Slashdot Mirror
Novell CEO Gives Behind the Scenes Account of Microsoft Deal
raffe writes "Here is a Q&A with Ron Hovsepian CEO of Novell. He describes 'a love-hate thing' between the two companies." From the article:
"This past May, I picked up the phone and called Kevin Turner, the COO at Microsoft. I knew Kevin when he was the CIO at Wal-Mart. I said, "Kevin, I'd like to have a conversation about what the customer needs. If you could put back on your old hat as a customer, if I came in and started talking to you about virtualization on Linux, and this Microsoft guy showed up and started talking to you about virtualization on Windows, what would you say to us?""
OK which one of you would cost me less in TCO.
This message was brought to you by "Lack of Sleep."
"Lucy, you got some 'xplaining to do!"
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
itsatrap
That was fairly contentless.
If you didnt read it and pretended 2 marketers yakking, it was about as interesting.
Well, that and Virtualization is the next key word. Add that to Web 2.0 and Beowulf cluster.
Zzzzzz
here's a $100,000,000 bone
the guy sounds like an MS soundbite now
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
We did not do a full review as part of the process. [Microsoft] may have; we did not. I think your question was based on an assumption that we did a deep review, and we didn't.By a full review there, I believe he means a code review, to look for patent violations, before they signed a deal to protect their customers from possible patent violations. So he bought something, without actually doing due diligence to find out if they actually needed it. That's like buying flood damage insurance when you live on a mountain, it's not spending company money responsibly.
How we know is more important than what we know.
So, Novell's lost 4 deployments to Microsoft ..... and now Microsoft wants to help Novell get a chance at future deployments?
Is this something that makes sense in CEO-land?
Because it sure doesn't make sense from where I'm at.
and tries to sell virtualized Linux on a Win server and right after him another man walkes into the bar and tries to sell virtualized Windows on a Linux server. The barkeeper says "Get the f*ck outta here, both of you!".
Bad joke, eh? At least now you get the deeper meaning of the Novell/Microsoft deal.
I'd trust him more if he said one of these statments; since they at least sound plausable.
- "In one contract I closed more Linux revenue at a higher profit margin than we make in most of a year; and as a new CEO it makes me look good regardless of what it does to Novell long term" or
- "Oracle's too strong on the lobbying side in the federal government business for us to compete with; so we needed someone like Microsoft to partner with there because Microsoft has good ties to lobbyists thanks to Gates's dad's company where brahamoff got his lobbying job." or
- "Yes, there really is Microsoft IP there - here are the patent numbers so you can see that we really are protecting you"
But instead he's just spewing Micrsoft FUD that this has something to do with what customers want - while it's pretty obvious looking around that ZERO customers respect what Novell has done here.
The key point from the article is that Novell accuses Microsoft of spreading patent FUD to kill Linux deals.
Software patents are such a fantastic weapon for monopolists who have lots of lawyers. No surprise Microsoft is pushing so hard to get them legalised in Europe.
My blog
As Darl McBride showed us: You can say whatever the hell you want to the press. It's what your contracts say that really matters.
Well, if you are not happy with Novell, you can always migrate to Debian, the second largest GNU/Linux distribution.
From the Netcraft's GNU/Linux distribution share stats:
RH - 34%,
Debian - 25%
Suse - 11 %
To which Turner replied, "OK, I'm Microsoft now, so I can be a customer by buying out Novell's strategic assets, like its patent licenses. How much?"
We know the rest.
--
make install -not war
Did the patent review turn up any possible violations of Microsoft patents in the Linux source code? We absolutely have made no admissions of any infringements, period, from our point of view. No admissions.
Slimy toad. The question should to follow this should have been. "Are you personally aware of any violations of Microsoft patents having been identified as present in Linux code." None of this wishy washy "I haven't admitted to anything" nonsense. Bloody admit to it or state for the record that you aren't sitting on something that you'll "admit" later.
They have been in financial difficulties for years, this deal gets them a big chunk of change and the MS marketing machine goes to bat for them. The royalty payments are likely to be insignificant compared to the markets they gain. Good luck selling that one to the shareholders as misconduct.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
And what company is going to deploy Linux just so it can virtualize Windows? Why wouldn't they save the time and expertise (and finger pointing) and just deploy Windows as the host and Windows as the guest?
But it was Novell's CEO who said that he lost deals to Microsoft, again and again and again. I don't often see Microsoft complaining about losing deals to Linux.
You might want to check your email server logs. It seems that 95%+ of the businesses we deal with are running Exchange.
