Microsoft-Novell Relationship Hits the Skids

Well, seriously... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-03-13 09:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

Who buys Linux in an economy like this?

Re:Well, seriously... by Yfrwlf · 2009-03-13 09:51 · Score: 4, Insightful

And even stupider, who'd want to strengthen software patents and give Microsoft leverage by caving into their FUD and paying for this "protection" racket? All efforts to invalidate all software patents should be taken by all companies and citizens.

--
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
Re:Well, seriously... by schestowitz · 2009-03-13 09:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

"Who buys Linux in an economy like this?"

People still buy Red Hat. Check their numbers.

Novell was warned (since the beginning of its relationship with Microsoft) that Microsoft 'partners' consistently get stabbed in the back. It took Novell a couple of years to take the toll.

--
My Linux - (L)ove (I)s (N)ever (U)tterly eXPensive
Re:Well, seriously... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-03-13 10:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

Who buys Linux in an economy like this?
Who buys a proprietary operating system in any economy when you can download and use linux free. And if you need support then you can pay for linux support without ever having to pay for a license, unlike our favorite proprietary software vendors that charge for a license and for support and in in some cases for every client connection to said software. I guess you can't fix stupid.
Re:Well, seriously... by Kjella · 2009-03-13 10:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

Microsoft 'partners' consistently get stabbed in the back. It took Novell a couple of years to take the toll.
Not limited to Microsoft, if "partner" implies some sort of revenue sharing then in bad times you'll find they work find hard to find solutions not involving their partners. In ways it can be more frustrating than a straight-up competitor that you know where you got.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:Well, seriously... by drinkypoo · 2009-03-13 10:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

Novell was warned (since the beginning of its relationship with Microsoft) that Microsoft 'partners' consistently get stabbed in the back. It took Novell a couple of years to take the toll.
Not to mention that Novell should have known damned well that Linux is the Microsoft alternative. If you tie it in with Microsoft, suddenly it's the Microsoft partner, not the Microsoft alternative. TONS of Linux customers went to Linux specifically to avoid Microsoft lock-in. They're trying to get further away! It's pretty fucking sad when Novell and Sun are both in Microsoft's back pocket.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Well, seriously... by drinkypoo · 2009-03-13 11:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

Someone who wants to do anything in a GUI? Linux makes a powerful server, but its desktop applications (even OpenOffice) lag far behind their proprietary counterparts in features, or are non-existent (where's the Photoshop or InDesign clones?).
Uh, the photoshop clone is called the gimp. Whether you think it's a valid replacement or not, it has all the same features, except the most important one: Adobe plugin support. You can do the things you can do in InDesign in Scribus or Inkscape, but neither one is much of a contender.
On the other hand, since less than 1% of the world's population needs to use those two programs to get their work done (graphic artists are a severe minority in computer professionals - a term pretty loosely applied there, since most of them are about as computer-savvy as a pygmy warrior from ubangme) this is probably not a big deal. Most people need an office suite that will let them write papers and letters, and a web browser, and a media player. Since any operating system offers all of these, Linux will work for most people. Kind of like Electric cars... they can only meet the needs of what, 95% of the population? How terrible!

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Well, seriously... by Darkness404 · 2009-03-13 11:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

Look, for most people who A) Don't need the "obscure" features of Office B) Don't need MS server support (such as Exchange) C) Don't game or D) Don't need photoshop, Linux is the obvious choice. There are many, many, many businesses and most homes that fall into these categories. There are some people who obviously *need* Photoshop, there are a lot more that *think* they need Photoshop when The GIMP (or a more basic image editor) can do exactly what they want albeit with a different UI. Sure, there are some features of Office that OOo doesn't have yet, but these features aren't the "everyday" features, its the obscure stuff, secondly, the argument of a lower learning curve goes down the drain when you show the UI of 2007 to a user of a previous version of Office, and then show them the familiar interface of OOo. Sure, there will be people who can't switch to Linux because of a program that is crucial to their business doesn't run on Linux (or isn't emulated well in WINE). But for all others,(and that is a large amount of people), Linux does just fine.

Someone who wants to do anything in a GUI?

What are you talking about? Installing? Almost all distros have a GUI for installing. Changing settings? For any day-to-day settings, there is a GUI for that. Etc. About the only time you don't have a GUI (assuming of course that this is on Ubuntu or similar, not Gentoo or Arch) is when you change a setting that to do the approximate Windows setting you would edit the registry.

