Red Hat Says They'll Be In Linux Long After Novell

Jane Walker writes "Red Hat general counsel Mark Webbink goes to the mat for his company regarding the Microsoft/Novell partnership, in this SearchOpenSource.com Q&A. 'In one year, Red Hat will be all that remains of commercial Linux, he said.'" From the article: "Between last week and this one, it is clear that the two largest software vendors in the world perceive Linux to be at least on the same plane as them. They have got to respect what we have done. Having said that, does Red Hat think either of them has taken the right approach, now that Microsoft and Novell have made 'Microvell'? They've gone off the road a bit, we think, but we are feeling good about the attention that has been brought to Linux. "

Comments

Dubious

[BeeBeard]

In one year's time, it's quite possible that Red Hat will have already lost the battle of even just supporting their own product.

Re:Dubious

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you seriously saying that Oracle can support Red Hat better than Red Hat can? Have you actually tried to support Oracle? They can't even support that properly. Their dependencies on archaic libraries like compat-gcc-296, hilarious dependencies on irrelevant packages like xscreensaver, and installation instructions that rival the US tax code make me cringe at the very thought of hiring Oracle to support Linux itself. Not to mention the company itself doesn't even care about their customers, things such as random licensing reviews make companies spend thousands or millions of dollars for no reason so Larry Ellison can have a new boat.

I have no faith in oracle as a product OR as a company. They are the real enemy to computing, not Microsoft.

Re:Dubious

[WindBourne]

And as a neutral party who sits here and watches both being used in the commercial space, but has no loyalty to either, I would say that MS is far worse. They have legions of support ppl and yet they have virus, bugs, huge amounts of downtime. The costs of support on windows is many times what Oracle is (again from an outside POV). Of course, you can argue that it is because windows is on so many systems, but I have noticed that when DBAs need help from Oracle, they get it. OTH, trying to get an honest answer from MS? Hell will freeze over before MS comes clean with their bugs.

Re:Dubious

[walt-sjc]

Oracle, like Cisco and Sun, and other enterprise class companies, have support teams around the world that will work with you 24 hours a day until the problem is resolved. I don't buy the Redhat supported linux because: 1) I can support all of linux myself just fine, and 2) it is WAY overpriced for what you get when dealing with volume licenses. The volume license model is f*cked. It doesn't cost 73 times more to support 75 servers that are all clones of each other on identicle hardware than it does 1 (the price break is virtually nil.) Maybe 3 times, but not 73. I would much prefer to buy chunks of time or incidents than license per server, but they don't have that option. Windows is WAY less expensive. So I donate to and use Centos.

Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[aussie_a]

*Yawn*

Alright, if you do read the actual article (a foreign concept for some I know), they do make some valid points about Linux in general. Such as that Microsoft has finally admitted it has to take Linux seriously. But one thing that does concern me.

I don't think Linux customers have anything to worry about there.

So people who use Novell and Microsoft products are safe, but what about those that choose other products? Will they get sued?

One year ago, we provided a counterweight to people with patent portfolios that may threaten open source software by building a contravening portfolio of software patents.

Nothing says that the patent system is more broken then this.

Think back to the Microsoft/Sun announcement from a couple years ago, and today, you haven't seen any of the promised technical collaboration from that partnership whatsoever.

Heh. Now there's an apt comparison.

That problem is, you can be either for freedom and collaboration, or you can take a different approach

Aaawh, now come on. You can come out and say it. "You're either for freedom and collaboration, or you're against it."

I can at least respect Microsoft, because they don't pretend to be an open source company.

Come on, we all know what you're saying. Leave that bush alone it's looking pretty nackered. "Novell isn't an open source company, even though it pretends to be." There, now was that so hard?

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[QuietLagoon]

Such as that Microsoft has finally admitted it has to take Linux seriously.

Let's see, what other companies has Microsoft partnered with in order to improve Windows interoperability? 3Com, Sybase....

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[laffer1]

Sun...

Yes, all these companies are not doing that well today. They are not out of business either. I think Redhat makes a good point about Novell pulling out of Linux before they do. Look at the Novell track record. The real issue is why is Novell making the deal with Microsoft? Could it be that many people don't consider them relevant anymore with Netware and Groupwise? Perhaps their plans for Suse have not come to pass. I've worked for two different Universities that use Netware/Groupwise and are slowly migrating off of it for Microsoft, Sun and Apple solutions. Linux was not deployed. Granted universities tend to make terrible choices in software and hardware.

This is Novell's big attempt to get relevant again. Perhaps if we ignore it they will go away!

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[kripkenstein]

So people who use Novell and Microsoft products are safe, but what about those that choose other products? Will they get sued?

As has been discussed at length in many places in recent days, this doesn't seem likely. To summarize:

1. There is no real 'new' risk to other Linux distros than there was a week ago. Just FUD. Saying "but Novell admit there are patents" isn't a real argument.

2. Microsoft cannot easily crush their competition with patents, because (a) of the risk of antitrust measures, (b) the EU may decide to never allow software patents, once they see such abuse, and (c) other parties, e.g. IBM, which have a great interest in Linux, won't stand by idly, and they have their own patent portfolios (leading to mutually assured destruction for all).

3. Should Microsoft sue (e.g.) Red Hat on some patent, and later on Novell admit that they have a license for the same patent from Microsoft, then they are in violation of the GPL, and Novell's entire Linux line of products is dead in the water. Novell would never put themselves at such risk. So either (a) Microsoft won't sue other people, or (b) Novell won't claim they have a license from Microsoft in the event that they do sue. Note that in the latter case, Novell appear about as protected as Red Hat (which currently indemnify their customers), and no more.

So, in the end, nothing has changed, except for the apparent "gentlemans' arrangement" between Microsoft and Novell not to sue each other. This may appeal to some managers and lead them to choose SUSE, but that is all it is, a little good PR.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[jlowe]

I think you summarize what is going on well, but you are missing a key component that is leading you astray on your first point.

There is no "new risk," per se, but there is a less treacherous path for Microsoft should they decide to sue commercial linux vendors or non-profit companies (more than an individual developer). Linux has some protection from Microsoft or other companies with software patent portfolios because Linux has had the backing of Novell and IBM. Both of those companies have very large portfolios of patents. Microsoft has to respect the possibility that if they go after linux, there may be a retaliation. Now that Novell and Microsoft have made an agreement regarding each other's "intellectual property," that clears all of Novell's patents from being used against Microsoft should they decide to attack linux.

No new risk, but a more probable scenario.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[houghi]

So people who use Novell and Microsoft products are safe, but what about those that choose other products? Will they get sued?

No change in what the situation already was for all the others. Absolutely no change there. It says they won't go after Novell. It does not say that it will go after everybody else. To asume that is prety much Bush-thinking. ;-)

"Novell isn't an open source company, even though it pretends to be." There, now was that so hard?

You are right, it is easy to say. I don't think Novell would say that they pretend to be an OSS company, because they are not. They have started openSUSE.org, they have put YaST under the GPL and they have made it possible to make a pure OSS SUSE installation (just don't install the non-oss CD). They stared the build service.

Yet they also are aware that they have plenty of closed source stuff that they are not likely to make OSS in the very near future.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[molnarcs]

So, in the end, nothing has changed, except for the apparent "gentlemans' arrangement" between Microsoft and Novell not to sue each other. This may appeal to some managers and lead them to choose SUSE, but that is all it is, a little good PR.

That's hilariously naive. A little good PR? Well, you forget about the BIG BAD PR for the entire linux community. I will spell out for you what exactly happened: Novell (the holder of Unix copyrights btw, and a linux distributor) acknowledged that Microsoft might have valid patent claims in linux. If you haven't realized: that's pretty bad.

And I will explain it in Ballmer's words as well, if you think I'm crazy or a zealot (btw, I use FreeBSD, not linux, but care for the FLOSS movement):

The distributors of other versions of Linux cannot assure their customers that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement. "If a customer says, 'Look, do we have liability for the use of your patented work?' Essentially, If you're using non-SUSE Linux, then I'd say the answer is yes," Ballmer said. "I suspect that [customers] will take that issue up with their distributor," Ballmer said. Or if customers are considering doing a direct download of a non-SUSE Linux version, "they'll think twice about that," he said.

Novell succeeded in what SCO failed - incriminated linux distributions. SCO was a weak proxy of Microsoft, now Novell is much much stronger - after all, it is the company that has ~20% marketshare in the enterprise linux arena.

Some people think (I'm not referring specifically to your post) that calling others zealots, because they are angry and disappointed is somehow cool. They think that they sound more intelligent if they think only inside the pragmatical/technical box. Here is another angle for those - until now, linux distributions participated in "pure" competition. What I mean is that they competed on two fronts: technical merits of the distribution, and quality of support and services. This was good, even if sometimes it got nasty (like in Oracle case). Novell tainted this with another factor: the MS patent flag. This is very bad on the long run ... unless Novell is stopped somehow.