And Novell's marketshare has been in decline for years.
Somehow that doesn't add up to "got lucky on a few".
It was a bargain. the agreement allows them access to 108 million in patented items were they only had to pay 40 million for. In a direct exchange, that would be a profit of over 60 million dollars.
I find it annoying when people think Novel only does Linux now. They have tons of other products that are not free as in spirit or beer. Their group ware application could probably benefit from tons of Microsoft IP seeing how Microsoft's product generally run better then others on Microsoft's operating systems. And the claims for this seem to revolve around secrete api's and such stuff no one else has access to without forking a sum of money over to Microsoft.
So i guess we need to see were novel is going to use this patented IP and see if the deal allows them to deploy something free of royalties. It would probably burn Microsoft a new ass if they found novel could take a closed source app made with Microsoft's patented materials and then open source is or create an add on "advantage" pack that isn't strictly GPL compliant but give a lot of the stuff away anyways.
You know, I worked at an organization that had it's building withing a 500 meter range of a river. Therefore it was forced by the government to take an insurance against crashes with ships. The fact that there was an altitude difference of about 30 meters didn't count at all.
Now replace government with customers and you have a Novell-Microsoft deal.
Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
WMWare already offers something like that.
And Linux, when administered by someone who does NOT know what he's doing is no more stable than Windows. But Windows can be as stable as Linux when you have a competent administrator. In your scenario, the company would be paying for Linux experts AND Windows experts. Why? Why not just spend the money and get competent Windows administraters?
www.vmware.com
It's even free (as in beer) now. And you don't have to tweak the guest OS. It runs clean. We use it all the time.
Up your ass Novell.
You betrayed us. I hope you crash and burn in hell for your SINS.
You're going to pay a heavy price for your transgressions. Better dust off those resumes, you're all about to be out on your asses looking for work once Novell goes tits up..
Traitors..
Ron bought a dollar for a dime, it's Ballmer that should be the one who's head is examined. Microsoft can only lose in a patent fight with Novell and Linux.
... to naught.
I'll do my part to see that Novell never sells another Suse install anywhere I have influence. I suggest you do the same. All these asshats could see were the dollar signs in theri eyes. I hope they enjoy it while they can. I wonder if the courts would say that the outcome was obvious, therefore Novell's executives are civilly liable to the shareholders for doing the deal in the first place.
So close, but so far away.
Parent wrote "WMWare already offers something like that."
Yes, technologically VMWare can run all the Vista variations.
Unfortunatelly the Vista EULA for some of their versions apparently prohibit it, so despite being technologically capable of doing so (in much the same way you're technologically capable of pirating Windows or violating the GPL), it doesn't do you much good if you're trying to obey the law.
man, they must have felt like PT Barnum identifying todays "sucker"
Novell is still Novell I see. willing to slash their own throats for a buck
OldNovell -> Caldera -> SCO
NewNovell -> SuSE -> Microsoft
no pattern here, move along
The CEO of what company entered an agreement with the largest software company in the world only to proclaim "I didn't examine the agreement?"
I predict there will be no shareholder lawsuit.
Yet another example of how the Executive Class in America have long ago passed the point of accountability for their actions.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
So you called Microsoft out of desperation because you had no idea how to get Novell out of the cesspit it has found itself in? Why don't you just say that? No one calls the company who is taking business off you hand over fist and is the source of all your woes unless you're effectively conceding defeat. There's no deal you can do with them. They're just going to laugh at you and have you on.
Yet again, we get this virtualisation nonsense which seems to be Novell's answer to everything these days. In what possible way is virtualisation a stumbling block to anything?! Somebody, tell me. We've been able to virtualise Windows quite happily under VMware for years without any trouble - no thanks to Microsoft. Xen won't yet virtualise Windows, but it can, and when the right hardware support is in place it will do without any help from Microsoft.
Again - what on Earth is the problem apart from your own business and your own strategy?!
Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. You wait until Xen works with the hardware it needs to make virtualising Windows possible, or in the meantime, you grab a copy of VMware and install Windows or Linux on it? You could even partner with VMware. Fancy that. *Puts phone down*
That's not the way Microsoft views it.
From Microsoft's perspective, absolutely nothing, because they don't care about interoperability. They must be doing something right, because its worked for them. All the useful Java and .Net interoperability software is already being sold successfully via smaller software companies, and most are doing quite well out of it. It's a pity that Novell isn't a part of this, isn't making any money out of this and can't put Mono to some actual good use.
To do with what exactly? Cluestick: people are already doing it.