--
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Re:Well, seriously... by sloanster · 2009-03-13 11:50 · Score: 3, Insightful

Who buys Linux in an economy like this?
Lots of people, including the fortune 100 company i work for. In fact, the linux demand has gotten much stronger, as my employer is dumping old school platforms and moving to linux in the server room.
The tough times motivate them to maximize their bang for the buck.
Oh, and trust me, big companies want the official paid support - so that basically means Novell or Redhat, though debian/ubuntu are there in some cases now too, since you can purchase support for either one from HP now.
Re:Well, seriously... by NeverVotedBush · 2009-03-13 12:34 · Score: 2, Informative

If you have been having compatibility issues, have you tried OpenSuSe?

It has been my experience (YMMV) that SuSe has better hardware support than some of the others.

On the other hand, I think it is Debian, possibly Ubuntu, that has a licensed package of codecs for stuff like mp3s and other files. With SuSe, the best method for me is to add the Pacman reository (SuSe makes it really easy) but those are codecs and not drivers.

The only 3rd party driver I've needed for SuSe has been the standard Nvidia driver, but again, SuSe makes that near automatic too.

Linux isn't that hard to deal with but it is a new paradigm and takes a little getting used to. For a standard setup, I really like SuSe. If you want the multimedia stuff with better mpeg support, learn about Pacman. But I think you will find Linux very powerful and very rewarding.

And if you want to get under the hood and explore the UNIX-like underpinnings, it is really an amazing OS and you won't ever look back. Also, if you still need to run some Windows applications, check out Codeweavers.com for Crossover Office. It's great and allows you to load and run Microsoft Office and a bunch of other Windows apps under Linux.
Re:Well, seriously... by Darkness404 · 2009-03-13 13:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

As for GUIs I can safely say my Ubuntu install is far less consistent than the Windows install I have in a VM.

What are you on? Just take a look at most Windows programs, different looks everywhere. (there used to be a nice screenshot that someone took highlighting this fact, but I can't seem to find it on google at the moment) Just look at Office 2007, it has a different look then XP's native toolkit, that looks different then Windows Live Messenger, that looks different then Visual Studio, etc. Mix MS's own inconsistency (remember that aside from the base GNU toolkits, almost all the software is from different people/organizations) with programs almost every Windows user uses (iTunes, etc) and you get tons of interfaces. On the other hand, most Linux software is either QT or GTK.

--
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Re:Well, seriously... by gbarules2999 · 2009-03-13 13:20 · Score: 2, Interesting

"My entire office switched to Office 2007 and the vast majority of people had no trouble adapting to the new UI." Excuse me if I stop believing you here. I helped out in a fairly major project that involved the local university servers, and the only way to save the files in a "meta-taggable" way was to use Microsoft Word 2007. And let me tell you, it was utter hell trying to get the common people to work that damn thing. So, anecdote negated. Try again.
Re:Well, seriously... by Cassini2 · 2009-03-13 13:43 · Score: 4, Interesting

Novell should have already known the don't be a Microsoft Partner lesson. Novell owned WordPerfect when Windows 95 came out. Microsoft gave so much incorrect documentation to the WordPerfect developers, that the lawsuit was still going on 13 years later. In fact, the lawsuit on-going when Novell signed the Linux deal with Microsoft.
Re:Well, seriously... by obarthelemy · 2009-03-13 13:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'd really like to explore, though the learning curve is steep. It's very frustrating going from DOS/Windows expert to Linux noob: finding an editor, then finding the config files, finding the info... Things I can do in 2 minutes in Windows take me hours, when they work at all.
I was thinking of going Ubuntu because of its success. PLus Wine for a bit of light gaming.

--
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Re:Well, seriously... by Alex+Belits · 2009-03-13 23:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

What examples? Posts like that are made by Microsoft marketing people.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:Well, seriously... by drinkypoo · 2009-03-14 02:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

You underestimate the importance of games.
No, I don't. You overestimate the importance of big-ticket games.

Gamers are forced to keep Windows installed, and it's a pain to dual-boot.
"Gamers" are a tiny minority. While over 70% of the American public plays video games, most of those aren't Crysis players. They're playing games on their cellphone, or they play freecell or some other solitaire game, which you can get a better implementation of for Linux... or they play flash games, which work fine on x86 and x86_64 Linux.

There are of course lots of middle aged people who don't play games or who are satisfied with simple ones, but they won't start any great migration.
What do you mean "great migration"? Ever heard of a concept called the "tipping point"?

