Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Novell's Linux Business Takes a Seat At the Grown-Up Table

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Fri May 30, 2008 12:11 PM
from the happy-corporate-overlords dept.
CNet is reporting that while Novell still has a long way to go before they start making Red Hat nervous, they have at least gotten a seat at the grown-up table. Reporting 31% year-over-year growth in their Linux business, Novell attributes very little of this success to their Microsoft partnership, looking to their Redmond connection mainly for interoperability work. "Novell's core Linux business is growing. By 'core,' I mean that our non-Microsoft- related Linux business is growing. These are Suse Linux Enterprise Server subscriptions sold directly by the Novell sales force or by our channel partners, without any Microsoft certificates or Microsoft salespeople involved. However, the important thing is that our total revenue picture for Suse Linux Enterprise is growing, as our customers increasingly don't distinguish. As we've said before, Microsoft offers an alternate avenue for purchasing subscriptions but we are focused on growth of the whole category."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Frosty Posts (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anarke_Incarnate (733529) on Friday May 30 2008, @12:14PM (#23601793)
    Go Novell. Competition = good
    • Re:Frosty Posts (Score:5, Informative)

      by spun (1352) <[loverevolutionary] [at] [yahoo.com]> on Friday May 30 2008, @12:22PM (#23601937) Journal
      I was at Novell Brainshare this year and I can say firsthand that their commitment to open source seems genuine. I was impressed with the amount of work they are doing, not only moving to a Linux based platform and phasing out Netware as an OS altogether, but in taking their partners with them. There were some very good seminars on porting Netware applications to Linux, using the GNU tools like autoconf, and Linux security.
      • Re:Frosty Posts (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anarke_Incarnate (733529) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:23PM (#23602409)
        Speaking of security, I kinda like 2 things about Apparmor vs SELinux (which oddly, Canonical chose for Ubuntu, over SELinux). One, the control follows the relative path to the file as opposed to the inode. Now, some may like it the other way around, but if you update the executable, as long as the path stays the same, no changes have to be made. This increases the chance of an administrator NOT forgetting to update the settings for the restrictions during an update or for a patch where they have not gotten all the details. The other reason...It is not written by the NSA. Call me nutty, but I don't exactly like the involvement of government in my software.
        • Re:Frosty Posts (Score:5, Insightful)

          by mrsteveman1 (1010381) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:40PM (#23602617) Homepage
          That last point is sort of irrelevant, its open source.

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

          If you have some reason to not trust SELinux, much as i hate it, do tell.
        • Re:Frosty Posts (Score:4, Interesting)

          by spun (1352) <[loverevolutionary] [at] [yahoo.com]> on Friday May 30 2008, @02:05PM (#23602949) Journal
          I like Apparmor because it is much much easier to configure and use than SELinux. It also creates less of a performance drain.
        • You're right about government involvement. Thats why i dont read books. who knows what kinda words they can put in there without us knowing!

          Infact im getting rid of Ethernet since nasa wrote most of the drivers.
  • by iggymanz (596061) on Friday May 30 2008, @12:15PM (#23601803)
    so that $367 million Microsoft paid Novell in 2007 alone had nothing to do with profitablity and growth. glad to hear it
    • by Anarke_Incarnate (733529) on Friday May 30 2008, @12:17PM (#23601859)
      Having worked with Red Hat and Novell as well as HP, Sun and IBM on *NIX, I have to give Novell credit on their support. They tend to go the extra mile and I even really like their documentation better than Red Hat's. Red Hat's kickstart has fewer issues than AutoYaSt, but YaST as a tool to manage servers, plus Novell's Zenworks Linux Management is awesome in capabilities. It seems to just be easier to make things happen on SUSE for me.

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

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      actually, all of that money wasn't realized at the agreement time. I think only $100m or so was up front, the rest is only recognized by Novell as the MS certs are given/sold/activated by customers. So out of the remaining portion (which I think is $240m total), I believe since Nov 2006, about 2/3rds of that has been recognized so far...some in fiscal 07 and some in fiscal 08...most was last fiscal year.
  • That's what the flash Ad on this page says at least... "roll over for more". www.moreinterop.com
  • by Stu101 (1031686) on Friday May 30 2008, @12:17PM (#23601841)
    We are late arrivals in linux land. However we are deploying a new suse server a week to replace NT servers. We have gone from zero to 35% in little over 3 months. It really is linux for the enterprise made easy. And whats even better, the toolsets are free, opensuse is free, and no shitty activation codes. It's all gravy, to use a bad term ;)
    • So how do Linux servers compare to NT servers? Have you done any comparions?

      • by Stu101 (1031686) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:20PM (#23602375)
        Well so far we are finding that the amount of maintainance is a lot, lot less. Whereas windows you have multiple install and reboots to set it all up, just turn on the suse update repos, and do a zypper up, and press y several times and bingo you have a patched os.

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

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

         
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

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

            Novell do a really good implementation guide
            here [novell.com]
            • I have been looking at this, but have heard from some colleagues that Xen performance is not up to par with solutions like VMware when you don't use the Xensource drivers. Have you had any other experiences than theirs? How is I/O performance compared to native machine performance? Does it abstract the hardware the same way (relatively) VMware does?
      • by MrMr (219533) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:42PM (#23602647)
        Well, why not ask Novell's business partner:

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

        With friends like that...
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

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

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

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

        The windows server is relatively stable, besides the occasional freeze up(like 2-3 times a year it hardlocks). The real PIA is th
        • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

          Why in the holy fuck would you ever turn on automatic updates on a production server?

          Don't you have a test enviroment?

          Fucking noob.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      If you were going on the free (as in really free-free) side of the ecuation, youd have done a lot better in centos,scilinux, mandriva, debian or ubuntu.

      In particular Mandriva's conf screens beats the ---- out of yast any day of the week and twice on sunday.
  • by pembo13 (770295) on Friday May 30 2008, @12:17PM (#23601851) Homepage
    According to this page, http://www.moreinterop.com/solutions/benefits/ [moreinterop.com], they are "The Most Interoperable Open Source Platform on the Market Today"
    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      the first bullet point in your link explains it: "Only Linux distribution recommended by Microsoft and SAP"

      only Linux distro to take Microsoft bribe on the order hundreds of millions of dollars.....
  • by walterbyrd (182728) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:09PM (#23602233)
    Is this good news? Are novell sales up, in part, due to their dirty-deal with msft?

    I could argue that apple and sun also benefited from their deals with msft.

    But, long term, although the individual deals are often beneficial, at least in the short term; the long term effects of these deals is to further entrench msft standards.

    JMHO.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Personally, I'm happy to see "embrace and extend" applied against Microsoft. Microsoft overturned industry-established standards by embracing them (adopting them, providing interoperability with them, etc.), then creating Microsoft-only extensions that locked people into their products. Now, Novell is giving Microsoft a little taste of their own medicine, embracing .NET and turning it into Mono, among other things.

      The only way we're going to get back to truly open standards for everyone is if we accept
  • The first thing Novell did when they acquired SuSE was change the name to SUSE. Sort of thing that separates the amateurs from the pros. Like when Intergalactic Digital Research [digitalresearch.biz] switched to a grownup name.
    • What was wrong with SuSE?

      The company's full name was Software- und System-Entwicklungsgesellschaft (Software and System Development Society), and S.u.S.E. is just the abbreviation. I don't see anything wrong with that.
  • "grown-up table" ? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bsDaemon (87307) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:40PM (#23602615) Homepage
    So, I actually went and R'd the FA, because I was curious about this phrase -- of course, it doesn't appear in the article, so I can only assume that it was the submitter's invention.

    That said, what, exactly, constitutes the "grown-up table" and who sits there? Does it mean that they're now a player against Red Hat? Against Sun? "Endorsed" by Microsoft?

    What exactly are the rules of the game at this point. 10-15 years ago, BSD and Linux were going head-to-head against commercial UNIX, such as Solaris, HP-UX and the like. Now, Sun is getting back to its roots and open sourcing Solaris (Bill Joy, original BSD author and creator of vi and csh was a founding partner of Sun, after all).