Oh, and fuck Miguel and friends. They only care for pushing their own agenda. Last year Novell leadership was convinced that going GNOME and MONO is a good idea. Then they had to backpedal, not only because existing customers who standardized on KDE, but because there were migration plans in progress that specifically choose KDE on SuSE, and one of them was a 2000 desktop migration plan (in Europe). Then we had Miguel saying for YEARS that there are no patent issues with MONO. And now, he claims that MONO is finally safe, at least if you use Novell's linux offerings. Yes, yes, some people would say that they saw this coming, after all, he has been a Microsoft fan for some time now. And now:

So today we have secured a peace of mind for Novell customers that might have been worried about possible patent infringements open source deployments. This matters in particular for Mono, because for a long time its been the favorite conversation starter for folks that find dates on Slashdot.

Well, what about non-Novell customers, Mr. Miguel? There goes all the warning agains incorporating MONO technology into GNOME btw.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[TheRaven64]

Well, there's a really simple solution. Ban software patents. We don't have them here in the EU, so I don't care about this pact. On the other hand, it's becoming increasingly difficult to keep it that way, and the argument is always the need to 'harmonise' our patent system with the USA, so you guys in Leftpondia could make our lives a lot easier if you'd spend some time slapping your elected representatives. My MEP is an active member of the FFII. Will you be voting for active EFF supporters tomorrow?

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[molnarcs]

No change in what the situation already was for all the others. Absolutely no change there. It says they won't go after Novell. It does not say that it will go after everybody else. To asume that is prety much Bush-thinking. ;-)

Let me clarify this - there isn't any need to assume that they will actually go after other linux companies. The fact that we are discussing this possibility is bad enough for the reputation of linux in general. I my opinion, that's what Microsoft will do - it won't actually go after RedHat, but it will imply the possibility of doing that. Thanks to novell, they can now do that with some credibility (even though the actual possibility is remote).

To put it in another, more familiar way:

SCO: buy a licence from us, and you won't get sued NOVELL: use our own distribution, and you won't get sued by Microsoft

Or in Ballmer's words:

The distributors of other versions of Linux cannot assure their customers that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement. "If a customer says, 'Look, do we have liability for the use of your patented work?' Essentially, If you're using non-SUSE Linux, then I'd say the answer is yes," Ballmer said. "I suspect that [customers] will take that issue up with their distributor," Ballmer said. Or if customers are considering doing a direct download of a non-SUSE Linux version, "they'll think twice about that," he said.

So the damage is already done, but instead of the pitiful attempt of SCO, we now have a linux vendor hand in hand with Microsoft operating the FUD machine. If you haven't realized: that's pretty bad for linux in general (and we will see how good it is for Novell).

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[houghi]

operating the FUD machine.

The only FUD I have seen so far is from the community itself. There is no change for those non-SUSE Linux users. There might be only a change for the SUSE Linux users.

The fact is that if you use Novell you won't get sued. That has changed.
If you use anything else, you could get sued before, you can get sued now. No difference there.

Let us talk numbers. Say 100 ditributions. This means 100 distributions could get sued in the past. Now SUSE can't get sued. That means 99 can STILL get sued. No change for them

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[molnarcs]

That would be exactly the solution. But: how long do you think that the EU remains patent free? The European Parliament can reject the drafts a few times, but eventually, the European Committee can push it through if it wants to. That's one flaw of the EU - EC has too much power compared to EP.

The problem is, that Novell provided pro-patent legislators some munition. It would be wise for European linux wendors to cooperate on a higher level, and put unprecedented pressure on pro-patent legislations. A joint anti-patent organization sponsored by all linux vendors, with the sole job of raising publicity, countering every single pro-patent claim, organizing awareness-rising events, etc. I know this is happening through FFII right now, but we need much-much more.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[kripkenstein]

That's hilariously naive. A little good PR? Well, you forget about the BIG BAD PR for the entire linux community. I will spell out for you what exactly happened: Novell (the holder of Unix copyrights btw, and a linux distributor) acknowledged that Microsoft might have valid patent claims in linux. If you haven't realized: that's pretty bad.

I agree that it is bad PR, but disagree on the amount. Now, if the actual patents were disclosed, this would be far worse (but disclosing them would put Novell in GPL violation). As it is, it is a general statement. Yes, some managers will buy Novell products because of a vague fear caused by the claim. But those same managers can buy Red Hat as well, or Oracle for that matter, since they are guaranteed indemnification (Red Hat clarified that matter just yesterday on their website). So in the end, I don't see how such managers' decisions will greatly change.

That is for commercial distros. As for noncommercial distros, nothing has really changed. For the reasons in my previous post, I am wagering they won't get sued.

[SNIP - arguments against Mono]

For those reasons, and others, I develop in Python (and C++, when I must).

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[molnarcs]

I think that this is a bigger problem than you think, because it affects so many aspects of the FLOSS movement. Just one aspect I didn't even mention : what will happen to Novell's contributions? Patents need not to be disclosed to be effective. The fact that Novell and Microsoft now claims that there are - undisclosed - patents in some of the software that is covered by the agreement (MONO, ooo.org, SAMBA) is enough to view every possible Novell contribution as dangerous. If nothing else, this might remove Novell from the FLOSS pool. Again, I don't say this is going to happen (although I think this is much more likely than MS suing RH) - but the fact that we even have to discuss this is bad enough. How will upstream developers react? Would they merge Novell changes as easily as they have done in the past? Not likely, as long as code developed by Novell is under the MS-Novell patent covenant.

If you take one aspect alone that this agreement affects, it might be a minor issue, but there are lots of minor issues raised by this agreement, and they add up in my opinion. And there are lots of major issues - depending on how you look at these. For me, the competitive-cooperative model of FLOSS development is the most important asset of free software. Now that asset became somewhat tainted. Competition based on technical excellence and quality of service became tainted (I didn't like what Oracle did, but their move still remained inside the cooperative-competitive model). For me, that's a big problem, but I can accept opinions that regard this as a minor one. But if I take all the issues - be they minor or major ones - I'd say this deal is a big problem.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[blackest_k]

http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq.html [novell.com]
"Under the patent agreement, both companies will make up-front payments in exchange for a release from any potential liability for use of each others patented intellectual property, with a net balancing payment from Microsoft to Novell reflecting the larger applicable volume of Microsoft's product shipments. Novell will also make running royalty payments based on a percentage of its revenues from open source products."

WTF Microsoft gets Royalty payments from Novell for sales and support of Novells linux distro

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[molnarcs]

The only FUD I have seen so far is from the community itself. You must be joking, or completely blind. Since when is Ballmer part of the linux community?

Such talks would be a good idea, Ballmer suggested, since now only Novell's SUSE Linux customers are the only Linux vendors that have any assurance that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement.... Steve Ballmer

There, now you saw some FUD - actually, do you understand the meaning of that acronym - that doesn't originate from the linux community.

I stated this multiple times in this thread: I DON'T SAY THEY WILL ACTUALLY SUE OTHER LINUX VENDORS. If they would do that, that wouldn't be FUD, would it? It would simply be a fact of life. FUD - Fear Uncertainty and Doubt - that's exactly what is introduced in the competition of FLOSS (a competition that so far was based on technical merits and quality of support). They just insinuate all linux distributions and many commercial FLOSS developers (that's a broad category, just to name one project: KDE - many kde developers are employed by a commercial companey, trolltech). If you don't see that a problem, that's fine. Probably you didn't see SCO a problem either, after all, if we talk numbers, 99 linux distributions were not sued by them...

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[kripkenstein]

I see your point, and in fact developers may be wary of Novell code. But I again think that this is mostly psychological, and not justified. If Novell distribute GPL code, then they are necessarily distributing along with it a license to all relevant patents (and again, if they aren't, then Novell are in violation of the GPL). As for non-GPL code from Novell, well, I am wary of non-GPL code in general. The license in such cases needs to be carefully inspected (and if it doesn't contain a patent clause, then that would be dangerous). But if I recall correctly most of Novell's contributions, such as Mono, are in fact GPL or LGPL.

But still, your point is valid, this is a problem for Linux. I tend to think that it will turn out to be not a very serious one, but I admit I may be missing some angle here. Time will tell.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[molnarcs]

I see your point, and in fact developers may be wary of Novell code. But I again think that this is mostly psychological, and not justified. If Novell distribute GPL code, then they are necessarily distributing along with it a license to all relevant patents (and again, if they aren't, then Novell are in violation of the GPL).

I see your point too - I just don't differentiate between psychological problems and ... well, what? Even if the problem is merely psychological, and unjustified because of the letter of the GPL (you are absolutely correct there, that's what E.Moglen says as well), it has real world practical effects. In fact, a very large portion of marketing is merely psychological. The way FUD works is entirely psychological, but it has real-world consequences, like slowing down the adoption of linux, more - well, psychological - ammunition for pro-patent legislators in the EU, etc.

