDL and SuSE and I really hope they succeed. Unfortunately, unless Novell has an ace up their sleeve, I really don't see how they can succeed. They did bring a SuSE SDK ( something that no other Linux company has ever done) and they have really revamped SuSE and NDL, even if beauty is only skin deep ( XGL excluded ).

    Well like I said I wish Novell the best of luck and maybe in an year or 2 rather than migrating to Vista I will finally become a fulltime Linux user. ( tried that in the past and it was a serious pain with tons of time spent maintaining the system )

  22. Re:Games... by cciRRus · · Score: 0, Redundant
    Of course they're dual-booting windows - how else are employees supposed to play the latest games?
    How about using Cedega or WINE to play their latest games in Linux?
    --
    w00t
  23. No obstacles, only opportunities. by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can see why they haven't migrated yet. There are a few business apps, mostly vertical applications for ticketing, billing and invoice, that need to be run on Windows. For instance, where I work, we use a proprietary ticketing system that is unlikely to be ported to anything that isn't Windows. It enters problems on a customer's account, and assigns the problem to the appropriate technician, who then updates the ticket as needed.

    But here's the deal... for all of its slowness, awkward GUI implementation, dubious reliability and stratospheric license and support contracts, all it really does is read and update database records. It's a LAMP application with out the L, A or P.

    Here's a bigger deal... almost all vertical client/server apps can be replaced by a web-based application. Almost all of them do nothing but update and display database records.

    Why not just hire a full-time RoR geek or two to crank out LAMP applications that will be robust, secure, customizeable to meet coprorate standards, easy to deploy and dirt cheap compared to a multi-zillion dollar per-seat license?

    Why not indeed.

    This is where the new growth in the IT industry is headed. Already, most of the tools I need to interact with the vast and varied store of corporate data are web-based utilities. Admittedly, I work on the technical side of a major ISP, and we tend to be more elightened about such things, but really... Linux on the desktop will be a reality sooner rather than later.

    The trick isn't porting applications to the Linux desktop, but to the Linux server.

    1. Re:No obstacles, only opportunities. by acid_zebra · · Score: 1

      "we use a proprietary ticketing system that is unlikely to be ported to anything that isn't Windows. It enters problems on a customer's account, and assigns the problem to the appropriate technician, who then updates the ticket as needed."

      This exists in the open source world (and its LAMP, too :P)
      http://ruqueue.rutgers.edu/

      We've been using it for 6 months and it rawks. As much as trouble ticket systems can rawk anyway. AND there are a zillion programs like it on freshmeat.net in varying states of readiness.

      --
      -- No Sig is a Good Sig
    2. Re:No obstacles, only opportunities. by bwalling · · Score: 1

      Can everyone please stop with this 'port everything to a web based app' stuff? It sucks. It sucks for the developers and it sucks for the users. Even with AJAX, web development still sucks. Web apps still suck. A good GUI app will beat a good web app in terms of UI every single time.

    3. Re:No obstacles, only opportunities. by PsychicX · · Score: 1

      Why not just hire a full-time RoR geek or two to crank out LAMP applications that will be robust, secure, customizeable to meet coprorate standards, easy to deploy and dirt cheap compared to a multi-zillion dollar per-seat license?

      Probably because LAMP applications are not robust or secure without sinking a lot of effort. If we're talking LAPJ (Postgres, Java) then maybe you've got a case, but LAMP is a joke with anyone who knows what they're doing.

    4. Re:No obstacles, only opportunities. by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Web apps that rely on a browser like IE suck. Nothing more.

      This will change.

      SCT Banner - which is a HUGE application that runs universities - runs off Oracle Java stuff. Yes, the app itself sucks - but considering that it started out as a mainframe app, got shrunk down to client/server, then further shrunk down to the Web, that's not surprising.

      But there is little about it that doesn't do the exact same thing it did with a client/server GUI native on Windows. Yes, you have to install WebStart and JInitiator and download Oracle Forms crap and all that, so it's more client/server than pure Web, but it still runs in a browser - even in Firefox. Cut out the expensive Oracle cruft, and the whole thing could be in LAMP with Java.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  24. Re:I call bull by Jahz · · Score: 1

    Touche

    --
    There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
  25. Makes sense. by gregarican · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are likely some departments within Novell that still are dependent on Windows for third party apps. Like an accounting or payroll department perhaps. Are there enterprise level Linux apps that would support them? Not trying to flame. Just a question.

    1. Re:Makes sense. by jbolden · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well yeah like Peoplesoft, Oracle financials, JD Edwards.... The problem for those guys is Excel Macros not their core apps.

  26. They sell Windows software, duh by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

    We have tens of thousands of dollars (US) of Novell software that runs on Windows.

    If Novell didn't run Windows, how could they support us and their products?

    eDirectory for NT.
    ZfDS6.5.
    Middle Tier.
    Netware Client for Windows.
    ConsoleOne
    iManager
    Zenworks Imaging

    OMG - a company that sells both Windows and Linux software has machines that dual boot to both Windows and Linux. Who would have thought such a thing?

  27. The training myth by meosborne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The oft-hyped training issue is a complete myth in my experience.