Youths are the key, and the gamers especially.
Understanding the makeup of the population of video gamers? YOU FAIL IT! The average age of the U.S. gamer is 35. Those of us who buy multiple big-ticket games a year are far in the minority. Actually, now that I think of it, let me just be anecdotal; I'm 31, and while I did reinstall Windows XP so that I could replay some old games I owned (mostly Mechwarrior IV which doesn't support arbitrary resolutions anyway to match my display, so I'm over it again - fucking amateurs) the only new game I've bought I think in the last COUPLE of years was Twilight Princess... which I bought when I bought a Wii. The next one will likely be Wii Fit... if my gigantic ass will fit on the thing. I'm (barely) under the weight limit, but I wear size 16 shoes and have a very broad stance to match my height.
Sorry, but people like you and me are now in the minority of gamers. And people like me don't care so much about computer games any more. I have a Wii, an Xbox, and a PS2. The only game I play on Windows any more is Civilization 2, which runs fine in vmware.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

er? by Speare · 2009-03-13 09:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

And I'm sure that all the hiring-freezes, paycuts, forced unpaid furloughs, capital freezes, capital audits, travel restrictions, quarter-by-quarter purchase order approval budget oversight procedures, executive-authorization-required-for-new-staplers, and restructurings that we see in most of the Fortune 1000 have nothing to do with this.

--
[ .sig file not found ]

And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised by damn_registrars · 2009-03-13 09:58 · Score: 5, Insightful

Really, Novell doesn't do marketing. They had the most reliable server OS for connecting windows boxes, and Microsoft came and ate their lunch with an inferior (and more expensive) product. Did someone really expect that all of a sudden, Novell would discover the secret to marketing and manage to sell something? Even after striking a deal with Microsoft, they still need to be able to sell their own product - or at least make it look like they are selling their own product.

Being as they won't likely be able to get (many of) the former Novell shops back to NetWare, if they are planning to revive their company by selling Linux, their goose is cooked.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised by rickb928 · 2009-03-13 10:34 · Score: 3, Informative

Until 2005, my Netware servers were an order of magnitude mroe reliable than my Windows servers. Period.
NDS 'worked' when AD was borked. Does no one remember mixed mode, and the joy of early Server 2K? We will leave NTAS out of this, though it was the first competitor to NetWare.
The myth that NetWare is no better or worse than Windows was untrue up till Server '03, and then only barely.
The real reason NetWare failed to survive? Not reliability. Applications. Microsoft built apps on Windows servers that you could program in essentially the same IDE as the client Windows desktop app. NetWare required you learn .NLMs and be in a foreign and not very good IDE. Microsoft salted the community with freebie dev tools, and from there on in, it was over. Of course, hosing the Novell client didn't hurt either. As an example, the Novell client would return a 'not found' in 2 seconds when it had searched the tree and did not find what you were looking for. The Microsoft client would then spend 15 seconds begging for a response from any resource, after it had searched all it knew. Ok, just for grins, why would you ask essentially 'anybody out there got this?' when you have already searched all you know? The fraking MUP drove us crazy. And people blamed Novell. Nice.
Microsoft out smarted Novell. We lost. Darn. But not because they were better.

--
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised by drinkypoo · 2009-03-13 11:02 · Score: 2, Informative

Netware was a complete POS.
You and I must have used different products called "Netware". While Windows was totally fucking incompetent on the filesharing tip, you would have Novell servers with uptimes of months. The biggest problem with Netware was maintenance. When it came time to do maintenance it was time to place your bets as to whether the system would actually work properly after you installed a patch, or installed some software. Did netware have no memory protection or something? Installing two complex packages on the same server was pretty much guaranteed to fuck it up, especially if one of them was Arcserve.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:And Raise Your Hand If You're Surprised by sjames · 2009-03-13 11:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

Netware was good in it's day but Novell rested on it's laurels for too long and became a legacy solutions provider. They've had over a decade to come up with the next new 'thing' and the best they managed was to buy Suse and make an unpopular deal with MS only to find out that businesses that are going with Linux don't really want MS to put it's fingers in it (shocking I tell you!).

OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! by Bruce+Perens · 2009-03-13 10:04 · Score: 5, Funny

OK, cue the violins! Now, all of you at once!

AAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!

Bruce

--
Bruce Perens.

Re:OK, Let's have a big, hearty chorus, folks! by Sxooter · 2009-03-13 10:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

I have made sure that no one I know buys Suse as long as Novell has that stupid partnership with Microsoft. If they renounce it, tear up their contract and dance a jig, I might take them back. Til then, I run RedHat, Debian and Ubuntu. No need for any of the crap Novell is peddling.
I'll play some nice slow Irish songs about people drowning on a ferry for Novell, but I won't give them one thin dime. They're whores, and not the good kind.

--

--- It is not the things we do which we regret the most, but the things which we don't do.