One way to fight this is to point out that there are conflicts between the letter - and the spirit - of the GPL and the deal made by Novell. That's what we are doing here, which is good :)

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[killjoe]

If you want insightful legal analysis you have to go to groklaw. Groklaw had this pegged from day one. Here is an excerpt from the front page.

"Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said his company is open to talking to other Linux distributors about reaching mutual patent coverage deals similar to the agreement signed Nov. 2 with Novell.

Such talks would be a good idea, Ballmer suggested, since now only Novell's SUSE Linux customers are the only Linux vendors that have any assurance that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement....

The distributors of other versions of Linux cannot assure their customers that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement. "If a customer says, 'Look, do we have liability for the use of your patented work?' Essentially, If you're using non-SUSE Linux, then I'd say the answer is yes," Ballmer said.

"I suspect that [customers] will take that issue up with their distributor," Ballmer said. Or if customers are considering doing a direct download of a non-SUSE Linux version, "they'll think twice about that," he said. "

SO there it is. Ballmer is specifically threatening other linux companies with lawsuits unless they pay up. Don't for one second think that the company will not follow through on the promises and threats made by it's CEO.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[aussie_a]

You are right, it is easy to say. I don't think Novell would say that they pretend to be an OSS company

Perhaps. But the Red Hat worker was implying this.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[Stalyn]

So today we have secured a peace of mind for Novell customers that might have been worried about possible patent infringements open source deployments. This matters in particular for Mono, because for a long time its been the favorite conversation starter for folks that find dates on Slashdot.

He's talking about things like ASP.NET deployments using mod_mono and similar setups using the Microsoft compatibility stack. If you use Ecma 334/335 Mono like what is used within GNOME for things like beagle and f-spot; you are not potentially infringing on Microsoft's patents.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[init100]

WTF Microsoft gets Royalty payments from Novell for sales and support of Novells linux distro

In other words, if you buy Novell SuSE Linux, you will pay the Microsoft Tax. It is very probable that Microsoft will try to make people pay the Microsoft Tax even if they are not using their system. Just look at the invite to negotiations with other Linux distributors.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[Pecisk]

For Christ sake, take a reality dose.

Software patents HAVE BEEN REAL THREAT for Linux and free software FOR YEARS. Sooner or later, this kind of thing would be HAPPENING. Don't like software patents? Well, then DO SOMETHING AGAINST IT.

Just don't cry a river and don't be emotionaly naive about all premise - it all about business.

We can't fight against software patents ignoring them, or just puting claims in a licence that no one can use them against users. THIS won't work anymore.

Software patents must go. Concentrate on this, not on some marketing PR deal, which real impact is yet to seen (except people who are quite paranoid about everything happens around free software).

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[blackest_k]

That is just wrong.

Historically unix got "stolen" from the people who wrote it. Linux was almost a rerun but this time using the GPL to stop Linux being hijacked. Now Novell and Microsoft are hijacking Linux.

Morally its outrageous, It is a protection racket, isn't that what steve balmer is saying buy your linux from these guys or we're going to sue your ass's (maybe).

sad thing is to a company its a necessary cost, the cost of litigation is far higher.

Re:Red Hat Beats it's own chest

[init100]

Morally its outrageous, It is a protection racket, isn't that what steve balmer is saying buy your linux from these guys or we're going to sue your ass's (maybe).

I agree completely.

Navel staring

[Anonymous Coward]

Between last week and this one, it is clear that the two largest software vendors in the world perceive Linux to be at least on the same plane as them. They have got to respect what we have done. Having said that, does Red Hat think either of them has taken the right approach, now that Microsoft and Novell have made 'Microvell'? They've gone off the road a bit, we think, but we are feeling good about the attention that has been brought to Linux.

Don't want to burst anyone's bubble, but to a hell-hole of a lot of people the thing that happened with Novell isn't even a blip on the radar. Novell may have gotten of the road, but in Microsoft scope it's trivial.

Sure, attention is always good and perhaps Red Hat can take advantage of that, but all this grand talk doesn't do it for me. Please just keep pluggin away at making a better product. You are getting there.

Move along, nothing to see here...

[sasha328]

This is not about IP. This is about the freedom to meet customer needs and to create competition. That problem is, you can be either for freedom and collaboration, or you can take a different approach. These companies are trying to do both. I can at least respect Microsoft, because they don't pretend to be an open source company.

Intersting jibe at Novell. Although I agree. I've got nothing against MS' products, but their philosophy and that of "Linux" companies are diamerically opposed. I see no logic in Novell's moves at all. MS gains by improving virtualisation (and VMWARE is the real threat) for linux products.

For all it's worth though, in 5, 10 maybe 15 years, the landscape wil be totally different, and the consumer will still be able to do their work just as effectively if not more so than today.

Re:Move along, nothing to see here...

[Anonymous Coward]

What about a compatability layer that allows Novell's flavors of linux to offer and support Microsoft's various DRM products? Yes boo evil. But it'd also be nice to have the option.

Oh, come on...

[Mikachu]

Do you really have to go and call it 'Microvell'? It's a partnership, not a merger. Don't get them confused.

Re:Oh, come on...

[AdamKG]

Do you really have to go and call it 'Microvell'? It's a partnership, not a merger. Don't get them confused.

I do believe the correct term is "assimilation."

Re:Oh, come on...

[porl]

it appears that novell believed that resistance *was* futile...

Re:Oh, come on...

[Sassinak]

On paper it is a partnership, but lets be honest.

When one large firm partners with a smaller firm, its only a matter of time before the larger firm takes over and absorbs the smaller one. And especially since MS has a history of this. (partnering with a firm, and then "deciding" that they can do better if they just purchase the smallr firm).

Re:That's would be assuming

[aussie_a]

[nitpick]Actually it's the second, something called Abstract is the first :P[/nitpick]

The next

[Konster]

"Novell also takes issue with Ballmer's comments that no vendor today stands behind Linux with full intellectual-property indemnification."

That's the salvo that will be the real start of the war. The question isn't whether Microsoft will follow SCO's lead, but WHEN.

Re:The next

[Znork]

Of course, at that point we can also expect to see the EU Directorates get into a fullscale civil war between the DG Markt, Comp, InfSo and some others, over wether IP law is in any form compatible with anti-trust and a competetive market.

Indemm

[__aajwxe560]

I think the bigger news from this article is the fact that RedHat is now offering indemnification for its customers. They slipped this into their FAQ now as well ( http://www.redhat.com/promo/believe/). While I think their hand was forced a bit on this one in order to remain competitive with where the market seems to be going, its still welcome news. This has been a significant hurdle for many companies even considering whether to adopt open source. As it becomes more widespread and "the norm" that you do not need to worry about legal hassles for running Linux, more companies will consider the switch.

Re:Indemm

[aussie_a]

I think the bigger news from this article is the fact that RedHat is now offering indemnification for its customers.

So what, people have one of two choices now? Novell/Microsoft or Red Hat? Doesn't sound like much of a choice to me. But then again the American people are happy with it for their government, so I suppose they'll be happy with it for their operating system.

Re:Indemm

[houghi]

So what, people have one of two choices now? Novell/Microsoft or Red Hat?

No, they have three choices. Novell, RedHat or Microsoft. Ther only thing that has happend is that Novell and Microsoft will be working together to get better interoperability.

If you don't want or need that and if it is something that only Novell has, that no problem. Choose what you want.
If it is something you need, the chances are high that Novell has brought it back to the OSS community and you can still select RedHat, through Novells work.
If it is something only Novell has, because others don't want to implement it, you still have two choices. Either use that software or don't, like you don't use it now, because it doesnt exist yet.

the real reason for the MS Novell deal ..

[rs232]

"now only Novell's SUSE Linux customers are the only Linux vendors that have any assurance that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement..." Steve Ballmer

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200611032 01234813

Re:All that remains?

[felosi]

meh who cares, novell sucks just as bad as microsoft. Red hat owns both their faces and even though they are commercial they are true open source, we got centos to prove that. There is lot of stupid talk about ubuntu gonna put redhat under, microsoft gunning for red hat, etc. Nope red hat will only grow in all markets besides desktop. I know in my opinion you cant beat red hat for servers. And without redhat there would be no centos which is the most popular server distro at the moment. let novell and ms do what they want, they can join together and suck in eternal bliss.

Trustworthy?

[Decaff]

Think back to the Microsoft/Sun announcement from a couple years ago, and today, you haven't seen any of the promised technical collaboration from that partnership whatsoever.

