Slashdot Mirror
Novell Opens Source
hepjedi writes "News.com is reporting that Novell is
giving away its source code. " They did this at their annual conference and rolled out plans to "...the release of core NetWare
protocols, to test releases of its clustering software, to further refinements in its strategy to provide management tools for
NetWare and Microsoft's Windows NT operating system." Their basic aim is to get more developers for the system (Duh).
Why hire engineers when you can get the internet to develop your product for free.
Apple had it's own "giving away" announcement
too but the fine print
I can't find any information on the site
as to how this thing's gonna be licensed.
in my limited experience of Novell, i didn't find it at all like (my long time experience with) linux or aix or vms
I don't know about you guys and gals, but the way I see this is more of a reflection of the state of their business. They are running out of options. They are desperate.
The same with the other vendors who have made their key software available.
They lack the funds to inovate themselves and hope that just by chance it will catch on.
The sad part is that it's not going to work.
Novell's stock has gone up because people have finally acknowledged that the NDS product is much better than's MS's directory server. I doubt Wall St. cares about open source that much.
I am a Netware CNE and I am a avid Linux operator having run two ISP's on Linux. I do not see this as a week spot. Novell has NDS, a product which Microsoft is in the process of licensing cause AD is designed poorly. Novell's market share is going up again. Novell's interface/product line is consistent. Novell is gaining lots of ground. The only thing to kill Novell would be a 'Stealthy' marketing strategy like Commodor. Overall, I like the approach. However, I still pick Linux over everything else.
Like Wang, like DEC, like IBM; It's too little, too late. Their proprietary solution is dying a slow death ... killed by TCP/IP.
Hey, lamerators! Moderate this !
Viva Free Speech !!!!
Forcing even Microsof to release its source code would be immoral and probably bad for everyone in the long run. The less Big Brother stays out of our business, the better.
Oddly, if Microsoft were to release the source code to the public, it'd prolly do wonders to their stability and interface. That is, if they could round up programmers on par with most of the open source community folks. It could possibly kill out Linux (heh, yeah right) in the long haul. For some god awful reason, people like NT (except the people who have to admin it *ahem, me*)
Just being open-minded
Many large enterprise networks use it because NDS is still light years ahead of simular products. Even IBM licenced NDS to include into AIX
Shit, if IBM is dying, that's the way I want to go!
lack funds?
They have over 1 BILLION in cash on hand. hello?
Innovation? They are the directory service LEADERS. Microsoft is playing CATCHUP, delay tactics, and FUD, FUD, FUD. Novell actually delivers on announced products and on time (yes, this is a different, new Novell).
The open software announcement is just one of the MANY Novell has made this week and in the past few months.
look at www.openldap.org for more information on ldap.
Canadian AC
Doesn't the copyright laws give them all the protection they need?
Hmm...
Nothing compells one to publish anything. All copyright does is protect what is published. So, yeah, as a book of text, one would think that copyright law was sufficient to protect source code.
But just because copyright protects the authors/publishers of the books on my desk from me putting a new cover on them and calling the work mine, and then selling it or otherwise stating this, doesn't mean that I can't rip the cover off and rebind it for my own needs.
Too bad there's not a good way to watermark binary files. Then it might be OK, because it's really the binaries that matter, not the source. I.E., if I could verify that a binary I had alledgedly from Microsoft really was what it said it was, then that's the "official" binary.
But I could still then make my own binaries from their copyrighted source, possibly even distributing them, but they'd be ID'd as not-from-microsoft, so it's user choice as to whether they use my binaries.
But that would require MS to actually use their version control stuff consistently, and all that.
they have this already. you can get NDS for AIX and NT. I believe some other UNIX vendors where porting it.
Admins who use novell generally have things they like to do on off hours other than reboot NT servers, be on support for hours, and apply patches till 2am. And using NDS on a large network with many servers probably saves you 3 months of wasted time out of a year.
;)
Other than that, who uses novell anymore?
What is interesting about this is the comment in the article:
"The company has always had this fear that people would reengineer NetWare. Who would want to do that?" said Chris Stone, senior vice president of strategy and corporate development. "Just give it to them. It just helps create more community."
Could it be that M$ won't release thier code since they are afraid that thier sloppy code would be reingineered? Heh.
Look, you're not going to change the world. You're not going to get rid of business and ring in the Utopia.
Given this, so what if companies are opening up source to get other people to fix their bugs? So what? At least the damn bugs DO get fixed, and we're all better off as a result.
