Slashdot Mirror


Attachmate To Acquire Novell For $2.2B Cash

wiredmikey and a few others wrote in to let us know that Novell has agreed to be acquired by Attachmate Corporation for $6.10 per share in cash, in a transaction valued at approximately $2.2 billion. The Boston Globe reports that the deal also includes the sale of some intellectual assets to a consortium organized by Microsoft. Attachmate plans to operate Novell and SUSE as separate business units. Here is the press release.

221 comments

  1. Attachmate by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 2, Funny

    Attachmate To Acquire Novell

    Whoooooooooooooooooo?!

    1. Re:Attachmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know who they are, but they're gonna need a new web server.

    2. Re:Attachmate by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Attachmate is a venture capital firm, which means:

      - They're loaded but you never heard of them,
      - VCs usually buy or invest in a company to make a lot of money quickly,
      - If Novell's market cap doesn't increase a lot soon, or they don't turn a huge profit soon (fat chance), they're hosed, like most companies taken over by VC money.

      In short, expect Novell to be up for sale within 3 years.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:Attachmate by datapharmer · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is a reason for that according to netcraft:

      Walker, Richer Quinn Incorporated IT Operations 1500 Dexter Avenue North Seattle WA US 98109 150.215.214.130 Windows Server 2003 Microsoft-IIS/6.0 31-Jul-2010

      Attachmate Corp. 1233 West Loop South Suite 1800 Houston TX US 77027 149.82.9.36 Windows Server 2003 Microsoft-IIS/6.0 25-Feb-2010

      --
      Get a web developer
    4. Re:Attachmate by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

      Attachmate

      Attachmate is a software company owned by an investment group led by Francisco Partners, Golden Gate Capital, and Thoma Cressey Bravo. Attachmate focuses on terminal emulation, legacy modernization, managed file transfer, and enterprise fraud management software. It is the largest privately owned software company in Washington, USA.[citation needed]

      Products

      The Attachmate logo on older software products.As a result of the mergers and acquisitions detailed below, Attachmate has broadened its solution set to include several brands:

      [edit] Terminal Emulation
      Attachmate develops a variety of Terminal emulators:

      Reflection (IBM, HP, UNIX, OpenVMS, X)
      EXTRA! (IBM, UNIX, OpenVMS)
      INFOConnect (Unisys)
      [edit] Systems and Security Management
      The NetIQ business unit delivers systems and security management software.

      Among the NetIQ product offerings is AppManager, a suite that provides network, applications and systems monitoring. The product includes monitoring support Microsoft operating systems, Microsoft SQL Server databases, a variety of messaging environments, UNIX and Linux operating systems, Oracle systems, and Voice-over-IP for Cisco, Nortel, and Avaya.

      [edit] Secure Communications
      Reflection for Secure IT, formerly F-Secure SSH, is an SSH (secure shell) client and server for Windows and UNIX.

      [edit] Application Integration
      Attachmate Verastream provides application integration tools that quickly and noninvasively service-enable mainframe and enterprise host data and logic.

      Attachmate DATABridge is an extract, transform, load (ETL) solution for securely integrating Unisys DMSII and non-DMSII data to a secondary database such as Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server.

      [edit] PC X Server
      Reflection X allows Windows users to use graphical and command-line based applications on remote UNIX, Linux, and OpenVMS hosts.

    5. Re:Attachmate by humphrm · · Score: 5, Informative

      Umm, not exactly.

      Attachmate may be a VC firm now, but it started out as an IBM (or at least, mainframe) terminal emulation company. They used to make boards that emulated a 3270 that you could install in PCs. Plenty of people have heard of them.

      --
      -- "In order to have power, I must be taken seriously." -Mojo Jojo
    6. Re:Attachmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Attachmate has a long history of keeping it's acquisitions in house.

    7. Re:Attachmate by stoolpigeon · · Score: 3, Informative

      I spent years working a job where we used Attachmate Reflection software to connect to the mainframes where we did our work. It is a terminal emulator for Windows machines. Wrote quite a few macros for it.

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    8. Re:Attachmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aha, I knew I'd heard that name before. Reflection supported a bunch of oddball terminals, in our case HP mini stuff.

    9. Re:Attachmate by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, that's not the reason. Consider that PlentyOfFish was able to do a 30 million hit a day all dynamic website using "2 load balanced web servers with 2 Quad Core Intel Xeon X5355 @ 2.66Ghz), 8 Gigs of RAM (using about 800 MBs), 2 hard drives, runs Windows x64 Server 2003" for the web servers. There's a detailed writeup of PlentyOfFish's architecture and hardware here.

    10. Re:Attachmate by NJRoadfan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Reflection was originally a WRQ product. Attachmate bought them out a few years past.

    11. Re:Attachmate by wwphx · · Score: 1

      I was wondering who they were and didn't want to bother with TFA. I had an Attachmate SNA cards on my 3Com 3+Share network back in the late 80's and didn't think they could possibly still be around.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
    12. Re:Attachmate by Yfrwlf · · Score: 1

      From my own experience in IT, IIS sucks. I've seen a lot of problems with its stability. Regardless, it's Windows-only, and this is Slashdot where no one much cares about closed source software unless it is to outperform or outdo it in some way. So, while it is certainly possible the issue isn't due to crappy software, I would definitely not rule it out.

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    13. Re:Attachmate by cHiphead · · Score: 4, Informative

      2 Load balanced web servers, 3 database servers, and, drum roll, AKAMAI CDN.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    14. Re:Attachmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They haven't switched over to BorderManager and the NetWare web server yet.

    15. Re:Attachmate by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Aha, I knew I'd heard that name before. Reflection supported a bunch of oddball terminals, in our case HP mini stuff.

      Oddball? Yeah, now I understands why they wanted to acquire the makers of Netware...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    16. Re:Attachmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is a bad example. I've actually used it, and the site is horrible, slow, unreliable and a pain to use.

    17. Re:Attachmate by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      You say it's a VC firm now but started out as a VT firm?

    18. Re:Attachmate by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Well, from my experience, IIS sucks more if you use .NET, ASP, VB components or direct integration with MS-SQL. It sucks way less if you just use it as an Apache replacement, running PHP or another well written interpreter or VM.

      Of course, most people don't use IIS as an Apache replacement, and don't ask about how disfunctional a place needs to be to do that.

    19. Re:attachmate by microbee · · Score: 1

      The typical response is: No....well.

    20. Re:Attachmate by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Beware corporate takeovers, they are not always as clear cut as they seem. When one company buys another company company with shares, basically those shares increase in value based upon the additional value of the recently purchased company and obviously substantive owners of the purchased company are now substantive owners of the purchasing company. Reverse takeovers can readily occur amongst other corporate shenanigans, like the creation of a larger corporation with pretend growth driven by purchasing other corporation all than dumped to the public and pension funds for massive profit all driven by less than honest recommendations to big to fail banks.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    21. Re:attachmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Departmate.

      This was a catchphrase from a collection on a whiteboard, for what would come shortly after WRQ's merger with (into???) Attachmate. I was working as a dev at WRQ at the time, and when it happened 1/3 of my dev group got cut...

    22. Re:Attachmate by humphrm · · Score: 1

      +1 funny

      --
      -- "In order to have power, I must be taken seriously." -Mojo Jojo
    23. Re:Attachmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They're Microsoft proxies.

      This is just another part of the long-running SCO/Novell/Baystar game.

    24. Re:Attachmate by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      I'm probably a bit late to receive many answers, but I thought I'd try:

      We're thinking about using NetIQ AppManager in our company. Does anyone have experience with the tool? How is its usability and quality?