This comment alone makes me sceptical about this article, as it is not only incorrect, but easily shown to be false. Just to give one example, anyone who has been following the development of the latest Java release (6) knows that there has been considerable technical collaboration, one result of which is that Java on Vista will be fully integrated with the GUI. Another result is the much enhanced Ms Office compatibility of Star Office. Other results are better networking between Solaris systems and Windows.

No matter what anyone's views are of Sun, Microsoft, or Java, or Solaris or Star Office, to say that the technical collaboration can't be seen is nothing more than strong marketing spin by a commercial Linux vendor, and does not inspire confidence in anything else that is said here. Linux needs better support that this!

Re:Trustworthy?

[canuck57]

results are better networking between Solaris systems and Windows.

Does than mean IPec on Windows now works? Heck, I have BSD, 2 Linux and 2 Solaris doing IPSec natively and together but getting Microsoft Windows OS to do it is a nighmare nemisis. But not holding my breath. But it is about the only reason to upgrade to Vista I can think of.

Not only does the Microsoft/Novell agreement...

[DiamondGeezer]

...mean nothing but Slashdot is forgetting history. Despite commanding market positions and unique opportunities, Novell has consistently fucked up every single time without fail. Most of their managers can't scratch their own arses without two mirrors and a searchlight.

Think Novell won't fuck this up again? Wrong.

Re:Not only does the Microsoft/Novell agreement...

[LWATCDR]

A better piece of history to remember is how Microsoft ripped off Novell back in the OS/2 days. Network manager was supposed to be a joint project. Microsoft has done a good job targeting Novell's netware ever since.
I just can not think this is a good thing.

Re:Not only does the Microsoft/Novell agreement...

[canuck57]

Think Novell won't fuck this up again? Wrong.

Your quite right on this. Novell bought XIMIAN, a key component to really making a serious run at Microsoft's desktop but when it came to marketing it they fell right down without so much as gasp. Self destructive.

Give it a year and ...

[quiberon2]

Sony Playstations will have displaced Lenovo Personal Computers as the hot-selling technology item.

As far as I know, Microsoft Windows doesn't even run on the Sony Playstation.

Linux does, though.

Re:Give it a year and ...

[Bing Tsher E]

If Sony doesn't succeed in the PS3, they may soon fold as a company. I can see WalMart buying Sony at a firesale price, just for the name. Then WalMart will simply replace the Durabrand logo on their low-end product line with their new Sony logo.

Earth shatering stuff!

[jotaeleemeese]

The specialized media has been aghast with the result of such fruitful collaboration.

People are clamoring, no, begging, for more of it.

Re:Earth shatering stuff!

[Decaff]

The specialized media has been aghast with the result of such fruitful collaboration.

People are clamoring, no, begging, for more of it.

The strange thing about supposedly ironic and sarcastic comments is that very occasionally they are, in contrast to the intentions of the author.

One of the results of the collaboration has been Java 6 integration with Windows. No matter what the common belief, Java desktop development is widespread, but what is really needed is GUI integration and performance that makes it comparable to other Windows applications. This has been one of the areas of collaboration, with Sun providing, in Java 6, such capabilities.

Here is one such 'specialised media' article:

http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/30722
"Java SE 6 First Impressions: A Desktop Winner"

here is another:
http://www.builderau.com.au/program/java/soa/Java_ SE_6_in_a_nutshell/0,339024620,339266522,00.htm
"Java SE6: A Desktop Revolution?"

So yes, there is publicity about what this collaboration has delivered for desktop Java. And many developers have indeed been 'begging' for it; Java on the desktop has been held back, many say.

So, before posting ironic comments, it is a good idea to make sure you have your facts straight....

Yeah, but...

[ZoneGray]

>> In one year, Red Hat will be all that remains of commercial Linux

Sure, but what will remain of Red Hat?

And who needs "commercial Linux" anyway?

Hey, I don't dislike Red Hat, in fact it's my favorite distro. But the idea of running a standalone Linux vendor is history. It is a dead parrot. It's nailed to its perch. It has shuffled off this mortal coil, etc. etc. etc.

Re:Yeah, but...

[ZoneGray]

To clarify... Red Hat could continue to operate at modest profits on their current business model... but the stock market (ie, the owners) aren't going to allow it. A private owner might settle for it, but the market has been sold the stock on the basis of a growth story that no longer exists. Management will be pressured to restructure or be acquired.

It's not hopeless for them, but it's time to just completely forget the 90's business model of making money by selling a branded OS. Shucks, even Microsoft can barely pull it off nowadays. Apple uses their OS to sell hardware. Oracle plans to use Linux to sell databases and CRM. See the trend?

Meanwhile Red Hat is using Linux to sell... Linux support? Somebody will eventually find a more worthwhile use for RHEL.

Re:Yeah, but...

[BokLM]

And who needs "commercial Linux" anyway?

"commercial Linux" contributes a lot of code to Linux and other open source projects. Linux wouldn't be what it is today without RedHat...

Re:Yeah, but...

[mikesd81]

Funny, I thought it was the kernel developers that make the vanilla code and other software developers that Red Hat modifies for their use?

Re:Yeah, but...

[BokLM]

Who do you think is "the kernel developers" ?
It's mostly RedHat, Novell, and many other companies ...
And there's many other important free software that every distro include which are mainly developed by RedHat employes.
Have a look at http://www.redhat.com/truthhappens/leadership/osde velopment/

Re:Yeah, but...

[Poppler]

Funny, I thought it was the kernel developers that make the vanilla code and other software developers that Red Hat modifies for their use?

Red Hat contributes back to vanilla. I'm grateful for what they've done, and I don't use their distro or any of its derivatives.

$ grep -r Red\ Hat /usr/src/linux

Red Hat has been very good to the Linux kernel.

Re:Yeah, but...

[ZoneGray]

Sure, but going forward Oracle, IBM, and others can pay programmers just as easily as Red Hat. Five years ago, that didn't make sense for the bigger companies. Now it does. In any event, the world really doesn't need a commercial, pay-to-use distribution. Free commercial distributions can work just fine, thank you. That was the essence of my comment.

And while I appreciate Red Hat's contributions, Linux is popular because it's Free, not because of Red Hat. They contributed, but so did many others.

with blinders on... (about linux)

[3seas]

good thing there is no more space for others to surface in competition.

---surface----
you can bunt too.

Alternate theory

[Mateo_LeFou]

just thinking aloud: Novell has some sort(s) of big plans for Mono. Mono is the most likely target of patent action by MS. They're covering their bases before they roll out a killer app.

Re:Alternate theory

[laffer1]

Novell has been trying to replace groupwise with a .NET version for some time. They want it to run in mono on linux as well as in windows. Anything to get rid of the terrible memory leaks would be an improvement. I should explain... Groupwise 6.5 has a little issue. Once a user sent an email to everyone at the university I worked for. She did not use a list, but actually addressed everyone individually. On most computers, Groupwise consumed so much ram that it actually overwrote memory for other processes including the Intel graphics drivers. The result was strange corruptions and crashes across all machines. I worked support at the time and some of the techs initially assumed it was some new virus but it turned out just to be groupwise. Novell was in the process of rolling out groupwise 7 and therefore would not consider fixing 6.5.

Re:Alternate theory

[maxwell demon]

If Groupwise was able to overwrite memory of the Intel graphics driver, then there was more wrong with those computers than just Groupwise.

Re:Alternate theory

[laffer1]

Yes, they were dell systems with XP SP2. Since intel graphics use shared system memory, it wasn't too hard to cause the problem.

If you enable software buffer overflow protection, groupwise ALWAYS crashed. No other applications would misbehave that we had in our image.

I'm thinking 'coalition of the willing' (n/t)

[Mateo_LeFou]

no text today.

the reason

[pair-a-noyd]

would be because M$ is going to ass rape Novell Suse Linux into oblivion with a flaming chainsaw.
M$ is going to pollute Linux with their poison code then sue everyone else out of existence.

I've been a loyal Suse user for a few years now, I PURCHASE, use and resell Suse Linux.
I have advocated and pushed Suse Linux commercially and personally to customers, friends and family.

But this is the end of the relationship. It is time to part ways with Suse now.
I don't want to update machines only to later discover they've been tainted by M$ code.
I am now actively researching the distros for a good Suse replacement.

I see this M$ / Novell alliance as the worst thing that could happen.
This will put an end to a consumers right of freedom to choose.
Up next, M$ buys Intell, AMD, Award & Phoenix. And for desert, M$ plans to have a double helping of Apple pie.

Re:the reason

[rapidweather]

I don't want to update machines only to later discover they've been tainted by M$ code.

Will be interesting to see what code is used for some of the common tasks in getting a box up and running.

Will they be using GRUB?

