Oracle Looks At Buying Novell

Several readers wrote to note Larry Ellison's comments about launching an Oracle Linux Distro (great! yet another!) and that Oracle has/is also looking at purchasing Novell. The great shake-out continues.

Comments

yay

[KarmaMB84]

Oracle Novell SuSE Desktop Linux!

Re:yay

[iggymanz]

hey, that's GNU/Oracle-Novell-SuSE Desktop Linux!! GnoranoveSuSE?

Re:yay

[utlemming]

Better yet, just imagine how this would have some serious impact on our friends at SCO? They thought they were taking on IBM, and Novell got into the mix, but with an acquistian by Oracle you would have SCO up against IBM and Oracle -- two heavy weights. To really make it painful, Larry Ellision is not known for being a nice business man.

Re:yay

[gclef]

Nononono, it's Oracle Web Novell Enterprise Desktop.

Re:yay

[antarctican]

We ditched Red Hat when they dropped their free distribution in favour of Fredora (really, what business wants to rely on a distro with a version life cycle of a few months?)

So we went to SuSE because it had a longer upgrade cycle. Why am I filled with dread the moment I read the title, why can I see Oracle doing the same with SuSE that Red Hat did with it's distro - the free one becomes their test version with the public as beta testers.

Well, I guess this means I can finally convince my boss to switch to Debian.

Re:yay

[marktoml]

I think it more likely that the opposite would be true. It is unlikely that Oracle would focus on the OS as a revenue stream *directly* rather as an enabling technology for the rest of the stack they already sell. Naturally there would be the ability to buy support for th OS itself so that would add some value.

Re:yay

[Deathlizard]

I imagine this, and it scares me.

I'm not too sure what Oracle would do here, but look at it from Oracle's Standpoint. They Don't like IBM (more Specifically IBM's DB2). Novell's sitting on patents that could theoretically swing the SCO Linux debacle both ways. Linux is one of IBM's big assets, and IBM is moving a lot of their platforms from AIX to Linux. If they buy Novell, they may just swing on the SCO side just to get at IBM to slow them down and spend money in the process.

And it doesn't stop there. kicking Linux also gives MySQL a pot shot since most of their installs are Linux installs. Also a lot of their other competitors run on Linux software. If Oracle wanted to do the evil thing, they could side with SCO and set Linux back for a while and give their competitors headaches.

On the other hand, Siding with IBM gives MS a kick in the groin. So it really comes down to who Ellison hates more in the end. Right now, I'm pretty sure it's Microsoft.

oracle tuned

[iggymanz]

RedHat and SuSE are the usual "enterprise" distros that have tweaks for running Oracle, but Redhat dominates. wonder how threatened RedHat would be if Oracle bought and pushed SuSE. Oracle has had a problem in the past four years of trying to make integrated features that really were best left to third party, like for example oracle filesystem and oracle clustering, which are shakier and more trouble to admin than 3rd party.

Re:oracle tuned

[hackstraw]

RedHat and SuSE are the usual "enterprise" distros that have tweaks for running Oracle, but Redhat dominates. wonder how threatened RedHat would be if Oracle bought and pushed SuSE. Oracle has had a problem in the past four years of trying to make integrated features that really were best left to third party, like for example oracle filesystem and oracle clustering, which are shakier and more trouble to admin than 3rd party.

RedHat threatened? How about Sun Microsystems?

Back in the day, Sun's Solaris was the target for Oracle. Every other platform was a port of it, and reportedly not as good. I've only used Oracle on Solaris for big and important DBs.

I've thought for years that Oracle should be an OS because an Oracle box is not going to be doing much else anyway. Oracle has its own filesystem, redundancy, clustering, you name it. Many of Oracle's "big boy" features are blurred between what an application does and what an OS does. Its common that the first thing you do when you install oracle is modify the OS to allow for Oracle to work. Most importantly, its the shared memory parameters of the OS that needs to be modified (or at least used to as of version 10).

Having an Oracle OS seems inevitable. With Linux its more than possible.

Re:oracle tuned

[digidave]

I sort of agree with you, but if I were Oracle I'd be much more interested in OpenBSD, wouldn't you? The license is much better for a company that wants to take the code and wrap it around a big proprietary product.