    25. Re:Attachmate by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      You forgot the most important part of the scalable system: "Akamai CDN".

    26. Re:Attachmate by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      Akamai for the static content. Most of the site is dynamic. Look at the their stats--serving their dynamic content on 2 web servers and 3 database servers is way better than most comparable sites manage.

  2. Mono? by popoutman · · Score: 3, Informative
    I wonder what the IP that'll be acquired by MS will consist of?
    My guess will be the items that were relevant to the MSNovell patent deal, to remove that need for MS to provide protection for those that have used SuSE..

    Time will tell I suppose.

    --
    - This sig deliberately left blank. Nothing to see, move along.
    1. Re:Mono? by capnchicken · · Score: 4, Informative
      --
      A libertarian shat on my carpet once. Claimed the free market would sort it out. -Ford Prefect(8777)
    2. Re:Mono? by anshulajain · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I hope that Icaza and his Mono-ilk will be finally transferred to Microsoft (as they've always secretly wanted to)...

    3. Re:Mono? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As long as we're making guesses, I'm guessing it will include:
      Mono... maybe.
      eDirectory (formerly NDS) - To end the lawsuit threat Novell has had over MS since Active Directory, MS's NDS clone, debuted in 2000. Oh, and MS will kill eDirectory and encourage users to move to Active Directory... along with Windows Server if they currently use Linux.
      ZenWorks Desktop Management - To my knowledge, this is like nothing MS currently has. Used for centrally managing the software installed on networked computers.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    4. Re:Mono? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Novell is the owner of the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights"

      Not this shit again ...

      Ohhhh, yeah:

      Novell also said it has entered into an agreement for the concurrent sale of certain intellectual property assets to CPTN Holdings LLC, a consortium of technology companies organized by Microsoft Corp., for $450 million in cash,

      nuff said.

    5. Re:Mono? by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      Ooooohh crap.

      Is this some kind of horror series? Now that the SCO zombie is well and truly dead, its ghost comes back to haunt us.

    6. Re:Mono? by thijsh · · Score: 2, Funny

      Always remember to double tap!

    7. Re:Mono? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Darl? Is that you?

    8. Re:Mono? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I don't understand. Suppose Novell owns some valid copyrights over Linux. They actively distributing Linux (the kernel) and its source code (by distributing suse), with GPL copyrights attached to it. Doesn't this mean that they have released all relevant copyrights under the GPL?

    9. Re:Mono? by dna_(c)(tm)(r) · · Score: 1

      Mr. Balmer, whether you rename that utter $%#& to "Unix 8" or "Unwind-ow-six" - I will still not like it. And only use it when I get paid a lot.

    10. Re:Mono? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      ZenWorks Desktop Management - To my knowledge, this is like nothing MS currently has. Used for centrally managing the software installed on networked computers.

      System Center Configuration Manager
      System Center Operations Manager
      System Center Service Manager

      I could continue but you can read it yourself at http://www.microsoft.com/systemcenter/en/us/products.aspx

    11. Re:Mono? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'centrally managing software installed on networked computers' == System Center Configuration Manager, formerly Systems Management Server

      see
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Center_Configuration_Manager

    12. Re:Mono? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Yes, as did SCO. There are now 7 years that some companies are fighting SCO on the tribunal to stablish that simple fact (or any other of several simple facts that make SCO's case flawed).

    13. Re:Mono? by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 2, Informative

      What?

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    14. Re:Mono? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Secretly? I don't think MdI ever made a secret of the fact that he applied to MS and was turned down.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    15. Re:Mono? by dot45 · · Score: 1

      I guess you haven't heard of the System Center Suite MS created. SCCM is a direct replacement for zenworks, and functions much better in most respects. Zen 10 and 11 fail in certain areas regarding software inventory on pc's. With SCCM you can do network based "pushed" uninstalls of apps, so anytime that app is installed it will be removed from the system. The Org. i work at currently uses Zenworks, and its a royal pain. At least with Zen 10 eDir is starting to die, and we no longer have to have the NWGINA.

    16. Re:Mono? by Builder · · Score: 1

      You don't seem to understand the difference between copyrights and licenses. The GPL is a license that code is distributed under. That license covers what you can and can't do with the code. As a high-level for-instance, the GPL stops you taking code and including it in your own product without releasing the code for your product.

      Copyright still plays a BIG part though. Say I release something under the GPL version 2 and later I want to change this license to GPL version 3. I can do this because I own the copyright for the code.

      Now say 100 different people have copyright on various bits of a big project. Even though the project is released under GPL v2, that doesn't mean I can just go and apply GPL v3 restrictions to it. I have to get the permission of every one of the copyright holders of that code to change the license. The same goes if I want to start dual-licensing (GPL and some closed source license to a company); I have to get permission of all copyright holders to make that change.

  3. IP? by anshulajain · · Score: 1

    The question is...what "IP" has been sold to Microsoft? Novell's sale has been widely expected for a long time now.

    1. Re:IP? by windcask · · Score: 5, Funny

      The question is...what "IP" has been sold to Microsoft?

      Probably 127.0.0.1.

      *buh-boom tick*

      I'll be here all night.

  4. I'm not hopeful by Omnifarious · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Attachmate's strategy for the economic downturn was to lay off most of their development staff while still collecting maintenance from all their customers. And they only had to follow that strategy because the private equity group that owns them had sucked a ton of money out of the company by saddling it with a gigantic debt.

    I don't feel very good about the prospects for sane, customer focused management from this particular company.

    1. Re:I'm not hopeful by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      Doesn't sound like a bad idea during an economic downturn. Cut expenses while maintaining as much revenue as possible until things get better.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    2. Re:I'm not hopeful by Omnifarious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, and no. I consider it to be dishonest to customers. And if it weren't for the debt they had been saddled with, they would've been plenty profitable enough to avoid doing it at all.

      Additionally, programmers are not easily replaceable. Every single project I've ever worked on inside a corporation had an amazing amount of 'tribal knowledge' locked in the heads of various developers. So not only are you battening down the hatches for the present when you lay them off, you're mortgaging your future by destroying the core intellectual base for the stuff you have.

      Seniority was a big criteria when they did this, but the morale destruction caused a lot of their most senior and competent people to leave.

      The whole fiasco painted a picture (to me) of management that didn't see a quality product as the key to improving their bottom line, but rather was more interested in the appearance of a quality product and making short-term decisions in the interests of the bottom line. They traded on their reputation with their customers to the detriment of those same customers.

      You could argue that having the company go under would be even worse for those customers. But the only reason why that was a danger at all was because of previous decisions that teated profits as an end to themselves rather than as a reward for a job well done.

    3. Re:I'm not hopeful by mounthood · · Score: 1

      Relax. They're splitting up Novell and SUSE, so at least part of the company will be quickly sold off again and survive. (Wonder which part?)

      --
      tomorrow who's gonna fuss
    4. Re:I'm not hopeful by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      It's probably smarter during a downturn to cut marketing expenses and continue development at pace. That way, when your customers are ready to buy you can start heavily marketing your new product that's ready for them. The only companies that should cut production staff and especially creative design staff (which software developers are) during a downturn are ones that would go under otherwise.

  5. SCO 2.0. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We from /. look forward to CPTN Holdings LLC. who seems to have bought linux and will now be known as SCO 2.0

  6. Time to kill the Software Patent system! by harish · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I guess there goes the whole ecosystem. Not the Novell being sold part, but the "intellectual properties" (patents, copyrights, patents) going to the M$-led group. It looks like there could be potential litigation out of that group who would want to maximize their "gain". I think the time is NOW to ban all software patents! Any more delay or foot dragging will kill the IT industry.

  7. IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by FrankNFurter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Think about it: Novell hold the copyrights and trademarks to UNIX. They would make for a nice addition to Microsoft's portfolio, don't you think?

    --
    "Slashdot - the one place on the internet where guys brag about how small it is." - that IT girl
    1. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh god

    2. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Jim+Hall · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Think about it: Novell hold the copyrights and trademarks to UNIX. They would make for a nice addition to Microsoft's portfolio, don't you think?

      Maybe not. According to this old press release, Novell sold the UnixWare IP to Santa Cruz in 1996.

    3. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      GNU is Not UNIX

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    4. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UNIX is probably the least valuable thing Novell owns. There are about two remaining licensees (IBM,HP) with minimal revenue associated with it.

      The core of Novell is the legacy networking stuff - Directory services, NetWare, GroupWise. If everyone of these customers were slammed onto Microsoft products, who cares, really.

    5. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Sylak · · Score: 1

      You say that like everybody hasn't been dumping Novell for MS products anyway since Windows 9x has died

    6. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Java+Pimp · · Score: 1

      During the entire SCO trial while Novell was asserting it owned the Unix copyrights they continued to distribute SUSE. If Linux does in fact contain Unix code, it has been affirmed by the courts that Novell owns the Unix copyrights and Novell has been distributing it for years under the GPL.

      Of course... IANAL but it would be hard to look past this fact.

      --
      Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
      Kull: She told me she was 19!
    7. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Think about it: Novell hold the copyrights and trademarks to UNIX. They would make for a nice addition to Microsoft's portfolio, don't you think?

      It's hard to see how that wouldn't stir up a hornet's nest of antitrust issues.

    8. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by socsoc · · Score: 1

      I haven't.

    9. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 1, Informative
      I believe you may have misread the article you linked to.

      From your link:

      I just found a Novell press release dated November 26, 1996, which makes it *after* the October 16th, 1996 Amendment 2 was signed. Guess what it says Novell sold off to Santa Cruz? "The UnixWare product lines". I'm pretty excited about digging this up.

      SCO is arguing in its Reply Brief in its appeal that Amendment 2 changed the excluded assets language of the APA so that it gave SCO the copyrights and everything:

      The exclusion of all copyrights was subsequently amended in Amendment No. 2 so that copyrights "required for SCO to exercise its rights with respect to the acquisition of UNIX and UnixWare technologies" were not excluded from the sale, and thus remained within the encompassing reach of all "right, title and interest," including all "ownership" rights in UNIX and UnixWare that was sold to SCO. This appeal focuses on whether these contractual agreements, and the evidence surrounding them, properly allow a finding that none of the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights were required by SCO to exercise its rights in the UNIX and UnixWare technologies it acquired.

      But here in this press release, we see what Novell told the world it sold, and once again, it was just the UnixWare business, the UnixWare product lines. No mention of UNIX at all, by the way. Let me show you the press release, because I think this knocks SCO's arguments out.

    10. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      As I understand it.

      Novell bought some UNIX copyrights from AT&T. But, AT&T could not transfer all UNIX copyrights, because AT&T did not own all UNIX copyrights - see: AT&T vs BSD.

      The deal was: AT&T gave Novell whatever copyrights AT&T owned. Where those copyrights begin and end, is a matter for speculation, since the AT&T vs BSD decision is closed.

      It make also be worth noting that popular UNIX versions such as AIX, and Solaris, do not have much of that ancient UNIX code anyway.

    11. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      "since the AT&T vs BSD decision is closed."

      It was released under FOI. Summary: most of it is actually public domain, not even BSD-licensed.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    12. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Yfrwlf · · Score: 1

      Not when you own the government!

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    13. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by zhub · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has a history of throwing good money after bad (as with SCO) on the one-in-a-million chance that they'll find a shortcut to global domination, mostly because they can afford to. So their new IP may come to nothing. Yes, that's what I'm telling myself.

    14. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      They would make for a nice addition to Microsoft's portfolio, don't you think?

      Not really, they aren't going to make use of the UNIX trademark and the copyright is pretty worthless, as it's not going to be able to manipulate Linux into anything since the code that was shared was shared under a GPL compatible license already and not illegally copied (as SCO claimed).

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    15. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by mfinn999 · · Score: 1

      UNIX is probably the least valuable thing Novell owns. There are about two remaining licensees (IBM,HP) with minimal revenue associated with it.

      The core of Novell is the legacy networking stuff - Directory services, NetWare, GroupWise. If everyone of these customers were slammed onto Microsoft products, who cares, really.

      Uh...I think those Novell customers might care.

    16. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Mod: -1 Whoosh

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    17. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      They might, but if they haven't been seeing the writing on the wall for years they're idiots. If Microsoft can polish up Active Directory with some Novell IP it would only sweeten the pot for the remaining hold-outs, whose phone numbers now all go into Microsoft's little black book as part of the deal, no doubt.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    18. Re:IP sold to MS-led consortium = UNIX? by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      They own the copyrights on the source code.

      The trademark is owned by The Open Group.

  8. Attachmate by capnchicken · · Score: 2, Funny

    In other news Attachmate's website appears to be unable to handle the extra load caused by this announcement. Things are not looking well.

    --
    A libertarian shat on my carpet once. Claimed the free market would sort it out. -Ford Prefect(8777)
  9. Only 9 Percent Premium. More bids? by wiredmikey · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't be surprised if this sparked other bids. Not a super hot company by any means but at a 9% premium (low for tech acquisitions) I wouldn't be surprised...

  10. Cue The Queen by marcello_dl · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Another one (that made a deal with MS) bites the dust.

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    1. Re:Cue The Queen by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why is that truthful comment marked flamebait? What's the matter, mod, the truth hurts?

      Stacker, FoxPro, many others. MS's buying of Foxpro especially annoyed me; Foxpro was a good DBMS before MS bought and killed it. It was head and shoulders above Access. MS couldn't compete, so they bought them out and pretty much ruined it.

      Do a little Googling before you mark someone flamebait.

    2. Re:Cue The Queen by Cwix · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well assuming that the mod would find something googlable in "Another one (that made a deal with MS) bites the dust."

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    3. Re:Cue The Queen by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      FoxPro, many others. MS's buying of Foxpro especially annoyed me; Foxpro was a good DBMS before MS bought and killed it. It was head and shoulders above Access. MS couldn't compete, so they bought them out and pretty much ruined it.

      I remember the atmosphere on the CI$ FoxPro forums back when the MS-Fox deal was announced - real "end of the world" stuff. People were talking about jumping off buildings. I was one who feared the worst, but as it turns out, MS only killed the Mac and Unix versions. They did continue to support and develop the DOS (for a little while) and Windows versions until recently.

      Err, hmm, not so recently. Apparently VFP 9 was released at the end of 2004, with a couple of service packs released since then. Time flies. My company uses VFP very heavily, and though I've been doing my work in Python for the last few years, I still do some VFP from time to time. I do wish MS had modernized the language more. A Python-like language with xBase's integrated database handling would be nice. ORMs help but don't quite match the power and ease.

    4. Re:Cue The Queen by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Good point, whoever modded that "flamebait" probably isn't smart enough to google well enough to find it.

      I'm glad the other moderators are smarter. If it wasn't for the "flamebait" he'd be sittingt at a +5 now.

    5. Re:Cue The Queen by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Yes, the last version that was anything at all like the old FoxPro was 6. It was still actually a good program. My work upgraded to 8, and it was an unusable mess. I've been using Access since. I hate it, but I heted the mess they made of FoxPro even more.

      Makes me want to go back to mainframes, I loved NOMAD.