The first thing I thought of when I heard about the cooperation agreement between Microsoft and Novell, was that perhaps "dual boot" boxes might be offered.
Windows Vista, and SuSE Linux.
Really can't imagine that Microsoft would allow that, the users won't be needing all the virus protection software if they stick to always booting into linux. So, I suppose the dual boot idea appearing at your local Wal*Mart in a HP box is just a pipe dream for all of the joe sixpacks out there, wanting to do without all the extra costs involved in keeping Windows up and running and free of viruses and trojans. I know, it might be a stretch of the imagination having a concerned joe sixpack here, but even he would want to save a little money here and there.

And what about Novell?

[Junta]

What about Novell's treatment of SuSE has made it less open source/sucky? CentOS exists to the chagrin of RedHat. RedHat would love to be able to and has tried to make life hard within the boundaries of the law, without being overly dickheaded about it. RedHat discontinued offering their distro for free download, and transitioned to having the Fedora project be the equivalent, so the RH name was made 'pure' commercial.

Novell at first look even seems to have made it more open. I.e. yast was not an open product before the Novell buyout, it now is. SuSE in iso form was at one point not downloadable (though you could install via network all the packages), but now OpenSuSE is out there (dunno how OpenSuSE's inception correlates if at all to Novell).

Truth is RedHat is ahead by market momentum alone right now. They were the first to get entrenched commercially particularly in the US. Their offering at the core is just about the same as any other distro, but the RedHat name carries it. RedHat and Novell are the big commercial players because they put forth the most professional images, and because they understand the product lifecycle that companies want. They have their differences, SuSE has a more centralized configuration app (YaST, which i ultimately almost never use), SLES10 happened to release at a time ripe for incorporating Xen virtualization (RHEL5 I'd wager will equalize this). The meat of it is they are about the same.

I don't see how Novell is sucking, did they start sucking when they started talking to Microsoft? I admit that single deal is fishy, but the company has yet to actually do anything that is sucky yet.

Excerpt from a business story that doesn't exist

[dkleinsc]

CEO of Acme Inc: Our business model is seriously flawed, and these new competitors of ours are kicking our asses in the marketplace. We have serious concerns about the future performance of our stock, and we are unable to succeed at new product development.

Aren't they humble.

[Junta]

"Between last week and this one, it is clear that the two largest software vendors in the world perceive Linux to be at least on the same plane as them. They have got to respect what we have done."

So Linux is good, and it's *all* thanks to RedHat? No one else deserves credit.

"We still believe that we will be the dominant player in the Linux market, because by that time there won't be any other Linux players."

Do they have to take it to the point of saying 'there can be only one'? I mean that is the whole problem with MSOFT, a homogeneous market. If he stopped before the because, that would have been sufficient and appropriate, but that last bit fuels the flames of those who proclaim RH wants to be the MS of Linux. Whether or not they can is another matter, but it sounds like for this person, this is a confirmed desired path for RH's future.

Re:Aren't they humble.

[asuffield]

So Linux is good, and it's *all* thanks to RedHat? No one else deserves credit.

Well, when you're only considering Redhat and Novell/SuSE, only Redhat deserves any credit. All SuSE ever did was create proprietary applications and package other people's work - this isn't a *bad* thing to be doing, but they certainly don't deserve any credit for it. They've become a little less irrelevant in recent years, but haven't done anything special in that time.

It's also true that Redhat does a lot of good work on developing essential free software (linux itself, glibc, gcc, etc) - depending on how you count, they're probably responsible for something on the order of 10% to 50% of the work on the "core" components of the system. That's far more than any other single player. It's not a *majority* of the work done (individual developers, with no particular corporate affiliation, as a group do more work than Redhat), but no other entity can claim to have done any more work than they have - which appears to be the point they're making here.

Re:Aren't they humble.

[talksinmaths]

So Linux is good, and it's *all* thanks to RedHat? No one else deserves credit.

Your paraphrasing skills need some work. This isn't what was stated or implied.

Do they have to take it to the point of saying 'there can be only one'?

What you're (intentionally?) leaving out is that they're referring to enterprise linux market 'players'. How many players are there now? Two by my count, but I'm not counting offerings such as Unbreakable (or even Ubuntu LTS) unless/until they gain meaningful traction in the market. I think RH is saying that they see the MS/Novell deal as the beginning of the end of Enterprise SuSE. Are they right? Who knows. Are they beating their chest? Probably. Regardless I think it's a stretch to claim that they're playing Highlander.

Re:Aren't they humble.

[Junta]

"Your paraphrasing skills need some work. This isn't what was stated or implied."

I'm not the only one who read it that way. Generally companies making an assertion about the accomplishments of Linux somehow include explicitly words like 'the open-source community' or whatever to avoid the ambiguity. Red Hat has a history of acting like they are the shit, and has done a fair amount of work to get a fair share of credit, but still Red Hat would generally have everyone believe that they and they alone make Linux a viable platform, which is beyond what they have actually done.

"What you're (intentionally?) leaving out is that they're referring to enterprise linux market 'players'. How many players are there now? Two by my count..."

Counting players with significant market penetration, or enterprise players at all? I will admit Novell and RedHat are pretty much the only two to achieve widespread commercial penetration so far. However, they didn't stop at 'being the dominant player', the first half of the sentence, but said there would only be one at all. That includes Ubuntu and Unbreakable, which while not big now in this space, are players all the same. I said the first part of that statement would be an appropriate one to say for a business, but the second part screams 'we would love to be a monopoly if we could'.

Re:Aren't they humble.

[quantaman]

"Between last week and this one, it is clear that the two largest software vendors in the world perceive Linux to be at least on the same plane as them. They have got to respect what we have done."

So Linux is good, and it's *all* thanks to RedHat? No one else deserves credit.

I think I parse that answer differently than you do, here's my interpretation
"
Has Linux won?

Mark Webbink: Between last week and this one, it is clear that the two largest software vendors in the world perceive Linux to be at least on the same plane as them. They have got to respect what we [the Linux community] have done.

Having said that, does Red Hat think either of them has taken the right approach, now that Microsoft and Novell have made 'Microvell'? They've gone off the road a bit, we [Red Hat] think, but we [Red Hat] are feeling good about the attention that has been brought to Linux.
"

"We still believe that we will be the dominant player in the Linux market, because by that time there won't be any other Linux players."

Do they have to take it to the point of saying 'there can be only one'? I mean that is the whole problem with MSOFT, a homogeneous market. If he stopped before the because, that would have been sufficient and appropriate, but that last bit fuels the flames of those who proclaim RH wants to be the MS of Linux. Whether or not they can is another matter, but it sounds like for this person, this is a confirmed desired path for RH's future.

I agree that his quote there seems a bit off though it might be somewhat accurate. I take "players" to mean major players in the enterprize which is the only thing Red Hat is really concerned about. Currently those players consist of Red Hat and Novell, Oracle claims they want in but that's still vaporware and Canonical (guys behind Ubuntu) seems to be looking for a way in but afaik they haven't really made any headway there.

All that quote really says is that in a year Novell will be gone from the market or completely insignificant, if Oracle has something it will still be too new to get any real following, and Canonical still won't have made much progress.

That being said while his quote does sound pretty aggressive I don't think he wants Red Hat to be the MS of Linux if for no other reason than he realizes it's impossible and all they could accomplish by trying to monopolize the Linux market is antagonizing the community and allowing a new player to challenge them in the enterprize. I consider that one of the advantages with Open Source based businesses, they have a very strong motivation not to abuse their users since they don't have real lock-in. Of course he probably wouldn't mind if the other players just went away :)

Article content is interesting, but...

[BlabberMouth]

what comes to my mind is another blow at Red Hat's business coming on the heels of Oracle's announcement that it would undercut Red Hat's linux support pricing. I've got three words for Red Hat stock holders, sell, sell, sell. Red Hat really needs to enter a joint venture with or sell out to nother bigger company who is or wants to get into the linux business.

Re:Article content is interesting, but...

[PMoonlite]

Red Hat really needs to enter a joint venture with or sell out to nother bigger company who is or wants to get into the linux business.

Which bigger company would that be, exactly? And what would they get from their purchase that they don't already get from the existance of Linux and Red Hat? How would they assimilate Red Hat's radically different culture and ideology without destroying all the value they've purchased?

Please be specific. There are a very limited number of bigger tech companies with any interest in linux, so you can't apply generalizations here.

Otherwise, admit you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

Re:Linux will be darn hard to kill

[idonthack]

The other thing is that if Microsoft actually identifies a patent infringement, the community will patch around it in short time.

I'm not sure how true that is going to be. Since software patents don't cover an algorithm but the end result of the algorithm, it's not like they can write the software to just do it a different way. They will have to actually remove functionality to escape a patent lawsuit.

RedHat sounds arrogant...

[porkThreeWays]

Red Hat sounds really arrogant in the article. However, much of it is basically true. I was a long time Novell/SuSe support after the acquisition. I use products from both companies on a daily basis. In the past few months I have pretty much left the suse train and jumped on the red hat one. Why? All this Oracle, Microsoft, Novell news is great for market analysts who never actually will ever use any of their products. But for someone who uses them on a daily basis, red hat's products and support are far superior.

