Slashdot Mirror
Novell's Linux Business Takes a Seat At the Grown-Up Table
CNet is reporting that while Novell still has a long way to go before they start making Red Hat nervous, they have at least gotten a seat at the grown-up table. Reporting 31% year-over-year growth in their Linux business, Novell attributes very little of this success to their Microsoft partnership, looking to their Redmond connection mainly for interoperability work. "Novell's core Linux business is growing. By 'core,' I mean that our non-Microsoft- related Linux business is growing. These are Suse Linux Enterprise Server subscriptions sold directly by the Novell sales force or by our channel partners, without any Microsoft certificates or Microsoft salespeople involved. However, the important thing is that our total revenue picture for Suse Linux Enterprise is growing, as our customers increasingly don't distinguish. As we've said before, Microsoft offers an alternate avenue for purchasing subscriptions but we are focused on growth of the whole category."
Go Novell. Competition = good
so that $367 million Microsoft paid Novell in 2007 alone had nothing to do with profitablity and growth. glad to hear it
That's what the flash Ad on this page says at least... "roll over for more". www.moreinterop.com
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
We are late arrivals in linux land. However we are deploying a new suse server a week to replace NT servers. We have gone from zero to 35% in little over 3 months. It really is linux for the enterprise made easy. And whats even better, the toolsets are free, opensuse is free, and no shitty activation codes. It's all gravy, to use a bad term ;)
http://www.writeitfor.us - Writing IT for the IT generation.
According to this page, http://www.moreinterop.com/solutions/benefits/, they are "The Most Interoperable Open Source Platform on the Market Today"
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
I was at Novell Brainshare recently with thousands of other people from all over the world. I'd have to say your assessment of Novel's position is way out in left field. You really have no idea what you are talking about, sorry.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
That being said, regardless if you like Novell or not, they contribute to some of the most important and popular projects for F/OSS that if you use almost any distribution, you are touching daily.
Your assessment of the situation is flawed and incorrect. Please see the following as some proof: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/ http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/about_members.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_v._Novell http://www.novell.com/ctoblog/?p=54 So... In summation, if you use the Linux Kernel, SAMBA, Gnome, KDE or any numter of other F/OSS products/projects...thank Novell for their contributions.
Is this good news? Are novell sales up, in part, due to their dirty-deal with msft?
I could argue that apple and sun also benefited from their deals with msft.
But, long term, although the individual deals are often beneficial, at least in the short term; the long term effects of these deals is to further entrench msft standards.
JMHO.
Fine - dislike the company, but you really need to get away from the FUD and the fear of microsoft and realize that they are doing nothing of the sort (subverting the open source community). you can hate mono, hate gnome, hate evolution, hate kde, you can hate opensuse/suse linux, whatever, but you can't say that novell hasn't done a lot for the community -- they've donated TONS of code (opened up all of SUSE Linux, app armor, yast, hula, etc. and have done tons to go after folks who try to hurt the community and/or open source (gifting patents to OIN, going after SCO, etc.).
stop pushing FUD and realize that they, just like other companies are in the business of making money and despite that, they continue to help the community. I'm not saying that I necessarily love their MS agreements either, but I don't think they're going to let MS poison open source and/or hurt the community...
appreciate your comments, but honestly am a bit sick of some of the novell bashing, most of which is based more on fear than on reality.
While the parent's tone is strong, there are other factors besides the trojan horse microsoft has delivered to consider. The company is not financially healthy in any way, shape, or form. Management performance is still dismal. SuSe is not a silver bullet, or at least hasn't appeared to save the company.
Argue for a minute that SuSe saves their bacon, there's no proof Novell can out-manage RedHat. Let's say BOTH companies are viable growth assets, then I think Microsoft will open the trojan horse they sent to Novell at bare minimum.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
> Microsoft wants to hedge bets on many levels and getting any stream of income from open source would be good for them.
I don't think that is what the deal is about. Msft's business model does not work unless msft can control the standard. Msft wants linux to be legally encumbered. Msft is getting Novell to agree that all other version of linux are violating msft patents. This is supposed to create one legal version of Linux, and all the rest are illegal. Why do you think msft is sponsoring the Acacia lawsuit against Redhat?
Right now, there is no way msft can kill off linux in the same manner that msft has killed off msft's proprietary competitors. But, if there is only one linux, and this linux is commercial product, then it becomes much easier for msft to kill off, or at least contain the problem.
The first thing Novell did when they acquired SuSE was change the name to SUSE. Sort of thing that separates the amateurs from the pros. Like when Intergalactic Digital Research switched to a grownup name.
