> Fuck the FAQ. It doesn't answer the questions I posed. Andreas Jaeger's answer really is a non-answer.
No, it answers it head on, and explicitly so. It's very easy to say "it's a non-answer" to suit your tantrum here but it's not so easy to substantiate that. You're persistently ignoring one very obvious fact: the deal was made in response to customers. Customers wanted the patent coverage. Novell are not admitting any form of infringement of Linux on MS's patents (and Microsoft verified that this was the case). Microsoft have not been using this to substantiate their war on the free world (that's a little myth you seem to be maintaining).
> If there was no threat, why acknowledge Microsoft's assertions about patents?
Because customers want the extra assurance? Keep ignoring that point all along, but it addresses your point.
> Fuck Miguel. Fuck Microsoft. Fuck John Dragoon. Fuck everyone that says that this is a good deal.
That's fine. While you're foaming at the mouth, I think I'll leave Novell/SUSE to actually continue being one of the greatest contributors to free and open source software, ever, for hiring hundreds of engineers to work on Linux. Developers to work and ensure that KDE, GNOME, the Linux kernel, OpenOffice.org, X.org/XGL/Compiz are constantly improving. To increase the usage of Linux around the world, and to continue being fierce competitors to Microsoft.
> Oh gawd, this is an ISSUE? Are you SERIOUS? This does not even pass the laugh test!
You can laugh it off but it's not addressing the very serious fact that customers have asked for it.
> And Google is the biggest Linux user out there. Microsoft has not sued Google for the $BIGPAYOFF. Neither does anyone believe that Microsoft will even attempt it.
Pretty bad argument. Just because Google might not be concerned, this is not to say that many other customers aren't (which they are). Microsoft would hardly get involved with Google over Linux (if anything) anyway.
> Signing the agreement with Microsoft has given PERCEIVED validation to Microsoft's claims.
No it hasn't. We can argue all day on how different people perceive it, or what the "spirit" of some agreement is etc etc, and yet the only things that really stand are the facts, what's written down. The fact that you have to get cornered into "well, it's perceived that way" when the only people who have implied that are some Microsoft speakers (a long time ago) and some people in the Linux community who don't know about the deal itself, is very telling.
Anyway, if the perceptions are erroneous (which you seem to imply) you should be battling against them, not the deal (or Novell) itself.
> But that was _one_ statement on _one_ day while they've been threatening world+dog that those who use Linux are infringing on Microsoft IP and "y'all better sign agreements with us like Novell if ya know what's good for ya"
It was also only one statement on one day when they said that Novell was acknowledging that Linux infringes on Microsoft's patents. This has never been a clear point in their righteous crusade against the free world.
> It doesn't matter what Microsoft said in an obscure press release that didn't get _any_ reprinting in any of the rags. What counts is what they've been shouting from the rooftops.
The comment hit a lot of news sites actually; many people in the Linux community however have conveniently forgotten it however (negative headlines stick so much better).
> Yeah, it's been so freakin' good that the GPL3 is going to stop stupid shenanigans like that. Thank God.
Quite nice how every point just bounces off you; still, despite what you like to think, the deal has been good for Novell (and hence Linux). Also, you clearly haven't read the FAQ if you're pulling the GPLv3 card.
> JUST WHY DO NOVELL CUSTOMERS NEED PROTECTING FROM "MICROSOFT IP" BY THIS COVENANT NOT TO SUE?
This has been answered countless times. Personally, I think Andreas Jaeger said it best:
Let me state clearly: We do not think that Novell's Linux distributions violate valid patents - but if they do, we do change the code to avoid or work around the patent. Meanwhile we have some means in place to protect customers and developers better. So, it's some kind of important insurance.
We did not expect that Microsoft would sue individuals. But who would have known a couple of years ago that the record industry is going after individuals downloading or copying music and driving them in bankruptcy. Therefore the agreements consider a promise not to sue.
The meaning is clear: customers want the extra assurance. When you've got billions of dollars, you cannot avoid so many risks, you become a big target. This is why Microsoft customers asked for the protection from Novell as well, of not being sued.
> Just by merely signing the agreement, which is secret, allows Microsoft to say whatever the hell it wants, and Novell can do *fuck-all* about it.
Not when Microsoft have explicitly stated that it wasn't part of the original deal (which they have); makes your point a little moot.