The stock can take a major hit in the short term by this sort of news, but quality products and good management (both of which red hat has) is what will keep the company alive in the long term. One year is much too short a timeframe for all this to pan out. Three years is more realistic. Oracle linux will turn into Sun's java desktop. The Novell/MS partnership will have yielded little/no technology advances. And Novell as a company may or may not have enough steam to keep on chugging in general (non-linux related activities).

Re:Suse Linux 10.1

[houghi]

This is a known issue. Just do a YaST Online Update (not via zen) and all will work well. To get it from scratch, download 10.1 which is basicaly the same as before, but with patches untill october 9th.

After the download, just point to your DVD for all aditional software, or point to the repositories.

If you want to use the 9.1 way, just use YaST (and even uninstall the updater). Works great as it always did.

Re:Linux will be darn hard to kill

[b0s0z0ku]

If a patent which Novell licenses or manages jointly with Microsoft is infringed on, they might plausibly be able to obtain injunctions against rivals commercially distriubuting their enterprise products, or forcing them to withdraw support or disable functionality related to the patent.

Remove the functionality, then make sure that the code and packages "leak" out for free and are easily available on sites hosted in friendly countries i.e. those that don't have the same level of patent stupidity as the US.

-b.

Debian derivatives/Ubuntu/Kubuntu

[b0s0z0ku]

*Those* are the distros that M$ should be shitting their pants about, since they actually are competitive to Windows on the *desktop.* If anything, an Ubuntu installation is easier than a comparable Windows and MS Office install. No licensing/key crap to worry about, and (if anything) a larger selection of built-in drivers is available. My last install of Ubuntu (on my dad's computer) took about 30 min tops, start to finish. The only slightly tricky part was installing the wlan card driver - had to use ndiswrapper. But the wlan card actually works better than under Windows now - it seemed to drop connections periodically under Windows and take 30 sec. to reconnect.

-b.

Re:Debian derivatives/Ubuntu/Kubuntu

[kamatsu]

Ahem. SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop is superior to Ubuntu/Kubuntu by far. Much easier to use and better support - Ubuntu and Kubuntu are much more community-oriented, which doesn't suit corporate landscapes as well.

wintel got used...

[zogger]

..for a long time. Fair is fair and all... and we have MacIntel now, too. It's just funny, that's all. I think it's amusing really. The name, not the situation, the situation sucks. Although better now than later, the entire computing world needs to have some things sorted in the courts more, copyrights versus patents (like, why does software get both, but novels and musical scores don't? Ideas represented by a language or languages and symbols, etc, able to be put on dead trees or represented by electronic bits, seems roughly similar to me anyway) and etc.

Of course, MS still isn't finished with the anti trust action, billy and stevie got a court date in iowa now. Isn't that special.

Suggest Debian/Progeny

[YetAnotherBob]

Progeny only sells support/services. If you can do the support, so much the better. Debian, while 'old' is rock solid stable. If you want 'newer' then go with testing. Also, 'old' isn't really old. It's just not the 'latest version'. That is because testing takes time.

Xandros, Mepis, Ubuntu, Knoppix and etc. have all shown that this is the way to go.

Loosing RPM Hell is a good benefit too.

Certification might be a bugaboo for you though.

RedHat, the last Linux Distro Vendor ??? LoL

[wizkid]

So RedHat is going to be the last redhat vendor? BULLCARP!!!! I personally believe Ubuntu is in the running, and if oracle puts out a distro, they won't just put it out and forget it. IF oracle puts one out, I hope they do a better job of patching then they do with their database products!

I have influence on what products my company supports, and I've been kinda pushing that someday we should support SUSE. Well, that recommendation ended yesterday. I'm going to recommend we NOT support SUSE from now on. Anytime $M gets involved, the only one that wins is $M. SUSE has just flushed themselves down the toilet. The Lawyers at $M are drinking champaine tonight!

Better name than 'Microvell'

[mergy]

How about 'Nosoft'

Re:Better name than 'Microvell'

[johnpipe]

"How about 'Nosoft'"

How about "NoMicrosoft"!

Well, now. . .

[Hamoohead]

I can only think of one reason why Microsoft would change from their hard-tack "Open source is evil" philosophy to embracing Novell and OSS. When it comes to competing products, MS has always tried to buy, litigate, or FUD the competition. Why should this be any different? MS doesn't want to further open source any more than it wants to distribute its own source. What MS can't invent, they buy. What they can't buy, they FUD. What they fail to FUD, they disallow. I doubt they're playing fair. Remember the old saying? "DOS ain't done 'til Lotus won't run." Looks like the wolf has got a new wool cardigan.

Clueless modding

[BeeBeard]

You know, mods, comments that attract the attention of only a few trolls are not trolls per se. Mine was simply the first post in the discussion by a registered user, and by someone who has always had no less than excellent karma. You sure have an odd way of penalizing people who contribute to the overall discussion of an article, and to the quality of discussion on this forum in general. And by "odd" I think I really mean petty, clueless, and incompetent. You know, that kind of odd.

I've been running various incarnations of Linux and other open source projects since before apparently half of Slashdot readers even started elementary school. Using this, my third Slashdot account, I have offered my opinions on various topics as both a licensed, practicing attorney and as just another fellow geek. Open source and open source companies such as Red Hat have few better advocates than old diehards like me. But in all that time, I've never seen such ridiculous, toe-the-line open source jihadism. To mod anything even marginally critical of an open source-based company appears to be great heresy in the court of Slashdot. The petty abuse meted to anyone playing devil's advocate or presenting opposing viewpoints is distasteful. If you think, in your infinite wisdom, that all people want to read are a bunch of "Me too!" and "You got THAT right!" posts that correlate with a Slashdot hive mind mentality, then why even have an open forum to begin with?

My little fee-wings are a tad hurt, you sad, sad little assholes. Please, use the full extent of your petty power to drive the sensible posters away who come from other walks of life, leaving just the maniacal, drum-beating and chest-thumping zealots. That will work out great for you. Promise.

Re:Clueless modding

[Sr. Zezinho]

Oracle support sucks (1). You should have been modded "Funny".

(1) Except for the core database.

Re:Clueless modding

[Hal_Porter]

Well said. I can see the whole Open Source thing fizzling out because people would rather deal with commercial operations, no matter how dubious their business practices elsewhere, because they acknowledge flaws in their products and work hard to fix them.

I've spent 10+ years working for commercial software companies, all embedded ones, and the one thing that's consistent is that if customers complain, people have to work hard until they stop complaining. Whereas any criticism of open source stuff leads to a torrent of abuse on Usenet, IRC and the other places that are laughably recommended as support forums. And it's the same on /. And absolutely nothing happens after that. Most of the time, it's actually cheaper to use the commercial alternative than to fix all the linux issues yourself, which is what it comes down to.

If I were actually betting money on something working for customers, I'd much rather use something commercial, especially as OSE, vxWorks, and the like are a lot skinnier in terms of resource usage than Linux.

Linux is RedHat's core business

[stock]

Linux is RedHat's core business.

About the Novell/Microsoft inter cooperation agreement?

http://www.linuxtoday.com/it_management/2006110301 426NWMSNV
http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=200 6-11-03-014-26-NW-MS-NV-0010

Robert M. Stockmann - Subject: sad Outlook for Novell
( Nov 3, 2006, 02:46:50 )

"Novell has never had a foothold in the Desktop business, why would
Microsoft allow them to gain foothold on the Desktop market? If
linux is going to get a foothold in the Desktop Market, Microsoft
will make sure they are the ones supplying it. In this way their
agenda, whatever that maybe, can still be fullfilled.

1. Munich selects Linux on the desktop, with SuSE GMBH as native
support company in mind
2. Shortly after SuSE GMBH is bought up by Novell
3. Novell is remolding the SuSE desktop by making Gnome the
standard desktop and KDE the extra option. KDE is to be outphased.
see
http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=200 5-11-04-018-26-OP-SS-NV-0067

4. Microsoft officially endorses the 'Novell' version of the Linux
desktop, by funding it.
5. The 'Novell' Linux desktop is getting further adjustments to
get it Americanized, Microsoftized if you wish. Novell will be
doing all the hard labor.
6. Some BIG date will be set, after which 'Novell' (MS approved)
Linux Desktop is announced through Corporate Boards and CEO's as
the only one fit for corporate use in business. Other Linux distro
vendors will be put more and more in harms way to survive. They
will use the same arguing/advocacy like hey have used the mandatory
Outlook Agenda to have MS Exchange installed in businesses.
7. Novell Linux Desktop will in the end be able to fullfill all of
the overt and secret agenda wishes by Microsoft, or at least
hookups are available.
8. The Linux Desktop for use in business will become a new
Novell/Microsoft monopoly.
9. Microsofty will introduce a 'superior' Linux Desktop to
'Novell' Linux, and Novell will be forced out of the Desktop
Market, which is what Microsoft has always been aiming for.
10. Microsoft will starting hunting down other Linux related
commercial software companies and buy em out and destroy.

