Slashdot Mirror
A 5-Year Deal With Microsoft To Dump Novell/SUSE
Nicholas Petreley writes, "Wake up little SUSE, wake up. No, that's not good enough. Wake up SUSE customers, wake up. Novell is jeopardizing the future of Linux for its own short-term rewards. If you want to see Linux flourish, let alone survive, after Novell's five year deal with Microsoft expires, I suggest we make an alternative five-year deal with Microsoft. In this case, our part of the deal is to spend the next five minutes, months, or years migrating away from every shred of Novell/SUSE software in our home, office, or enterprise."
I understand people hate Microsoft. But, how is this any different than the mono project and their microsoft deal?
Microsoft advertises on slashdot as well.
Microsoft is, in the end, just a company. It may be a monopoly, but it is just a company. It's not going to destroy linux if one company makes a deal with another one. Linux is an operating system that spans MANY companies. If anything, this may get linux into more of those pro-windows IT shops. The ones that aren't pro-windows won't care about the deal either way.
It just seems odd to me that people are foaming at the mouth over this.
People who have actually seen the agreements: 10.
/., digg, or anywhere else? 0.
/. paranoia gets to me. While there may be downsides to the agreement the fact of the matter is that Suse customers will benefit as long as it exists and probably after it is no longer. Linux users at the very least won't be hurt because nothing Novell or Microsoft does will break Linux....neither company owns it, one of them actively contributes, and the other is saying it will help with interoperability.
People who have seen the comments who have publicly shared the exact details on
Honestly sometimes the
Sheesh....time for a break from my tinfoil hat and staying indoors.
The thesis here is a little murky, but the author has enough of a point for me to wipe Novell-related Linux products (though that's easy for me to say, as I don't actually use any that I know of).
In brief: Microsoft has cross-licensed software patents with Novell. The idea is to legitimize their patents before they attempt to sue other Linux distro vendors (and probably others).
The author is correct in their assertion that, if Novell has done so (and it appears that they may have), they are actually now in violation of the GPL. From section 7:
For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
The endgame is where I lose the guy a little on the specifics, but it doesn't really matter. The point here is another anti-Linux legal FUD campaign. suffice it to say, this is hardly a conspiracy theory. Microsoft is the direct author of SCO.
Say it with me, kids. Software Patents are Insane.
Software Patents are Insane.
No one can read 200,000 of them, or the few thousand new ones each day. No human being can validate code against the patent base. All software is a ticking patent timebomb. It is (vaguely) legalized barratry, and the rest of the world (who has soundly avoided this insanity) will be laughing at the American software industry all the way to the bank.
There is no solution short of immediate and complete invalidation of all current and future patents on software.
Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
Listen.
Do you want in the door at Fortune 500 companies? I mean lots of them? Then this is a good thing.
If Linux is to displace Microsoft then it needs exposure exposure exposure. It needs people seeing if they can run complex Excel spreadsheets with VB Macros on other platforms. It needs people seeing if there are alternate Exchange backends that allow full Outlook frontends.
If Linux works well with Microsoft more people will at least *try* Linux, plain and simple. When people try it, they either stay with it or come back and say why it won't work.
For example, there are tons of popular PC platforms that various Linux distros won't work on without changing things. Just 2 weeks ago I attempted to install the newest Ubuntu build on a 3 year old P4 IBM business class PC and you know what, it wouldn't install. I was able to troubleshoot it to a lack of onboard video memory, but a quick bios fix took care of that. Unfortunately the error that came up was so vague that the "average" user would have probably given up.
Linux needs all the "new" users it can get. They are the ones that find the funky errors, the ones that the "elites" otherwise consider a "minor" issue.
One of the reasons that Windows is so popular is that for the most part it installs without any problems, especially on PC's from major manufacturers (which Fortune 500 companies tend to buy).
Enough now, I'm at work.
Ever feel like you are driving the getaway car?
I have never used SuSE anyway. I have installed it a couple of time, and I found it bloated and needlessly complicated.
Some companies may buy SuSE, because of the Microsoft deal, but I strongly doubt it. SCO has shown that legal threats do not work. Do you really think IBM will beg for mercy if Novell (or Microsoft) knocks on the door, legal papers in hand? Do you think HP will do the same? What about Sun? I don't think so.
As a matter of fact, the Novell/Microsoft deal may be excellent for the future of Linux: I can see a lot of companies (HP, IBM, Red Hat, Mandriva, Sun, etc) get together and pool legal resources to fight any such threat. And that means -- worst case scenario -- that their combined economic power will simply crush any attempt by Microsoft to be "legally" naughty. The fact is, Linux cannot be stopped right now: there is simply too much interest and too much money at stake for too many people. And I suspect Microsoft knows this: it's simply trying to dip a toe in the water, see how this Linux thing really is working, try to work out some sort of compromise and preserve its profit margin. But it knows it can't fight Linux anymore (or, at least, some parts of Microsoft know that -- some other parts may ignore it).
Open source is an idea whose time has come. And it was Victor Hugo who said: "You can't fight an idea whose time has come". Again, I suspect Microsoft knows this. Hence the Novell deal.
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
Novell/SUSE users and customers should wipe Novell/SUSE off their disks and install virtually any non-Novell/SUSE alternative in its place.
Not so easy in a server room, especially in a mixed Windows/*nix server room where Novell's deal with Microsoft doesn't bother management in the slightest, even if you can explain it to them.
An "upgrade" to Red Hat might be the sort of thing that could be explained to the average PHB though, especially if you can make a cost-savings case for it.
We can expect marketing campaigns from Red Hat and Oracle anytime now, with "upgrade" deals waved around.
Dump all MONO development for any of the many excellent alternatives, and abandon your investment in all Novell-based open or closed source tools.
Sounds easier: Mono hasn't established a significant base in the corporate market yet. And if Sun GPLs Java, you could even start presenting Java as not just more open, but also least-likely-to-be-sued.
Weird times.
As I offered earlier:
"Under the patent cooperation agreement, Novell's customers receive directly from Microsoft a covenant not to sue. Novell does not receive a patent license or covenant not to sue from Microsoft, and we have not agreed with Microsoft to any condition that would contradict the conditions of the GPL. Our agreement does not affect the freedom that Novell or anyone else in the open source community, including developers, has under the GPL and does not impose any condition that would contradict the conditions of the GPL. Therefore, the agreement is fully compliant with the GPL,"
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS4685037869.html
That reminds me of another, historical, agreement:
"Under the treaty, England receives directly from Germany a promise not to attack Poland. England does not receive a promise not to attack Germany, and we have not agreed with Germany to any condition that would contradict the conditions of previous treaties. Our agreement does not affect the freedom that Poland or any other country in Europe, including France, has under previous treaties and does not impose any condition that would contradict the conditions of such treaties. Therefore, the treaty is fully compliant with all previous treaties."
Sincerely,
Neville Chamberlain
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill