Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

Hubert Mantel Returns to Novell

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thu Dec 21, 2006 09:21 PM
from the changing-of-the-guard dept.
Krondor writes "Hubert Mantel, SUSE Co-Founder, has confirmed in an interview with Data Manager Online that he has returned to employment with Novell. When asked why he left Novell to begin with, Hubert responded that he was 'burned out' and 'following unpleasant experiences with our investors needed some time off.' Slashdot had reported previously Hubert's departure from Novell approximately one year ago shortly following Novell's acquisition of SUSE and subsequent layoffs. Hubert also provides his opinions on the Novell-Microsoft Agreement, which he characterizes as 'a good thing.'"

Related Stories

[+] Suse Linux Founder Exits Novell 245 comments
csplinter writes write to tell us that SuSE Linux founder Hubert Mantel has resigned from Novell stating "Too late for me. I just decided to leave Suse/Novell. This is no longer the company I founded 13 years ago." Novell confirmed his resignation but had little else to say on the topic. From the article: "Mantel's departure also comes less than a week after Novell announced a major restructuring that would result in 600 layoffs. It's unclear if Mantel's resignation is related to the restructuring."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • out of context (Score:3, Funny)

    by User 956 (568564) on Thursday December 21 2006, @09:27PM (#17333006)
    (http://www.atomjax.com/)
    Hubert also provides his opinions on the Novell-Microsoft Agreement, which he characterizes as 'a good thing.

    I believe the full quote was "Microsoft just paid me a few duffel bags full of money, so it really can't be anything but a good thing".
  • He'll at least have a front row seat to watch as all the people he didn't like before walk out the door.
  • Confused (Score:1)

    by Zarkonnen (662709) on Thursday December 21 2006, @09:51PM (#17333132)
    (http://www.zarkonnen.com/)
    You know, when I skimmed over this I thought "I'm sure this is a repost. Wait... it's a repost saying the exact opposite of what the other post said? Did they miss out a lot of 'not's in the original press release?"

    I need more sleep.
  • by BlenderFX (954511) on Thursday December 21 2006, @09:51PM (#17333136)

    Hubert also provides his opinions on the Novell-Microsoft Agreement, which he characterizes as 'a good thing.'"
    What's wrong with these people?! This guy is supposed to know that nothing good will ever come out of this "deal"
  • by KWTm (808824) on Thursday December 21 2006, @09:52PM (#17333142)
    (Last Journal: Sunday July 29, @12:15PM)
    I anticipate some derisive comments about how Mantel is a bad guy, and Jeremy Allison is a good guy for quitting. If this does happen, it would start to become a mudslingfest like the name calling at the start of the Iraq war.

    I had been hoping to hear Mantel's views on the MS/Novell deal, seeing what further insight he could provide. Disappointingly, he only points to the good side of the deal, and doesn't explain why this outweighs the bad side. We already know the good part: that MS has acknowledged the importance of Linux. No one is arguing with that. But the point is, MS is poisoning the waters, as pointed out by Allison's statement, and that is definitely a bad thing.

    It's like some small Pacific island country who has just acquired nuclear weapons, and now the USA is going to come invade them with two navy fleets. The island country's president says: "I see this as a good thing: the USA is now taking us seriously." Yeah, right.

    Maybe Mantel hasn't had time to formulate his thoughts and reactions to the negative aspects of the deal yet. But you can't make something good just by pointing out the positive aspects and ignoring the negative. You might try it on those populace of those states whose IQ's are in the lower half, but it's not going to work here on Slashdot.
  • Explanation, please (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Brandybuck (704397) on Thursday December 21 2006, @10:52PM (#17333474)
    (http://www.usermode.org/ | Last Journal: Tuesday April 17 2007, @09:13PM)
    Some please explain the controversy over the MS/Novell deal to me. It seems that in everyone's rush to bemoan the fate of all mankind, the actual specifics of the problem have been lost. So after several weeks of trying to sort it out, I now humbly ask clarification. No snarky comments please, I'm being serious.

    My understanding is that this is an indemnity deal. Microsoft says it won't sue Novell over patents. While this may be interpreted as a statement of intent to sue non-Novell distros, that still doesn't explain attitude towards Novell. Shouldn't they be considered equivalent to shopkeepers who knuckle under and pay protection fees to the mob? At most they should be treated as cowards, and not as traitors who have sold out the future of Linux.