> If Novell was really looking out for its own interests, it should have given Microsoft two fingers up.
Except:
(i) Novell have made a lot of money from this (which open source companies can always do with)
(ii) they have had wider access to more customers (HSBC, Wal-Mart, etc); something like over 40,000 SLE coupons have been sold from Microsoft
(iii) Their stocks have gone up
(iv) they've gained even more Linux engineers.
That's nonsense. Novell have made it explicitly clear, and since they have, the only thing it possibly does is make Microsoft look silly (as they regularly do). Although you clearly don't want to admit it, this deal has been very beneficial for Novell (and, in turn, Linux), and it's hardly like Microsoft have used the deal to begin their campaign on Linux infringing on MS's patents -- that has always (ALWAYS) been around.
> if they knew how the deal would likely be perceived in practice, such a statement is likely to be meaningless or just legal ass-covering.
The only people who perceive it that way are some Microsoft speakers and a few clueless people in the Linux community. I haven't seen any indication anywhere else to suggest otherwise.
The reason 99% of the people (and, I know this from direct experience) in the Linux community are annoyed about this is because there's some (as usual) very vocal poisonous people in the community who spute out countless of erroneous negative headlines without even knowing what's going on. Others in the community see these headlines, think the headlines alone are evidence, and don't even consider the matter. I mean, the amount of people I've seen who think that Novell have some immunity from Microsoft (completely false), or the amount of people I've seen who think that countless of people have left Novell because of this (when only two have permanently left), or the amount of people who think that Novell is losing money from this (when they're getting a few hundred million), or the amount of people who have no clue about Novell's hundreds of Linux engineers in the open source community (KDE, GNOME, Linux kernel, OpenOffice.org, etc), is always astounding.
It's an unfortunate simple fact: people like fighting for a cause when the ideal (freedom) is good, even when there's no threat to it or they're ignorant of who the enemy is.
This headline is nothing new from Novell (I mean, they're an OIN founding member), but people will still interpret it in a silly way.
Using Judas terminology doesn't validate your point, unfortunately. Microsoft have always been claiming that Linux violates Microsoft's patents. This is NOTHING new. Novell couldn't have made it clearer that they didn't agree to any nonsense about Linux infringing on MS's patents, and Microsoft even openly admitted this wasn't part of the deal, and yet you'll still go on about it.:)
Well, they employ more KDE developers to work directly on KDE than anyone else (though _possibly_ tied with Trolltech). 3 of the 7 people on the KDE Technical Board are also SUSE employees, which alone sums up SUSE's dedication to the KDE desktop.
Your statements show such an ignorance of Novell's history and works that I barely know where to start. If you'd stop fuming for a second from your irrational Novell and Microsoft hate campaign, you would head around to a few facts:
* Microsoft has explicitly mentioned that its deal with Novell is not exclusive
* Novell has done more for OSS over the years than you can possibly imagine; do a little Googling. They're still the biggest contributors to GNOME and KDE, and pipe incredibly significant development efforts into the Linux Kernel, OpenOffice.org, X.org/Xgl/Compiz, etc etc
* Novell are fully and totally dedicated to the ODF format.
* There is absolutely no way Ubuntu is even remotely ready for the Enterprise. Consumer desktops are nice and everyone is pleased about that deal, but it simply doesn't have the software and innovation as RH and SUSE to survive in many Enterprise environments.
And yet Ubuntu aren't really innovating; they're more just packaging. Sure, they do a few little things for their own benefit (like the installer, or Launchpad, even though it's proprietary), but it's Novell/openSUSE who are really sponsoring so many Kernel, GNOME, KDE developers etc to make OSS a reality, and possible.
Improving hardware support of course is nothing new for any and all Linux distributions, indeed, but that wasn't the whole goal of the survey; a lot of the information is very important and interesting.:)
Well, from the article:
"Thank you all for your participation. With your input we all are able to make openSUSE better and better."
It was a general survey on opinions and usage of openSUSE for the developers and those working in and around openSUSE.
Package Manager != YaST. There are great improvements on speed with Libzypp in 10.2, but there's really exciting things planned for this with the new cache introduced into Libzypp for 10.3, so I really do recommend you try that out (when it's out).
If you got out of your trolling tantrum you'd realise the survey was about the _distribution_ and not political opinions on political decisions.
