Slashdot Mirror
Groklaw Guts the Novell/Microsoft Deal
walterbyrd writes "Pamala Jones, at groklaw, totally rips apart the Novell/Deal patent protection deal. From the article: 'Justin Steinman reveals that to market their SUSE Linux Enterprise Server against Red Hat they ask, "Do you want the Linux that works with Windows? Or the one that doesn't?" It's just appalling. Let me ask you developers who are kernel guys a question: When you contributed code to the kernel, was it your intent that it be used against Red Hat? How about the rest of you developers? Is that all right with you, that your code is being marketed by Novell like that? I also have questions about antitrust issues, with Microsoft being Novell's partner in such deals and sales pitches. Nothing speaks louder about Microsoft's true determination never to be actually interoperable than this conference.'"
I think that some more "mainstream" journalists have written articles on topics after seeing her coverage. It seems like a lot of the tech writers in big media don't bother doing the type of digging that PJ is known for and instead wait for her to do a most of the real work before they decide whether or not to voice their own opinions.
Classic Microsoft - leverage a partnership with a company seen as your enemy, yet try to do so to keep them at the mercy of the guys in Redmond. That's why MS has always tried to do with Apple - prop them up so they can be seen as viable, but make them your bastard stepchild anyway. This is just a more appalling trespass as they managed to get Novell in a position to market the hard work of thousands of contributors, who simply wanted a free viable alternative for those not wanting to be held to MS's will, in a way quite opposite of the motivation of that work.
I've always liked SUSE as a distro, but once the Novell deal went through, I knew it was only a matter of time until the sour taste was just a little too sickening, making it unconscionable to fathom dealing with them for the foreseeable future. There are better distros out there anyway.
Ignorance is the Agent of Fear; Fear Is the Agent of Violence - >1
On the one hand, there is the M$ deal.
On the other hand, there are the Good Things that Novell has done, and does, for GNU/Linux and F/OSS.
On the third hand, there is me, and others like me, that I'm sure wonder about the MPD that Novell exhibits. To whit: I understand and agree that Open-solution based entities should be willing and able to work with proprietary companies. But it seems that in this instance Novell is going about that the completely wrong way, with the completely wrong company.
It's like there is Novell Darkside, and Novell Lightside, and ne'er the twain shall meet.
Maybe these are just the actions of a corporation that is so large that the different divisions inside of it are unaware of what others are doing, a la Sony.
"...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
As disgusting as this might be, it's going to have very little impact on Linux. It's marketing and unfortunately even Free Software is not immune from marketing. RedHat markets as well with slogans like "more than mission critical".
While I can't defend what Novell is doing here, I do want to point out that after buying SuSE, they created an open-source community project around a distribution that was one of the most closely kept. The openSUSE project now releases free SUSE downloads - something SUSE had been against. Novell also bought Ximian which I think has a great reputation in open-source development and Novell has been continuing the work that they have done.
Is it possible that Novell needs this marketing to overcome the fact that it is a late entrant? Maybe, judging by the other things that Novell has done (opening up a formerly closed distro and continuing important work on open-source projects) it is ok to forgive them for this highly annoying example of stupidity? Maybe I'm just naive and this actually is a bigger deal.
One of the primary reasons that Novell/SuSE were gaining market share was Samba. Guess what? Jeremy Allison, one of the core Samba authors, left Novell over what he sees as the illegal behavior of Novell in this deal. He now works for Google.
If Microsoft wanted to try to control Samba development, they may have done so. But I'd expect Google to run with the network storage work, now, with Jeremy in place.
"Before, Linux was this cloud we didn't get. I was high-fiving everyone I could find when Novell bought SuSe. We already won once against Novell." Martin Taylor, Microsoft General Manager of platform strategy link
Developers are free to join a project to help improve it, they are also free to abandon such projects enmass to equally stifle the products development and therefore screw those companies who are relying on the developers efforts to bring to market a good product!
That largely depends on how they compete though. If I compete with you by blowing up one of your offices, that doesn't improve the quality of my software, and does nothing for the end user. If you compete back by killing my top developers, the only innovation we're going to see will be in weaponry.
You can see this in Microsoft: world class PR machine, but in terms of software... well, they can't even design a power-off button without five years of committees, meetings, and focus groups.
mmm... you cut that paragraph a little too short, I think. Here's a longer section:
Keep on like that, and you'll have to change your handle to "quotes_out_of_context"
Go read some of the legal research. Look at how closely the Groklaw analyse the legal filing in the SCO case. Look at the care they take to be accurate. That's why PJ is so widely respected. For her hard work and dedication to defending free software from a threat against which of the Linux hackers wouldn't have known where to start.
Granted, when she moves off law and on to wider subjects, she can sometimes go a bit over the top. I don't think she has in this particular article, but even if she did - I figure all that hard work earns her the right to voice the occasional opinion.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
I want a Linux that works with Windows.
But if I invest in Novell's (Suse) Linux(TM), will my Windows work with Linux? Or will I have to buy the Novell version of Windows for that to happen?
Those of us old enough will remember when Microsoft had certain licensing deals with Compaq, and if you bought a Compaq server, you also had to buy Compaq Windows NT, which was quite a bit more expensive than the Redmond version. If you tried to get around this by just buying the server and installing Microsoft's Windows NT, you'd find yourself with a dead machine - the BIOS actually checked the Windows version, and if it didn't have the Compaq magic number, would refuse to continue loading it.
I can foresee a time when Windows will check to see if it is connecting to an "authorized machine" - presumably, to improve security - and that it will simply fail to connect to a Linux box, unless it is running an MS-approved version. (aka, Suse).
The only reason why Microsoft tolerates Novell is because they realize that Linux has replaced UNIX in a lot of corporate environments. As soon as Linux becomes widely used on the desktop, Microsoft will treat Novell as they've treated all of their past partners. Novell seems not to understand this - they can market their version of Linux only to the extent that Redmond blesses it, and that is truly sad.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
I have decided not to waste my time condemning Novell over the deal, however I no longer recommend their distributions to clients.
When clients ask for SuSE or Novell Linux I usually explain that Microsoft and Novell have signed a 5 year deal that allows Novell to use some Microsoft patented code in their Linux Distro. There is no telling if the deal will be renewed at the end of the 5 years or if users will have to start paying a license fee to either Novell or Microsoft. Novell and Microsoft have kept details of the deal a secret, but these details could incur costs for users. It is impossible to know what will happen.
I tell them that because of this ambiguity over the deal I no longer recommend Novell SuSE Linux as this could leave my clients in a legally questionable situation.
So I recommend Red Hat because they indemnify their users against legal harm and debian because their commitment to open source guarantees that any legally questionable code will be removed or replaced