    My parents (age 70+) are happily running Fedora Core 5. training was neglible. They e-mail, surf, and play games with no problems at all.

    My present company is completely linux-based using thin-clients. Training issues? None, nada. Complaints? None, nada. No issues teaching people to use Linux, no issues teaching people to use OpenOffice.org, or Gaim, or Evolution, or any of the other applications we use.

    We are a medical facility. Our staff are trained to treat patients and are by no means computer people. They just want the computer to work so that they can get their jobs done. And you know what? That's exactly what it does.

    Linux is not perfect, but neither is Windows. Each is better at some things than the other. Your comments are simply ignorant.

  28. It's not like they haven't already paid for it... by ViX44 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just because Novell is offering Linux doesn't make it heresy that they have boxes with Windows dual-booted. If they've already bought their licences for Windows, MS is already paid. Not exercising the licences they own out of protest isn't going to make a dent. Meanwhile, their devs need to be able to run stuff on Windows, so it kinda makes sense that they have Windows at their disposal.

    Speaking as someone who lost a number of potentially productive days trying to get Windows 2000 SP4-slipstreamed to install on a 250G harddrive without crapping out at boot-time when it saw a partition beyond the 128GB barrier, Linux is looking better every day. In fact, after spending five minutes in Fedora, Ubuntu, and SuSE, the chameleon won and is now installed on my hda4. But I still need Windows to run a few things...yes, mostly games, and a few college websites that just have to have IE6. But I already own Win2K, and I'd be silly not to use it just because MS is an idiot sometimes.

    Keeping Windows around for the things Windows is good at makes my computer more powerful. I don't support MS, but I'm not going to rend my nose to spite Bill's face.

    Windows, or at least, the Microsoft Operating System, is never going to go away. If Linux seriously erodes Microsoft's position, they'll sink their pentillions of dollars into making a solid, quality, viable OS product. So don't mind Novell, or myself, for installing SuSE and Windows next to each other. You need not be a zealot or a martyr to be a soldier.

  29. Re:Inspector Clouseau strikes again by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Informative

    I know you're trolling but you're obviously not very knowledgeable in business. It doesn't have to be the year of Linux for Novell to make millions. And guess what? We still haven't had "the year of Linux" and Novell is making millions! In the last year they've signed with a few governments. That alone is enough to drive the company for years. They have plenty of customers. In the last years they've had bigger problems with management than linux, IMO.

  30. Novell's growing at amazing rate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you see the 500 employees they added between the first sentence and the last?

  31. Did you know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A third of Novell's servers run Windows because those applications only run on a windows server...So much for removing windows from the desktop since they still need a device\user cal for anyone connecting to their windows servers.

  32. Developers + PSE's by Glamdrlng · · Score: 1

    Since Novell actively supports and develops Client32 for Windows, Groupwise for Windows, Zen for Windows, etc I hope they'll keep[ some Windows boxen around for developing and testing purposes. And since their PSE's support accounts that run Windows, those cats need to be using dual boot and/or virtualization setups as well. I say don't focus on how many desktops they didn't migrate to 100% Linux, focus instead on how many they did. I'm also willing to bet that if Novell weren't an IT company that had to develop and support software on Windows, they'd have migrated a much greater percentage of their desktops.

    --

    Yes, my only tool is a hammer. And you're starting to look like a nail.
  33. Wine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Until wine is in decent shape, it is pointless to approach general public to switch. While it will never run 100% of the applications,
    it is not necessary. It just a larger fraction of the applications than it currently does.

    Having said I was surprised to see how far it has come. I tested several niche applications used in the insurance industry with codeweavers. None of them had a problem. While I am not ready to recommend wine as an option in our company, I have a hope that
    in future it can become a reasonable recommendation.

  34. Report by supra · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if they are generating a report of the migration (positives and negatives).
    And if so, will they publish it?

    --
    On a computer or under a hood.
    1. Re:Report by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

      Anything positive in such a report won't be trusted, since they are selling Linux but not Windows.

    2. Re:Report by Krimszon · · Score: 1

      They are ofcourse documenting everything about this process. But not to share it with you and me, but to use in their own business support for companies that want to make that same switch. That documentation (knowledge) is be worth too much to just give it away.

  35. Re:I'll tell you why: The high cost of training by lordandmaker · · Score: 1

    I dunno. 'URPMI OpenOffice.org' seems far easier to me than finding, downloading, executing and specifying paramaters, which is easier again than convincing myself to part with the money for the latest MS Office.

    When i made the move over to Linux i wasn't at all a 'Linux Geek' (i still don't think i really am, aside from liking the CL), but maybe that's why i don't see these 'obvious' pitfalls. I switched because my Windows CD was scratched, and it occurred to me that it would be easier to download a Linux one than a new Windows one.
    Since then, i've used my PC for exactly what i used it for when i had windows, and i've had no problems installing anything. 'course, i don't try to upgrade the kernel, port software or hack software. I do web-browsing, instant messaging, e-mails and word processing.
    I also write HTML and Fortran, which, with Kate and GCC, is far easier and cheaper than anything i found in Windows, but i didn't look too hard in windows (they came bundled with Linux).