    6. Re:Cue The Queen by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Makes me want to go back to mainframes, I loved NOMAD.

      Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated.

  11. Possibly SCO-related? by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I for one would be wondering whether this move was intended to acquire the Unix copyrights that Novell owns (as determined by the SCO case). The idea here is that SCO was stopped largely because they didn't actually have copyright on what they claimed infringement for.

    Not that there weren't lots of other reasons why the case didn't hold water, but this does look like potentially a way to get the whole thing started up again.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    1. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by Gbor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wonder... if the UNIX copyrights are of any good to damage Linux or Open Source, why would have other big companies involved in and benefiting from Linux and Open Source taken any risks by allowing for these assets to end up in unfriendly hands? On the other hand, if the UNIX copyrights can potentially be harmful when misused, what would a.o. IBM and Google have for an apology for letting it happen? This is of course under the assumption that the "certain intellectual property assets" did contain Novell's UNIX related IP...

    2. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by Java+Pimp · · Score: 1

      While Novell never confirmed whether or not Unix code was in Linux, it was affirmed that they owned the Unix copyrights. If Linux does contain Unix code, SUSE has been distributing it for years under GPL anyway...

      --
      Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
      Kull: She told me she was 19!
    3. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by dkleinsc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They don't have to be actually capable of being useful in attacking Linux or open source. They just have to perceived as being useful to a friendly judge who allows the case to go forward.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oops, yes. At the very least, I can see Novell's new owners settling with SCO. As soon as it's out of court, the remains of SCO can start the shakedown racket again.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    5. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Shipping a Linux distribution didn't stop SCO and to my knowledge nobody ever pushed hard on the "they were shipping Linux angle" because SCO stopped distribution, and if their allegations were correct someone else put it in there anyway so they could still sue.

    6. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by ais523 · · Score: 1

      No, nobody pushed hard on the "they were shipping Linux" angle because the relevant court case would be SCO vs. IBM, which has been stayed pending the outcome of SCO vs. Novell (which still hasn't happened; SCO are appealing yet again). I'm sure IBM's lawyers would use it if that case ever went forwards.

      --
      (1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
    7. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by Java+Pimp · · Score: 1

      It wasn't pushed hard because that angle would only have been relevant had SCO actually owned the UNIX copyright. The case never got that far. It had to be determined first, who owned the UNIX copyright. Then, it had to be determined if Linux in fact contained UNIX code. Then, if so, whether or not it was legally contributed to Linux and distributable under the GPL.

      The only one of those three things that was determined in the courts was the owner of the copyrights. There hasn't been any ruling on whether or not UNIX code is in Linux. It has been determined that Novell owns the disputed rights and Novell has not had any problems distributing SUSE regardless of what code it may or may not contain.

      Given that, the "they were shipping Linux" angle may actually be relevant going forward. Of course IANAL... Just my opinion as I see things...

      --
      Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
      Kull: She told me she was 19!
    8. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by Java+Pimp · · Score: 1

      Now that's a scary thought indeed!

      --
      Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
      Kull: She told me she was 19!
    9. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't forget to pay your $699 license fee you cocksmoking teabaggers!

    10. Re:Possibly SCO-related? by yuhong · · Score: 1
  12. Makes little sense by walshy007 · · Score: 1

    Attachmate sell terminal services like xservers and an ssh server/client... they can only really sell these things because windows lacks them by default.

    By encouraging their users to go to linux would that not kill a fair majority of their market just because people can get linux to do that from anywhere?

    1. Re:Makes little sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      folks unix and linux has been and is still being strangled/killed for the last 15 years the final death throes are now upon us (SunOS/Solaris,Novell).

      I really hope Red Hat survives for a few more years.

    2. Re:Makes little sense by walshy007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      unix you may have a point, but it's market share is being absorbed by linux and has been for over a decade.

      Redhat/IBM etc will certainly be around for quite some time to support linux. Redhat has bet the farm on linux and without it they are nothing. Their market cap/share price is rather nice too.

    3. Re:Makes little sense by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Solaris and Oracle Unbreakable Linux haven't gone away. Just because Sun is gone (which for now it isn't, just being rebranded Oracle America by its new owners) doesn't mean Solaris is dead. Oracle had their clone of CentOS (which is a clone of RHEL) already before the buyout. Then there are Canonical, Turbolinux, and for a while longer at least Mandriva. Debian isn't going anywhere, and neither are other major community projects like Gentoo or Arch. AIX is alive and well. OpenSuse and Fedora seem fairly capable of existing separate from Novell and Red Hat at this point. NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, MirBSD, and a few others have never really ridden the Linux wave of popularity and they are doing fine.

      Meanwhile, Meego and especially Android are gaining share on mobiles. Linux is no longer gaining so much of its market share from proprietary Unix installations and is now starting to cut into Windows share on the server. IBM, HP, and thousands of other consulting companies support Linux and applications on it.

    4. Re:Makes little sense by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Having said that xservers and ssh servers/clients for windows are only really useful in a mixed windows/*nix environment...

      Though even on linux I can see the value in a GUI ssh client that lets you connect and authenticate once and then open as many terminals and file transfer windows as you like without having to open another connection and reauthenticate (the ssh protocols allow this but afaict the command line clients don't support it for interface reasons)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  13. What a Waste! by filesiteguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am amazed at how - once again - Novell blundered and lost the opportunity to capitalize on something. Back in '05 I thought Novell and SUSE (SLED, SLES...) would have a viable future competing against Wintendo and Unix. However, I noticed way back in '08 that they were slipping and I eventually jumped ship myself (over to Ubuntu) and gave up trying to persuade my server room staff to switch to Novell.

    Too bad.

    Kind of reminds me of 1995...

    1. Re:What a Waste! by filesiteguy · · Score: 1, Funny

      Um, my name isn't Jesus.

    2. Re:What a Waste! by rickb928 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Back in '95, we were lamenting this problem of defending NetWare in the face of an overwhelming Windows assault. The consensus then was that when the suits read a back cover ad declaring this the 'year of Windows', and the t-shirts get free development tools and the promise of write-once-run-everywhere, even though running your server tools on the client was never a requirement, then NetWare was doomed. This actually started with NTAS and picked up unstoppable momentum with Windows Server 2000. Nevermind that Exchange took a little while longer to come of age, for many shops NetWare was what they clung to GroupWise for. Once GW was hammered, it was over. The interesting GW exploits didn't help.

      ZenWorks was, back then and up to at least 2004, really clever and actually made Windows administration tolerable if not cool. Schools used that a lot for various clever reasons. But Even Microsoft saw that ADS administration needed to improve, and it pretty much did. Add in some licensing spiffs, a continuing campaign to destroy NetWare compatibility, and Novell ran out of time and market. Last I checked, they had solid revenue form licensing, but the end was in sight. SUSE is a whole other story. Novell should have acquired OpenOffice. SCO didn't help.

      I'm not hopeful for Novell. This looks like the carving of the turkey. All this time, and they will die the death of a thousand divestments. Arghh...

      I truly miss my NAMP server. But not enough to build it again.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    3. Re:What a Waste! by revlayle · · Score: 1

      Nope... it's probably Carl or Wayne

    4. Re:What a Waste! by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      The consensus then was that when the suits read a back cover ad declaring this the 'year of Windows', and the t-shirts get free development tools and the promise of write-once-run-everywhere, even though running your server tools on the client was never a requirement, then NetWare was doomed.

      I've got it. We'll run a back-cover ad on all the magazines declaring this the 'year of desktop Linux.'

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    5. Re:What a Waste! by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I am amazed at how - once again - Novell blundered and lost the opportunity to capitalize on something.

