Novell as Open Source Hero? 283
ccnull writes "Who's the #2 Linux vendor in the world? Would you believe Novell? Infoworld takes a look at this long-struggling giant and how it has (and hasn't) reinvented itself as an open source company in the face of utterly losing the LAN market to Microsoft." The piece argues: "But even though it seems to be holding all the right cards, Novell faces tough odds. In recent years, tough competition from Microsoft and dwindling support from third-party developers have caused Novell's once-loyal base to look elsewhere for infrastructure needs. Unless it can win back the loyalty of the industry, Novell's new, Linux-centric message could fall on deaf ears."
Mono (Score:5, Interesting)
Novell will do alright in the Linux market (Score:5, Interesting)
Novell has a good name with their customers. (Score:5, Interesting)
One if these was discussed with a rather large customer (government) who was surprised and very favoribly impressed to hear that the product was based on "Novell's Linux, and Novell's implementation of
Their core infrastructure - many dozens of offices across the state - is all based on Novell, who they have a lot of confidence in. I think there's a good chance they'll be wanting the "Novell
Open source hero? Bah! (Score:3, Interesting)
Anywho, if anything, I see SuSE and open source being Novell's savior, although it's previous history does not seem to indicate so...With the quality and issues with Fedora/Red Hat, SuSE has a remote (remote damn it, don't you all jump my @$$ for saying there are problems with Fedora, if you don't believe me, read previous
-thewldisntenuff
Re:Effective? (Score:5, Interesting)
When I say "Novell" what do you think of first?
But which company is worth more?
Surprisingly, they're both about exactly the same. 2.71Billion for Novell and 2.76 Billion for Red Hat according to Yahoo Finance today.
Not that market-cap means a lot, but it was surprising to me. I suspect it surprises both groups - open source fans will be surprised to see the "failed network company" be worth so much - especially considering Red Hat was once worth 10X as much. And I suspect old-school-corporate types would be surprized to see a bunch of Linux hippies being worth as much as a giant like Novell.
Should Novell have lost? (Score:3, Interesting)
If these would be greatly beneficial and widely adopted, it seems odd that they haven't been more aggressively developed by Novell.
If their exit from the marketplace is a blessing in disguise, then it seems almost inevitable that Novell had to find a different product line or revenue stream.
Novell hasn't really been one of the vendors that I followed (due to their poor mac compatabilities) back in the dark ages of proprietary software so I'm very open to opinions of others on these matters.
Re:Effective? (Score:5, Interesting)
that "failed network company" who still pulled in over a billion dollars in revenue last year, and whose massive deployments now look like having an upgrade path to GNU/Linux? :-)
What do we think of when we say "SuSE"?
I'm sure there's many people who are happy they haven't started branding "Novell Enterprise Linux". "Entwicklung" is such a great word...
Re:Effective? (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux company, one in a dozen, happens to be the biggest.
When I say "Novell" what do you think of first?
Technically superior, way underappreciated.
At least, thats what I think.
I feel Novell is technically better than RedHat. The application support and the customers just aren't there. Anyone who has used Novell seriously will agree that there is no equivalent to GroupWise, ZENWorks or eDirectory on the Linux platform and there are only lower quality alternatives for the windows platform. Bringing this to Linux could make Linux it a serious option for larger companies...
Re:Effective? (Score:5, Interesting)
Eh? what does this have to do with the price of cheese? Novell Inc has been around since 1979 - Linus was still running around in shorts then.
Most folk probably think of Novell as a rather large company specialising in networking software - that's exactly what they are. They like linux because it's an alternative to Microsoft, and over in the Microsoft world there's a bigger company trying to sell copycat versions of many of Novell's programs. In the linux world there's a lot of demand for enterprise grade networking and groupware software.
When you think of IBM, does Jo Bloggs think of a Linux company? I wouldn't expect so - they too like linux because it fits in with their core products and strategies.
Novell are a major Linux company now because they own SuSE and Ximian. Now they are Linux companies, they just happen to be subsidiaries of Novell Inc.
Re:Mono (Score:1, Interesting)
Still a lot of restructuring ahead (Score:5, Interesting)
Before the SuSE and Ximian acquisition, Novell was going to focus on "web services" and spent a lot of money on a merger with Cambridge Technology Partners and an acquisition of Silverstream. Now, with Ximian they get Mono as well, but I don't really see a coherent revenue stream strategy coming out of Mono/Silverstream/SuSE (yet). Novell has a staggering product list right now.
There are:
- All of the old pre-Linux products like NetWare, from when Novell's strategy was network operating systems
- All of the identity products like eDirectory from when Novell's strategy was identity management
- The ZENworks product line for desktop and server management
- Four, count 'em, four different collaboration products, all from different sources (GroupWise, NetMail, Evolution, OpenExchange)
- The KDE-based SuSE Linux and the Gnome-based Ximian Desktop
- The rebranded Silverstream app server along with Mono
It's really quite a mess, and I haven't yet seen any strategy to clean it up. Novell's company page still pitches the "One Net" vision, which is a holdover from the Eric Schmidt-as-CEO days. I'd like to see a strategy for how Novell is going to bring all this together.