I've been using NetWare long before Linux and I must say that for file/print and global directory services (NDS), it has no equal. Never mind the "wierd" interface, it is a server. Meant to be in the backroom and rarely needs attention. It is weaker than NT as an "application server", so they say. In the real world, I beg to differ. My favourite client (also has Linux for proxy and dialups) runs NetWare (they must run Accpac, no I won't emulate it under dosemu). They run a fault tolerant dual 100Mbs net with a high volume integrated fax/voice/email/web application that interfaces with all Win & DOS (Accpac) apps just fine. And of course the usual file/print services. Soon I'll trash M$ Access and install Oracle and the server still has room to breath. Nt can't touch it, and so far, Accpac won't be supported under Linux.
If I could get NDS funtionality (and possibly integration) under Linux, I would be 100% Linux. So I use both and don't discriminate (well I do hate NT). Caldera NetWare isn't prime time yet and the cost is nearly the same as NetWare, so I stay with that.
Instead of being paranoid or trying to justify why *nix* is better than NetWare (or anything else), I use what works, and works easily. NetWare has it's place and with Linux beside it, there is no reason for NT, ever.
I thought they used RSA, which isn't free.
Are you joking? Netware is one of the best choices if you need reliabilty. Typical uptimes exceed your hardware's life expectancy. In my experience, the only time you down a Netware server is when the fans stop turning from all the years of dust, and you replace 'em to avoid overheating.
Architecturally, there isn't any _reason_ for it to be so damn reliable, but it is anyway. Go figure.
Too right they should be worried!
One problem with Novell doing too much with open source is that many people won't trust secure data to an OS where the source code is available to crackers.
The more that other companies open, the more those that don't will benefit from that fear, too (you know who I mean...).
Novell's big problem is that half their customer base has stayed at 3.11 or 3.12 and absoleutly refused to upgrade.
I wonder if this has anything to do with price? Novell is just as famous as Micro$oft for raping the wallets of customers... And most customers (especially the many smaller ones) aren't willing to ante up the large cash necessary for a few new bells and whistles when what they've already bought somethings that does the basics. :-)
Think of it this way, if it weren't for the fact that all of today's Micro$oft apps need Windows NT/95, there'd still be a lot of people using Windows 3.1 (including me!). I really didn't want to have to ante up the cash for Win 98, but I had to. (my class work requires the use of a proprietary, windows 95/98/NT only program. bummer. and I enjoy choosing from a wide selection of 3d games too... ;-)
BS.....
...
:-)
I agree that by reviewing the code of software you can make sure it does not "endanger one's integrity".
If you're so unhappy with Windows, hey! Who is holding you back from trying another OS on the market. There are plenty to choose from, so you are not bound to using Windows.
You can't clain the rights to an innovative design or implementation that is copyrighted or patented - simply because it ain't yours.
Oh yeah - I'm using Linux, Windows NT/95
I'm onl
y for the competition of it - when there are more competitors on the market (goes for most commercial areas in the society) products tend to evolve faster and better, and the prized just keep dropping...
For some reason they aren't opening the security protocols, which (usually) are the part that needs the most work.
With all these companies releasing their source code there is no way one could claim doing this is not possible.
What would happen if I as a consumer went to court demanding the source for windows. I could claim that that there are no real reasons for microsoft not doing so (because everybody else is) and that the only way for me to bee sure that windows isn't violating my integrity or something is to be able to rewiew the code.
I belive that if people don't want to show you something it is because they have something to hide.
Is there any problem forcing companies releasing the source for their software? Doesn't the copyright laws give them all the protection they need?
Since you ask: one of the largest financial services company in the world, Primerica/Traveller's/Citigroup uses a lot of Novell for its departmental servers (I am neither a user nor an administrator there --so I can't tell you about how well it works, what version they're on, or whether there are any future changes planned)
What Novell needs is to GET OFF the "operating system" bandwagon, and instead sell "Netware" as an application rather than an OS. SMB shares bite big-time, and NDS rocks for managing 1000s of users across many servers and locations, but the big PITA has always been the weak Netware OS.
I'd much rather run Netware as a process under Linux -- with or without NLM module support. And I would really like to see NDS running on Linux (complete NDS partition hosting).
If they could make NDS/Netware file/print sharing available as an application/process you could bolt onto any Unix server, I think they might have a really killer application. I think a lot of shops moved from Netware to NT because they didn't have the manpower to maintain a filesharing OS and an application OS. If they could combine one with the other, Novell might have a chance.