    It seems that from old metrics, the "grown ups" are trying to sit at the "kid table."

    Does that indicate that we now look at Microsoft as "grown up?" Are we talking merely from a business standpoint, not technological? I surely hope that is the case.
  • Novell is Microsoft's Trojan Horse against Linux and thats ALL it is.

    They are selling their "differentiation through interoperability" so that they appear as a Microsoft friendly Linux.

    A complete lie, of course, because if there is one thing true about the GPL, is that they cannot do anything without giving it back. Particularily in samba.

    Assholes.
  • I abandoned RedHat when they first adopted the Redmond sales model with their WS, AS, and ES products. Nothing like telling the suits "Linux can save money" and then have the price of the OS make MS CALs look like a good deal.

    Novell's offering has been very, very stable for the server environment, and at a very reasonable price. Plus, I like what Novell has done for OpenSuse (my preferred choice for desktop platform).

    Good price, good stable environment, and even contributing back to the greater community.
  • Novell may attribute its earnings "outside of the Microsoft deal" in more ways than one. To many IT buyers, a Microsoft-tainted Linux supplier is the equivalent of napalm. I can certainly attest that we've done absolutely no business with Novell since they signed the deal, and will continue to avoid Novell as a vendor for as long as the Microsoft contract is in effect. Red Hat, on the other hand, has remained "pure" and has received the majority of our Linux business.
  • "The grown up table" (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Vexorian (959249) on Friday May 30 2008, @05:27PM (#23605329)

    So, was the rats' table full?

    Novell attributes it to the MS-FUD deal, yeah of course, if you receive big large amounts of money from another company so you paid them for every purchase done to you, and you would also use this fact to advertise yourself as more legal and "more interoperable" than other distros, it probably will put you in a high spot. However, that doesn't make you less of a rat.

    Smearing other Linux bussiness and using false advertising to climb and steal their market, it makes you a rat in a book.

    Oh, sorry slashdot, I forgot "Novell contributes a lot to free software", so it is untouchable and I cannot make a bad commentary about them or what they are doing to exploit a deal that should have never been made. Sorry for criticizing Novell, uh oh.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      I was at Novell Brainshare recently with thousands of other people from all over the world. I'd have to say your assessment of Novel's position is way out in left field. You really have no idea what you are talking about, sorry.
    • by Anarke_Incarnate (733529) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:04PM (#23602177)
      Speaking of blind.... Have you read the GPL v2 or v3? OK then. Microsoft wants to hedge bets on many levels and getting any stream of income from open source would be good for them. Hell, I am sure that if they sold MS Office a a binary blob solution for Linux, there would be takers.

      That being said, regardless if you like Novell or not, they contribute to some of the most important and popular projects for F/OSS that if you use almost any distribution, you are touching daily.

      Your assessment of the situation is flawed and incorrect. Please see the following as some proof: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/ [openinventionnetwork.com] http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/about_members.php [openinventionnetwork.com] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_v._Novell [wikipedia.org] http://www.novell.com/ctoblog/?p=54 [novell.com] So... In summation, if you use the Linux Kernel, SAMBA, Gnome, KDE or any numter of other F/OSS products/projects...thank Novell for their contributions.

      • by walterbyrd (182728) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:21PM (#23602381)
        > Microsoft wants to hedge bets on many levels and getting any stream of income from open source would be good for them.

        I don't think that is what the deal is about. Msft's business model does not work unless msft can control the standard. Msft wants linux to be legally encumbered. Msft is getting Novell to agree that all other version of linux are violating msft patents. This is supposed to create one legal version of Linux, and all the rest are illegal. Why do you think msft is sponsoring the Acacia lawsuit against Redhat?

        Right now, there is no way msft can kill off linux in the same manner that msft has killed off msft's proprietary competitors. But, if there is only one linux, and this linux is commercial product, then it becomes much easier for msft to kill off, or at least contain the problem.
        • http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq.html [novell.com]

          http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensource.html [novell.com]

          http://news.cnet.com/Microsoft,-Novell-spar-over-Linux-agreement/2100-7344_3-6137444.html [cnet.com]

          Microsoft got Novell to agree to very very little :). This is a collaboration effort and customer indemnification.