      If anything good comes of this it will be because Attachmate has the balls to do what Novell itself never seemed to be able to do: jettison its godawful management and put someone in place who knows what to do with Novell's products.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    6. Re:What a Waste! by filesiteguy · · Score: 1

      One can only hope!

    7. Re:What a Waste! by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      All you need to complete the scenario is a field sales force and some OEM deals.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    8. Re:What a Waste! by filesiteguy · · Score: 1

      Douchebag??

      Now there's an original insult!

      *rolls eyes*

  14. Mono, Monodevelop, etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone know what the implications to Mono would be?

    1. Re:Mono, Monodevelop, etc. by Noughmad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nothing of value will be lost.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    2. Re:Mono, Monodevelop, etc. by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Does anyone know what the implications to Mono would be?

      The monkies will continue to fling poop as usual.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  15. Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by Locutus · · Score: 1

    you know this was probably thrown in there somewhere. Now what could Novell have in "assets" which Microsoft would want so bad as to put a consortium together? Is Gnome getting handed over to Microsoft along with any remaining GroupWise customers maybe.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    1. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by mark72005 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      as an employee of one of the remaining groupwise customers I think this falls in the category of "anything would be an improvement"

    2. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by arivanov · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If gnome is being handed off - goodbye and good riddance. With mono together. And with the Microsoft worshipper AKA Miguel de Icasa as an added bonus. Please, pretty please...

      I am more concerned about the Unix copyrights. That may allow restart of the whole sorry SCO affair on a whole new level - not just going after Linux per se, but also after all of the stuff running on top it like Android.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    3. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey man, I think your tin foil hat is on a little bit too tightly.

    4. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by toogreen · · Score: 1

      Just asked the guy what he thinks via Twitter and posted about it here

    5. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by youngec · · Score: 1

      It's more like, Further Down the Spiral, aka Nine Inch Nails.

    6. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

      Despite current GW penetration, I keep finding shops that run it.

      I can't wait to finally work somewhere without Novell.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    7. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by mark72005 · · Score: 1

      Luckily I'm not a network guy or anything. I just use the Mickey Mouse email client.

    8. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      Gnome is GPL, "handing it over" would be rather hard.

    9. Re:Miguel finally gets his job with Microsoft? by Locutus · · Score: 1

      yes, but it might have to be forked.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  16. Well, well, well by mlwmohawk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft is involved, so that is not good news. SuSE is dead, or soon will be.
    What's going to happen to the UNIX copyrights, and will this IP sale be the stick that they will continue to try to beat Linux with?
    Software patents? OMG, in the hands of Microsoft?

    One can theorize that this is Microsoft's way of trying to get Google. Windows Phone 7 needs a way to beat Android, and I'm sure the whole Linux copyright, patent BS will be focused on the mobile phone market.

    1. Re:Well, well, well by Cornwallis · · Score: 1

      That's a deep subject...

    2. Re:Well, well, well by windcask · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is involved, so that is not good news. SuSE is dead, or soon will be.

      I guess the parallels to the Sun/Oracle OpenSolaris debacle are so obvious they don't even need to be stated...

    3. Re:Well, well, well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows 7 Phone is such an utter piece of crap technically that it is head-shakingly, gob-smackingly, jaw-droppingly astonishing that a company would even bother to enter the market especially with 5 or 6 viable better free and supported alternatives (not to mention iPhone) and doezne excellent unknowns. So why do it? Because they can: they have 20-30 billion in cash and huge free cash flow - enough for a 20 year tech-war. So whatever market they want to enter and own they can.

      The proof that MS is still a functioning even government policy supported monopoly will be seen in about 3-4 years when Windows 7 Phone begins to reach 15-20% of all new smart phone unit sales and eventually becomes the only viable alternative for IT departments that have no sysadmins or developers capable of working with BB/BES, Unix, Android etc. The MCSE's will vot for Exchange and Windows 7 every time.

      In 20 years Slashdot - if it still exists - will be running Sharepoint.

    4. Re:Well, well, well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, if Microsoft thinks the best way to quash desktop linux is eliminate Ubuntu's only direct competition, they've got another thing coming.

      The illusion of fragmentation is a large part of what's keeping us in check as a threat.

    5. Re:Well, well, well by houghi · · Score: 1

      SuSE is dead, or soon will be.

      That is dead since 2003. Since then it is called SUSE. That is 7 years. Seven years. And still people give it an old and outdated name.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  17. Mono by nicholas22 · · Score: 1

    What are the implications to Mono from this sale? Is this an Oracle/Java situation, or is it worse?

    1. Re:Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are the implications to Mono from this sale? Is this an Oracle/Java situation, or is it worse?

      The two aren't comparable because nobody remotely sane has or would ever use Mono.

    2. Re:Mono by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Yeah because some big company might sue you over patent infringment!

      I keed, I keed

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    3. Re:Mono by walshy007 · · Score: 0, Troll

      nobody remotely sane has or would ever use Mono.

      So you never use wine ever? what about samba for interacting with windows shares?

      It's all for compatibility. When employers force you to use c# and related things it is nice to be able to use linux to develop on and run it. Not all of us get to choose what languages we must work with.

    4. Re:Mono by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      Chicken and egg. If it weren't for Mono pretending to make .NET cross-platform, those employers might not force you to use C#.

      Of course, most of the employers that'd force you to use C# have drunk the 'microsoft-only' kool-aid to the point that Mono won't help you anyway. You're bound to need some other Windows-only component to do your work. And I guess that's my point. Mono does not make .NET cross-platform in any meaningful way if your employer is truly committed to .NET There's too much Windows-only stuff in there and designed to be the path of least resistance. Kind of like 'extend and emrbace' instead of 'embrace and extend' - has the same effect.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    5. Re:Mono by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      nobody remotely sane has or would ever use Mono.

      Apparently Linden lab are. Although, I guess the fact their primary core business being a virtual world platform might not seem sane.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    6. Re:Mono by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      If your domain is CLI server apps, mono tends to work just fine. I am well aware of some of the shortcomings of the GUI libraries of c#. And yes they would make us use c# even if mono did not exist.

      Disappointing I was marked troll. If it weren't for mono I would have actually had to use windows at some point in the last ten years. It does have some utility.

  18. CEO by chill · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maybe the Attachmate CEO just ran out of shit to kill and has moved on to companies.

    From Wikipedia:

    Jeff Hawn—the president and CEO of Seattle-based Attachmate who lives in Austin, Texas—has been sentenced to 10 days in jail for authorizing the slaughter of 32 of his neighbor's bison that wandered onto his Colorado ranch. Hawn pleaded guilty in November to criminal mischief and animal cruelty. Hawn and hired hands shot and killed 32 bison, which had wandered onto and near his property from a neighboring ranch in Park County, Colorado — including cows carrying calfs. In Colorado, bison are allowed to wander under open-range laws.

    The arrest warrant said most were left to rot.

    Hawn, plead guilty to criminal mischief and cruelty to animals and was released free on a $15,000 bail. The Denver Post reports that the judge sentenced Hawn to 10 days in jail.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't you love the american "justice" system?

      10 days in jail for killing 32 animals.
      Millions in damages for sharing 32 songs.

    2. Re:CEO by thijsh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Amount of Justice = Amount of Guilt / Amount of Money

      I'm fairly sure regular folk would do more time for killing someone's dog... But on the other hand, it surprises me that a rich son of a bitch like this would get any time at all.
      They seem to think they are above the law, but can you blame them... time and time this is proven in the court of law.