Caldera has been leaning this way for some time, but it would be nice to see it "official" -- Netware as an installable application, from Novell.
Of course, they're so far behind in the open-source world we probably won't ever see it -- compare SMB support to to Netware (Samba v. Mars-NWE). Oh well..
I wish Slashdot would really really really put more thought into the article banners. Even the Novell executive quoted in the article is careful to say that the "benefits are very open source-like." If the executive truely felt Novell was attempting to release under the OpenSource defination then there would be no need for the word "like." Yet, the article banner leaves off the word like. The C|Net article title is also carefully worded, stating that Novell is "giving away source code." It is trival to point out cases where source code has been "given away" and still does not fit the defination of OpenSource. It is bad enough to try to fight the rest of popular media from degrading the defination, is it possible that Slashdot could instead be one of the sources that encourages the prefered defination?
Some things to note:
- It isn't clear that Novell has ever evaluated or authored a Public License that they are confortable publishing source code under.
- None of their press releases have indicated that they are interested in publishing source under a license that provides all the required rights to fit the OpenSource defination.
- Registering as a Novell developer is free if you only want access to their developer web site (there is also an option to pay to have CDs of developer information sent to you). Novell has provided source code on their developer web site for a long time. Hence, the availablity of source code from Novell that costs nothing to get is nothing new. Yet, no one has ever shown Novell to be an OpenSource publisher.
If the title could be changed from "opens source" to "give away source," I would feel alot better.
Thanks
You're right, most of them don't get it and those who do are fighting an uphill battle. These folks have stockholders to answer to -- stockholders who don't know what Open Source is and don't care. All they (will) want to know is, "Why are you giving away our IP? What's going to happen to our stock?" If they try to move too far, too fast towards Open Source, they may find themselves pulling the ripcords on their golden parachutes. This is just the reality of doing business in a publically held corporation.
It's going to take another year or two for the OS/FS concept to establish a track record with the big ISVs, but we all know that it is a superior development concept that produces better software with smaller development costs in a shorter period of time. Once the numbers prove this, Apple, Novell, et all will begin to take the next logical step. In fact, I'd bet that the stockholders will begin to demand Open Source once the concept is proven.
Don't forget the inevitable part that any Y2K fallout will play in the future direction of the industry. Y2K wouldn't even be a topic for discussion if Open Source were the norm.
slashdot broke my sig
I couldn't have said it better myself :).
---
Alex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
i have also used netware 5, but i didn't like the integration of an xserver (be it xfree or anything else) in a SERVER environment. one of the strengths of netware is, that you can administer it completely remote (eg. nwadmin). why would anyone want to walk to the server just to administer it?
nb: console one is sooo butt slow even on a pII 350 with 128meg, since it's written in java (aka the second slowest language in world, after tcl/tk)
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
That's the most important thing...
We have 3.12 here as a file/print server. It runs and runs and, did I mention it runs? The only time in the last 2+ years we ever had to look at the box was when we lost a hdd. A bit more of this, and hey, presto! another viable, reliable server.
"shop smart:shop s-mart" ash
Yeah, so? Who uses Novell anymore?
We have it here at work and EVERYONE curses it, if that's any indication. :)
I had the pleasure of working with Novell 3.x-4.11 for a while. (I've not had hands-on with 5 yet.) The core operating system is quite strange... needs DOS to boot? There's no telnetYet, from any other machine on the network, I can RCONSOLE in and work on anything or just work with the great nwadmin application from any client. There is no better PC file/print server out there right now and NDS is an admin's best friend. However, I wouldn't want a Novell server as an application server. For that, I would go with a *nix box. Don't get me wrong, I love linux but in a typical windows* office, I'd rather have netware than SAMBA emulating an NT Domain (yech!) and SMB.
PS. I wish they would release the source to NDS. But that's their crown jewel right now. If anyone knows, how well does Netware on Caldera work?
_damnit_
It's my job to freeze you. -- Logan's Run
Does anyone else feel that news.com reports like this are going downhill.
They lack detail and they also lack external links to the content.
In this story almost all links are only internal to other news.com reports and at least one of those: "The company has already rolled out plans" is broken. Even the link to Novell's site is broken.
Where is the detail about what exactly is being opened by Novell? To be a bit fairer to news.com I have just been searching novell.com and can't find any details there either.
Dave
You are very correct, Netware 3.12 was the most reliable software I had ever used until I started using Linux (OK I admit it I am entirely from a PC background not a big box one).
But Netware has not yet proved itself as an application server. We all know how few NLM's there are. The choice in dbms has always been tiny with many vendors saying that Netware was not suitable for hosting a dbms.