So the deal was about interoperability, what there is to actually talk about, and Microsoft wanted to talk to you about patents and IP and you agreed, which serves their own ends? Brilliant. What a bunch of clueless idiots. I'm sure you're now part of another long running office joke in Redmond.
And you thought that gave you the upper hand, and you never once asked why Microsoft were willing to go along with something that they just didn't need to do?
Just a general statement of principle, apply it where you will. I've never seen it to be wrong. I've seen more than one business destroyed because people thought they could take tainted money and get away clean, or they were in denial about the source and motivation behind the money.
I don't believe it. It's easy to revise history when you were one of a few partcipating in it.
Even if he did have some initial thoughts regarding the matter in that way clearly Microsoft did not, even from the beginning.
Several factors will hurt this deal. It will potentially taint the developers and their contribution back into the linux development cycle. It will give Microsoft some control on the development of Linux.
Microsoft knows they can't compete so they wanted to control the development and then threaten anyone that didn't do it their way. That is so utterly clear I can't understand how this guy expects me (or anyone) to believe his rendition.
Honestly he may have had some intent as he described it but clearly Microsoft never did. This was at attempt to get Microsoft into a position that if you pulled them out of the works the whole thing would fall.
If Microsoft can compete then let them. If they can't compete then let the company die. But do NOT threaten the Linux community and attempt to manipulate it with slight of hand.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
Hovsepian has admitted that Novell have lost deals due to a great deal of IP FUD from Microsoft:
The problem is that when a covenant letter lands on the door mat of one of those customers it will seemingly confirm what Microsoft have been telling them on the quiet, whether Novell likes that or not. Novell have been screwed, and they just don't know it and can't see why.
Well, the reason use virtualization is to get the most usage out of our existing hardware by running multiple low-usage instances of servers so badly behaving apps can all run "together" without actually impacting each other.
Virtualization does nothing if your machine is already vulnerable to an exploit. I've used virtualized workstations to dig into spam trojans and such.
What you are thinking of is more commonly referred to as a "firewall".
As for a company wanting "to run get away form Microsoft", you may have missed the part of the article that said Novell was losing the deals to Microsoft. People were running away from SuSE and toward Microsoft. Not from Microsoft.
Yep. People did not want to deploy SuSE but were happy to deploy Microsoft. So I'm not seeing your point about companies wanting to "get away" from Microsoft and move to SuSE.
So, we agree that Novell is losing deployments and Microsoft is gaining them.
Ummmmmm, yes, it has.
Check your email server logs. Look at how many different companies run Exchange.
Then see how many run GroupWise.
And next year there will be even fewer instances of GroupWise out there. That is what "declining marketshare" means. Novell is dying.
And focusing on "virtualization" so you can offer the chance for companies to run the most common OS on top of your dying platform is just
Windows on top of Windows would be easier for Microsoft to produce and support with no finger pointing.
" I picked up the phone and called Kevin Turner, the COO at Microsoft. I knew Kevin when he was the CIO at Wal-Mart."
Good ol' boy. Just trying to figure out to make a bunch of money. It has nothing to do with customers or Novell surviving.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
it's the CEO, not the employees. The ceo is making deals with MS so he has someplace to go when Novel folds.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Then again, maybe he's just playing the role of abused spouse. Hitting me shows he cares!
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Let me explain:
Novell has announced their new product - Novell System Management (http://www.novell.com/products/zenworks/systemsm
Why does everyone assuming Microsoft is getting all the benefit from this deal?
It seems that Novell is working hard to make up for the PR loss following their latest deal with Microsoft. Apparently, they did not expect this to have such a negative impact on their image. I wonder if that's because they simply miscalculated, or because the community is overreacting and it's actually no big deal. I haven't been following the case closely, so I don't know, but maybe someone else can enlighten us all?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I don't believe for a second that Microsoft wasn't acutely aware of exactly that! They understand very well that they win deals due to FUD about Linux IP and indemnity issues, and that is exactly why they entered into this agreement.
This deal is serving as a major catalyst to make that very problem worse, not better!
``Novell CEO Gives Behind the Scenes Account of Microsoft Deal''
In other words, he answers the all-important question:
What the hack where they thinking?!
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
"We are almost broke, and wrong or right, Microsoft can sue us until our kids are geriatric."
"Or, we can take a hundred mil or so from Microsoft, and have some black ink on our balance sheet, and I wont be the 20th Novell CEO to get fired."