In short : Microsoft will like they have done many times: work
close with Novell, copycat essential gear from Novell linux into
Redmond Campus. When the time is right there will indeed be

Re:Linux is RedHat's core business

[petrus4]

In short : Microsoft will like they have done many times: work close with Novell, copycat essential gear from Novell linux into Redmond Campus.

You've forgotten one minor factor:- the market. You're assuming that IT consumers are going to allow Microsoft to get away with something like this. That is highly unlikely. There are a very large number of people in the world who still see Microsoft as a problem to be solved...If Microsoft attempt to engage in predatory behaviour with Linux, the legal system in at least some jurisdictions (even if not the US itself) will come down on them like a ton of bricks before they're halfway through whatever strategy they've got.

Microsoft have already screwed up many, many times in the past, and have pushed consumer trust and patience to the limit. If they even remotely look like they are attempting to destroy Linux, their reputation will not survive. The corporation will be finished...No company or individual will ever want to trade under the name Microsoft ever again.

RedHat == RedHat

[newr00tic]

So RedHat is going to be the last redhat vendor? BULLCARP!!!! I personally believe [...and so on; empasis mine..]

Yeah, RedHat will most-likely remain the only REDHAT vendor, -linux-, however...

=.:.:::.:::.

Re:Linux will be darn hard to kill

[DannyO152]

Maybe it's because the United States no longer really considers itself a manufacturing nation, but I think both parties are welcoming to the concept that ideas and culture can be owned like real estate and the experiencing a licensing proposition.

I like Ubuntu but it is not that easy

[Flying pig]

I have now had to replace Ubuntu twice, and both times for the same reason. An automatic update screwed X and I was not able to recover it. Obviously no data was lost, but the tedium of reinstalling a whole load of applications wasn't, in the end, worth it. Getting VMWare and NetBeans and DB2 was taking far longer than the Ubuntu install. Much as I dislike XP, it has been extremely stable.

I don't have the technical ability to write Norton Ghost for Linux, or a way of undoing updates from the terminal, but those are surely what is needed. And a few other things. I would like an easy way to set up partitions to hold my email and database so I can reinstall without having to backup and restore data. One that does not require a deep understanding of manual configuration. And I would like a way to create a simple Windows share as part of the install process.

As a developer, in the last few years I am beginning to feel that MS is finally getting things right. Vista may actually be a step in the wrong direction, but I suspect there is a Plan B. No, I think it is still very much on the multi-CPU server that Linux is a threat to MS. On the desktop it is still a cloud no bigger than a Gnome icon.

Re:I like Ubuntu but it is not that easy

[b0s0z0ku]

I have now had to replace Ubuntu twice, and both times for the same reason. An automatic update screwed X and I was not able to recover it.

Rare case. Such things happen with Windows, too. i.e. an automatically installed security update on a client's Win 2k3 Small Business Server box rendered the thing unbootable so their e-mail went down after the box did the mandatory reboot after installation. Fortunately, booting in safe mode, I was able to remove it.

As far as your update that screwed X, at least it didn't screw the whole system. And updates are removable from the command line via the Debian/Ubuntu APT utilities.

I would like an easy way to set up partitions to hold my email and database so I can reinstall without having to backup and restore data.

Assuming that you keep all of your data in the /home directory, just create two Linux partitions and mount one as / (your main file system) and mount the other one as /home. It's actually easier to ask Linux to do that upon install than it is Windows, since the "typical" Windows user has only one partition, mounted as C: .

As a developer, in the last few years I am beginning to feel that MS is finally getting things right.

Fine, if they're getting things right, more power to them. Let them compete on the basis of the merits of their products. There's no need for them to resort to underhanded tactics like frivolous lawsuits made to drive competitors out of business. M$ is acting like a bunch of gangsters and thugs, not a reputable corporation. There's room enough for more than one player in this game. The fact that Microsoft wants to maintain an almost complete monopoly at all costs is, in my book, unacceptable. And, ultimately, a monopoly will hurt innovation since monopolists tend to get soft and complaisant.

-b.

Re:I like Ubuntu but it is not that easy

[Burz]

Ubuntu is no competition for SuSE, unfortunately. I tried Ubuntu for a month and had to setup all my laptop security by hand (firewall, Wifi WPA, VPN, encrypted disk).

The X update bugs also bit me, leaving me to manually correct xorg.conf multiple times. An average desktop usser would also have gotten stuck here.

Ubuntu grossly mishandled my disks: The firewire and USB devices that were plugged-in during install had to be plugged back in for each reboot... otherwise the boot process would fail.

The installer did not provide an option for local (versus UTC) timezone, forcing the system to UTC which was off by 5 hours. I had to edit a file in /etc to correct this. Most PCs default to local time.

Ubuntu never got the acceleration in my very common Radeon to work right, even with ATI drivers. SUSE (and others like Xandros and Mandriva) handled this 100% correctly.

Ubuntu tends to configure audio using OSS when ALSA supportis available. This is inexcusable... why should I not hear my softphone ringing (or not be able to place a call) just because a webpage with Flash is open in the background? Why should I miss appointments because the calendar alarm could not sound?

Also, why does Ubuntu have a special background process tracking filesystem changes (and using 20% of my CPU!) when other systems track changes just fine without this CPU-eating behavior?

IMO Ubuntu needs to stop resting on the laurels of APT and start fixing these amatuer-level mistakes and major shortcomings.

Re:I like Ubuntu but it is not that easy

[b0s0z0ku]

The installer did not provide an option for local (versus UTC) timezone, forcing the system to UTC which was off by 5 hours. I had to edit a file in /etc to correct this. Most PCs default to local time.

That's a bad thing? UTC is the way to go - just change your hardware clock. Why is UTC hardware clock good? Because the hardware clock never has to change with Daylight Savings Time, switching time zones, etc. Changing the internal time reference of the system backwards could conceivable bork some software.

-b.

To Red Hat: Put up or Shut up

[BeeBeard]

No, that was my point. I don't know what kind of world people think we live in, where offering only marginally better support services for the same product can somehow compete with veritable truckloads of cash. It ain't the real one, though, I can assure you of that. Thanks, but my dollars are going into shares of the monopoly with questionable but effective business practices, instead of the bright-eyed darling of the Linux community that can barely break even and has been trending down, down down even in their estimation ever since the Fedora fork.

I only wish I still had that kind of youthful idealism and naivete. Red Hat thinks it has some sort of advantage over Novell, over Oracle, over everybody else? Let them prove it. Show us you really have a better product and really offer better support for it, and that those advantages are more significant than the proven track records of bigger corporations who can buy and sell your ass. Because all I see is this ridiculous "interview" that reads like a Red Hat press release. I don't see numbers, I don't see results--I damn sure don't see a company that is even in the same league as a Novell or an Oracle. When I read the "Oracle to Buy Red Hat" press release in 18 months, I promise not to be a bandwagon poster, chiming in with the "I told you so's." I'll simply be unsurprised and leave it at that.

SuSE always wanted to be Windows

[straponego]

Rant alert.

It's odd, I realized the other day as SuSE, for no reason (I moved a server to another room and plugged it into an external RAID; no other changes), decided to interrupt its boot process to detect ~12 "new" pieces of hardware-- most of which it had needed to boot)... SuSE is becoming more and more like Windows. The steaming pile of bugs that is YAST, the obtuse config files, the inconsistent behaviours (exactly the same actions have varying results). It's about like Redhat's Linuxconf from around 5.2. Under Debian, Gentoo, Redhat, Fedora, Ubuntu, if you have a problem, documentation is easy to find, but usually the config files and system utilities are plenty. Under SuSE... there's often only one way to do it, and they won't tell you what it is. If you manually edit config files, don't ever run YAST again.

So... good match for MS.

I'd be surprised...

[bitbucketeer]

I'd be surprised if Microsoft didn't call anything unix-flavored that it releases "Xenix".

Judas

[Daniel Phillips]

fuck Miguel and friends. They only care for pushing their own agenda

True. I have known Miguel for some years. I can now sum Miguel up with a single word: Judas. Thanks to Miguel, both Novell and Suse are now the walking dead. I sincerely regret both, but of course I regret the demise of Suse more. However, this will not be a mortal blow to Linux, quite the contrary. There is only one way for Novell to escape the consequences of their actions: repudiate the patent pact. Otherwise, Novell is the new SCO, with all that that implies.

OpenSuSE anyone?