OK it has changed a bit with the internet stuff Novell have added in recent times. It might change further if Java support is as good as claimed for version 5.
But it seems to me that Linux already has the stability of Netware, it already has the file and print services (via Samba), it already has the dbms and other server applications (Apache etc).
So I am not surprised that Novell are trying to change things - they must be very worried by Linux, although also very relieved that all the attention has been on Linux replacing Windows.
Dave
H'mm,
Did you actually read my posting apart from the bit you quoted?
My Netware experience is with 20 or so LANs in 17 or so countries over a number of years (more than 10 I think). As I clearly stated this has been on small sites.
I clearly stated that NDS is a key strength of Netware. But it is not so relevant for small sites. It is also true that for a long time Banyan Streetalk (sp?) was the premier directory service and that came well before NDS.
Is it not true that LDAP is an open standard for directory services that is being adopted by a large part of the industry and will potentially compete with NDS?
The argument that netware is better for Dos may be true but for how many sites is that still important?
Win 95 Client Aware software, sorry where is this better than the support for Win 95 via Samba?
Linux can compete with and be better than Netware for small LAN's now. For large Lans using NDS it cannot (but that's what I said anyway). As Novell have ported NDS to NT is it not possible that they will also port it to Unix?
So by what criteria are you describing my posting as a flame? I really can't see it myself.
Dave
Max,
I see your point about large sites being able to have dedicated servers. I meant that it is only very small sites that need no application server at all. The majority of sites will need at least some multi-purpose servers which do other things than just file and print. I would say that Linux still has more such server applications available than Netware.
Yes I agree that at present Linux competes most closely with Netware for small sites or as one element in a large site that also uses netware.
Yes I also agree that I would choose Intranetware again over NT, but I would also consider Linux over both.
All the application functions you mention come with Linux except some of the Groupwise stuff - but then I have never liked Groupewise, had problems with it on Dos and more recently on NT.
Once NDS is available for Linux then Linux is truely able to replace Netware on much larger sites.
I have now read up quite a bit on LDAP and agree partially with you. But an open directory standard supported by multiple products and easily accessible to applications (eg from Java using JNDI) is a powerful thing. OpenLdap do seem to have a working product for Linux (server and client) and it seems Netscape are porting their directory server as well.
David
I have used netware a lot in the past from 2.1 onwards through 4.1, this has been in smallish lans with upto approx 70 users but mostly less than 30.
For file and print services for msdos PC's Netware was magic, completely reliable, fast and very simple to manage.
But Netware has never been much in the way of an application server. Few dbms supported it (Btrieve being the most common), few other server based applications were available and those that were tended to result in one server per application due to load, performance and stability. For example we tried Global MHS for a while but it was hopeless compared to using a workstation. (NB Most of the server applications that were available were also very expensive)
Now we all expect to use application servers for many tasks. Servers only oferring file and print services are only relevant to very small LANS.
Unlike older versions of Netware it appears that Netware 5 might be a good application server environment. Particularly now with support for Java making it much easier to develop for than NLM's ever were. Also having Oracle now bundled makes a big diference.
But surely if Linux and the BSD's are competition for NT they are even greater competition for Netware on small sites.
Will I ever again specify Netware? Well if I need NDS then maybe, if I need plain MSDOS PC's then maybe (I have not looked at connecting msdos to Linux/BSD).
But in every other way Linux already has everything a small site would want from Netware. Not only that but the the number of vendors offerring pre-installed Linux is growing fast - how does it compare to the number with pre-installed netware.
All we need is directory services to compete with NDS and who will need Netware anywhere? I believe this is where LDAP should come in but I don't know much about that or the status of free LDAP software.
Just my 2c.
Dave
It seems that Novell and Apple and others are slowly moving closer to open source. Sticking a foot in the water. Maybe with a friendly push they will decide to Go fully open source in the not to distant future. But they don't want to leed with their best cards. Plus they don't want to scare the big customers off.
Anyhow Good first step Novell, I hope you are thinking about Step 2.
Erlang Developer and podcaster
I haven't had a chance to look at it yet.. It INCLUDES XFree86? That's such a drastic change.. Is it used for the graphical interface, or for remote X connections?
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
Lots of companies, including United Parcel Service, with an installed base of, lesse, 1,000 servers?
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
Err, read some more, guy..
Novell can use IP natively in 5.. IPX wasn't always that 'closed' really.. It did die a slow, painfull death, but the company has adapted.. Novell is far from dead..