The survey was to get information about the usage of openSUSE, opinions from the users, and hard-data from those taking it. It succeeded, and just because you don't find the information interesting, it's not to say that it's not very important.
Ubuntu innovate very little compared to openSUSE/Novell on the desktop. So when you're talking about the better _desktop_ you cannot talk about the community; that would arguably fit into _distribution_; so please, once you get out of the Ubuntu fanboy hype, you might see things a little more clearly.
SLED is also marketed on the enterprise, which has a FAR larger community than Ubuntu has in any enterprise. Please don't even try to tell me that Ubuntu is even remotely ready for the enterprise.
No. Novell is pushing for GNOME in the Enterprise Desktop they choose. (i) this has NOTHING to do with openSUSE (where more KDE developers are working on it than any other distribution), and (ii) KDE is still fully supported on the enterprise desktop. Now remind me what your point is again?
The original idea was to allow _several_ Linux distributions (including openSUSE and Fedora), so it hasn't exactly been fulfilled, but it's a nice step in the right direction.
These worked really great for the openSUSE release. Why is it good? It takes out the hassle of having to track down a working/fast mirror. Want to download a large DVD ISO *quickly*? Then this is the way. The small metalink file will have a populated list of around 50 mirrors. The client your using works with making multiple connections to all of these, so you will pretty much ALWAYS MAX OUT YOUR CONNECTION. And still get a really safe download. Why? Because it checks checksums on, IIRC, 4-megabyte chunks.
Reliable and fast, and it spreads out the weight between mirrors, AND it can work with torrents. Metalinks are indeed awesome. Wget and kget support for it is in the works, so stay tuned.:)
You're a little confused. Linus created the kernel; there's an awful lot more to an operating system than the kernel. It's a major part, indeed, but it's nothing without everything else.
Slashdot Mirror
> Fuck the FAQ. It doesn't answer the questions I posed. Andreas Jaeger's answer really is a non-answer.
No, it answers it head on, and explicitly so. It's very easy to say "it's a non-answer" to suit your tantrum here but it's not so easy to substantiate that. You're persistently ignoring one very obvious fact: the deal was made in response to customers. Customers wanted the patent coverage. Novell are not admitting any form of infringement of Linux on MS's patents (and Microsoft verified that this was the case). Microsoft have not been using this to substantiate their war on the free world (that's a little myth you seem to be maintaining).
> If there was no threat, why acknowledge Microsoft's assertions about patents?
Because customers want the extra assurance? Keep ignoring that point all along, but it addresses your point.
> Fuck Miguel. Fuck Microsoft. Fuck John Dragoon. Fuck everyone that says that this is a good deal.
That's fine. While you're foaming at the mouth, I think I'll leave Novell/SUSE to actually continue being one of the greatest contributors to free and open source software, ever, for hiring hundreds of engineers to work on Linux. Developers to work and ensure that KDE, GNOME, the Linux kernel, OpenOffice.org, X.org/XGL/Compiz are constantly improving. To increase the usage of Linux around the world, and to continue being fierce competitors to Microsoft.
> Oh gawd, this is an ISSUE? Are you SERIOUS? This does not even pass the laugh test!
You can laugh it off but it's not addressing the very serious fact that customers have asked for it.
> And Google is the biggest Linux user out there. Microsoft has not sued Google for the $BIGPAYOFF. Neither does anyone believe that Microsoft will even attempt it.
Pretty bad argument. Just because Google might not be concerned, this is not to say that many other customers aren't (which they are). Microsoft would hardly get involved with Google over Linux (if anything) anyway.
> Signing the agreement with Microsoft has given PERCEIVED validation to Microsoft's claims.
No it hasn't. We can argue all day on how different people perceive it, or what the "spirit" of some agreement is etc etc, and yet the only things that really stand are the facts, what's written down. The fact that you have to get cornered into "well, it's perceived that way" when the only people who have implied that are some Microsoft speakers (a long time ago) and some people in the Linux community who don't know about the deal itself, is very telling.
Anyway, if the perceptions are erroneous (which you seem to imply) you should be battling against them, not the deal (or Novell) itself.
Yes, very few people know that SUSE, for example, employ more people to work on KDE (tied with Trolltech) and GNOME than anyone else, for example.