  36. Re:I call bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a load of crap! They won't ever be completely Windows free. They develop Windows software. Just because they still have machines configured to dual boot Windows doesn't mean that Linux isn't ready for the desktop it simply mean that they need to compile their Windows applications natively under windows. Once they migrate their Windows code base to a .Net language such as VB.Net/C#.Net this will no longer be an issue either. Since you can compile both using mono under Linux.

  37. Novell Still Doesn't get it by HighOrbit · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is slightly offtopic....but

    First to dispense with TFA: since they are developing stuff for Windows, they will never be rid of it, nor should they. So they will always run Windows in-house to some extent.

    But why can't they sell their product to other people? They have all the right parts to replace a Windows/Active Directory infrustructure. They have a desktop (Suse), they have a respected directory server (eDirecotry/NDS), they have general purpose servers (Suse), Zenworks to mananage it all, and they have an entrenched legacy product (i.e. a foot in the door) for which they can provide an upgrade path. Most importantly, they have them integrated seemlessly in their Open Enterprise Server. But they still can't get the sale. Its because their pricing provides no advantage over Microsoft A Novell Open Enterprise Server per user license per year is $230 retail. A MS Win2K3 10 user CAL is $1199 retail (or $119.9 per user). That's retail. MS, being the bigger company, has the ability to come even lower in enterprise or site licensing. Sadly, Novell doesn't seem able to do the math.

    They should take the chance that they could make up the difference in revenue by going with volume over price. More licneses for less each, instead of fewer licenses for more each. They have to realize that every Windows installation is going to lead to an Exchange installation instead of a Groupwise installation. If they could build the market share in the network products, the revenue in services and add-on products will follow.

    1. Re:Novell Still Doesn't get it by jojo1835 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You havent seen the latest bundle. It's called the Open Workgroup Suite, and it includes SLES, Open Enterprise Server (Linux version, but there is also pricing for the NetWare version), GroupWise, ZEN Suite (manage Windoze and Linux workstations and servers), SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, and support for OpenOffice.org on Windows (so you can have a mixed deployment). The pricing on it hasn't been announced, but it's in the $100 - $150 / user ballpark.

      Check it out here http://www.novell.com/products/openworkgroupsuite/

      For my money, that's way cheaper than a MSFT solution, plus it's got a ton of open components in there.

      TT

      --
      See... and you thought your sig was boring - TT
    2. Re:Novell Still Doesn't get it by rseuhs · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about it, but I think Novell includes support, but you have to buy it extra for the Windows-solution. (And that makes sense because if you don't need support you also don't need Novell to run Linux)

    3. Re:Novell Still Doesn't get it by ezs · · Score: 2, Informative
      Go look at the Novell Open Workgroup Suite - http://www.novell.com/products/openworkgroupsuite/

      Quote from the pricing and announcement:

      "The Novell Open Workgroup Suite includes the Linux* version of Novell Open Enterprise Server, Novell GroupWise® for Linux, Novell ZENworks® Suite, SUSE® Linux Enterprise Desktop and the popular OpenOffice.org. Pricing is $110 per device/user for a perpetual license and $75 annually for software maintenance."

      --
      Evil ZEN Scientist
    4. Re:Novell Still Doesn't get it by deanoaz · · Score: 1

      Novell is leveraging their legacy Netware installations to push Linux sales. With our existing Netware Multiple Licence Agreement, we are allowed to install additional SUSE boxes at no extra charge.

      That gives us a no-cost way of getting familiar with the systems.

      --
      If 'the people' in Amendment 2 are 'the state' then Amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 benefit the state, not you.
  38. Re:The Bright Side... by ianmassey · · Score: 1

    Maybe HP figured since you cheaped out on your OS you'd have a few spare bucks to spend on a printer other than their absolute bottom-of-the-line color laserjet, which isn't "new" by any stretch of the imagination.

    HP offers linux drivers for every color laserjet they make starting with the 3600 series and going up. So apparently the only asshole around here is the one who spends $250 bucks on a color laser and expects it to have features no other printer in its class has; and then shits on the company for his own cheap ways.

    Douche.

  39. Dual-boot means nothing in and of itself by RetiredMidn · · Score: 2, Insightful
    When I was working for Novell, I started my move to Linux by installing it on the second drive in my laptop and dual-booting; it was the easiest way to start with Linux and preserve the data on my Windows volume. I booted into WIndows very few times after that, and the last few times I realized that I really hadn't needed to. But my Windows volume remained intact (and unused) for months, until it was worth my time to re-format the volume and do a clean install of Linux. So I was officially in "dual boot" status for months, but using Linux 99% of the time.

    Having said that, the transition at Novell had its high and low points. I was pleasantly surprised at how quickly the services on the company intranet shifted from supporting WIndows/IE only to generic browsers. I was disappointed in the quality of the GroupWise client on Linux (not that I was wild about the Windows version...), and the lukewarm support for the Evolution client on the GroupWise servers.