          • Microsoft got Novell to agree to very very little :). This is a collaboration effort and customer indemnification.
            #1. Microsoft got Novell to agree to pay royalties to Microsoft.

            #2. What "indemnification" is Novell paying for, specifically?

            Companies usually do NOT pay for things that they do not receive.
              • by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Friday May 30 2008, @02:20PM (#23603107)

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

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

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

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

                It doesn't matter how much you get paid, you've still entered into an agreement stating that you are paying Microsoft for the property that know is included in the product that you are selling.
        • Times are changing (Score:5, Interesting)

          by blind biker (1066130) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:53PM (#23602825) Journal
          Do you remember the days when any company that stroke a deal with Microsoft, died a horrible and agonizing death? Well, look at this deal with Novell: it seems this is the first time a company pulled a fast one - on Microsoft! Novell saw a small opportunity to make a bit of money and offered to Microsoft something Novell must have known is worthless and impossible: the proprietarization of Linux. Microsoft was desperate enough that it wanted to believe this baloney and Novell was more than happy to oblige and feed them the BS, making a few bucks in the process, and attracting (extremely few) additional customers. Not too much profit, but every little helps, and you won't spit on it, especially if you give NOTHING in return, like Novell did to Microsoft.

          Microsoft is getting sloppy and silly. These are indeed new times.
        • I don't think that is what the deal is about. Msft's business model does not work unless msft can control the standard.

          Their business model worked just fine before they were big enough to "control" anything. In fact, that's sort-of how they got to be that big. It never ceases to amaze me how ready the groktards are to condemn a company for doing what every company since the beginning of the free market are trying to do: make money.

          Msft wants linux to be legally encumbered. Msft is getting Novell to agree that all other version of linux are violating msft patents. This is supposed to create one legal version of Linux, and all the rest are illegal.

          Good thing Linus and all those other developers gave Novell the permission to "agree" that they were violating patents they've never even seen. Of course Microsoft wants Linux to be using its

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            Their business model worked just fine before they were big enough to "control" anything.

            On the contrary, Microsoft was controlling from the beginning: it piggy-backed on IBM's clout to control DOS, and went from there.

            Seriously, I know most of the kids here on /. probably weren't around before there was a Windows 95, but have you ever seen an old Apple II or Mac OS? Commodore? Tandy? DesqView or DRDOS or OS/2 or any of those other OS's and applications that Windows was "competing" against?

            My first comput

      • I see it this way. (Score:4, Interesting)

        by RotateLeftByte (797477) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:34PM (#23602557)
        Ok, I use Linux and have since Slackware 1.1. I promote Linux as a more than viable alternative to the Redmond 'Lock in System'.

        But, I see SUSE as the following.

        A Linux system that you can buy (note not OpenSUSE) without the fear of being sued by Microsoft for the duration of the licensing agreement between the two companies.

        For that reason, I would not recommend SUSE to any business at all. I might be legally wrong but that is how the tie up between Novell & MS seem to me a non Lawyer.

        I do appreciate the stuff that Novell has contributed but personally, I won't touch anything that uses MONO with a 100m Barge Pole. Yes, I know it is apparently free of any potential patent liabilities but I see it as a trojan horse much like Moonlight.

        IMHO, Microsoft wished that Novell, RedHat & Canonical would just disappear. They are not so I wish that for once they (MS that is) would say 'Ok guys, we will work properly with you for the pure benefit of our customers'. That is as likely (IMHO) as Concorde ever flying again.

        • I do appreciate the stuff that Novell has contributed but personally, I won't touch anything that uses MONO with a 100m Barge Pole. Yes, I know it is apparently free of any potential patent liabilities but I see it as a trojan horse much like Moonlight.

          And you're wrong. Even disregarding estoppel (look it up), it's an excellent way to leverage cross-platform code without the brain damages of Java. (Hint: it's Mono, not MONO.)

          Anyone who uses "hurf durf Mono M$ LOLOLOLOL" as a reason not to take advantage of an awesome set of tools is a fucking moron.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Holy crap am I glad you aren't my legal counsel.