> But that was _one_ statement on _one_ day while they've been threatening world+dog that those who use Linux are infringing on Microsoft IP and "y'all better sign agreements with us like Novell if ya know what's good for ya"
It was also only one statement on one day when they said that Novell was acknowledging that Linux infringes on Microsoft's patents. This has never been a clear point in their righteous crusade against the free world.
> It doesn't matter what Microsoft said in an obscure press release that didn't get _any_ reprinting in any of the rags. What counts is what they've been shouting from the rooftops.
The comment hit a lot of news sites actually; many people in the Linux community however have conveniently forgotten it however (negative headlines stick so much better).
> Yeah, it's been so freakin' good that the GPL3 is going to stop stupid shenanigans like that. Thank God.
Quite nice how every point just bounces off you; still, despite what you like to think, the deal has been good for Novell (and hence Linux). Also, you clearly haven't read the FAQ if you're pulling the GPLv3 card.
> JUST WHY DO NOVELL CUSTOMERS NEED PROTECTING FROM "MICROSOFT IP" BY THIS COVENANT NOT TO SUE?
This has been answered countless times. Personally, I think Andreas Jaeger said it best: Let me state clearly: We do not think that Novell's Linux distributions violate valid patents - but if they do, we do change the code to avoid or work around the patent. Meanwhile we have some means in place to protect customers and developers better. So, it's some kind of important insurance.
We did not expect that Microsoft would sue individuals. But who would have known a couple of years ago that the record industry is going after individuals downloading or copying music and driving them in bankruptcy. Therefore the agreements consider a promise not to sue.
The meaning is clear: customers want the extra assurance. When you've got billions of dollars, you cannot avoid so many risks, you become a big target. This is why Microsoft customers asked for the protection from Novell as well, of not being sued.
> Just by merely signing the agreement, which is secret, allows Microsoft to say whatever the hell it wants, and Novell can do *fuck-all* about it.
Not when Microsoft have explicitly stated that it wasn't part of the original deal (which they have); makes your point a little moot.
> If Novell was really looking out for its own interests, it should have given Microsoft two fingers up.
Except:
(i) Novell have made a lot of money from this (which open source companies can always do with)
(ii) they have had wider access to more customers (HSBC, Wal-Mart, etc); something like over 40,000 SLE coupons have been sold from Microsoft
(iii) Their stocks have gone up
(iv) they've gained even more Linux engineers.
Doesn't sound like they're doing bad, right?
That's nonsense. Novell have made it explicitly clear, and since they have, the only thing it possibly does is make Microsoft look silly (as they regularly do). Although you clearly don't want to admit it, this deal has been very beneficial for Novell (and, in turn, Linux), and it's hardly like Microsoft have used the deal to begin their campaign on Linux infringing on MS's patents -- that has always (ALWAYS) been around.
> if they knew how the deal would likely be perceived in practice, such a statement is likely to be meaningless or just legal ass-covering.
The only people who perceive it that way are some Microsoft speakers and a few clueless people in the Linux community. I haven't seen any indication anywhere else to suggest otherwise.
The reason 99% of the people (and, I know this from direct experience) in the Linux community are annoyed about this is because there's some (as usual) very vocal poisonous people in the community who spute out countless of erroneous negative headlines without even knowing what's going on. Others in the community see these headlines, think the headlines alone are evidence, and don't even consider the matter. I mean, the amount of people I've seen who think that Novell have some immunity from Microsoft (completely false), or the amount of people I've seen who think that countless of people have left Novell because of this (when only two have permanently left), or the amount of people who think that Novell is losing money from this (when they're getting a few hundred million), or the amount of people who have no clue about Novell's hundreds of Linux engineers in the open source community (KDE, GNOME, Linux kernel, OpenOffice.org, etc), is always astounding.
It's an unfortunate simple fact: people like fighting for a cause when the ideal (freedom) is good, even when there's no threat to it or they're ignorant of who the enemy is.
This headline is nothing new from Novell (I mean, they're an OIN founding member), but people will still interpret it in a silly way.
How curious it is that so few people on Slashdot can read any FAQs.
Using Judas terminology doesn't validate your point, unfortunately. Microsoft have always been claiming that Linux violates Microsoft's patents. This is NOTHING new. Novell couldn't have made it clearer that they didn't agree to any nonsense about Linux infringing on MS's patents, and Microsoft even openly admitted this wasn't part of the deal, and yet you'll still go on about it. :)
GNOME is default on SLED, but NOT on openSUSE, where KDE is very much thriving.