    Oddly, the thing that made the Linux move easier for me than many of my co-workers was the fact that I am an OS X user by preference. Of course, the terminal was not a mystery, and I was more accustomed to accepting that similar things are sometimes managed very differently on different platforms.

    One constructive criticism I would leave Novell with is that they could learn a lot from Apple about making *nix palatable to the desktop user (specific example: printing), but, from where I sat, it seemed as though Apple was completely invisible to Novell.

    1. Re:Dual-boot means nothing in and of itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is using CUPS as a backend. Rumour has it that Apple has modelled its printing stuff after KDE Print even. To say it with Linux founder Linus Thorvalds: If you want printing to work decently just use KDE as a desktop. Not that it's the perfect solution but at least you shouldn't be limited in using your printer. SUSE has been popular because of its great KDE support.

    2. Re:Dual-boot means nothing in and of itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gads, if you think printing is a problem on Linux, you've not looked at SUSE Linux 10.0 and how its printing works.

      I recently had to set up printing for a bunch of Linux desktops and a single Windows desktop.

      For the Windows desktop, it took me almost 30 minutes to get the drivers (vendor site was having problems), and three tires to get the driver installed before it worked correctly.

      On the Linux boxes, it took about four clicks and I was done.

      To say that managing printing on Linux clients is difficult is to not live in today's world.

    3. Re:Dual-boot means nothing in and of itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and to say that configuring printing requires the use of KDE is also to not live in today's world - those machines that were set up in the AC reply to parent - all GNOME desktops (Novell Linux Desktop 9, actually).

  40. Non-story by jasonmicron · · Score: 1

    This has to be the biggest non-story I've ever seen on Slashdot.

    Seriously, did ELSE anyone read that summary and just think, "Wow, who cares what Novell is doing OS-wise internally?".

    Yes, I realize that this story is here for the purpose of reporting on another company converting to a pure-linux environment but the way the story reads, at least to me, is that Novell should be ashamed of itself for not doing it sooner or something.

    Not trolling, just saying...

    1. Re:Non-story by Wudbaer · · Score: 1

      Well, as Novell is supposed to be one of the biggest Linux vendors who publicly stated many many times that they are converting all of their internal systems to Linux and pronto this is certainly not only "another company converting to a pure-linux environment". Do as you say or "Eat your own dog food". Especially as I only yesterday read an interview with Mr Messman from Novell in some financial paper stating that Linux can do everything Windows can do and that there is no need for Windows any more (ok, he admitted that there will be a long time where Windows and Linux will have to live side-by-side, but still).

    2. Re:Non-story by jbolden · · Score: 1

      And they are quickly and aggressively converting all their internal systems to Linux. Their plan is on schedule. BTW their are shops that converted to all Linux in the late 1990s in a variety of industries. Most (all?) of them were coming from Sun, SCO, not Microsoft so the Linux argument that the problem is one of Windows "addiction" seems borne out by the evidence.

  41. [OT] HP LJ2600"N" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Now, if I could just get HP's new 2600N networked colour laser to work with FedoraCore5....

    Great, how can HP call this an "N" model when it doesn't support LPR protocol or Postscript? From the specs, it looks like a nearly hopeless WinPrinter. The only hope is that there are OS X drivers, so it can't be 100% Win dependent. But it is clearly "host based".

    I suspect you got sucked in by the "N" tag, and didn't research this. But thanks for warning the rest of us that a Laserjet "N" is no longer a safe bet for *nix users.

  42. Good Enough. by twitter · · Score: 1
    their pricing provides no advantage over Microsoft

    If that's true, it's good enough. Something that works better but costs the same will take market share. TCO is probably better on the Novell side and your data and employee's time is way to expensive to leave to Microsoft. By now, you have to have a hole in your head to use Exchange or any other M$ server.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  43. Dual boot? by misleb · · Score: 1

    I can't imagine why they would even want to dual boot if they could run something like VMWare and just virtualize Windows. Rebooting just to run a piece of software seems a little odd, unless it is a game that doesn't run well in VMWare. Something is fishy about this claim, methinks.

    -matthew

    --
    "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    1. Re:Dual boot? by jbolden · · Score: 1

      No, they're discouraging use of Windows by making it inconvenient. That gets the employee to spend some time thinking about how to do XYZ in Linux.

    2. Re:Dual boot? by misleb · · Score: 1

      Now THAT I can understand. ;-)

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
  44. Novell internal use of Linux and Windows by ezs · · Score: 4, Informative
    Disclaimer - I work for Novell.

    The migration away from Windows and Microsoft Office was always a phased approach.

    Office --> Open Office first (Novell is now standardised across the company on OpenOffice 2.0)

    Windows --> Linux workstations for those that can; based on business function, application needs and the 'savviness' of the user

    Right now I'd say that a large proportion of development, test and technical people are using Novell Linux Desktop as their primary desktop. I can see this just by working with people in meetings.

    I can't comment on the overall number of people using single boot Linux, dual boot or just Windows; all I can share is what I see - lots of people using Linux on a daily basis.

    The next phase is 'filling the gaps' - seeing how knowledge workers and those with specific applications can move. The release of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 in mid-year should help with a lot of these issues.