I'm still a Novell stockholder and I wish Novell the best of luck, I'd just like a little more clarity about how this is all going to come together.
Re:Effective? (Score:5, Interesting)
* integrated connectivity to Novell GroupWise
* integrated connectivity to Microsoft Exchange
* improved offline support for IMAP accounts
* numerous calendar improvements,
* support for S/MIME, enhanced contact management
* Gaim instant messaging integration
* Improved desktop integration
Especially the integration with MS Exchange is somewhat unique for a linux application. If Novell can provide a linux-based desktop that integrates perfectly with a MS Windows environment, then they are a step ahead of RH&Co and are close to becoming (at least my) Open Source Hero.
Re:Novell has a good name with their customers. (Score:3, Interesting)
Perent wrote: "some mexican kid...'s hobby...Deb and Ian's Unstable OS [Debian/Unstable]"
Funny? Seems more insightful.
This amateur image is probably the biggest problem with Linux in the workplace today. It's also IMHO the most valuable thing that Novell can bring to Linux. Novell having (developing/supporting/backing) a linux distro means even more to business than IBM doing peace-love-linux-graffiti-vandalism. Finally a Linux from a vendor my upper management will trust.
Not "winning back" loyalty, but maybe winning. (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, Groupwise, Nterprise, Red Carpet Enterprise, Ximian Desktop and SuSe, in a tight package, intended to scale seamlessly all the way up and down the enterprise, all backed by a company with considerable name recognition and cash, and has been defending ground against MS for decades?
This sounds like it could be a killer combination - something that could provide a significant challenge to MS, in a relatively short time.
One thing I don't knoww about Novell - are they known to treat thier customers (or even the general market) reasonably well? I know there is an ancient SCO relationship, but not one that would indicate they support the current regime or direction over there, correct?
Novell Visited Our LUG (Score:5, Interesting)
They seem to be pretty fired up about stuff. Their next generation product will be "Open Enterprise Server", which can run either on Netware or Linux as a base OS.
They seem very into cross-platform and compatibility, in particular with respect to authentication, single sign-on and all that.
Re:Is Ximian dead? (Score:3, Interesting)
It would be quite interesting to see if they pull the same move on SuSE and call the next Linux release 'Novell Linux X' or something similar though. I'm curious to see what the desktop'd look like, having heard claims that it would bring the best of both KDE and GNOME together.
The problem of Novell is ... (Score:5, Interesting)
They all got training
More than one of those guys earned a second home just by upgrading its customers to Windows. Why Windows? Because Microsoft forced customers into buying whole new license packs, with new software. Even customers running older versions of Windows. It were the days that we simply couldn't find enough people to install and implement upgrades. Microsoft couldn't even ship CD's, licenses and boxes fast enough. In the end we did complete conversions from blanc CD's and provided the customer with its formal material later. And crew was even worse: we sent whole groups of 'people_handy_with_computers' off to South Africa where we bought MCSE documents, just to be able to put them on jobs in Europe...
Oh, and Novell? They simply produced upgrades, even for aging versions of their OS, like 3.12 and such. Each upgrade was about $200 (or something) with which you could make your server OS millennium proof. 3.x went to 3.2 and 4.x went to 4.2. And that was it... my Novell guys just sold a handful of CD's, didn't earn a second home on bonusses, but scored a ten on customer satifaction. And the problem was that Novell informed all customers about the possibility. My guys simply didn't have the opportunity to scale 'm up from 3.x to 4.2 or even version 5.... every customer was already informed about the $200 update kit for the 3 and 4 series.
Since most salesguys don't have a heart or basically don't care about quality (it's just about the bonus), they simply advised customers to ignore the opdate: it's better switching to Windows... you see, I have a second mortgage to pay
It was terrible to see such a nice product becoming a victim of its customer loyalty, especially since the Windows customers simply didn't (and still don't) see that they are being toyed with.
And I? I left the circus in September 1999 on 'matters of principle'
What would make them a FOSS hero? (Score:5, Interesting)
In many sites, Exchange is the one MS product that is irreplaceable infrastructure. I know, alternatives exist, but plugging together 12 different pieces of FOSS with differing licences isn't something that a lot of IT departments are comfortable with. They'd rather live with their regularly unscheduled Exchange outages, thanks very much!
If OpenExchange was free, it would go close to being a drop-in replacement for MS Exchange. With a company the size of Novell behind it, it would be a much easier sell to those companies than plugging together a bunch of FOSS server products, most with no big vendor behind them.
Novell would get a *lot* of mind-share in these organizations, as they'd be the enablers for getting MS out of their core infrastructure once and for all. I'd bet they could leverage this mindshare when it came time to upgrade those desktops as well.
Well, Novell, what are you waiting for?