      Solve equation for all variables results in: Law != Justice

    3. Re:CEO by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      The main factor here is probably that unfortunately for buffalo, they are ugly stinky animals. If instead he had killed cute cuddly puppies or pandas, or sleek mustangs, I bet they would have thrown the book at him.

    4. Re:CEO by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Funny

      In court testimony Mr. Hawn is reported to have said 'I was told we had to kill GNU as part of this deal. I didn't really understand the reference, but I looked up a picture of a Gnu. When I saw them wandering onto my ranch I knew what had to be done."

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    5. Re:CEO by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      E.g., Michael Vick.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    6. Re:CEO by Teun · · Score: 1
      May I amend your equation:

      Justice !=Law

      A(n interesting) conflict in logic?

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    7. Re:CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That bit about the bison killing is missing some relevant information. First he did have a fence around his land to keep the bison out. They either busted throught the fence or went over it in winter were they did considerable amount of damage to the land, probably more than $15,000 worth of damage. Second he did try and get legal help but was told "Nope, cattle (And by extention bison) can roam where ever they want". As an aside the cattle fences along the highways in Colorado are put there by CDOT to keep the cattle off the roads. Third the "Hired Hands" were hunters (I believe most of them were Native Americans) who paid to hunt to buffalo. They were not charged as they were hunting in "good faith" that the buffalo were Hawn's to shoot and they had the proper permits.

    8. Re:CEO by rabblerabblerabble · · Score: 1

      This was a huge deal in Park county (I live in Alma, CO ) this area is open range which means the rancher does not have to fence his herd in. Rather you have to fence them out of your property if you don't want to be bothered. Hawn did not have fences and wanted them to "get off his lawn" so he had told some hunters they could kill any bison on his land. And they did.

    9. Re:CEO by evilviper · · Score: 1

      You're mistaken. The fine for killing an animal generally only equates to the cost of replacement (a few hundred dollars, depending). People who seriously abuse animals typically pay 1000$, and if you're lucky, get 6 months of probation. I certainly don't expect an average person would have gotten worse (unless they didn't pay the fine).

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    10. Re:CEO by Rudolf · · Score: 1

      Amount of Justice = Amount of Guilt / Amount of Money

      So with zero money, there is an infinite amount of Justice?

  19. It's a shame..... by cyberkahn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I started my career in I.T. with Novell, but I left it behind when I saw the writing on the wall. I had been wishing for a miracle for the company like Google acquiring it, since IMHO a easy intuitive GUI driven directory service is lacking in the Non-Microsoft world. Especially one that plays well with other operating systems. Yes you can use other operating systems in an AD environment, but not as "out of the box" as Novell IMHO. Oh well... I guess we will see.

    1. Re:It's a shame..... by Sadsfae · · Score: 1

      I started my career in I.T. with Novell, but I left it behind when I saw the writing on the wall. I had been wishing for a miracle for the company like Google acquiring it, since IMHO a easy intuitive GUI driven directory service is lacking in the Non-Microsoft world. Especially one that plays well with other operating systems. Yes you can use other operating systems in an AD environment, but not as "out of the box" as Novell IMHO. Oh well... I guess we will see.

      Have you taken a look at Fedora Directory Server? Red Hat also sells/supports an enterprise version.

      http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Screenshots

      --
      Have a squat over at the hobo house.
    2. Re:It's a shame..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I started my career in I.T. with Novell, but I left it behind when I saw the writing on the wall.

      So did Eric Schmidt.

    3. Re:It's a shame..... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      So... why isn't there a FOSS replacement for Netware yet?? Seriously. Has the concept even been considered??

      And I mean the Netware NOS, not Netware-built-atop-linux, as in the latter days.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    4. Re:It's a shame..... by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      So... why isn't there a FOSS replacement for Netware yet??

      Really?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    5. Re:It's a shame..... by cyberkahn · · Score: 1

      ROFL, so true. I bet Eric wakes up every day thinking to himself, "man moving go Google was the best decision I ever made."

  20. Attach-a-who? by McNihil · · Score: 1

    There is nothing good that can come out of this. I repeat NOTHING good.

    I see Ballmer gleefully giddy in his chair.

    1. Re:Attach-a-who? by gtall · · Score: 1

      And Hovsepian, that bozo has been looking to sell out to MS ever since Novell stupidly gave him a job.

  21. Antitrust by Mr.+Munshun · · Score: 1

    I have to wonder if the antitrust against Microsoft case that Novell was going to appeal will still happen.

    1. Re:Antitrust by Locutus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What surprises me is that a company found to have illegally used its monopoly in operating systems is even allowed to be involved with a deal like because operating systems are involved. And the EU had lots of issues with MS middleware and this includes lots of middleware too.

      To top it off, this deal involves a company with current antitrust legal efforts on going. I guess this is a form of settlement but without any open market considerations, this seems more like the bully won again.

      We will once again see Microsoft's true colors regarding open source and they will not be friendly. If you've not seen recently, Microsoft had to pull revenue from losing divisions to prop up their Windows divisions so they look like there was growth. What that means is they have peaked and the wounded lion is going to come out pissing on everything. IMO

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    2. Re:Antitrust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What monopoly?

      Do wounded lions really urinate everywhere?

    3. Re:Antitrust by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I did find myself wondering to what degree this might be one of those "gut the company and run away fast" exit strategies by Novell's current owners.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    4. Re:Antitrust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too wonder where the FTC much less the EU stands on this deal. It seems that Microsoft is able to operate like Standard Oil before the Sherman Act. I don't think AT&T would have been allowed interest in another regional telephone company after they were found to be a monopoly.

    5. Re:Antitrust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, good thing there was SBC to do it from the other way around :D

  22. GNU slaughter ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there a possible GNU slaughter on the way after the president & CEO slaughtered 32 of his neighbor's bison ?

  23. Didn't have to be. by khasim · · Score: 1

    I'm sure that Novell could have found some way to transfer ownership of those items to the public. If Novell had wanted to.

    1. Re:Didn't have to be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If Novell had wanted to." needs to be put into perspective.

      Executives have a legal responsibility to shareholders to maximize profits and shareholder value. If Novell sacrificed shareholder value by needlessly transferring IP to the public, then shareholders can sue. Not only that, what other corporation would hire executives that do such a thing?

      So if you were a Novell exec, would you sacrifice your career and risk getting sued on top of that? Not if you have a mortgage to pay and kids to feed.

    2. Re:Didn't have to be. by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      How naive could you be? Why would a publicly traded company GIVE AWAY a valuable asset in the middle of dealings to sell itself?

      Novell IS a business.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    3. Re:Didn't have to be. by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Considering they will get golden parachutes I doubt feeding the kids is a big concern.

    4. Re:Didn't have to be. by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Correction: Novell WAS a business. Now it's a brand name.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
  24. The billion dollar question... by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...is "What IP did Microsoft acquire in this deal?" If they've acquired the UNIX copyrights, we could very well see the zombie corpse of SCO rise from the grave to terrorize the world again.

    1. Re:The billion dollar question... by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      we could very well see the zombie corpse of SCO rise from the grave to terrorize the world again.
       
      Just the USA, which is only a small part of "the world".
       
      It's my understanding that copyrights aren't really the issue due to the provisions of the GPL, but software patents could be a problem. Only in the USA, though, as the rest of the world doesn't have those. Yet, anyway.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    2. Re:The billion dollar question... by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      The rest of the world is still indirectly affected. If the FUD cloud descends again, it will slow adoption of Linux by businesses and have chilling effects on corporate donations of time, money, and code -- don't forget that a lot of Open Source development is backed by US corporations like IBM. So this potentially affects everyone, regardless of whether you're subject to US copyright/patent law!