    Remember - just like any project choose the visible, realistic goals - that's what Novell's IS&T team have done.

    --
    Evil ZEN Scientist
    1. Re:Novell internal use of Linux and Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well... you get a paycheck from Novell.... I think saying you work for them might be stretching it...

    2. Re:Novell internal use of Linux and Windows by ezs · · Score: 1
      You obviously know me too well.

      If you weren't posting as AC I'd probably see you were my manager :)

      --
      Evil ZEN Scientist
  45. Management nightmare? by RomulusNR · · Score: 2

    But how are Novell's middle managers going to play with their Gantt charts from Microsoft Project?

    --
    Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
    1. Re:Management nightmare? by megabyte405 · · Score: 1

      By installing "Project" (shows up in GNOME under Applications, Office, Project Management), of course! :)

      --
      I recognize people by their sigs. Is that a bad thing?
  46. No sh**, Sherlock by bondjamesbond · · Score: 1

    No shit that they have to keep windows boxes around to develop with - for the developers. Maybe, just maybe, they are talking about all their NON-development activities like accounting, CRM, the receptionist, etc... converting to Linux. This is SO not worth the elevated BP to debate any further.

  47. Re:Inspector Clouseau strikes again by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 1

    Perhaps if Oracle bought Novell they would then have the power to give MS a true run for its money. Novell's Desktop Linux, OpenExchange with an Oracle DB back end and Evolution as the email client. OpenOffice/etc for the office suite. Opera or Firefox as their browser and Oracle, while still supporting Unices and Windows, has their own tuned Linux distro (SLES) to push their databases out on. This would be good competition for both Redhat AND Microsoft.

  48. freedom of choice by bmh129 · · Score: 1

    I thought the whole point of an alternative to Windows was to have a choice. Why are they in such a hurry to eliminate Windows from their company? Keep it for the win32 developers and remove it for all the others. No big deal. If all your developers do win32 and POSIX development, then paying the "Microsoft tax" is the cost of doing business. But if you want to get down and dirty, you could take a play from the Microsoft playbook. Make the POSIX version of a program as good as the Win32 version, and then gradually improve the POSIX version over the Win32 version, and then make up some BS excuse like "Windows can't handle it and Linux can," which may be true, but it doesn't have to be.

  49. Ready or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gnu/Linux is Now ready for some people , will be tomorrow for others , and was yesterday for others.

    I for example dual boot Ubuntu and Windows , why? well games , just for it! If was not Ati crappy drivers and Win-only games i would have dumped Windows a long time ago , i would dumped it anyway if i had a better pc , that way i would use Cedega instead and ignored the performance lost in favour of having only my dear Gnu/Linux for human beings in my computer.

    Problems with Ubuntu on a regular base? almost none :

    A) After reading this wiki https://wiki.ubuntu.com//UbuntuHowCome (great for noobs getting started) i was ready for apt-get , learned to edit my own sources.list (for those interested there is always the chance to get one already "completed" from several links) , and use several related commands , after a few codecs and programs install i had already a fully functional OS.

    B) Without wanting to be a troll , but people who say Windows as got a friendly gui than Gnome are simply morons , the applications are all organized under categories ( internet , games , sound and video , etc...) , images are automatically "previewed" at the Desktop , i can install themes and stuff just with drag and drop , etc...

    C) My only problematic hardware so far was my Ati radeon 9250 , sound , internet , printer , etc.. all work out of the box or with minimal fuss , i know most people have some piece that gives them troubles , but that luckily is not my case , believe it or not windows actually gave me more work in the past using official drivers to get things working.

    And now? well i just love it , multiple Desktops , apt-get to install stuff , if a break something at the next moment i already fixed it , at the current moment im dual-booting Breezy , Dapper Drake and XP , im also planning to try other distros.

    Planes for the future? This summer im going to install Dapper Drake at a friend computer , he does nt know almost anything about computers , his hardware is "Gnu/Linux friendly" , and after configuring it for him (he is not capable of doing it by himself , both in windows as Gnu/Linux) i will teach him how use the basic stuff without break anything , and im pretty sure he is going to love it!

    I also have plans to install it at my older sister laptop ( Acer Aspire 1691) , unfortunately as far as i know there are still some issues with Acers , and besides my sister has got Gigabytes of works made in Office 2003 which OOO at the moment is not capable of handling at 100% , so i decided to wait until OOO 3.0 comes out and see at the time.

    Gnu/Linux is groing at the Desktop , just wait and see.

  50. The'll always have to run Windows to some extent by kimvette · · Score: 1

    Novell will have to keep Windows around for as long as they have to:

      - produce Windows software
      - support existing product
      - maintain support contracts with legacy clients (see previous point)
      - need to interoperate with Windows (although based on SuSE 9.3 and 10, they did little testing of KDE/Samba integration with Active Directory in recent release, it took a fair bit of tweaking on my part to make it work)
      - Need to make Evolution work smoothly with Exchange
      - Need to work out migration paths for clients who wish to move away from Windows

    In other words, their support reps, development staff, and quality assurance labs will always need to keep Windows kicking around, very likely everything dating back to Windows 98 up through the current Enterprise Server, along with associated peripheral products like SQL Server, Exchange, Sharepoint, and so forth.