[faolan_devyn_aodfin]

Well there is always OpenSuSE which can have all the power of commercial SuSE if you add the extra software repositories. Secondly most componets of SuSE including YAST2, SaX, and hwconfig are all now licensed under the (L)GPL so the distro could be totally split. If Microsoft / Novell tries anything funny they'll have to deal with anti-trust lawsuits from Red Hat, Mandriva, Oracle, and Apple just to name a few--the simple fact this that they wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court with all that evidence against him.

new form of fud?

[vile8]

The thing that jumps out from the recent oracle news, and the M$ news is all the speculation. What are the odds
  that this is just a new form of fud?

"Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt" have been created by the bizarre claims that M$ will
somehow taint GPL'd code... the opposite is very likely going to be the case.

Or the lawsuit ideas that will supposedly clean everyone out of business that isn't running a M$, or
Cash-whole-acle version of Linux... Yeah... and software can't be free.

This is why RedHat would release indemnification, as you won't need it, and if anyone
did they would be the first ones to take the suit. As there business depends on protecting
these rights, and they have the resources to do it. Not to mention it would be a terrific legal
precedant that would put in stone the ability for businesses to make money with Open Source.
Which is good for everyone.

Watch for wolves to control their population and impact, not to run from them.

I don't know Novel's motivation but...

[Eric Damron]

What Microsoft most wants is clear. It all started with the funding of the SCO lawsuit. A lawsuit meant to scare customer's away from switching to a FOSS solution. Now that it is becoming clear that the SCO lawsuit is falling flat on its face they need to raise the ante. They want to plant a seed of doubt about Linux and cultivate it for the duration of this agreement.

Notice how Microsoft is framing the agreement. As an act of Cooperation with Novel which implies FOSS. I'm willing to bet with the EU pissed off over numerous issues with Microsoft products, licenses, abuse of power etc., they want to be able to say "See, we're playing nice." without really playing nice at all.

This is phase one. Phase two comes in five or six years when the agreement expires. Even if Linux isn't infringing on Microsoft's patents in any way there will be more than half a decade of subtly implanting that doubt in peoples minds. At that point Microsoft will have to decide if they are going to start suing.

I don't know what Novel was thinking or what pressure Microsoft may have put on them. I can only speculate. Did Microsoft make it clear to Novel that the size difference between the two companies (Microsoft brings in about 100 times as much revenue as Novel.) would make a nuisance lawsuit (Like the SCO lawsuit which was funded in part by Microsoft.) would devastate Novel?

The reason I wonder this is that I don't see how Novel could have miscalculated the backlash of ill will this is going to generate toward them and the difficulties it could cause for Novel and all Commercial Linux distributions in the future.

"...if your time is worthless"

[BeeBeard]

It almost conjures up the old saying "Linux is only free if your time is worthless" doesn't it?

It's funny because there seems to be this commonly-held notion that Linux and other open source projects are perfect tools for any situation and are therefore immune to any criticism. And of course, that's not always the case. Sometimes commercial solutions are far more viable because a company has already paid people for the man hours it takes to do whatever it is you are trying to do.

When I'm not out of my gourd and posting things like this, I tend to be a fairly advanced Linux user and I have yet to find anything that I just simply cannot do under Linux. But there is a threshold at which the more important consideration is time and not the freeness of the solution. It's just not worth my time to spend 6 hours diagnosing a particularly ugly and complex problem, and poring over the questionable online resources you described. I'm not going to pay anybody in my company to do it either, they have other things to do.

But maybe, just maybe, it's worth it for a company with whom I have a support contract to pay somebody else for 6 hours of their time to do the same. In the case of Red Hat, Oracle, and Novell (what has become the holy trinity of corporate Linux solutions), the market has turned into a battleground where the better-financed of the three has not been afraid to throw its weight around. It's arguably the same level of support for the same product. In that case, who wins? It's the company that has far more capital to dump into any project of its choosing. It's the company that can afford to charge literally half as much as the competition. And unfortunately, that just ain't trusted and true Red Hat.

Re:"...if your time is worthless"

[Hal_Porter]

I always liked this. The strange thing is that if you ask any geeks questions, and you aren't someone who can adversely affect their careers, you have a fair chance of getting the Fault Threshold effect.

I've seen it with lazy programmers all the time, it's just that lazy programmers get fired if they do this to customers, or at least moved to a dead end job with a basement desk. But if you're not a customer, or their boss, or a friend, this is pretty much the default. And I think that's the deep problem I have with non commercial software development, it's the fear of getting fired, or the desire to get promoted that keeps people honest as engineers, and helpful as tech support people. Otherwise, it's easy to think up an excuse and go back to doing whatever you do outside work.

YaY ! Thanks Microsoft

[Delifisek]

Well, some times having enemy better than having friends.

I believe this partnership will help GNU/Linux Community.

Mr. Miguel now cross hairs in all GNU/Linux zealots. He reputation drops to -666 troll. Because of this GNOME project may take hit and this is maybe fuel Desktop unification on KDE.

Because of Red Had success, those commerical boys doesn't show enough respect to us "The hard core GNU/Linux zealots". This is wake up signal to every one. Wake up guys you just earn some bucks, there are lots of hard battles ahead.

Those old DON's can't defend their turf. Even they can't hit any serious punch against Google. M$ can't produce any better code than OSS, Oracle can't produce anything other than RDBMS. They are not better than OSS, they are just Fat and Rich.

We are Penguinistas you mindless IT barons. So you got tons software Patent's. Oh WE ARE SO SCARED, come and SUE US.

Don't you ever learn someting from history. Thise FUD tactics won't work against us.

You cannot defeat us, we came after you and beat you and we take your market share pice by piece when our job finished, we raid your enterprises, we rape all your code and patents. Do what ever you do best, you cannot beat us.

We are Penguinistas, we do not show any respect other than better code.

Re:YaY ! Thanks Microsoft

[petrus4]

Because of Red Had success, those commerical boys doesn't show enough respect to us "The hard core GNU/Linux zealots"

You're assuming fanatics deserve respect. Some of us might say that that's a debatable assertion. ;-)

We are Penguinistas you mindless IT barons. So you got tons software Patent's. Oh WE ARE SO SCARED, come and SUE US.

Hint:- If respect is something you want, you might also want to look at developing some maturity. Making negative generalisations about corporations, taunting them, and bragging about being a member of Linux's answer to the Mousketeers doesn't exactly make you look like an adult...or mentally stable, for that matter.

You cannot defeat us, we came after you and beat you and we take your market share pice by piece when our job finished, we raid your enterprises, we rape all your code and patents. Do what ever you do best, you cannot beat us.

*sigh*

Some of us are interested in seeing Linux become an operating system that is used by normal people. The FSF (other individuals like you) are still working on a kernel you've probably heard of, called the Hurd. Why don't you go and help them with that? It also isn't something which that portion of the population who live above ground are ever likely to hear about, either...so it's doubly perfect. You get to spend time with kindred spirits developing an operating system that works entirely according to your own liking, and the rest of us get to see Linux become mainstream, and also forget that you exist. Everyone wins.

Re:Battle over. Microsoft gets $ for every SUSE co

[Delifisek]

Well thank you too my dear Anonymous Coward.

Do you think after than that, Any SuSE user find support in boards ? Do you think any GNU Zealot will say any good word about SuSE ?

So can you tell me how Novell increase his Linux market Share ?

SuSE market share already declined. Now their status is second (whatta hell I even dont remember SCO linux distro name).

SuSE is finished. Novell is finished. guy named Miguel de Icaza is finished...

Just so I'm on record ahead of time...

[edward.virtually@pob]

Microsoft's patent permission deal with Novell is the death knell for all other commerical Linux use in the United States (and anywhere else software patents hold sway), Red Hat included. All MS has to do is push one or two patent violation cases (easy, given the number of bogus software patents covering basic aspects of programming) throught the courts and destroy one or two non-Novell Linux using businesses, and the rest won't touch Novell's competition for fear of sharing their fate. You heard it here first.

Microsoft Reply

[Alt_230]

Emailed Microsoft with this:

At least publish what patents are allegedly infringed in SUSE, so the rest of the Linux world can evaluate and pull out anything like Mono or whatever it is that was threatened or research and disprove any allegation. Not everyone even includes Mono, because of worries about Microsoft and patents, so if that's what this is about, please just say so.

They replied:

Hello, Thank you for contacting Microsoft Customer Service. I understand that you would like the alleged infringement in SUSE be published so that Linux users may do an evaluation of it. Please provide the following information so that I can investigate your concern: 1. Please confirm if you are referring to this article: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov0 6/11-02MSNovellPR.mspx 2. The exact address of the Web site where you found the alleged infringement in SUSE. 3. Where exactly would you like this published? Microsoft values you as a customer and I look forward to your reply.

Thank you, Glenn & Dave Escasa Microsoft

managers@microsoft.com

Anyone want to give it a go and take the ball from here? -hehee!