Novell execs do what novell execs think is in their own best interest. Sometimes that means helping Linux/foss, other times not. Novell execs may presently wants to linux to succeed - but only for novell, not for everybody. Bottom line, novell execs are looking at their own bottom line - whether that helps, or hurts, linux is inconsequential. Novell execs are not in business for the sake of any kind of idealism.
Whatever criticisms people have against msft, you have to give msft credit for being strategic. Right now, msft is teaming with novell to defeat redhat via msft's patent scam. Once redhat has been defeated, msft can turn their attention to other linux distributors, including novell. Let me remind you, msft has a long history of turning against their business partners.
http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensource.html
http://news.cnet.com/Microsoft,-Novell-spar-over-Linux-agreement/2100-7344_3-6137444.html
Microsoft got Novell to agree to very very little :). This is a collaboration effort and customer indemnification.
Ok, I use Linux and have since Slackware 1.1. I promote Linux as a more than viable alternative to the Redmond 'Lock in System'.
But, I see SUSE as the following.
A Linux system that you can buy (note not OpenSUSE) without the fear of being sued by Microsoft for the duration of the licensing agreement between the two companies.
For that reason, I would not recommend SUSE to any business at all. I might be legally wrong but that is how the tie up between Novell & MS seem to me a non Lawyer.
I do appreciate the stuff that Novell has contributed but personally, I won't touch anything that uses MONO with a 100m Barge Pole. Yes, I know it is apparently free of any potential patent liabilities but I see it as a trojan horse much like Moonlight.
IMHO, Microsoft wished that Novell, RedHat & Canonical would just disappear. They are not so I wish that for once they (MS that is) would say 'Ok guys, we will work properly with you for the pure benefit of our customers'. That is as likely (IMHO) as Concorde ever flying again.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
So, I actually went and R'd the FA, because I was curious about this phrase -- of course, it doesn't appear in the article, so I can only assume that it was the submitter's invention.
That said, what, exactly, constitutes the "grown-up table" and who sits there? Does it mean that they're now a player against Red Hat? Against Sun? "Endorsed" by Microsoft?
What exactly are the rules of the game at this point. 10-15 years ago, BSD and Linux were going head-to-head against commercial UNIX, such as Solaris, HP-UX and the like. Now, Sun is getting back to its roots and open sourcing Solaris (Bill Joy, original BSD author and creator of vi and csh was a founding partner of Sun, after all).
It seems that from old metrics, the "grown ups" are trying to sit at the "kid table."
Does that indicate that we now look at Microsoft as "grown up?" Are we talking merely from a business standpoint, not technological? I surely hope that is the case.
#2. What "indemnification" is Novell paying for, specifically?
Companies usually do NOT pay for things that they do not receive.
Do you remember the days when any company that stroke a deal with Microsoft, died a horrible and agonizing death? Well, look at this deal with Novell: it seems this is the first time a company pulled a fast one - on Microsoft! Novell saw a small opportunity to make a bit of money and offered to Microsoft something Novell must have known is worthless and impossible: the proprietarization of Linux. Microsoft was desperate enough that it wanted to believe this baloney and Novell was more than happy to oblige and feed them the BS, making a few bucks in the process, and attracting (extremely few) additional customers. Not too much profit, but every little helps, and you won't spit on it, especially if you give NOTHING in return, like Novell did to Microsoft.
Microsoft is getting sloppy and silly. These are indeed new times.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
1) Actually complete a sentence and
2) Link us to the real thing! Seeing a pumpkin isn't shocking.
Shameless, just shameless.
It doesn't matter how much you get paid, you've still entered into an agreement stating that you are paying Microsoft for the property that know is included in the product that you are selling.
Novell is Microsoft's Trojan Horse against Linux and thats ALL it is.
They are selling their "differentiation through interoperability" so that they appear as a Microsoft friendly Linux.
A complete lie, of course, because if there is one thing true about the GPL, is that they cannot do anything without giving it back. Particularily in samba.
Assholes.
NO SIG
So, in some twisted, accidental sense, you're right. Microsoft can't kill off Linux or OS X the way it did every previous competitor because those two are actually worth using. But somehow we expect MS not to adapt its business strategy to compensate for the fact that someone actually managed to come out with a quality competing product? Get real.
--Mike
One thing is to thank Novell for their contributions (which I do at least), and another thing is not looking at their "differentation through interoperability" strategy as the outright damned lie it is.
THey are saying that because they have this deal with MS, they are MORE interoperable than other linuxes.... which is an EVIDENT LIE.
In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro.