    Sales folks? Receptionists? Accountants? IT staff? They can very easily get away with running only Linux or UNIX variants.

    Changing your focus of business away from an antiquated product like Netware, acquiring the rights to UNIX AND becoming a Linux solution provider takes guts and a lot of pain goes along with it. They're lucky staying with Netware as their primary focus for so long even after Microsoft used their monopoly status to gain entrance into the server environment (and made Netware integration a bit difficult) didn't kill them. Now their main threat is that they're going head-to-head with IBM in the marketplace now in several areas, and personally I hope that Novell wins because Novell has real products to offer, while IBM is surviving primarily on services now.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  51. They'll never get rid of Windoze by gtg · · Score: 1

    I'd be surprised if Novell do manage the transition to Linux desktops. They sure as hell won't be using their own products on the servers: Many Novell web products only work with IE on the client. Last time I checked, M$ don't produce IE for Linux

    1. Re:They'll never get rid of Windoze by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that hasn't been true since the 6.5 Netware/OES release. I think the only thing that still requires IE is installing windows drivers to the iPrint broker. Which I did from VMWare.

    2. Re:They'll never get rid of Windoze by slothjammin · · Score: 1

      I'll have to concur. iManager, RemoteManager, GroupWise Webaccess all are accessible through Firefox on Linux. We run a (Traditional) Novell NetWare 6.5 shop here. 10 servers, VPN's, Bordermanager, GroupWise. We have a couple more SUSE servers for things like RSYNC, disk imaging, Hylafax server, etc.

      --
      Squidward: "Spongebob, If I had a dollar for every brain you don't have, I'd have 1 dollar."
  52. Ordissimo : a linux pc for the tech impaired ? by tajan · · Score: 1

    Who does Linux have to be "ready" for to be called desktop ready? (...) The elderly who don't even know what a mouse is?

    Well, why not. Indeed, a french company has developped a linux based computer aimed at those who have nether touched a computer in their life, and especially the elderly. It's called Ordissimo ("ordinateur" means "computer" in french). It's sold only as a piece of hardware running their custom distro (eliminating instal and driver problem), run a simplified version of mozilla, features basic word processing, file management and even extra unsuported feature such as skype or gaim. It is secure, features online update and the company provides paid remote support. The only obvious drawback is that you can't install additionnal software of your choice, but in our days of online Web 2.0 services covering most of the needs, why bother.

    The cost is 400 (320 $) without the screen. I grabbed one for my spouse grand mother, and being a Windows user myself, I feel more secure knowing that she runs a stripped down version of linux that she can't break, and a limited set of tools aimed at doing simply and efficiently what she needs (check email, occasionnal surfing and word processing, manage digital photos).

  53. Booting from Hard Disks by DrSkwid · · Score: 0

    Booting from hard disks, how primitive!

    5000 terminals with hard disks ensures plenty of hardware failure.

    Diskless terminals (not thin clients) *should* have been the future.

    Sadly the Lunix crowd is stuck with NFS, never mind.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    1. Re:Booting from Hard Disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fag.

    2. Re:Booting from Hard Disks by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Uhm, Linux Terminal Services Project...

      Troll.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  54. Re:Inspector Clouseau strikes again by FishandChips · · Score: 1

    I'm afraid you are in the grip of a fantasy. I'd suggest you read up on Novell's recent financials before talking about them "making millions". Or ask your parents to read them to you when you are out of short trousers. You may be surprised at the real situtation, which makes the stream of announcements, interviews, etc., from Novell all the more fatuous.

    --
    Las qué passoun
    tournoun pas maï
  55. There is no need to be apologetic. by master_p · · Score: 1

    Windows is a great operating system, despite all its problems. Let's not forget how many machines run Windows. Linux is cool, and if you are a programmer, maybe it is better, but for everyday use, Windows is fine.

  56. Re:Inspector Clouseau strikes again by FishandChips · · Score: 1

    Novell turned over just around $50 million in pure Linux products last year (as disinct from its Linux netware replacement products which you won't need if you don't want netware). Novell itself is capitalized at around $3 billion. Why should Oracle pay £3 billion to acquire a revenue stream worth $50 million? Explain please.

    --
    Las qué passoun
    tournoun pas maï
  57. Reality check by metamatic · · Score: 1
    ...Novell has real products to offer, while IBM is surviving primarily on services now.

    You ought to take a look at IBM's actual annual reports. IBM Software Group has a large portfolio of software products, and pulls in billions of dollars of sales every year. (And yes, it's profitable.) Less than IGS, but not exactly peanuts.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  58. Re:I call bull by fritz1968 · · Score: 1

    Face facts folks, Linux still isn't ready for the desktop, and Novell, despite their loads of marketing, knows it.

    Either this guy is a troll or doesn't know Novell at all. Since when has Novell been know to do a lot a marketing? Or even a little for that matter?