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
I'm actually had to install Novell 5 for a class.. (I had to use/install Novell 4 and 3 b4)...
.02;
Novell 5 is great... I love how they added XFree86 to it... It's interesting....They started using open source in it (ie xfree86), so I guess the next move was to start opening up some of their stuff...
My guess is you have to sign an NDA to get this stuff..
my $cents =
ChiefArcher
Yep.. it's like 3.2 something.. but yep..
It's xfree86
Trust me, that really isn't difficult...
So FastTrack comes with a PHP module? And what about the next great server side extension? Unless you're using an Open Source webserver, you're going to have to wait for your chosen vendor to support your choice of goodies (which they may just refuse to do). I'm not knocking Novell or FastTrack, but in some cases, having access to the source is all but essential.
Agreed, and that's one area in which Novell excels -- fileserving to gazillions of users.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
I just wonder what part of NetWare Novell plans to release sources for. I don't believe the sources to yet another operating system will be a great benefit for the OSS community. However, the source to the NetWare network components (netware protocol, user database, directory services etc) could be very interesting for making these protocols the defacto (or even IETF approved) standard instead of the SMB protocol with all its
flaws for hererogenous environments.
I probably wouldn't switch to writing NLMs, just because NetWare is free, but i would switch to the NetWare protocol, once the reference implementation is free.
-- Jochen
As a famous writer once said, "if I had had more time I would have written less". I typically read posts in flat mode rather than threaded. I pulled out a quote from your message and used it to illustrate my response to several posts elsewhere in the topic as well as yours. That wasn't fair to you, nor did it make my points entirely clear. Sorry for any confusion, although I still think my overall theme is correct.
sPh
"But in every other way Linux already has everything a small site would want from Netware. Not only that but the the number of vendors offerring pre-installed Linux is growing fast - how does it compare to the number with pre-installed netware.
All we need is directory services to compete with NDS and who will need Netware anywhere? I believe this is where LDAP should come in but I don't know much about that or the status of free LDAP software."
A few points:
* Novell has many strengths in the large, corporate network world. Things like DOS-aware login scripts, Win95-aware client software, and the inheritance approach to access permissions make life easier for the corporate admin and were not available until recently in the *nix world (if they are available even today).
* Many of these advantages can only be appreciated in a well-engineered Netware network. However, there are very few well-designed, well engineered systems out there. A poorly engineered Netware system will indeed be confusing and difficult to use (at least it will still run reliably, if clunkily).
If your only experience with Netware is taking over a badly designed system for a few days, or in a class, then your impression will be similar to that of an NT person working with Linux for the first time. The differences/disadvantages will be obvious, the strengths/advantages will be hidden.
* Saying "when system x gets something like NDS" ignores the fact that it has taken Novell 6 years of very hard work to get NDS to where it is today. No one else is even close (Banyan being basically dead at this point). NDS is Novell's ace in the hole and a product that is very difficult for M$ and others to compete with.
As before, if you are not familiar with NDS, please do a little research before you flame.
sPh
I don't think it'll work this way. It's like privacy laws, on a corporate level.
That's like saying "The only people who object to being strip-searched are the ones with something to hide. Drop them trousers, boy!" Not my idea of a good time. Sounds more like a police state. Admittedly, a business isn't a citizen, but some rights DO apply.
On the other hand if you have something vaugely suspicous, you could probably get some judge to supenoa (sp?) the source, but that still wouldn't actually force it to be Open. Even then, you might not see the source. It could be reviewed by some third party.
--Mark
It is definitely weird. Some management from the server console, some from the workstation. No shell to speak of ... the server console is perhaps the worst CLI ever concieved, with it's clumsy natural language commands. Netware is kinda crappy, and it's hell to manage, but it is fast. If it had a unified management interface (like a unix style shell) it would be OK. NDS is very nice, of course, but that's different.
It makes sense that they are opening the source a little; they did take a LOT from the Free software community for Netware 5 (bind, dns, xfree, et al).
support gun control: take guns from cops
I guess what you meant was UnixWare but UnixWar sounds much more interesting.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Like...ummm...active signatures? We've been doing just that with PGP for _years_ now.
-- I avoid spam by accepting only OpenPGP encrypted or signed email at this address. Clear-signed, RFC2015, heck, even
Given:
1. the quite severe impact that a software bug can have on a business that relies on Internet-connected computer systems, and
2. the history of almost total disregard for quality in the software industry,
I would say that an OS vendor should be under legal obligation to prove that their product is _not_ defective (e.g. by releasing source code), because the common case is that it _is_, and the aggregate cost of failures is large.