Small and Medium Business (Score:4, Interesting)
* Licencing cost are low(er) compared with rivals
* Costs due to Viri don't exist in Novell's SuSE offerings (business men know this problem first hand)
* Costs due to Spam get significantly reduced due to Novells SuSE offerings (business men know this problem)
* Security is inherently high (business men know this problem)
* Single signon and other Directory services are good for business (business men know this problem)
* OpenOffice is free and compatible (free is allways good, as long as you get support... Novell enters the stage)
* Novell removes the nerdy part of Linux and makes it business man friendly
These are not technical arguments. They would be the ones I would use to convice any owner of a small or medium business to use Novell's products in an upgrade cycle (from win95, from Oracle 8, from IE5 etc.).
Re:"Developers! Developers! Developers!" (Score:3, Interesting)
And it's not just developers, it's also all the back-office tech guys that have been around since Novell owned the LAN. They know how much more difficult it is supporting a lot of Windows boxes than it is a lot of Netware boxes (plus you don't need as many). So these guys are now thinking maybe they can reduce some of those clunky Windows machines with Novell/Linux/SuSE alternatives.
The big hope is that those .NET developers (often pushed into that environment by gullible managers) can deploy those apps on Mono. Lots of folks see IIS (whether justified or not) as major vulnerability, security wise. From my experience, deploying an IIS installation that is both secure and will support everything the developers need is a major challenge. If Novell can make it happen with SuSE/Apache/Mono, they would have a lot of fans.
web services is key to a linux rollout (Score:3, Interesting)
We use web services for plenty of other stuff but if you need to do cross platform integration there is nothing sweeter.
Novell as Open Source Hero....what you overlook. (Score:3, Interesting)
Novell 'has been a hero' years ago when they came to a settlement in the USL vs BSDI lawsuit, freeing the BSD source tree for anyone to use. The settlement had little to do with 'sticking a finger in Microsoft's eye', whereas Linux support today is all about the eye gouging.
What would be interesting is a 'map' of the managers from back then to now. The points that are common may be the allies.
Additional points to someone who adds a 'map' of the Canopy Group to search for 'common' points - what with their formation of the Linux company Caldera who bought out SCO then renamed themselves to SCO.
Re:Moderators: The most important reply so far!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
So, if your salary is based on your team of 9 people that service 35 servers and 120 desktops, why would you start thinking of an alternative situation in which you can do the same with 4 people or even less
I know this is a terribly message, but right now a lot of those such called IT managers are being paid because they waste money.
Hardly anyone gets fired on overspending on MS based solutions including overpriced maintenance. Hardly anyone gets rewarded for picking a cheaper solution that gives someone more uptime and productivity.
I have a customer running 4000 servers. Most of them MS stuff, some Unix (RS 6000), some Linux, some solaris and -yes- a few Netware. If we talk about platform with the IT director, he is always talking about MS, MS, MS
Can you imagine that the day is coming on which the IT manager involved is being rewarded for the fact that he finally got rid of that old Novell stuff.... (I think here in Holland I pay 1.5% taxes just to pay for all that MS crap).
Re:Novell and IBM, sitting in a tree (Score:4, Interesting)
Personally, I've thought for some time that the behind-the-scenes plotting is really over the desktop. Like you said, no one cares what their servers are running, so long as they can access the services they want from the desktop. But more than that, no one cares what their DESKTOP is running, so long as they can access the services they want and they have the applications they need.
One of the threats to Linux on the desktop is, ok, you make the Ximian Exchange connector, but MS can change the Exchange server and make the connector stop working. You can make Samba improve desktop access to a Win2K network, but when Windows Server 200? comes, they can change the SMB protocol a little and force Samba to play catch-up. So, IBM and Novell work together to make the switch-over from Windows2K networks to Novell-based networks nearly trivial. They then work together to make the Desktop switch to Linux nearly trivial, which should be easier if you control the servers.
But why would IBM want Linux on the desktop so badly? Because once Linux is on the desktop, switching to a PPC based architecture is nearly trivial. If IBM wants to be a player in the Desktop processor market, essentially taking on Intel with the equivalent to the G5, they need to go through Microsoft to get support. Unless, that is, people are running Linux, which already has support for PowerPC.
It's a bit of a conspiracy theory, with absolutely nothing to back it up, but I have a hard time believing that no one at IBM has realized the possibility.
Re:#2 vendor, in who's books? (Score:1, Interesting)
I don't have a link to back up the claim that SUSE is #2. I'm surprised IBM isn't #2, actually. Since IBM doesn't have distro of their own, I guess they don't count?
Re:Now all Novell needs to do is deliver. (Score:3, Interesting)
Huh? If you don't see any difference between suse 9.0 and suse 9.1, you're not looking.
Suse 9.0 was a nice distro, one I could have lived with, but I stuck with redhat (and fedora). When 9.1 came out, it was so good I simply had to switch to suse - and have been doing so, on my desktops, and servers.
BTW netcraft shows that in the past month, redhat has lost web server market share and suse, the 2nd distro, has gained ground. I expect the trend to continue.