"But, I run the risk of losing the love, respect and admiration of the Linux Community, be labeled a sell-out, and be forced to eat alone at trade shows."
Novell CEO's wife:
"What would your cut be of that hundred Mil?........Really?..........Well,....look bitch, if you want a friend, get a dog. Mama needs a new SUV!
Ah. High praise. Says volumes about both of them.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
FTFA:
.Net stacks in their shops. If I'm a CIO, that's what I'm dealing with: "What are you guys doing to make my life easier to make those things work together?"''
.Net. However, that's really a .Net port of Visual J++, Microsoft's own, incompatible imitation of the real Java. At any rate, various projects have sprung up to allow better collaboration between CLR and Java code, and, of course, there are also the trusted old tools of protocols that can be used to make code written in any language cooperate with code in any other language. Why Mr. Novell CEO thinks we need virtualization for this is beyond me. Perhaps it's just because virtualization is the new buzzword.
``My point of view is that customers are going to have J2EE stacks and
What they _should_ have done was to keep things compatible in the first place. In fact, Microsoft did something along those lines with Visual J#
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Regarding Ballmer's "undisclosed balance sheet liability" comments:
``Obviously, I was disappointed, because the heart and essence of the deal was around the technology collaboration and what we want to get done for the customer.''
Perhaps that's what you (Novell CEO) thought, but if Microsoft finds a way to exploit this and rape you or your customers or the rest of the world in any way, you still made a foolish deal.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
MS isn't promising not to sue Novell, they are promising not to sue novell customers. That's a big difference. Of course there are loopholes so their promise is worthless anyway.
Ballmer has recently stated that they are ready to start suing people who USE linux if that linux was not purchased from SUSE/Novell. This mean you could be sued by MS, I could, anybody could.
evil is as evil does
Much like the UNIX subsystems on IBM MainFrames, Linux provides an Ultra high availability backbone for a system that otherwise might bring down the entire infrastructure when needing to be rebooted. With a Linux virtualization system, you can provide a level of redundancy and support for applications that Microsoft can only dream of. I personally know of a company (yes, I work there) which runs a Seibel CMS system on Windows servers which are virtualized on SuSE 10, and have not had a single outage since they went that route. Prior to that, the system had outages on a weekly basis, and our bonuses suffered for it.
"My immediate reaction is "WTF? What kind of moron doesn't make things 64-bit safe to begin with?" Linus
Ron seems to have completely forgotten about Microsoft's track record with "collaboration"..psst Ron..it sucks.
*Ron, we smell poniez: http://techp.org/
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
If you could put back on your old hat as a customer, if I came in and started talking to you about virtualization on Linux, and this Microsoft guy showed up and started talking to you about virtualization on Windows, what would you say to us?
What a weirdly constructed phrase. If I was the customer I would say, wtf are you talking about? Or I might say, get the fuck out of here, I'm not interested in your virtualization marketing-speak.
What I need as a customer is for things to become mre clean, simple, consistent, stable, secure, etc, I don't need yet another layer of shit on top of the layers of poop that are already there.
If I'm a CIO, that's what I'm dealing with: "What are you guys doing to make my life easier to make those things work together?" I saw virtualization as a key to us being able to do that in a different manner than we have in the past.
Why? So instead of two dual core systems I can now buy one quad core? Except the two dual core systems would always run smoother because there's less resource contention?
Is virtualization really what the market demands nowadays??
...just a lot of dodging. If it was a honest and straightforward deal, it would be easy to explain without all this non-answering.
Is my Samba server that's been running in a back room for two years, and only ever gets rebooted when the power's out long enough to drain the UPS (which has happened maybe twice during that time.) Didn't even need a reboot when we changed its IP address. Did I mention it's had NO problems since being initially configured?
Parent poster has it dead on about uptime...
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
virtualization....that's what they would say................oh..that's what they did aye?
One of my co-workers spent the summer working for Microsoft on a very cool project (IronPython). During his stay there he heard from Microsoft lawyers during a presentation that Microsoft has approached Novell numerous times over licensing concerning .NET patents during the last year or two. Each time they were rebuffed by Novell. He got the impression Microsoft was very displeased about this. In their minds after all, .NET *is* their IP and Novell was flouting it. One has to wonder what really changed Novell's mind about dealing with Microsoft in a patent covenant relationship.
Novell CEO Gives Behind the Scenes Account of Microsoft Deal
I read
Novell CEO Gives Bullshit Account of Microsoft Deal
My bad
You think that CIO of the largest retailer in the US is a job you can get straight out of DeVry?