Re:You get serious by alexborges · 2009-03-13 10:08 · Score: 2

Why would it be any kind of threat to apple? You are talking about hardware, not software patents.

--
NO SIG

Muddled Issues by fm6 · 2009-03-13 10:14 · Score: 3, Interesting

TFA seems to muddle together a bunch of different issues.

One is the purely Novell issue of not being good at selling stuff. Which might be true (though I spend a lot of time dealing with SLES issues at the hardware vendor I work for) but really doesn't have anything to do with the Novell-Microsoft deal.

Another issue is the core of the Novell-MS partnership: interoperability. AFAIK, that part is working well.

Finally, there's the fact that MS is committed to supported mixed Windows-SLES installation, but hasn't bothered to actually sell any SLES licenses. Really, what else do you expect? People actually making deals based on technology they've worked with for years are not going to change their strategies just because management says so. IBM never could get its people to sell OS/2 instead of Windows, and Sun salespeople often continue to push SPARC products to all their customers, even though Sun is now in the x86 business. And in the case of MS, they have particularly limited motivation to sell Linux, since doing so would not actually generate any extra profits for MS.

Re:Muddled Issues by bertok · 2009-03-13 12:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

Another issue is the core of the Novell-MS partnership: interoperability. AFAIK, that part is working well.
Not so much.
The last time I played with SLES/SLED was about a year ago, and interoperability was not hugely better than any other generic Linux. They just don't have the manpower now to rewrite core stuff themselves. They do have a nice distro with well chosen components, and a default desktop that is very "Windows-Like", which is nice. They even had the start-bar at the bottom!
However, in the environment where I worked, it all broke down in testing. For example, joining a domain was painful, broken, and flat out didn't work in my client's environment (multi-domain, multi-forest, with users and machines all over the place). It could talk to one domain, most of the time, until you removed a domain controller, which would break it.
A note to Linux devs working on Active Directory compatibility: When 'joining' an AD domain, a Linux desktop is allowed to ask exactly 3 questions:
- The name of the domain (either the 'short NT4 name' or 'long DNS name')
- A user name to connect with
- A password
Lets compare this to instructions I randomly found on Ubuntu's support site:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=91510
That's about 2 pages of config files! NO. Just NO. It's not even slightly correct. I have nothing against config files as such, but "hard coding" parameters that MUST be looked up dynamically is WRONG. You can't state "compatible with Active Directory" when it is clearly NOT COMPATIBLE.
What happens when the machine and the user are in different domains? What happens if domain controllers move? Why doesn't it automatically locate the nearest servers using Sites & Services?
Correct behavior isn't even one of those Microsoft secret proprietary things. The API for dynamically obtaining configuration data for a desktop's AD connection is well documented:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms684291(VS.85).aspx
Re:Muddled Issues by styrotech · 2009-03-13 21:02 · Score: 2, Informative

That's about 2 pages of config files! NO. Just NO. It's not even slightly correct. I have nothing against config files as such, but "hard coding" parameters that MUST be looked up dynamically is WRONG. You can't state "compatible with Active Directory" when it is clearly NOT COMPATIBLE.
Your complaint should be with whoever wrote that doc (just a random user reciting what worked for them) not with the software capabilities.
I have joined Ubuntu machines to AD domains without hardcoding much of that stuff at all.
eg krb5 can look up everything it needs (KDCs, realm names etc) in the DNS without needing a config file. The only reason to hardcode a realm in there is if you want a default one so you don't need to specify it in your login name.
In smb.conf, most of those hardcoded bits aren't required. I think realm is (not sure) but workgroup, netbios name, and password server aren't.
Nothing in pam or nss was hardcoded in that exmaple anyway.
Putting the domain name in the home directory path is optional.
The kinit step is also unnecessary.
So your three questions on Windows correlate nicely with the 3 things you need to tell samba.
1) realm name in smb.conf
2) user name to join with (in the net ads join command)
3) password (also part of the net ads join command)

Re:You get serious by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · 2009-03-13 10:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

That's quite a violent approach to the problem. Invalidate all software patents? I don't think Apple would approve, as that would be the end of their business.

How do you figure? Half of Apple's revenue is from their PC business where their largest differentiator is OS X, protected more by copyright than patents. Then there is their iPod business, where hardware patents are the major protection. Between hardware patents, copyright, and trademark protections, I don't see Apple being in much trouble if software patents are invalidated... even if it went to extremes and included UI's that include a mix of hardware and software, ala multi-touch.

But you really meant invalidate all of MSFT's right?

Why would you make such an assumption? That's not at all what he said, nor does it even make sense.