Is it just me?

[pubjames]

Is it just me, or does it seem like a lot of the IT companies don't get Linux and OSS.

Hint to Larry (and IBM, HP, Novell, etc): Work together on a single distribution of Linux if you want to get rid of Microsoft. Commoditize the OS and make your money providing services and software on top of it.

Re:Is it just me?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Hint to Larry (and IBM, HP, Novell, etc): Work together on a single distribution of Linux if you want to get rid of Microsoft.

Hint to pubjames: Larry, IBM, HP, Novell and all the others would go to bed with Microsoft without any moral qualms if it was profitable for them and if it wasn't a dangerous move in the long run.

Re:Is it just me?

[kimvette]

No sane person wants to get rid of Microsoft. Eliminate Ballmer maybe, but not Microsoft. Competition is good, and aside from Microsoft's redefining terms like "downtime" to appear competitive and obfuscating configuration tools (e.g., tools like Exchange, Active Directory, the IIS metabase) Windows is a good choice for a good number of people. The costs need to come more in line with its real value and maintenance and configuration tools need to improve to bring the true TCO in line with other operating systems, but for a system that Joe Sixpack can click through and get a basic server configuration up and running, you cannot beat Windows. Linux is "getting there" from that perspective, and so is OS X server, but neither is quite there yet.

Competition is good for everyone. You can bet that if Microsoft, Apple, and Sun were gone tomorrow and Linux were considered the be-all-end-all of operating systems, development sponsorship from corporate entities would decrease or simply stop and development would slow to a crawl.

Fragmentation

[Anonymous Coward]

SuSE is starting to be come fragmented from so many changes. Oracle would only be able to further complicate SuSE development. There have been many core changes since Novell bought SuSE and if gives SuSE that patched together feeling. Companies can't keep doing this to SuSE customers. SuSE customers need a stable reliable platform to develop upon.

Re:Novell has been for sale for years

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

You make them sound like Caldera. At least they have the rights to Unix.

So now we can look forward to...

[Billosaur]

"We're missing an operating system. You could argue that it makes a lot of sense for us to look at distributing and supporting Linux."

Ladies and Gentlemen, Larry Ellison proudly presents -- Orix!

I for one am not jumping on this bandwagon, because Larry is driving and I don't think he has one hand firmly on the wheel as it is. This is a shotgun marriage and isn't liable to make Oracle any more competitive with Microsoft in the forseeable future. He should have probably done this 5 years ago.

FT and eweek links

[Anonymous Coward]

FT link

eweek.com link

In other news

[Billly Gates]

Mysql and postgresql are mysteriously missing from SuSE after the acquisition

Re:In other news

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

You overreacted. KDE is still very much supported on SuSE. Why jump ship based on a rumour of what someone might possibly do when you can just as easily jump ship later if they ever actually do it. I am on OpenSuSE 10.0 now and the water is just fine.

Years ago I was worried that what I was doing did not have much of a future and was looking at retraining doing something else. In the end I decided to carry on with what I was already specialised in and cross that bridge (retraining) when I came to it. I am still working on the same platform 20 years later, still worried that it is going to run out at some point but have noticed that some of the alternatives I was looking at back then no longer exist.

Don't panic.

Re:In other news

[rainman_bc]

I did. I did when Novell made noises that they were going to stop supporting KDE on SuSE.

And yet YaST remains written in Qt... An annoying move on SuSE's part...

Re:Not another distribution.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Gentoo and Ubuntu ought to be enough for anyone. That's it. No more corporate Linuxes.

What?

What about Debian? (Ubuntu would have trouble without debian to fork every six months)

What about Redhat? (They sponsor alot of stuff that goes into both Gentoo and Ubuntu)

The great thing about linux is that people can go and do their own thing as much as they want - who cares if there's another distro - all the good bits will be ported back to Distro-you-use (tm).

Frankly, I think Oracle Linux would be great (even if I'd never use it). Loads of corporations are vaguely interested in linux to run oracle on to save on the costs of Sun Hardware. An oracle CD they just pop into their drive, where everything just works would make life easier for them and smooth corporate acceptance of other OSS.

That's been out for a while.