Well, they employ more KDE developers to work directly on KDE than anyone else (though _possibly_ tied with Trolltech). 3 of the 7 people on the KDE Technical Board are also SUSE employees, which alone sums up SUSE's dedication to the KDE desktop.
Probably useless speculations as all drafts of the GPLv3 have no direct effect on Novell; see http://www.novell.com/prblogs/?p=310.
Your statements show such an ignorance of Novell's history and works that I barely know where to start. If you'd stop fuming for a second from your irrational Novell and Microsoft hate campaign, you would head around to a few facts:
* Microsoft has explicitly mentioned that its deal with Novell is not exclusive
* Novell has done more for OSS over the years than you can possibly imagine; do a little Googling. They're still the biggest contributors to GNOME and KDE, and pipe incredibly significant development efforts into the Linux Kernel, OpenOffice.org, X.org/Xgl/Compiz, etc etc
* Novell are fully and totally dedicated to the ODF format.
* There is absolutely no way Ubuntu is even remotely ready for the Enterprise. Consumer desktops are nice and everyone is pleased about that deal, but it simply doesn't have the software and innovation as RH and SUSE to survive in many Enterprise environments.
And yet Ubuntu aren't really innovating; they're more just packaging. Sure, they do a few little things for their own benefit (like the installer, or Launchpad, even though it's proprietary), but it's Novell/openSUSE who are really sponsoring so many Kernel, GNOME, KDE developers etc to make OSS a reality, and possible. Improving hardware support of course is nothing new for any and all Linux distributions, indeed, but that wasn't the whole goal of the survey; a lot of the information is very important and interesting. :)
GNOME is NOT the default on openSUSE. :)
The user has the choice of DE on Installation, and neither is pre-selected.
Well, from the article: "Thank you all for your participation. With your input we all are able to make openSUSE better and better." It was a general survey on opinions and usage of openSUSE for the developers and those working in and around openSUSE.
Package Manager != YaST. There are great improvements on speed with Libzypp in 10.2, but there's really exciting things planned for this with the new cache introduced into Libzypp for 10.3, so I really do recommend you try that out (when it's out).
If you got out of your trolling tantrum you'd realise the survey was about the _distribution_ and not political opinions on political decisions. The survey was to get information about the usage of openSUSE, opinions from the users, and hard-data from those taking it. It succeeded, and just because you don't find the information interesting, it's not to say that it's not very important.
Ubuntu innovate very little compared to openSUSE/Novell on the desktop. So when you're talking about the better _desktop_ you cannot talk about the community; that would arguably fit into _distribution_; so please, once you get out of the Ubuntu fanboy hype, you might see things a little more clearly. SLED is also marketed on the enterprise, which has a FAR larger community than Ubuntu has in any enterprise. Please don't even try to tell me that Ubuntu is even remotely ready for the enterprise.
No. Novell is pushing for GNOME in the Enterprise Desktop they choose. (i) this has NOTHING to do with openSUSE (where more KDE developers are working on it than any other distribution), and (ii) KDE is still fully supported on the enterprise desktop. Now remind me what your point is again?
Do you have no idea how companies work? Employees come, employees go. Believe it or not it isn't that exciting working in the same company for ever.
The original idea was to allow _several_ Linux distributions (including openSUSE and Fedora), so it hasn't exactly been fulfilled, but it's a nice step in the right direction.
The openSUSE Build Service: http://opensuse.org/Build_Service (supporting Mandriva, Debian, openSUSE, SLED, SLES, Ubuntu, Fedora...).
These worked really great for the openSUSE release. Why is it good? It takes out the hassle of having to track down a working/fast mirror. Want to download a large DVD ISO *quickly*? Then this is the way. The small metalink file will have a populated list of around 50 mirrors. The client your using works with making multiple connections to all of these, so you will pretty much ALWAYS MAX OUT YOUR CONNECTION. And still get a really safe download. Why? Because it checks checksums on, IIRC, 4-megabyte chunks.
:)
Reliable and fast, and it spreads out the weight between mirrors, AND it can work with torrents. Metalinks are indeed awesome. Wget and kget support for it is in the works, so stay tuned.
You're a little confused. Linus created the kernel; there's an awful lot more to an operating system than the kernel. It's a major part, indeed, but it's nothing without everything else.