Relationship going bad? by girlintraining · 2009-03-13 10:15 · Score: 3, Funny

Well, did you send flowers? No. Did you write anything but crappy emo poetry? No. Actually, no poetry at all. How about flaunting yourself in tight outfits, or at least making some minimal effort to be sexual? No there too. And apparently Microsoft is a louzy kisser (way too much tongue). Big surprise the relationship failed.

More seriously: What do these people expect? The economy is crap. Nobody's going to be trying anything new right now. And neither side spent much on marketing from everything I'm reading. And at any rate, their marketing strategy is crabbed -- you open with support, not a feature set. Whatever feature set is being offered better be one for one what they have now or don't even bother. Support is the key here -- they should have been screaming "We have technicians trained for this! Really! More than you can fit on a bus!" Except that would be a lie. So they focus on what they can effect: Which is some limited marketing propaganda that won't fool anyone. Microsoft lost its crown jewels when Vista tanked. Now everything they say comes under scrutiny -- Apple's been taking free potshots at them in the general media for about a year now and I see average people parroting those "Hi, I'm a Mac; Hi, I'm a PC" commercials. This relationship needs some pizzaz back in it, and instead Novell comes home to Microsoft wearing a familiar wonderbra and fishnet stockings?! Seriously, we're all supportive of Microsoft getting in touch with it's softer, less monopolistic side, but crossdressing in linux is not the answer. -_-

--
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie

Novel by certain+death · 2009-03-13 10:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

Novel needs to pull their collective heads out of their asses if they want to live on...They haven't done a bit of successful advertising since the 2000 superbowl, and that is questionable! They just don't seem to understand the fact that you need to have your shit in front of people in order to get them to buy it. Then they canceled Brain Share, that was the only place anyone ever gets the scoop on what they are doing. Damn! Why are they so stupid?!?

--
"My immediate reaction is "WTF? What kind of moron doesn't make things 64-bit safe to begin with?" Linus

Another attack of the spin monkey... by icebike · 2009-03-13 10:43 · Score: 3, Insightful

> 'So Novell, one of the biggest Linux
> distributors in the world, and Microsoft, one of
> the biggest companies in world history, couldn't
> find a single large customer on Planet Earth to
> buy into Novell's Suse Linux Enterprise Server
> software.

Why can't you simply cut and paste instead of putting your own lying slant on things?

You Imply Novell never signed any SLES customers, which is not true.

The actual article stated:

"During the first quarter of fiscal 2009, we did not sign any large deals, many of which have been historically fulfilled by SUSE Linux Enterprise Server ("SLES") certificates delivered through Microsoft."

So Microsoft didn't even try to sell these certificates for SLES. Novell still sold SLES, probably to the very same customers that send Microsoft packing.

How hard do you suppose Microsoft tried to sell these certificates?

--
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.

The Buck Stops by _Sprocket_ · 2009-03-13 10:56 · Score: 2, Insightful

CEO Ron Hovsepian is right; the buck stops with Novell. They're to blame. Not because their retail channel needs to be tweaked. But rather, they got in to bed with Microsoft! I mean, c'mon. Your hedging your bets on a technology that your partner is busy trying to bury. Yeah, sure... Microsoft is trying to help make Windows and Linux work together. Meanwhile, Microsoft's CEO is discussing Linux and so-called IP law like Eddy Izzard discussing the mortality of Englebert Humperdink. And Novell wants people to pay for the privilege of getting in to the middle of that?

Over the past few years, I've purchased licenses for Windows, Solaris, and Linux. Not once during these procurements did the name "Novell" come to mind.

I'd say grinding SCO very, very fine... by Ungrounded+Lightning · 2009-03-13 11:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

1. IBM ("We pretend to support open source but ...

I'd say playing "mill of the gods" and grinding SCO exceedingly fine constitutes more than just "pretend" support for open source.

--
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way

Red Hat by Tubal-Cain · 2009-03-13 12:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

Anybody have any figures for how Red Hat (and Canonical) are doing?

Re:You get serious by ozphx · 2009-03-13 12:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

I hope you enjoy "open-source" pharmaceuticals...

--
3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.

Re:Except for sheer performance by ion.simon.c · 2009-03-13 20:15 · Score: 2

Sadly, looks like Gimp is a weenie next to Photoshop CS4.

Just how many LOLCAT images will the average computer user be creating today? I'd wager that the speed difference between the Gimp and PS isn't worth ~450 USD to your average computer user.

Hell, the Gimp is more than enough for what little graphics editing I'm called upon to do in the course of my duties to my employer.

Slashdot Mirror

Microsoft-Novell Relationship Hits the Skids

36 of 194 comments (clear)