    --
    It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
  59. Re:Inspector Clouseau strikes again by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 1

    You are thinking small. I am not saying "Aquire Novell for Novell's current assets and asset structure. I am saying use Novell's assets along with your own to become greater than the sum of the parts. You could sell the pie and the pie plate with the fork too. SuSE could easily become the defacto standard for Oracle Databases. OpenExchange with Oracle DB back ends would be sales of more databases, etc; a real viable chance to take on MS in that arena.

  60. Re:Inspector Clouseau strikes again by truthsearch · · Score: 1

    I have their annual report on my desk here. Thanks for the useless comment with a total lack of any information to back it up.

  61. Different people different idea of IDE by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    My experience with an IDE was with QuickBASIC. You could/can get help on any feature of the language just by placing the cursor on a word in your program and pressing F1. If you put the cursor on a variable and pressed F! it told you what type it was. If you pressed F1 on a user defined type, you would see all of the elements of that type.

  62. Re:Inspector Clouseau strikes again by FishandChips · · Score: 1

    The information is in their recent financials which I take it you have not read if you do have it. Novell announced a 22 per cent rise in the growth of their pure Linux products to $13 million. While that may sound impressive, Novell's annual turnover is just over $1.2 billion, and a huge proportion of that is their netware side which is declining since many netware customers are migrating to other platforms. No one has yet explained how a product line currently turning over $50 million is going to replace turnover worth $1.2 billion before the whole thing goes tits up, especially as Red Hat, Novell's main Linux competitor, are growing their own Linux market at twice Novell's rate which means less opportunity for Novell.

    Like many people, I suspect you have been taken in by the SuSE story without realizing that it comprises not even 10 per cent of the whole company picture. In addition, no one has yet demonstrated that there is a market for SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, Novell's much-touted new killer distro, or that Mono is ever going to be something Novell will make money from.

    --
    Las qué passoun
    tournoun pas maï
  63. fedora for dads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes. My father is running FC3 as well. He was interested in free software and liked where it was coming from, and thus willing to put up with transition costs. Also, a series of poor experiences with windows for the last eight years added incentive to move.

    He seems fine. I do need to upgrade to FC5 though, if only because of NetworkManager and thus easier hot-spot detection. That was problematic before.

  64. Re:The Bright Side... by XB-70 · · Score: 1

    I don't need to stoop to your level to post a response. Please take the time to read the reasonable, cogent reply to your missive from a decent concerned citizen... ([OT] HP LJ2600"N" )

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  65. Re:I call bull by scottv67 · · Score: 1

    or even better: Touché

    ALT+0233 on the keypad.

    If you are posting to Slashdot from a VT100, you may have trouble finding the Alt key. :^)

  66. Re:The Bright Side... by ianmassey · · Score: 1

    I think your original post's -3 score speaks for itself. If you need a few bucks to buy a low-end color laserjet that supports linux, my lawn needs mowed. Let me know.

  67. Re:The Bright Side... by XB-70 · · Score: 1

    Allow me to fill you in a bit: the reason for the choice of hardware is that I'm building a Linux server http://www.k12ltsp.org/ with some old, dumb work stations for a computer lab at a school of disadvantaged kids. This on my own time and my own dime. The idea is to end up with a model that can provide easy, cheap, reliable horsepower while leveraging some existing hardware. Laser printing has a net-net lower cost per page.

    So, flame away. But remember that you're flaming someone who is giving kids a hand up, not a hand out. I'm just wondering what your contribution to society is.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  68. Re:The Bright Side... by ianmassey · · Score: 1

    Donating linux hardware to schools doesn't make you a saint, it makes you an activist. The distinction is important. And furthermore, even if you were St. Peter Incarnate, i'd still bust your ass for flaming HP when they did nothing unethical, immoral, or in opposition to any promises they have ever made. The "N" in 2600N designates the presence of an ethernet port. Nothing more. Had you read their website before you bought the printer, you would have known that it didn't have linux drivers, saving yourself both the $250 and getting called out by me on an internet site over your misinformation. So by all means, congratulations on boosting your own e-political agenda by giving some kids access to linux. That has nothing to do with this post, but since you seem to need validation on the subject, there it is. My contribution to society is that by virtue of being a high-earning republican, my copious tax dollars end up paying to replace your crappy donated hardware with expensive Macs after the system realizes there is no legitimate basis for linux in elementary or middle schools. Further down the road, my copious tax dollars will pay for your disadvantaged children to eat and watch cable TV while they serve their jail sentences. No need to thank me, I'm forced to do it by the government.

  69. OT (was:Novell internal use of Linux and Windows) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, really... I doubt your manager reads Slashdot... would you believe I was a fan? Or maybe a well-informed customer? How about someone from a rival group just looking to throw some anonymous public jibes? :)

    But, then, reading and responding to all these messages on Slashdot yourself sort of re-enforces my previous point, doesn't it? ;)

    (And, can I just say that it's very liberating posting as an AC... )

  70. Re:I'll tell you why: The high cost of training by McCarrum · · Score: 1

    Anyone who modded this as a Troll doesn't deserve their friggin mod points.

    I'm a Linux weenie, but the points above are very very true, and no manner of indepth analysis of the "rights" and "wrongs" of how things are done today will change the reality of what and how computers and their OSes function. We have reached a point where a computer is not a difficult device which requires a degree to operate. It is able to function as simply as a "device". I don't need to know "how" a microwave oven functions to be able to use it, and use it safely and easily.