In fact, I would go further and say that a user should be under no obligation to a vendor until after the user has approved the source code and put it into production--in other words, a money-back guarantee if it doesn't work. Anything less is highway robbery and software vendors know it.
-- I avoid spam by accepting only OpenPGP encrypted or signed email at this address. Clear-signed, RFC2015, heck, even
Now, I don't know much about Netware, or exactly what code that Novel has released...but...
I'm not so sure about all of these companies "opening" their source. Seems like most of them (ie Apple) just want to use the Open Source community to help them fix their problems.
Novel said that "opening" their source helps create community. But do we really *need* their source? Wouldn't it be better if they opened and standardized their protocols, api's, etc? There would be no "help me, help me! fix my source so I can sell it!" using of the Open Source community.
I dunno, I guess I am just a little sickened by the recent half ass move toward Open Source in the buisness community. Seems like it is just to whore us to make more money.
Comments?
This sig is false.
Look, you're not going to change the world. You're not going to get rid of business and ring in the Utopia.
I don't think business (or even commercial) software is really the problem. They both have their place. It is the potential misuse of the OS community that I am worried about.
so what if companies are opening up source to get other people to fix their bugs? So what? At least the damn bugs DO get fixed, and we're all better off as a result.
And what about those honest people who work for a living that are no longer needed to fix their company's bugs? If I were paid to write free software, I would be most happy. But I am not. I have to work for a living. I don't want to be cut by my company because it thinks it can whore writers of free software.
I would rather a company open it's standards and api's. That allows others to play but wont cost jobs. We don't *need* Novel's code. Or Apple's code. There is more than enough free software out there to do what they do.
Companies like Novel are going "open" to increase their market share and to get a quick, free fix on their code.
This sig is false.
Apache may be cool, rock solid, fast and it might talk to a lot of things, buut its nott the best.
having access to the source is all but essential. But unless your a programer, your equaly screwed. Who is to say that the infinite monkeys working on your selected project will get to adding your feature before the money guys? If itll make a lot ot people happy, companies will do it to make money, and itll be done to opensource either dirrectly by people with that problem, or others 'cause its cool.
What would M$ gain from fixing 3.1? They would spend a lot of mony, and make none. By not fixing it they dont spend any money, and make lots by forcing people to upgrade.
Novell could have done exactly the same thing with NW3.1x
It runs Groupwise, which is by all accounts better than Exchange (and dose stuff xchange couldn't dream of).
It runs bordermanager, which Novell says is the best firewalll/proxy/cache on the market. (and for commercial stuff, thats proably prety close to true.
It runs (all?) Netscape servers.
It runs Perl and Java.
There is no need to port apachee to .nlm, FastTrack comes with the base install. Orcale comes with a 5 user license.
And besides, it makes a hell of a lot more sense putting NDS on a backend (unix, or even a mainframe) box than putting backend apps on PC hardware...
From a user stand point, and from a administrators standpoint, individule servers, and the operating system they run should be irrelevent. Use the network, login to the network, admin the network. With ZENworks and groupwise, you can just about forget file management too: administer application objects, and save files to a database with revision control / multi authors.
Samba might be cool because you can do 9x and NT file shares, but 9x and NT file shares suck. Nothing else can do what Novell stuff can do.
Novell's not that weird when you consider it's roots are in MS-DOS. In fact, "Classic" Novell (3.x) really isn't more than a simple DOS-like kernel plus a really big memory cache plus the Bindery.
The youngsters out there who missed the Novell era are kinda lucky. Sure classic Novell is rock solid and fast, but having to use SYSCON and the other tools sucked so bad that I still have a headache.
A few years back Novell had an aborted plan to replace NetWare with UnixWar (AT&T System V). Too bad they backed off, because the poor applicaiton serving of NetWare is one of the big reasons they are losing their business to Microsoft.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Yeah, but 3.x is a horrible app server. Novell's big problem is that half their customer base has stayed at 3.11 or 3.12 and absoleutly refused to upgrade.
Apparently 5.x is a better app server, but the user base is just as likely or more likely to jump to WinNT than it is to upgrade their Novell installation.
(In this day and age, maintaining a seperate user account database on each server seems kinda retarded! Wait - that's how Linux works!)
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
I've got a old box here connecting via Samba using the Microsoft LanMan DOS client. Works great - supports IP and domain authentication although it's harder to set up than the Novell DOS client.