    And what's the big deal with the GPL? I've turned it upside down and inside out, and I can find no restriction against entering into indemnity deals. Not even in spirit. Microsoft may not sue Novell if it incorporates patented code into GPL sources, but the GPL licensors certainly will! So again, what's the problem?

    I'm coming to the conclusion that this is merely MDS. Microsoft Derangement Syndrome. It's the mere mention of the name "Microsoft" that has everyone foaming at the mouth. I greatly suspect that if the exact same deal had been made with IBM (who owns more patents than Microsoft ever will) no one would even be batting an eye. It's for these reason I've not asked this question before, out of dread that I would be flamed to oblivion. So please take a step back, count to ten, and calmy explain why Novell is so evil for entering into this agreement.
    • Re:Explanation, please (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Arker (91948) on Thursday December 21 2006, @11:04PM (#17333562)
      (http://antiwar.com/)
      Yes, they've cut a separate peace with MS, essentially. The GPL doesn't allow this, it has the 'live free or die' clause. There's a saying, we must all hang together, for if we do not, we shall assuredly hang separately. Novell has attempted to find a sneaky way to subvert the live free or die clause. This may not make them evil, but it certainly isn't behaviour to be rewarded. And it won't be. They just destroyed their own credibility with the community that develops the software they've bet their future on. In the process, they've converted themselves from a major player to a bit player, whether they realise it or not.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Explanation, please by TheNetAvenger (Score:2) Friday December 22 2006, @02:21AM
      • Re:Explanation, please by Brandybuck (Score:2) Friday December 22 2006, @03:41PM
      • Re:Explanation, please (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Arker (91948) on Thursday December 21 2006, @11:49PM (#17333794)
        (http://antiwar.com/)
        There is no chance of that, however. For it to become 'better' than the others, they would need good relations with the community that produces the software, that's the point. The better their relations are with the community, the better the community supports them, the more likely the community is to be responsive to their needs, and so forth. If you alienate the community, they don't care what you need anymore. That's the place Novell has put itself. Think about Samba, or instance. When Novell had good standing in the community, they had Jeremy Allison working for them, if there were things they had a need for in Samba they could just give him a call and know he'd put that on the front burner. Now, their desires are no longer relevant. If they need something they'll have to do it themselves, and if it's helping them and not the rest, they'll have to maintain a fork.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Explanation, please by grcumb (Score:3) Friday December 22 2006, @12:22AM
      • Re:Explanation, please by kakalaky (Score:1) Friday December 22 2006, @12:25AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Explanation, please by sjbcfh (Score:2) Thursday December 21 2006, @11:45PM
    • Re:Explanation, please by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday December 22 2006, @12:11AM
    • Re:Explanation, please by killjoe (Score:2) Friday December 22 2006, @01:38AM
    • Re:Explanation, please by rkhalloran (Score:2) Friday December 22 2006, @08:44AM
    • Re:Explanation, please by ClosedSource (Score:2) Friday December 22 2006, @02:12PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Glimpse of light in the dark here (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tulare (244053) <spammed@taupeha t . com> on Thursday December 21 2006, @11:43PM (#17333770)
    (http://www.taupehat.com/ | Last Journal: Monday July 17 2006, @07:24PM)
    Maybe (hopefully, please, PLEASE let it be so) this means SuSE will return to its roots as a kickass KDE desktop distribution... as someone who for various reasons has preferred KDE for many years now, SuSE's looming turn toward Gnome was a real bummer for me.
  • Divide and Conquer (Score:2)

    by femto (459605) on Thursday December 21 2006, @11:50PM (#17333804)
    (http://john.daltons.info/)

    Let's face it, the Novell-MS deal is probably about divide and conquer as much as anything else. Cut the deal, divide the FOSS world into "Free Software" and "Open Source" then try and bring them down one at a time, ideally using one against the other.

    Perhaps MS has found a way to bring "Open Source" into the fold, making it impossible for "Free Software" to work with "Open Source" without compromising principles?

    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Howie Mandel? (Score:3, Funny)

    by LM741N (258038) on Friday December 22 2006, @12:21AM (#17333944)
    Wow, I need to cut down on my EtOh consumption. I thought it said "Howie Mandell Returns to Novell."
  • 7 replies beneath your current threshold.