    3. Re:The billion dollar question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Novell developed and released the Linux kernel and the Suse GNU/Linux Operating system with the GPL licence so that means they had already given it's Unix right around Linux to the whole comunity.

      So wheter Microsoft acquired the UNIX copyrights or not, doesn't mather, they can not threat the Linux Comunity.

      Isn't that righ?

      I hope so!

    4. Re:The billion dollar question... by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      You know, I never liked the way the SCO lawsuits played out. Being stopped by Novell as copyright/patent holder never gave a 'final resolution' to the issue. All it did was said "For today, Novell declines to sue". It's been pretty apparent for a long time that Novell is somewhat past its glory days, and would probably end up for sale at some point. I've been expecting Novell to go on the block, and have been wondering who would buy it, and if they'd restart the lawsuits.

      I think SCO made a big mistake in initially suing IBM, who was big enough, and making enough money off of Linux, to vigorously defend against SCO. I've sometimes wondered if the whole Novell intervention wasn't a way for SCO to end the lawsuit without actually having any rulings/judgements made in the IBM case. Then, someone else could restart litigation, against 'softer' targets than IBM, and perhaps start to get precedents set against companies and individuals who aren't rich enough to make a vigorous, long-lasting defense.

    5. Re:The billion dollar question... by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      Novell's SEC 8K filing (which I hadn't seen yet when I started this subthread) explicitly states that the IP being sold to MS consists of patents. No mention of copyrights.

  25. Re:Unix Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If that's true then the timing is interesting. Microsoft always had a virtual bone to pick with Linux. As history has shown, Linux has never turned out to be the threat Microsoft imagined. But that's all changing with the rise of ChromeOS and more specifically Android. The Android is going to bring Linux into homes and businesses like never before. (because It will be the first LINUX you don't really need a system admin for since it's not intended to be used in ways that the user would need sys admin for: it's all apps and cloud. )

    This is the real threat to microsoft: the TV and and cell phone as the wedge.

    So finally, it does make sense for MS to do more than chuff and create legal liability FUD through cutouts and stalking horses like Baywater and SCO. Now it's war and time to buy the rights. Google OS is going to have a fight on it's hands.

  26. Re:Unix Patents by goombah99 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    maybe google can switch to BSD. Isn't that one safe from the copyrights issue?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  27. attachmate by digitaldc · · Score: 4, Funny

    They will attach themselves to you and then mate

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  28. Attachmate also appoints new novell manager... by aapold · · Score: 1

    Darl McBride

    --
    "Waste not one watt!" - CZ
    1. Re:Attachmate also appoints new novell manager... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was funny, thx

  29. Miguel's opinion on the matter at the moment... by toogreen · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just sent two tweets to Miguel de Icaza about this:

    @migueldeicaza So does it mean you will be somehow now working for Microsoft

    @migueldeicaza Sorry meant to add a question mark... And how about IP rights for Mono? What does it mean copyrights-wise? Not worried?

    And here's his answer:

    @2green Dont know the answer to that.

    Wow.

    This sucks...

    1. Re:Miguel's opinion on the matter at the moment... by nicholas22 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Miguel was very quick indeed to try to spread FUD and capitalize on the uncertainty that Oracle brought to Java, e.g. see: http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2010/Oct-26.html I wonder how is this going to impact his disposition. Let me guess, it's still better than Java right?

    2. Re:Miguel's opinion on the matter at the moment... by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      He has clarified that "don't know" now:

      @migueldeicaza So apparently Mono is NOT part of the IP that is being sold by Attachmate to Microsoft?
      @eric_sink I dont know, what I know is that the exact details of the transaction are under SEC regulations, so info is limited.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  30. Did anyone in /. READ Attachmate's product list??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Typical of /.tters to not read the F***king Manual before mouthing off about Attachmate / Microsoft / SCO lawsuits.....

    What has the world come to ?????

    Attachmate's main business is TERMINAL EMULATION.... That connect to *Nixes , Mainframes , etc

    NOT F***KING TERMINATOR EJACULATION ......

    Their business is to connect to UNIX/Linux/Mainframes from Windows systems ... etc.

    Do you suppose they want to W**K OFF THEIR CUSTOMERS LIKE TOOLS THAT SCO WERE ???

    PAhhh ..... Kids....

    GEROFF MY LAWN!!!!

  31. It's obvious why they bought Novell by wandazulu · · Score: 1

    They wanted to improve 3270 terminal handling.

    I read the headline and my first thought was "wait...the company that wrote Extra? They're still around?" Then all those nightmares of HLLAPI programing came back and I sat under my desk and cried.

  32. MS, via CPTN, gets "certain [Novell] IP assets" by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 2, Informative

    From the first paragraph of the press release:

    Novell also announced it has entered into a definitive agreement for the concurrent sale of certain intellectual property assets to CPTN Holdings LLC, a consortium of technology companies organized by Microsoft Corporation

    With Novell owning Mono, the free software community will have to watch this.

    What patents did Novell have in that area?

    It's unlikely that MS will have acquired the copyrights for Mono. It serves them better to have a "third-party" implementation which they can show to the competition authorities and standards groups.

  33. What next?? by quotient · · Score: 1

    What next? Apple buys Microsoft?

    1. Re:What next?? by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Hey, if AOL could buy Time Warner... Seriously, though, OS X and Windows 7 under the same roof would probably piss off some regulators in a huge way no matter which direction the purchase went. This purchase of Novell by Attachmate makes sense, because Attachmate makes its money supporting clients of legacy systems. Netware is a legacy system now.

  34. Are MS removing Novell's patents from OIN??! by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 1

    What patents did Novell have that are worth US$450 and a first-paragraph mention in a buy-out press release?

    Novell was a major contributor of patents to the OIN patent pool.

    (Mono probably isn't the main worry - it was Microsoft's patents that were posing a threat there, not Novell's.

  35. Novell sold all of their patents to Microsoft? by walterbyrd · · Score: 5, Informative

    I read this on another site. I have not yet checked for myself.

    NOVL has now filed its 8K. The IP deal is for 882 patents.

    A quick search of the Patent-Pair Assignment database indicates that this likely every "friggin" patent Novell owns. That is Patent-Pair has 1711 entries with Novell as an assignee, but since these include duplicate application and granted patents, as well as other stuff, the total patents sold down the river to Redmond likely represents everything touched by Novell.

    1. Re:Novell sold all of their patents to Microsoft? by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      If true, this is very, very bad.

  36. So, Java is the most open (enteprise) platform? by jernejk · · Score: 1

    Would you risk your next big project to run on Mono? Is Java the lesser evil again?

  37. A Sad Day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A sad day. I've been using SuSE since 1998. Looks like Ron sold-out for the golden parachute. No faith in VC's or private equity firms. They're just scumbag sharks looking to make a quick buck, and will kill, slaughter and maim to get it. So Novell falls victim to the scum and filth of Wall street. Too bad.

  38. so by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 1

    what does this mean for my version 3 CNE?

  39. Re:Novell sold ALL of their patents YES.. 882 MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, 882 patents.

            Patent Purchase Agreement

                      Also on November 21, 2010, Novell entered into a Patent Purchase Agreement (the “Patent Purchase Agreement”) with CPTN Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and consortium of technology companies organized by Microsoft Corporation (“CPTN”). The Patent Purchase Agreement provides that, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Patent Purchase Agreement, Novell will sell to CPTN all of Novell’s right, title and interest in 882 patents (the “Assigned Patents”) for $450 million in cash (the “Patent Sale”).