I don't know if any one has a better solution -- I guess there must be a NFS client for DOS, but that probably costs money.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
LDAP is a generalized protocol which allows you to 'look up' user names and attributes. NDS is a hellva lot more than a protocol. I believe an NDS server will talk LDAP if you want it to.
My understanding is there still is a few problems with LDAP as an authentication scheme.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Blame it on SlshDt.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Actually I think Novell lowered the cost of a 4.x or 5.x NDS licence to below the cost of 3.x to try to get the base to migrate. Didn't work.
Big companus don't buy a box that says "NetWare" or "Windows NT" - these products are usually annually licenced.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
As for the "violating integrity" arugument, I assume you mean that it might be doing something behind the scenes that you don't approve of, like sending out passwords w/o your consent. In which case, MS would likely say, "If you're that paranoid, sit behind a firewall, or don't buy it." Which, legally, is perfectly valid.
Of course, if Congress enacted law saying that all software must be open source, well, that'd make things much more interesting. But it'll never happen (thankfully).
Geez, I don't know if a "Friendly Push" is how I'd describe the /. response to Apple's Open Source foray, unless we're talking about a tank full of pirhanas :O)
The music is not in the piano -Clement Mok
Who uses Novell anymore?
Everyone, dammit! :-(
I got really excited when I saw the headline for this one... but then I went to the site and noticed that, no, they are not releasing the specs for all their protocols -- just some of the protocols.
So I still won't be able to read my MS-Mail(TM) or cc:Mail(TM) from Linux without running a DOS version of MS-Mail or cc:Mail with a Novell Netware client on top of DOS, inside dosemu, will I? It doesn't look like it.
Between *nix making a bunch of new converts and the MS team continuing to evangelize the uninformed, I was beginning to wonder about Novell. I've been an engineer for a decent-sized Netware/Linux/NT network for some time and I have always been impressed with Netware's performance. They have been so quiet amidst all the latest events I was beginning to wonder.
And why shouldn't they? Ray Noorda (who was the CEO for Novell for a number of years is one of the prime movers behind Caldera, a prime supporter of an LSB (Linux Standards Base). I mention both because I don't think Novell (or Noorda) is content to be either just it's own beast OR attached to just one distribution.
I would also like to point out that Novell, like Linux, has survived and is even beginning to thrive, despite the best efforts of MS both Netware and Linux to the sidelines permanently. As another poster has surmised, the possible transition from Netware as an NLM to a fully Linux compatible system topology would be extremely powerful and probably add immense value to Novell's bottom line. But partnering to OpenSource is tricky -- a company can't easily give up the "company secrets" without risking a legal backlash from stockholders. I expect that we will see further clarifications and announcements in the near future regarding this story. Let's just hope that whatever licensing Novell chooses to use doesn't shoot their ability to work with and support the growth of Linux in the foot.
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
It makes sense that they are opening the source a little; they did take a LOT from the Free software community for Netware 5
Gotta disagree with you there. They are revealing the source code; I saw nothing that indicates they are making it open or free. They are doing this to attract developers, not out of any sense of "Well, you gave us cool stuff, we'll give you cool stuff."
If the vendor lets you see the source but doesn't let you do anything with it but try to grok it, they're not hiding it, they're not opening it, but they are revealing it. Perhaps a good thing to call it would be "revealed source"
IBM lost its dominance in the PC market in the early 80s but is still an $80 billion/yr company. They make more money than most other PC manufacturers combined. For comparison - Dell: $7 billion/yr. Gateway: $5 billion/yr.
> I would say that an OS vendor should be under legal obligation to prove that their product is _not_ defective
No. You can't logically prove a negative.
> a money-back guarantee if it doesn't work.
That I can handle. Of course, given terms like "this software is not guaranteed to be suited for any particular purpose", yada yada yada, a vendor can skirt that issue easily.
--C
Not only will they not deserve liberty or safety, Mr. Franklin, they will be DENIED both!
Note that in the article that Novell will not be releasing their "security related" protocols?
Hmmmm.... I wonder why? Security through obscurity ISN'T.
I know many companies that are still using good ol' NetWare 3.12 for critical file and print services. There's a HUGE market for new NLM development...just think if Novell opened up those specs a bit more. NetWare would become really cool -- already NetWare 5.0 runs an FVWM-type Window Manager. Open source apps (like MySQL) on NetWare would give those companies a LOT more flexibility with minimal cost. Coupled with the already-powerful NDS and ZEN Works, NetWare could become very interesting.