[khasim]

Oracle on NetWare beens out for a while now.
http://www.orafaq.com/faqnetwr.htm

Personally, I think that it would be a bad move for Oracle to attempt to expand into the desktop OS/app market. They don't have the experience at that level.

Re:That's been out for a while.

[bernywork]

Umm Oracle Financials, the complete design and implementation, full Java front end, a complete dev environment... So they have an application dev environment, and all the applications they put out, now including PeopleSoft.

Oracle supports Novell / Suse, Asianux and RHES as it stands now. As well as doing code contributions back to the kernel. Admittedly this is predominantly to do with their clustered file system, and some of the memory allocation stuff, but still, it's better than some. They also run a number of their servers on Linux as well. They would have to have one of the biggest commercial Linux installations around at the moment.

So; they are doing application development on Linux, Linux kernel work, supporting the operating system through 3 or so distributions and a number of iterations thereof...

Really, why not just buy Novell / Suse and take their staff who can help to support it, and who are doing exactly that now?!?

Apples & Oranges

[MudButt]

Work together on a single distribution of Linux if you want to get rid of Microsoft

I don't think their goal is to get rid of Microsoft, per say. When you buy an automobile, you have the choices ranging from sedans to minivans to heavy duty trucks. Does the Ford F350 really "compete" with a Honda Civic? Does a person purchase a vehicle and decide between the two of those? Not for the most part. For the most part, I've seen IT professionals pick the right tool for the job. When I need to deploy a Microsoft solution, it's usually because it's the best fit for the job. When I need to deploy and Linux solution, it's usually because it's the best fit for the job.

IMHO, there are very few instances where and educated IT professional could actually have to compare a MS or OSS solution in the same way a car buyer would compare a Ford F350 and Honda Civic.

Re:Apples & Oranges

[Anonymous Coward]

When I need to deploy a Microsoft solution, it's usually because it's the best fit for the job.

So you have people at your company who spend all their time gaming?

Re:Apples & Oranges

[wtansill]

I don't think their goal is to get rid of Microsoft, per say. When you buy an automobile, you have the choices ranging from sedans to minivans to heavy duty trucks. Does the Ford F350 really "compete" with a Honda Civic?

I think you miss the point. The reason that M$ has been wildly successful ("success" being defined by the fact that they own > 90% of the desktop space) is that they came out with a standard way to interface with the underlying system (yeah, I know -- 16/32 bit API's. Still...). To my knowledge, Linux hasn't achieved that. Part of that is by design -- the folks who do Suse have a different vison than the folks who do say, Mandrake. Still, if you want to dislodge M$ and have far greater desktop penetration, you need to have a standard to which various vendors can write.

If I'm missing something, please feel free to enlighten me.

whatevar

[JeanBaptiste]

I'm running DBase II over Banyan Vines.

XANDROS would be a much better buy

[LINM]

Xandros would be a much more appropriate acquisition:

1) Best in class business desktop
      -Best desktop: LinuxWorld best business product
      -Focused on the business user (vs the Novell Gnome focused desktop that is more all-purpose / home user market)
      -Designed to provide an easy transition for Windows users (vs all of the other distros - more below)

2) Best in class Linux "business" server
      -The new Xandros server offers the print serving, file serving, network management needed to run small businesses. I
      -Provides unique capabilities (apart from Microsoft) that would instantly differentiate Oracle from all the other "me-too" Linux players
      -Designed to provide an easy transition for Windows users (vs all of the other distros - more below)

3) Better strategic fit
      -Xandros is a pure play in the Linux area and would not come with the "hair" and unwanted, sub-leading products that Oracle would pick up from Novell (and have to pay for)
      -Xandros comes on top of the Debian server architecture. This would be an immediate and powerful win for Oracle to pick up the Debian Server base.
      -Top business focused engineering team with long track record of efficient engineering (that delivered the award winning Corel Linux Desktop)
      -Xandros was founded as an Simple Compatible replacement for Windows and Microsoft solutions that would provide an easy transition for Microsft users. Compared to the other Linux distros that have been laboring hard to create a new better product albeit alien to the marketplace. This company has not deviated from this strategy (plans for this server were announced years ago).

Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy

[filesiteguy]

Well, I'd disagree with your (otherwise valid) reasoning for one issue - Novell has a world-class network admin software (Zen, I believe) and a whole host of people still running NetWare. I think from an Oracle perspective, that would be more tasty than a desktop like Xandros (which I haven't honestly tried) that is percieved to be more of a home-based system.

Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy

[cloudmaster]

Xandros is a modified Debian - not a totally separate distribution like SuSE (I know, they stopped the mixed-case capitalization, but I like the dropped u). So, "buying" Xandros really wounld't be the same thing. They wouldn't really be getting a whole distro, just a team of people who modify someone else's distro. Xandros would not necesarily be "bad", but with Novell, they'd get the actual point of origination for a distro. And Novell has a bunch of other cool stuff beyond SuSE, like the zen management things and a big respected (generally) name, among others...

Nevermind, of course, that Ubuntu's better than Xandros (Corel didn't go away because it was a great distro). ;)

Why stop there?

[jayhawk88]

Hell, let's get Sun into this deal somehow too! Then we could have the trifecta of old school struggling tech companies bound by a hatred of Microsoft.

Rumors preempted

[Anonymous Coward]

Rumors of a Novell buyout by Oracle were pre-empted today when Redhat officially announced their aquisition of Novell.

It seems, though that all may not be lost for Oracle. Redhat has indicated that Novell will sell off their Suse division before the Redhat-Novell merger is completed.

"We have been trying to work this deal for a long time," said the head janitor at Redhat's Sao Paulo, Brazil offices. "Why do you think we ejected 'Fedora Directory Services'? We're ready to push eDirectory to its full potential!"

Officials at Oracle did not comment. But a chair was heard smashing against a wall in Redmond, WA.

Re:Novell's new tagline

[Dr. Evil]

Naw, not rotten. Novell is a good company. Stable, boring.

It's more of a pinecone. Nobody is sure what to do with it.

hypocrites

[towsonu2003]

FTFA:

"We're missing an operating system. You could argue that it makes a lot of sense for us to look at distributing and supporting Linux."

Well, if you want to support Linux, give money to Linux-related open source projects you like. Coming up with a new distro with the argument of "supporting Linux" is not logical.

PS. I know and support the argument that the huge number of distros is a benefit of Linux. But an Oracle Distro? I don't buy that...

Say it isn't so!

[Horatio_Hellpop]

Novell Suse Linux 10.0 is the *FIRST* and *ONLY* desktop distro I've tried (RHEL, FC4, Mandriva, Linspire, Ubuntu) that has properly detected all my hardware and installed with barely any tweaking.

It's been a dream.

Novell ... please don't let Oracle destory it! Please!

Why?

[geoff lane]

Why would Oracle want Novell? A company like Oracle could knock up a Linux distro in a short time but why bother when they could just cross-license for a fraction of the cost. Do they want the residual Novell netware customers? Unlikely. Is it just a case of "because we can"?

But when Novell and IBM have finally kicked The SCO Groups butt, Novell ends up with a clear legal right to Unix. A paranoid person might wonder if Oracle is after Unix for some reason.

Re:Why?

[hackstraw]

Why would Oracle want Novell?

Brand recognition. 90% of Oracle's business comes from suits that sit in their office and say, "We need Oracle to drive the DB for this project!" Even suits that have previously negotiated and paid Oracle's licensing before.

Oracle could buy/use/exploit any of the hundreds of Linux distros, and the result would or could be about the same. Picking one of the top two Linux distros known in the business world seems to make sense. Would you really think that picking something called something like Ubuntu, Mandriva, Linspire, Slackware, or Puppy Linux would have better brandname recognition and perceived esteem over Novell and SuSe?

Re:This is a great idea...

[fimbulvetr]

so we wouldn't need to have a full time guy to test software upgrades with our current Oracle installations, or to troubleshoot errors

LOL. You've never worked with Oracle software have you? They have a very hard time releasing patches, much less testing them. I've spent dozens of hours on the phone with RH, IBM, Oracle, etc, and Oracle are the _last_ people you ever want to due to their gross incompetence and intentional disregard for anything you might know or claim to know.

Identity Management

[The Second Horseman]

The bigger issue for Oracle isn't Linux, it's Novell's Identity Manager product - it's the best in the market. Oracle has been buying a lot of companies in the space, so they have 3 (or is it 4?) products, none integrated, with no clear future direction for folks buying a product.