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
... Hovespian's head will roll when the Board figures out where the $$$$ from MS to "Novell" are going.
Ron baby, some advise.
Seek professional, as in "Psychriactriac help." Then seek help for the "AIDS thingingy."
Naughty boy, you should have used a condom "in your mouth."
Toodles
Most people who actually use Windows machines know what this constant rebooting nonsense is pure fantasy. In short, you're full of it.
Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!
I think it makes no difference if there are IP infringements or not. Microsoft has everyone convinced there are and that is a fact. Novell can now say (and is) If there are infringements or not, we don't know, but you're covered either way. That's a major warm fuzzy for a client spending a large sum of money on a platform.
One less major piece of FUD to be spread.
-m
http://www.invisik.com
yup, not worth $40 million, or reciprecation. He's admitted to buying something without considering its value. That's misconduct.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Funny how it isn't FUD when you are in the unique position to benefit from Microsoft's fearmongering about potential "IP" violations in Linux. Hovsepian also said that he was "disappointed" by Ballmer's "Undisclosed Balance Sheet" statement, but did not want to overreact since he knows how things can be taken out of context.
--10scjed IANAL,AFAIK
It's hardly an expenditure, as Novell is receiving $348 million. But maybe that's your point as well.
This is a classic "If you can't beat them, join them" scenario. But with the added bonus of having "them" pay us. Straight business. I think the open source community needs to get more comfortable with "business".
-m
http://www.invisik.com
"There is nothing irresponsible about taking out insurance against one of the biggest business risks corporations face today."
Would you also condone paying al-Qaida for not bombing your business? Where exactly would you draw the line? You don't give in to terrorists and you trust that the authorities deal with them. The same way you don't give in to the software patent mob and trust that IBM's nazguls will deal with them, since IBM is betting their business on GNU/Linux. Any IP doubts about GPL software are bad for IBM's business, since there is no settlement option for patents in GPL software. You either remove the patented parts or negotiate a universally free license to use the patent in free software. There is no middle ground, no way of paying licenses.
It's ironic, in a way: IBM makes a lot of money from patents, but the only way to make GNU/Linux truly viable is by eradicating software patents.
Businesses as well as governments have done just that since the dawn of time. Welcome to reality. And yes - if *I* had a business and the Mafia or al-Quaida - who cares who if I'm dead in the end in either case? - would trheaten to kill me unless I pay "protection money", I would pay. You, hero that you are, would of course get into your Rambo outfit and start killing everyone and their grandmother because you actually believe Hollywood is reality?
No, I would call the police. There are reasons why southern Italy has been an economic disaster area for most of the post-war years, and the fact that most businesses pay protection money to the Mafia, who in turn pay off or threaten the police and courts is a major one. Corruption is not good for business.
Mind, I live in Finland. We have the world's lowest corruption rate, low crime rates and the second highest productivity after the USA, while only working two thirds of the hours US employees put in, so perhaps I don't live in the 'real' world. Not that I mind...
That's exactly what I thought...
but Novell has had plenty of time to state that the IP deal doesn't cover Open Source Software. I honestly thought they would be working out a commercial Netware that perfectly integrated Linux networks with Windows networks. I thought they would be working on revitalising Netware as *the* logical system for integrated environments.
Apparantly, Novell..
Essentially, though I think Novell doesn't know what the hell they are doing right now.
And frankly, they have had ample time to put some spine in to their end of the deal, they haven't done so. Novell hasn't so, much as addressed the fact that this agreement is designed to solve an underlying problem with software patents throughout the industry.
Novell just lost me as a Suse customer.
Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
In short: by dividing the community into protected and unprotected parts. By saying: "our customers" are protected, instead of making a deal for the entire Linux community. By taking code written by countless programmers and not giving them or their users any of that protection they deem necessary for their customers. By technically and legally staying inside the GPLv2, but morally and ethically being in another galaxy.
1 03031303
Bruce Perens' petition: http://techp.org/petition/show/1
Groklaw article on GPLv3 & Novell/MS deal: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061116
I hope I don't get kicked off slashdot for posting that, but it's true.
Windows running native is a lot less expensive, and more stable, than any virtualization setup.
Small download, only install once, best package management in the business.
"Do either of you guys know the phone number of VMWare's CEO?
Seriously... who even thinks anyone but VMWare for enterprise virtualization. Xen is cool, but it is nowhere near VMWare infrastructure's capabilities. And Microsoft's offerings are about 4-5 years behind the curve.