          But, I see SUSE as the following.

          A Linux system that you can buy (note not OpenSUSE) without the fear of being sued by Microsoft for the duration of the licensing agreement between the two companies.

          For that reason, I would not recommend SUSE to any business at all.

          I can just imagine the look on my CEO's face if our legal department sent this memo. "It is our conclusion that, by using Linux, you may be (but likely are not) taking on legal liability for patents which Microsoft may (but likely do not) have, that may be infringed (but likely are not) by Linux. Additionally, if you purchase SUSE Linux directly from Novell, you are guaranteed that Microsoft will not sue you for any such patents for at least some period of

      • One thing is to thank Novell for their contributions (which I do at least), and another thing is not looking at their "differentation through interoperability" strategy as the outright damned lie it is.

        THey are saying that because they have this deal with MS, they are MORE interoperable than other linuxes.... which is an EVIDENT LIE.

        In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro.

        While I m at this, I thank novell for their contributions, but i dont HAVE TO from any ethical standpoint
          • Ok, you concentrated in an evident mistake I made. Here is what I would change:

            From:"In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro."

            To: "In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that can not be done in another distro."

            I think the general argument still stands: there is no real "interoperability" feature that exists in Novell's Suse and nowhere else. That can be done in ANY linux distro (if you feel such inclined).

            Therefore, their campaing is full of BullShit (TM)
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 30 2008, @01:12PM (#23602265)
      Fine - dislike the company, but you really need to get away from the FUD and the fear of microsoft and realize that they are doing nothing of the sort (subverting the open source community). you can hate mono, hate gnome, hate evolution, hate kde, you can hate opensuse/suse linux, whatever, but you can't say that novell hasn't done a lot for the community -- they've donated TONS of code (opened up all of SUSE Linux, app armor, yast, hula, etc. and have done tons to go after folks who try to hurt the community and/or open source (gifting patents to OIN, going after SCO, etc.).

      stop pushing FUD and realize that they, just like other companies are in the business of making money and despite that, they continue to help the community. I'm not saying that I necessarily love their MS agreements either, but I don't think they're going to let MS poison open source and/or hurt the community...

      appreciate your comments, but honestly am a bit sick of some of the novell bashing, most of which is based more on fear than on reality.
    • Mod Parent Up (Score:4, Interesting)

      by mpapet (761907) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:20PM (#23602369) Homepage
      While the parent's tone is strong, there are other factors besides the trojan horse microsoft has delivered to consider. The company is not financially healthy in any way, shape, or form. Management performance is still dismal. SuSe is not a silver bullet, or at least hasn't appeared to save the company.

      Argue for a minute that SuSe saves their bacon, there's no proof Novell can out-manage RedHat. Let's say BOTH companies are viable growth assets, then I think Microsoft will open the trojan horse they sent to Novell at bare minimum.
        • Re:Mod Parent Up (Score:5, Informative)

          by Anarke_Incarnate (733529) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:48PM (#23602743)
          From my various experiences with both, Novell's support IS better.

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

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

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

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

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

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            I have the exact opposite experience.

            Ive had novell support tell me that some packages IN THEIR DISTRO are supported and some arent.

            Which are which (i asked him) and where in your page can I know?

            You cant, he said....

            In RH, everything in the distro y rightly supported through adn through.
      • by walterbyrd (182728) on Friday May 30 2008, @01:30PM (#23602503)
        Novell execs do what novell execs think is in their own best interest. Sometimes that means helping Linux/foss, other times not. Novell execs may presently wants to linux to succeed - but only for novell, not for everybody. Bottom line, novell execs are looking at their own bottom line - whether that helps, or hurts, linux is inconsequential. Novell execs are not in business for the sake of any kind of idealism.

        Whatever criticisms people have against msft, you have to give msft credit for being strategic. Right now, msft is teaming with novell to defeat redhat via msft's patent scam. Once redhat has been defeated, msft can turn their attention to other linux distributors, including novell. Let me remind you, msft has a long history of turning against their business partners.