Oracle has been going to a lot of trouble to shove Novell's IDM out of shops by pressuring sites to switch to their identity management product lately.

Of course, this could just be "Crazy Larry" trying to get IBM to blow a lot of cash buying Novell to prevent Oracle from controlling the intellectual property at issue in the SCO case.

I see something alot more sinister.

[saur2004]

OK let say Oracle buys Novel. The first thing they could do, is use their much more substantial and well funded coral of land sharks in Novels fight against SCO. OK now lets say they win. Now Oracle can say they own UNIX IP outright.

And now we get SCO round 2, but with a far more powerful and well-funded bank of land sharks.

Not a good move

[Ian.Waring]

The #1 thing that Linux gives to users (that they value highly) is choice of hardware and software on commodity (read: Intel or AMD) platforms. From a commercial subscription market share perspective, it's just about game over; Red Hat is up there in 90% plus land with SUSE collecting almost all of the few remaining crumbs.

To date, Novell is stronger on PR (Google search volumes on "SUSE" are almost at Red Hat levels) but are struggling really badly to monetise this.

The best thing that Oracle could do would be to support both equally. As stupid as it sounds, everyones best interest is served by having two (or more) Linux distributions duking it out.

Read the article again

[houghi]

FTFA: Oracle had considered buying Novell Inc

The way I read it, it means: We looked at buying Novell, but instead will be launching our own Linux distribution.

Oh and they are "considering" their own distro. So to sum the article up: business as usual.

Absolute no decisions are taken and most likely nothing will happen. If this were about Microsoft, the whole article would be called FUD.

Move along, nothing to see here.

i'm just guessing how it'd called

[C0vardeAn0nim0]

maybe "Larinx".

"larry" plus "*nix", got it ? no ? well, whatever.

Not quite...

[foreverdisillusioned]

As far as I know, the Ubuntu foundation operates independently of Canonical, Ltd. Canonical could pull all support for Ubuntu in favor of Ubuntu Enterprise Edition (a la Red Hat), but free Ubuntu would live on because Canonical can't take away the Ubuntu Foundation's $10,000,000+ war chest.

You should also note the grandparent's use of the word corporate. Red Hat is indeed a publically traded corporation, while Canonical is a privately held Limited Partnership. There's a big difference between those two when it comes to legal rights, shareholder obligations, and overall evil-ness.

Re:Not another distribution.

[jonasj]

No, Ubuntu is maintained by a non-profit foundation, that gets a lot of funding from a corporation that exists to fund and promote open source software -- not to make money for it's shareholder (not shareholders, since there is only one).

I just wrote about this

[MarkWatson]

I blogged about this today: the next step in the commoditization of operating systems: application and tool vendors include the operating system and every thing in one complete software stack.

This is not as crazy as I might have thought a few years ago because of virtualization tools like Xen (etc.) However, if companies like Oracle start selling the 'whole stack' I hope that they offer versions that are built for Xen.

Re:Another Distro?

[saleenS281]

driver crap isn't true? That's funny, my linksys/cisco card won't load on linux without using windows drivers, and it's till a crapshoot at best going about it that way.

If I had a PowerBook G4, I'd load OSX onto it. If I had a Sun 10000E I'd load Solaris onto it, and you can bet your ass everyone else who bought one will too. Last I checked, when you drop 6 figures on a server you want support.

That being said, your point is moot. Knowing I can run linux on a powerbook doesn't chang ethe fact my wireless doesn't work for shit. YOU are all that is wrong with linux right now. Instead of saying "hey, you're right, that's a problem we really need to fix" it's "well f you, that doesn't matter it's not important because of this and this and this". Stop patting yourself on the back, and stop trying to brush a serious problem under the rug. I can only be happy people like yourself aren't running the show or linux would've never made it out of Linus's dorm room.

LFS should be enough for anyone

[nurb432]

Only pansys need a distro.. be a man and do it yourself..

Ok, so im only kidding. somewhat.