Diligence schmiligence - Novell walked away with the fat end of the purse. There's a fair probability that some Microsoft claim somewhere is infringed in Linux - there's also a fair chance it's a bogus claim. There's a near-certainty that some Novell claims are infringed by Microsoft. If you don't believe it look at who got to keep more money.
Unless MS didn't look for patent infringement of Novell IP in their products either...
Didn't you even ask him what specifically they discovered in Linux that was violating their patents. They do have a Linux Lab after all and have been pouring over the code for years.
What did you talk about. What did you ask him. What didn't you ask him and why not.
davecb5620@gmail.com
" if I came in and started talking to you about virtualization on Linux, and this Microsoft guy showed up and started talking to you about virtualization on Windows, what would you say to us?"
"Who are you and what are you doing in my house?"
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
We never changed our position. All I cared about was, I lost a deal with a large retailer to Microsoft for the first time about 12 or 18 months ago. It was going to be an all-Linux deal, and I lost it because they were unduly influenced, in my opinion, to be fearful of these [IP and indemnity issues]. From my point of view that was really too bad, because Linux lost. Then I watched it happen three more times.
Perhaps he would have been better off reminding them that Microsoft customers don't get IP idemnity either. IIRC, Microsoft's customers were sued by Timeline for using code which Microsoft improperly integrated into SQL server. Then, the Eolas suit caused Microsoft to issue a patch which removed functionality from Internet Explorer. I am not aware of Microsoft compensating its customers in either case.
I think Ron really failed Novell with this recent Microsoft deal. Actions speak louder than words; no matter what he says, he's sent a clear message to the world that Novell believes Linux infringes on Microsoft IP. Microsoft agreed to the deal because they knew it had a strategic advantage against Linux, not because they wanted to help Novell.
It never was about IP - his lost customers were bluffing. He might have won the deals had he been a better salesman:
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Do you think Microsoft is spreading a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt about the risk of IP violations if companies adopt Linux?
They were sharing their position in the marketplace as they saw it through their lens. And we figured, "Shucks!" so what if the deal drives a wedge in the Linux community, creates more FUD, and makes us Microsoft's "approved" version of Linux. A buck is a buck, baby. I gots to feed the monkey, know what I'm sayin'?
CommentBot 0.7a running with args "-module irritate,disagree -target random"
Heh, my parents once took over ownership of a pub under protection. Instead of paying them we paid for a real security group to point shotguns at them and threaten them to leave the pub alone.
Raised the value of the pub more then the cost of the security group heh.
On the other hand, I'm pretty much a windows expert. I can do pretty much anything with a windows machine EXCEPT keep it running for more than a month. I'm not talking windows expert as in the guy in your family that helps with PCs, I'm speaking as the guy who helps the IT department when they get stuck.
Yeah. I'm running a 2000 server at home thats been up at least 6 months, the last time it was down was due to a power outage (its not on a UPS).
I'm hosting like 10 webpages for different people, many of them running ASP applications I wrote myself... I also use it for doing torrents (just downloaded a 12 GB file over the last week)... oh, its also running a popular MMORPG server (not going to name it here) which has an average of 15 players on it at any given time, up to 40 at peak times.
Been doing this since 2003, really haven't any problems with downtime except for a drive failure, and have not once been hacked into, tho it is fun to watch all the chinese bounce off my firewall.
Not sure what you're doing wrong. And I wouldn't even call myself an 'expert' as you did.
Kipling said it best:
Dane-geld
(A.D. 980-1016)
Rudyard Kipling
IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation,
To call upon a neighbour and to say:--
"We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."
And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!
It is always a temptation to a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say:--
"Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray,
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say:--
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!"
By all means, please start suing. I guess the EU may have second thoughts about software patents then. And as I live in the EU, I cannot be sued for software patent infringement, since they are not valid here (yet).
http://forum.ev1servers.net/showthread.php?s=&thre adid=42270&perpage=25&pagenumber=1
It didn't work out well for Robert Marsh, but at least his company survived.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
It's not sufficient - a paradigm, properly pronounced aloud, is worth only twenty US cents.
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
.... they can keep their own distro an mantain it themselves.
If you have so many different flavours of Linux in your shop that talks about incompetence and lack of profesionalism.
No immoral patent deal will fix that for you.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
..... like if they were a valid construct.
Software patents do not matter. How big your team of lawyers is does.
The validity of them is also immaterial, which is what many folks around here are not getting.
MS, or any big company for that matter, can put of of contention just by threatening to sue, no matter the merits of hteir "complaint".
IANAL but write like a drunk one.