NetWare is more stable than NT, and easier to administer than the *NIXes. I for one would go with Linux, but for people who have to run NetWare for NLM compability, this is great news.
This might be just because of that; if the protocols -have- problems, it's not exactly prudent to make them public. Once they have a little more work done on them (i.e., they can be reasonably relied upon for something other than office gossip), I think we'll see them come out. Someone pointed out apple and novell are "testing the waters"...give it a little time.
-- A wealthy eccentric who marches to the beat of a different drum. But you may call me "Noodle Noggin."
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Monty (who got a wrong number call from Steve Kerr last night!)
The strange CLI gets some better with Netware5. Heck, you can even run Perl or Java scripts from the command line on the console.
Caldera+Netware services is where it is at if you are a Novell shop.
I can count over 500 Novell 4.12 servers in my "Network Neighborhood" and I'm at a fortune 100 company.
Novell's stock has gone up from around 14 to around 27 in the last two months. I'd say with this next move it could be going up even more. They've also been investing in RedHat, and are going to release their Directory Services for Linux - It looks like they've making some intelligent business maneuvers recently. Now I'm seriously thinking about investing in Novell.
Probably because they're afraid of some cracker checking out the source code and figuring out how to circumvent the security.
I haven't worked in Novell environment for over a year now. But as I recall, Novell either has or were planning support for LDAP. Also, I am quite sure of the existence and have used the LDAP features of GroupWise. Having worked on a couple of very large NetWare 4.x Installations, I can definitely say that there is significant benefit for using NDS across multiple servers. Basically, the user and resource become independent of the servers themselves. I loved NDS, and am waiting for the day for something better to supplant it, because I don't believe that Novell is going anywhere with it.
Reasons why big companies are going Open Source:
1. As Stallman said, they'll open parts of their code but it's useless unless you use the proprietary portion also.
2. They think that they'll get all the gazillion coders to help them improve their code.
2. They're envious of how Microsoft can charge customers for using and debugging a beta program.
3. They're envious of how Microsoft can charge customers for a bug fix aka Win98, Win2000,etc.
4. All the other big guys are doing it.
5. It's the newest buzzword thing to do.
And don't forget all the lawyers they have to answer to!!! I think that's why the IBM and Apple licenses came out that way -- their lawyers forced them to
...and has since IntraNetware 4.11 released, as well as an XConsole. I can't count the number of times I've had to Telnet into a server to correct the IPX addressing so that it would work.
Of course, Netware itself could be easier to configure, but then again, there's always the trade off of ease-of-use and power.
Servers only oferring file and print services are only relevant to very small LANS. I would argue that this is only relevent in LARGE installations where you have multiple boxes dedicated to task. But surely if Linux and the BSD's are competition for NT they are even greater competition for Netware on small sites. Competition in small sites primarily. Will I ever again specify Netware? I know I certainly will. Of course, cost is always a concern, but IntraNetware for Small Business (IWSB) offers everything a small company needs to get started, including a slick setup process. It includes Netware OS (file & print), GroupWise (mail, group calendaring, document management), Arcserve (backups), Inoculan (anti-virus), and a couple of other goodies. All for less than NT Small Business Server. I believe this is where LDAP should come in LDAP, or Lightweight Directory Access Protocol, is a specification to allow ACCESS to directories such as NDS (or ActiveDirectory, etc). Not that competition isn't a good thing, but why have a competitor? NDS is just about everywhere, now. It's available for NT, Solaris, HPUX, AIX, and OS/390. I suspect Novell will release it Real-Soon-Now for Linux.
I would argue that this is only relevent in LARGE installations where you have multiple boxes dedicated to task.
But surely if Linux and the BSD's are competition for NT they are even greater competition for Netware on small sites.
Competition in small sites primarily.
Will I ever again specify Netware?
I know I certainly will. Of course, cost is always a concern, but IntraNetware for Small Business (IWSB) offers everything a small company needs to get started, including a slick setup process. It includes Netware OS (file & print), GroupWise (mail, group calendaring, document management), Arcserve (backups), Inoculan (anti-virus), and a couple of other goodies. All for less than NT Small Business Server.
I believe this is where LDAP should come in
LDAP, or Lightweight Directory Access Protocol, is a specification to allow ACCESS to directories such as NDS (or ActiveDirectory, etc). Not that competition isn't a good thing, but why have a competitor? NDS is just about everywhere, now. It's available for NT, Solaris, HPUX, AIX, and OS/390. I suspect Novell will release it Real-Soon-Now for Linux.