SuSE is Better for Oracle

[bloobamator]

I have installed and operated several production Oracle db's on both RedHat and SuSE. SuSE is by far superior for Oracle. SuSE supports Oracle much better than RedHat does. It's much easier to install Oracle on SuSE, and SuSE has a very nice mailing list for Oracle dba's, with moderators from both companies. So in this sense, SuSE is a much more attractive acquisition target for Mr. Lawrence "Gotta Have It" Ellison.

Re:Novell has been for sale for years

[kimvette]

I'd prefer IBM buy Novell than Oracle. It'd be nice to see IBM be a software company again, and they have the marketing presence to put a real dent in Microsoft's market share. Once that happens not only will Linux become much better supported by both commercial vendors (I'd LOVE to see the Adobe Creative Suite and Ulead's media suites ported to Linux) and hardware manufacturers (maybe ATI cards will stop sucking, and maybe we'll even see accelerated drivers for the AiW line!). Another benefit is that Microsoft will be once again be forced to compete rather than rest on their laurels; we'll see vast improvements in maintenance scriptability (Don't tell me VBS is a solution; it isn't! VBS is a hack which has had major security holes), better customer support, prices more in line with what they should be charging, and they'll be forced to recognize that when customers buy software, they BUY software and actually DO have the right to sell used licenses on eBay when they decide to quit using it. Everybody wins in that case, whether you want to run Linux or Windows.

Oracle? Oracle appears to be a company that buys companies for the same reason Microsoft does: to kill off any potential competition.

Is this even a story?!?

[AtlantaSteve]

Man, the standards for Slashdot articles seem to be slipping by the day. Now all it takes to get people talking is speculation about PAST events that didn't even happen?

Back in 1985, rock guitarist Slash (of later Guns 'n Roses fame) almost joined Poison, to take the spot which eventually went to C.C. Deville. There, babble about the relevance of that for awhile.

Re:Novell's new tagline

[kimvette]

What would be interesting is if Novell, MySQL, and Trolltech were to merge.

Out of the distributions I like SuSE the best, and here's why:

  - Quickest time to get to real work

  - It's as close to plug & play as the distributions come

  - It uses fairly recent kernels

  - Its KDE configuration out of the box is the best I've seen

  - If you're into Gnome, it has a full Gnome configuration as well (I hate Gnome but my KDE is configured such that it looks like a mix of OS X and Gnome - what I hate about Gnome is the developers dumbed it down so much it removed any flexibility I need/want, and when I sit novices down at Gnome and KDE, they're invariably lost in Gnome. Windows and even MacOS have trained them to expect more functionality)

  - The retail version comes with a fairly good selection of packages

  - YaST is a dream for desktop configurations. On servers I use it for only package management but on desktops I primarily rely on YaST. For servers I go straight to the config files.

Ubuntu is my second favorite right now. Mandriva used to be, but not any more. Ubuntu has matured a lot since I first tried it.

Debian? Even though Ubuntu is a fork of Debian, I despise Debian - it's so out of date that I find a lot of machines won't even boot the install disc. I know a lot of people swear by Debian, but if it won't support the 915 and newer chipsets, it's not even an option. I haven't even attempted it on an nForce chipset but I'm sure that if it failed on even a now-outdated Intel 915 chipset, it won't be too friendly on the newer chipsets for AMD.

Fedora? I keep trying it but I hate it. I've had trouble with the install disc booting on various configurations. RHEL? I hate working on it if I need X - its desktop configuration is the most disorganized I've seen, even compared to Slackware circa 1995. I used to like RedHat but from what I've seen they've taken leaps backwards - it seems as though they spent many man-hours planning the most counter-intuitive desktop imaginable. If I need RedHat or a RedHat-esque distribution, I run CentOS. I wouldn't pay for RHEL until they clean things up.

I keep going back and revisiting various distributions every 6 months or so (I don't blindly choose the distribution) but I invariably end up going back to SuSE because it Just Works(tm) (well, I hit some snags in 10.0 in Evolution and in the KDE/Samba integration but fixed those issues, but 10.1 seems to have resolved those).

Re:Not another distribution.

[everphilski]

IF everyone ran Windows the world would be so much better. Imagine one central repository where everything could be collected, supported, and distributed.

Now think about what you just said if someone from another vantage point said it. Just because its your favorite distro doesn't mean its right for everyone. Multiple vantage points is what keeps linux and the rest of the computing world competitive.