Slashdot Mirror
Three Takers Named for Microsoft's Linux Support
narramissic writes "According to an article on ITworld, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank AG, and AIG Technologies have signed on for Microsoft's technical support for Novell Inc.'s Suse Enterprise Linux. This follows last month's announcement of a deal between Novell and Microsoft that Steve Ballmer described as an effort to 'bridge the divide between open-source and proprietary-source software.' None of the companies cited the price of the support certificates, nor would they say how many they were activating. Even more interesting, Credit Suisse is a brand new cusomter for Novell."
Where is the "itsatrap" tag?!?
Customer: "Please don't hurt me."
Ballmer: "These are some lovely client server apps you have here, it would be a shame if something were to.. happen to them..."
Customer: "Okay.. okay, I'll pay.... I'll pay" [quiet weeping].
-GiH
So...this deal is bad for Novell how??
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6962961128.html
What am I missing?
What's so intresting about that ?
It's not like Microsoft would start companies to make it look like people are actually supporting this thing.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
Working the SuSE helpdesk wouldn't be as bad as you think. #1 call is going to be "I need to share these files from my Linux server to my Windows 2k/XP desktop." Microsoft will be motivated to make this happen (I've had some strange problems with this in the past). They really don't want the helpdesk response to be "Sorry, but Microsoft hasn't released that patch yet." They can blame Samba, sure, but then Microsoft looks stupid for associating with a product they won't stand behind. From an Interoperability standpoint, it seems that Microsoft is playing ball.
I think the only real problem here was the deliberate attempt to undermine the GPL. In the end, though, the effect is not as bad as we think. GPLv3 plugs the loophole, a Linux vendor gets a ton of cash from Microsoft, and life goes on. I don't like Novell getting in bed with Microsoft, but it's not like they had a whole lot of choice. $400 million is a lot to turn down on the basis of "principles", "morals" or "ethics". The important thing is that the timing of the announcement allowed the GPL to be developed to prevent any further deals of this nature to be made.
mandelbr0t
"Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
So when is /. going to replace the SuSE icon with a stylised thirty pieces of silver?
Never, we are way to scientifically mindied here to resort to Biblical symbolism. However we are quite mean enough to, say.... superimpose a portrait of Vidkun Quisling over the Novell logo.... Mwuhahahahahahahahaha!
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
next stop - Microsoft binary Linux drivers for Suse - $799
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Blind bashing? In this case, I don't think so.
:)
To use another bogeyman to illustrate it... this is like Sony "offering" to "service" Xbox 360s, or something.
I've already seen some other analogies put forth, and I find this is one case where they are friggin' hilarious, and appropriate
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
What strikes me here is that Microsoft could potentially make more money selling "we won't sue you" certificates to [Novell] Linux users than the companies actually providing *real* support for said systems ...
What?! Microsoft's CEO basically threatens companies that use Linux, and Microsoft isn't at fault?!
And I suppose if Guido says, "Bad things might happen to your family, Mr. Anonymous Coward, unless you pay me some 'protection' money...", then it isn't Guido's fault if you pay him for protection you don't actually need???
And you got modded Insightful! Unbelievable!
I, for one, am getting pretty tired of people whining that Microsoft gets unfairly bashed here on Slashdot too often. I regularly read plenty of responses that defend Microsoft that get modded +5 Insightful.
As far as "bridging the divide between open-source and proprietary-source software" is concerned, Ballmer doesn't seem to grasp that the basic concept of open vs. closed. His so-called "divide" isn't something that can just be patched up like so many Microsoft products. The only way to "bridge" the difference between open and closed is with a hinge.
So which way does Ballmer expect to bridge this door?
When clients like these sign on to the program, the Geek becomes expendable.
Sure...but only until some overpaid executive can't get his second yacht because of revenue shortfalls. This is only as permanent as there is money to be made.
As to the why-still-use-Windows people, my philosophy is to use the best hardware and software tools for each job - and 'best' is a hazy function of suitability for the task, purchase cost, maintenance cost, admin training cost, user training cost, support quality, compatibility with other systems, industry reputation... the list goes on. And as long as the license for whatever it is allows us to do what we intend, that's all I care about. I have problems to solve and solutions to provide, and I need to solve them today. Some of what I need is best served by Windows. Some isn't. It would be good from some aspects to use all-OSS software, but I can't do everything I need to do with it, and neither can my users, and neither can my customers. Meanwhile, there are 'closed' or 'non-free' systems that do deliver what we need, and fit the other criteria above. I'm sure a couple of dozen talented programmers and a couple of years would be able to remedy that, but that is completely impractical from a cost and timescale point of view. Live with it. I do.