            The Patent Purchase Agreement contains representations and warranties of the parties, including with respect to Novell’s title to the Assigned Patents, existing licenses and rights with respect to the Assigned Patents, restrictions on rights to the Assigned Patents, the validity and enforceability of the Assigned Patents and the equity commitments of the members of CPTN to fund CPTN in an aggregate amount equal to or exceeding $450 million.

  40. Free download by digitalPhant0m · · Score: 1

    Someone should have told them they could download a Linux distro for free.

  41. Re:Novell sold ALL of their patents YES.. 882 MS by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 4, Informative
  42. Re:Unix Patents by Teun · · Score: 1

    The kernel yes, but the pain might be in the applications.

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  43. Wintendo by tepples · · Score: 1

    competing against Wintendo and Unix.

    Please don't say "Wintendo". It insults Nintendo fans. :p

    1. Re:Wintendo by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Wiindows?

    2. Re:Wintendo by filesiteguy · · Score: 1

      LOL!

      I wouldn't want to upset my Wii and DS-loving children. :)

  44. mmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In some office in Redmond :

    MS Winnix...
    MS Uinnix...
    MS Unidows...
    MS Uindows...

    - God damn programmers!
    - Programmers ?
    - Yeah, programmers .
    - Programmers, programmers, programmers... They've made everything free, now I have to come up with another name to charge $150 for this next generation / cutting edge Windows

  45. "Linux Will Be Everywhere" Argument by mpapet · · Score: 1

    Hot news for you: Linux is many more places than Microsoft's products. You just don't know it. Millions of electronic devices use it. Yes, millions. Mostly invisible to you because it just works. When it **has** to work, there's some kind of Unix used.

    Windows has a niche and does a good job defending it. It's an "okay" desktop. Mostly they use the desktop like a cancer that bores into an office environment. Straight server applications? Expensive in most ways and comparably weak. It's below average-ness doesn't stop it from being sold because Microsoft knows the customer is not the geek, but the boss of the geek's boss who doesn't know anything about the geek's job.

    It looks like this deal keeps NetWare customers going for sure and forces the SuSe business to pay for itself. That will likely chop the head count of the group working on SuSe.

    Flame on!

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    1. Re:"Linux Will Be Everywhere" Argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks like this deal keeps NetWare customers going for sure and forces the SuSe business to pay for itself

      Not sure what you mean exactly, but Novell's last Netware OS (Netware 6.5sp7) went out of support in March this year.

    2. Re:"Linux Will Be Everywhere" Argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing out on the millions of embedded windows xp systems out there.

      Every current gen arcade x86 based cabinet seems to be running it. Diebold ATM machines are all running it, and AFAIK the touch based voting machines are mostly running it.

      While I agree there are probably 10x that in embedded linux/*nix machines, there is a non-negligible amount of XPe setups out there running a number of 'critical' applications.

      In a related item, all of the California State lottery terminals I've run across are running linux, and have been for quite a few years (with JAVA for the frontend no less!). Don't know if that is changing with new machines, but I know firsthand from two different convenience stores in California that they're still running those as of this year. Mind you both are early '00 era P3s.

    3. Re:"Linux Will Be Everywhere" Argument by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, most Diebold kiosk-style machines like ATMs and voting machines were Windows CE. XP embedded may have overtaken it by now, though.

  46. Re:Unix Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The BSDs contain some UNIX code but it was "safe" after the settlement in the 90s. However, several of us have merged code SCO opened up several years ago that might not be safe such as spell(1), etc.

    This would probably affect OpenBSD, NetBSD, MirBSD and MidnightBSD at the least.

  47. Re:Unix Patents by Confusador · · Score: 1

    Given that the UNIX code is old enough that no one is looking at it now (if they ever were when working on Linux), the fact that Novell released Suse under the GPL which means that even if there IS any UNIX code in Linux (not likely), it's still safe.

  48. Oh, to heck with it. by Hasai · · Score: 1

    I'm done. I'm going back to Weapons Systems.
    The work's grim, often tedious, frequently frustrating.
    But at least you get to kill idiots instead of coddle them.

    --

    Regards;

    Hasai

  49. Extracting Value by mpapet · · Score: 1

    So not only are you battening down the hatches for the present when you lay them off, you're mortgaging your future by destroying the core intellectual base for the stuff you have.

    The buyers in this case and most others are not planning for a future. They are extracting as much wealth as possible as quickly as possible with no regard for a future that will never be. If it blows up in 2, 3, or five years is only a matter of finding more suckers to take money from while Novell's business prospects end.

    People with a mindset like yours are not valued because you are not looking to extract maximum value today with only a pretty presentation and pro-forma statements. You might add a little value to a pillager's target that is with certainty headed to bankruptcy and dissolution, but that's about it.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    1. Re:Extracting Value by Omnifarious · · Score: 1

      The buyers in this case and most others are not planning for a future. They are extracting as much wealth as possible as quickly as possible with no regard for a future that will never be. If it blows up in 2, 3, or five years is only a matter of finding more suckers to take money from while Novell's business prospects end.

      Exactly! That is exactly what I feel Attachmate will do to Novell and Suse. It is one of the reasons I think any company that buys non-Open Source software is insane. They are just setting themselves up to be fleeced in just this way.

  50. Some of Novell's shareholders are pissed by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Re:Some of Novell's shareholders are pissed by baldheretic · · Score: 1

      Try plugging this into google and reading the results: "Kendall Law Group, led by former federal judge Joe Kendall, is investigating" and "shareholders in connection" 31,000 hits, many different companies named. Looks like a common practice for the Kendall Law Group....maybe just shopping for lawsuits?

    2. Re:Some of Novell's shareholders are pissed by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      Heh... so basically the corporate merger version of ambulance chasing.

  51. Re:Unix Patents by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    Most applications written for Linux are ported to BSD with absolutely trivial amounts of effort. As a matter of fact unless you're planning on doing really low level stuff, the majority of Linux users could sit down to a FreeBSD system and not even know they weren't running Linux, as most of the apps are the same.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  52. attachMate by ghorlacher · · Score: 1

    Novell bought by an online dating service?

  53. I remember Attachmate too by WebManWalking · · Score: 1

    Attachmate also made terminal emulation for Unisys 1100/2200 series mainframes. They did print ads referring to themselves as "The Perfect Mate" (for your mainframe) with very pretty girls to assist the emotional connection to the "perfect mate" message. Also, at conferences, the best looking ladies were in the Attachmate area and at their (free booze) receptions.

    Being a systems programmer, I wasn't in a position to make purchasing decisions, and I also wasn't married. So neither my morals nor integrity were compromised by allowing myself to be schmoozed by those stunningly pretty girls. I have nothing but fond memories of Attachmate.

    Also, their terminal emulation was top notch, though a little pricey compared to hungrier vendors.

  54. The old ones are the best... by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    The question is...what "IP" has been sold to Microsoft?

    Probably 127.0.0.1.

    Bet the security on that thing is awful if it's running IIS. Watch me give Microsoft a taste of their own medicine by hacking their si1-0$%#$I)%^%)#%

    NO CARRIER

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  55. Attachmate Linux? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

    Attachmate Linux?

    sounds like the linux distro for australian couples...

    --
    This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  56. Re:Microsoft by symbolset · · Score: 1

    For "Attachmate", read "Microsoft".

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  57. GroupWise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using both GroupWise and Outlook extensively, the historical stability and low maintenance of GroupWise, server and client, including very large mailboxes, and the productivity of some of its features, such as the very useful Home view, GroupWise could have been an email platform that would have benefitted businesses tremendously. Outlook has some features that GroupWise does not, but it also has only recently gotten some features that have been in GroupWise for years. What GroupWise lacks is robust third-party support, and that has become an increasingly large problem. Still, there should be some competition for Microsoft.