While I m at this, I thank novell for their contributions, but i dont HAVE TO from any ethical standpoint. They contribute, but not because its fun to do it, or because it feels nice to, but because there is money in it for them.
So perhaps they should thank Linus Torvalds and the main team for them building a kernel and providing a free ecosystem where they can rescue their long forgotten company.
NO SIG
Sorry the very idea of this is absurd. I don't think anyone at MS is deluded enough to believe that this is a viable strategy...Maybe in the year 2100 under one world government someone could actually believe this line of reasoning but otherwise you are just making shit up.
"All those moments, will be lost in time...like tears in rain..."
On the contrary, Microsoft was controlling from the beginning: it piggy-backed on IBM's clout to control DOS, and went from there.
My first computer was a Tandy 1000 RLX (an "IBM compatible" with a 286). It ran Deskmate 3... on top of MS-DOS. And why did it run MS-DOS? Because the IBM PC did, which made it the "standard." Microsoft was already getting its tithe, even then.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Your assertion of a absolute truth is plainly false. While it is possible for other distros do do the same thing that they do, that is not at all the same thing as saying that they do do the same thing as SUSE.
Clearly, if all distros did the same thing, then there would be no reason for multiple distos. All distributions aim to be best at something special, and make some effort to differentiate themselves.
Distributions are designed around different goals, different sets of target users, built by different developers, working for different companies, to different ends. Quite possibly zero distributions modify none of their included packages, and all distributions modify heavily especially their "core" package and system management tools, at least adding on distinct high level tools. YOU vs RHN comes to mind here.
SLES, during installation, prompts you to join a Windows domain. I don't remember seeing this option the last time I tried Fedora. I do specifically remember seeing it in SUSE at about the same time as I last installed Fedora though. The Fedora people could do the same thing. But they don't (or didn't, at the same time as SUSE)
SUSE installs the Novell version of OpenOffice. This version exists specifically to better interoperate with MS office (and this polished version existed long before any formal Novell/MS partnerships). It is available for anyone to download - source included. There is nothing stopping other distributions from including it - but they don't.
How well these two specific examples work is a point I won't argue. But they are two things, off the top of my head, that are distinct about SUSE and their commitment to better interoperate with MS stuff.
I abandoned RedHat when they first adopted the Redmond sales model with their WS, AS, and ES products. Nothing like telling the suits "Linux can save money" and then have the price of the OS make MS CALs look like a good deal.
Novell's offering has been very, very stable for the server environment, and at a very reasonable price. Plus, I like what Novell has done for OpenSuse (my preferred choice for desktop platform).
Good price, good stable environment, and even contributing back to the greater community. How could I not wish Novell continued success at this point?
(now just don't blow it, or that giant N will stand for "No More!")
"The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -- "Step Right Up", Tom Waits
Novell may attribute its earnings "outside of the Microsoft deal" in more ways than one. To many IT buyers, a Microsoft-tainted Linux supplier is the equivalent of napalm. I can certainly attest that we've done absolutely no business with Novell since they signed the deal, and will continue to avoid Novell as a vendor for as long as the Microsoft contract is in effect. Red Hat, on the other hand, has remained "pure" and has received the majority of our Linux business.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Ok, you concentrated in an evident mistake I made. Here is what I would change:
From:"In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro."
To: "In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that can not be done in another distro."
I think the general argument still stands: there is no real "interoperability" feature that exists in Novell's Suse and nowhere else. That can be done in ANY linux distro (if you feel such inclined).
Therefore, their campaing is full of BullShit (TM)
NO SIG
So, was the rats' table full?
Novell attributes it to the MS-FUD deal, yeah of course, if you receive big large amounts of money from another company so you paid them for every purchase done to you, and you would also use this fact to advertise yourself as more legal and "more interoperable" than other distros, it probably will put you in a high spot. However, that doesn't make you less of a rat.
Smearing other Linux bussiness and using false advertising to climb and steal their market, it makes you a rat in a book.
Oh, sorry slashdot, I forgot "Novell contributes a lot to free software", so it is untouchable and I cannot make a bad commentary about them or what they are doing to exploit a deal that should have never been made. Sorry for criticizing Novell, uh oh.
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
The deal with Novell gives Microsoft a great deal of power, but in a subtle way. By encouraging the Linux servers to be as compatible as possible with Windows, Microsoft is able to hedge their bets against a time if/when Linux is the dominant server, by reducing any desire to get Windows off the desktop just to avoid headaches in the server room. They also reduce resistance to technologies like Silverlight if there are compatible versions of them, but because they make the main version of it, they continue to stay in control.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
Hey, DesqViewX was pretty good !
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.