    And, this mentality is the vast VAST majority. Rattling the sabre about "you should *understand* the workings of your PC" rank up there with "you should *understand* how microwaves function" so I can use my oven. If I *wish* to learn, then I can - but nobody should be forced to do such, and this unrealistic expectation to do such will only continually to hamper the cause.

    Every wondered why Ubuntu has rose to where it is today?

  71. Don't sweat it too much... :-) by Svartalf · · Score: 1
    "Hey, no fair! How come you get a higher score than I do..."


    I was teasing and joking with you when I made the quip (Hey Mods, look at the smilie next time! :-) - and look what it got me... Moderated negative as flamebait- ah, well... Happens some days...

    I've got raftloads of karma from prosaic and interesting commentaries on posts and other comments- so my posts typically come out of the gate at 2...

    Anyhow, it seems you actually DO see what I was getting at for the most part, but you lack something else that I happen to have- if things go right with my company's funding, I've got inside info that's relevent to all of this- let's just say that things are about to experience a sea change, much like the one from DOS to Windows or from all the CP/M machines over to DOS.

    Linux is either going to be going ballistic or going slowly into those areas. I'm thinking more the latter than the former- but it's going to hinge on a few key things happening. If my company gets funded, that'd be one of those key things.
    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  72. everythin' I needed was right in the hole by vpalexander · · Score: 1

    Mormonic anagramics aside
    The world keeps on spinning around
    Inter-layer enhancements
    Middleman
    Jazz

    Hot CA Novell brothel gasp sigh stew
    What's a little Mormon boy to do?
    Genius misdirected but
    Locked in by guilt and shame

    Set that bastard free I say
    Give me printership by USB
    Don't diddle with your daddy
    Don't think so much about money

    Take a lesson from the Red Man
    Screw 'em with their own hand
    Milk the bull
    All coffers full.

    When all is said and done
    And patents racked and rolled
    It's a proprietary scheme
    That's gotten old and stale.

    Roll out your bed partners
    Close your accounts
    This is divorce, fool
    And Utah is on the outs.

  73. Re:I'll tell you why: The high cost of training by richlv · · Score: 1

    i don't read slashdot that much, but even then i have noticed the exact same post in some 5 or so places. even at articles that have nothing to do with linux, userfrendly computing or computers at all. so yes, that particular post was clearly a troll.

    --
    Rich
  74. Re:Don't sweat it too much... :-) by myxiplx · · Score: 1

    rofl, sorry bud, didn't mean to get you modded as flamebait... guess the mods didn't see my smilie either :)

  75. Re:The Bright Side... by XB-70 · · Score: 1

    Ok, let's drop the gloves. I'm a right-wing pinko-hater too, but, sir, are dead wrong. The reason for using Linux is in no way evangelistic nor is it about propagating some sleazy activist agenda. It's about value, plain and simple. As any decent wealth-builder knows, the way you make money is by spending it efficiently on something that will give you a higher return that the initial price. Commodity hardware depreciates faster than fame in a one star movie, so leveraging used equipment that would otherwise need to be scrapped and re-purchased makes imminent sense. Add to that: minimal downtime, significantly reduced virus threats, lower maintenance and longer up-times etc. etc. The end goal being that the return comes from giving kids an edge who would not otherwise have it. A hand up, not a hand out.

    What you fail to see is the bigger picture: your government does not have a fundamental belief in education, as is evidenced by your obvious ignorance.

    The entire well-educated Pacific Rim is frothing at the prospect of pumping cheap products at a prodigious rate into the debt-shackled American economy. India is out-educating Americans in software development and taking market share there. Europeans consistently out-perform American educational standards. I don't think even you can argue that China will surpass the U.S. G.D.P. between 2035 and 2050. So, if you're going to put your hard-earned wealth anywhere and really make a difference, do the right thing: improved education will equal improved competitiveness. Hell, even Bill and Belinda Gates have figured that one out!!

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  76. Re:The Bright Side... by ianmassey · · Score: 1

    Educating the lowest common denominator doesn't help anyone out. It is precisely the disentegration of the socio-economic status quo that is responsible for American "dirty work" jobs being outsourced, fostering new economic prosperity in places like India, who can now afford to educate their people in a way that was strictly a western practice 30 years ago.

    If you want the American GDP back up, focus on steering talented kids (there's plenty of them) toward innovation in science the way their grandparents were steered, pre and post ww2. History has shown that if you lead technologically and socially, economics will follow suit. Let your underpriveledged kids get desperate enough to work for a living like THEIR grandparents did, and maybe we can get some of our jobs back from overseas. Life's too easy for the middle and lower middle class these days.

    The cost of linux vs. its competitors has been more than exhausted here and everywhere else too many times in the past 10 years to even bother addressing again. All i'll say is this: market share walks the walk, philosophy talks the talk.

    When it comes to MY hard earned money, it's being put to use really making a difference in MY standard of living. When I have Gates dollars maybe i'll start worrying about everyone else.