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."

24 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. Frosty Posts by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Go Novell. Competition = good

    1. Re:Frosty Posts by spun · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was at Novell Brainshare this year and I can say firsthand that their commitment to open source seems genuine. I was impressed with the amount of work they are doing, not only moving to a Linux based platform and phasing out Netware as an OS altogether, but in taking their partners with them. There were some very good seminars on porting Netware applications to Linux, using the GNU tools like autoconf, and Linux security.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    2. Re:Frosty Posts by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Speaking of security, I kinda like 2 things about Apparmor vs SELinux (which oddly, Canonical chose for Ubuntu, over SELinux). One, the control follows the relative path to the file as opposed to the inode. Now, some may like it the other way around, but if you update the executable, as long as the path stays the same, no changes have to be made. This increases the chance of an administrator NOT forgetting to update the settings for the restrictions during an update or for a patch where they have not gotten all the details. The other reason...It is not written by the NSA. Call me nutty, but I don't exactly like the involvement of government in my software.

    3. Re:Frosty Posts by mrsteveman1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That last point is sort of irrelevant, its open source.

      If the NSA wants to develop security frameworks they obviously can, and the main kernel devs seem happy to incorporate their work into the kernel.

      If you have some reason to not trust SELinux, much as i hate it, do tell.

    4. Re:Frosty Posts by spun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I like Apparmor because it is much much easier to configure and use than SELinux. It also creates less of a performance drain.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  2. more than a third of a billion by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    so that $367 million Microsoft paid Novell in 2007 alone had nothing to do with profitablity and growth. glad to hear it

    1. Re:more than a third of a billion by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Having worked with Red Hat and Novell as well as HP, Sun and IBM on *NIX, I have to give Novell credit on their support. They tend to go the extra mile and I even really like their documentation better than Red Hat's. Red Hat's kickstart has fewer issues than AutoYaSt, but YaST as a tool to manage servers, plus Novell's Zenworks Linux Management is awesome in capabilities. It seems to just be easier to make things happen on SUSE for me.

      But, now at my current job, it is all RHEL and HPUX........with a few older sun boxen tossed into the mix.

  3. Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? by Stu101 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? by cp.tar · · Score: 3

      So how do Linux servers compare to NT servers? Have you done any comparions?

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    2. Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? by Stu101 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well so far we are finding that the amount of maintainance is a lot, lot less. Whereas windows you have multiple install and reboots to set it all up, just turn on the suse update repos, and do a zypper up, and press y several times and bingo you have a patched os.

      Also we are getting better uptime, those little "glitches" you get with windows. Not that they were a major things but annoyance.

      More proof? We needed a new lookup only DNS server. So we dug out a low spec Dell box and used openseuse with yast to install the correct programs, and bingo, within an hour, we had one free, fast, functional dns server. No needing to find a key, or worse, trying to convince some jumped up rep that yes you really did purchase a Windows 2003 license, or even worse still , sorry we cant sell you w2k3 anymore, just windows 2008.

      --
      http://www.writeitfor.us - Writing IT for the IT generation.
    3. Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? by MrMr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, why not ask Novell's business partner:

      http://www.microsoft.com/canada/getthefacts/default.mspx

      With friends like that...

    4. Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? by rathaven · · Score: 3, Informative

      Elegant? Try using Heartbeat, OCFS2 and clustered Xen solutions (on top of the Linux iSCSI target/initiator and LVM and DRDB for snapshot and replication). Virtual machine failure with automatic restart and 300ms migration with remote site backup? Nice!

      Novell do a really good implementation guide
      here

    5. Re:Geez, it took you that long to figure it out? by y86 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I run 2 applications for a major retailer. One runs on AIX (and has some linux nodes), the other runs on MS Server 2003.

      I've never been paged at 4AM because my Linux/AIX boxes rebooted in the middle of a major data aggregation job because of an automatic update.

      In fact my AIX / linux boxes all have uptimes of over 700 days, except one of my new servers which has been up 200 days.

      The windows server is relatively stable, besides the occasional freeze up(like 2-3 times a year it hardlocks). The real PIA is the updates rebooting them all the time.

  4. What makes SuSe Linux more interoperable? by pembo13 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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
    1. Re:What makes SuSe Linux more interoperable? by rrohbeck · · Score: 3, Funny

      the first bullet point in your link explains it: "Only Linux distribution recommended by Microsoft and SAP" Translation:
      if(you.suit()) {
          buy();
      }
      else {
          run_like_hell();
      }

  5. Re:dislike this company by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 4, Informative
    Speaking of blind.... Have you read the GPL v2 or v3? OK then. Microsoft wants to hedge bets on many levels and getting any stream of income from open source would be good for them. Hell, I am sure that if they sold MS Office a a binary blob solution for Linux, there would be takers.

    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.

  6. Re:dislike this company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  7. Mod Parent Up by mpapet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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
    1. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 5, Informative
      From my various experiences with both, Novell's support IS better.

      In getting somebody on the phone, they are about a tie in time, but Novell edges them out in hold music.

      In getting solutions, RH loves to point you to articles, Novell likes to get lots of logs, but goes a bit further sometimes. I have 2 stories to share on that.

      At one prior company that switched from MS infrastructure servers to Linux, they moved from RHEL 3 to SLES 9 and 10 on VMware. I had an issue with logging into their servers via SSH using the company approved terminal program (not free, but oru version was not in support, being about 2 versions out of date. PuTTY worked fine.) After calling their support and escalating, their 2nd level guy said he'd call me back. A few hours later, having downloaded and installed the trial for the terminal program, he gave me the settings I had to change in the sshd_config to make it work.

      At the same company as above, we had issues using SAMBA/Winbind to authenticate users to the server. It kept losing kerberos tickets in our environment. We sent various logs to them and finally were sent to 3d level support. They shortly sent us to engineering support and issued us a patch for "our" environment and told us to use this version of SAMBA and to email them when the next version alert for it was sent to us with the reference to this case so they could check the change logs and backport the fixes they had implemented when/if we wanted to upgrade.

      Hell, I love their cool solutions pages and even use the novell docs sometimes to get things done on Redhat, due to their being more informative.

  8. Re:dislike this company by walterbyrd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > 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.

  9. Re:dislike this company by walterbyrd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  10. I see it this way. by RotateLeftByte · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
  11. Times are changing by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  12. Explain that again. by khasim · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The indemnification is basically MS' promise to not go after Novell's customers.
    So Novell DID agree that there was SOMETHING Microsoft could sue over.

    I agree they sold them "magic beans" but I have to assume A customer or customers wanted this.
    Explain that one again. It makes no sense to me.

    This was done under the umbrella of SCO's lawsuits, etc. Some customers probably did not want the hassle and wanted to have somebody shield them.
    Red Hat didn't seem to have a problem with that.

    So Novell Pays MS and Novell gets paid MORE than that BY MS.
    That's what is known as "selling out".

    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.