Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Novell Software Businesses SuSE Linux

Novell Missteps Not Affecting SuSE 96

Posted by CowboyNeal from the ridin'-the-storm-out dept.
OSS_ilation writes "Analysts and users agree -- if the layoff rumors at Novell prove true sometime soon, SuSE Linux has nothing to fear. Over at SearchOpenSource.com the word is that the popular SuSE Linux operating system has both the community support and technical chops to weather any personnel-related storms that may be lingering on the horizon. However, the point is also made that should Novell go south, there are those who believe SuSE could prove to be an appealing acquisition target."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Novell Missteps Not Affecting SuSE More

Novell Missteps Not Affecting SuSE

Comments Filter:
  • They want thier Big Red N back.
  • How about the whole entire slashdot community donates a dollar and buys the company?
    • Unfortunately, it could be a lot worse.

      What if someone like MS were to buy them? What if someone even more incompetant were to buy them (SCO? Though i don't know where they'd get the money. SCO and Novell have close ties though). What if someone that didn't really care about Linux bought them?
      • It is licensed under the GPL.... so another project would just fork off of it and life would go on.
        • That's not really the issue. The issue is that Novell is pumping a lot of money into SUSE and Linux in general. If they were bought by a company with a different agenda, that money and support going into Linux would evaporate.

          It's not a matter of who owns the distro, it's a matter of what money is being invested in it.
  • ... Novell going south that quickly. Somebody's spreading FUD here.
    • This is slashdot where group think is convinced massively wealthy, divested and well run corporations are constantly on the brink of extinction. That same group think predicted that Novell, a company in serious trouble before it acquired Suse, would soon take over the IT world because it had a linux distro.

      • This is slashdot where group think is convinced massively wealthy, divested and well run corporations are constantly on the brink of extinction.

        Yes, I would agree that a "divested" company is likely in trouble. However, I do not see how that applies to Novell. Please explain.

    • Re:I just can't believe... (Score:4, Informative)

      by LnxAddct ( 679316 ) <sgk25@drexel.edu> on Thursday October 27, 2005 @08:09PM (#13893606)
      This isn't FUD. Novell has been underperforming for years now. Its investors have been clamoring for massive layoffs and a major revampment. They wany Novell to sell off every thing that isn't profitable, and unless SuSE starts brining in a lot more cash, they *will* sell off that division. This isn't hard to believe either, look at Novell's history... they've always just moved from one tech to the other as each of their attempts failed. They are running out of the piles of cash aquired in the mid to late 90s and all the major investors are getting peeved.

      Novell's management is one of the most disfunctional units in any major corporation, its great that they bought SuSE and all, except that they haven't done anything with the product since they've bought it. Sure they hired Nat, and he's done some cool things, but when it comes down to it, Novell is still testing the waters with Linux and right now its not looking too good for them. Don't be surprised if they sell off that unit. Last quarter they only earned 2 million dollars, and now they are spending 200 million to buyback stock and bump up their stock prices so investors are a little happier.

      Investors have also already pushed Novell to sell off its consulting unit. Now they are also laying off at a minimum of 120 people in Europe. Most investment firms predict Novell will continue to underperform for sometime. Novell bought SuSE because it was on the market to be purchased and it was fairly cheap, Red Hat was offered the chance to buy SuSE first but they declined. Red Hat, unlike Novell, is riddled with major OSS advocates from the top down (i.e. the guy who wrote the first gnu c++ compiler is their VP of OSS affairs) and they believe in healthy competition, especially since with OSS everyone benefits from eachother's work, also it would have made them look bad as being a monopoly on the market. Novell saw a cheap way to test if Linux was profitable and its turning out to not be the golden goose that they needed. Novell is literally just a big mess and its been that way for over half a decade. They *can't* keep at this pace for another year or two.
      Regards,
      Steve

      • Novell won't sell Suse. Not a chance. (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        That's bullshit about them selling off Suse.

        Them getting into linux is about the ONLY thing that people ever liked about Novell in the past 5 years or so. That's it. The top management fighting with each other on actually who gets the 'credit' for pushing the movement to open source operating systems.

        That's it. It would be shit-ass suicide for them to sell of their linux systems.

        The last of the loyal following is starting to drift off of Netware. Linux is the 2nd most popular operating system in the world a
      • ...its great that they bought SuSE and all, except that they haven't done anything with the product since they've bought it.

        Wrong.

        Novell has bet their farm with SuSe being successful. Don't fool yourself. Novell may be mismanaged, but they do still have a huge install base running NetWare. And they've been gradually trying do get their existing NetWare customers to switch to Suse Enterprise. Virtually their entire product offering: E-directory, Identity Manager, ZenWorks, GroupWise, etc. have been po

  • Novell still has cash (Score:5, Informative)

    by stevesliva ( 648202 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @06:16PM (#13892902) Journal
    Novell's got a billion bucks. Really. Even if they take a huge onetime charge to fire everyone they have left in Utah, they won't be dead for years.
    • Novell's got a billion bucks. Really. Even if they take a huge onetime charge to fire everyone they have left in Utah, they won't be dead for years.

      Yeah, and I hear they've got a surefire business plan. They're going to sell IBM for not buying Unix licenses! They've even hired some guy named Sterile McBride as a consultant, though rumor has it he may have to go on vacation for a while.

    • To be clear, by firing a number of these employees they will manage to stay operational and maybe even profitable. Layoffs are no sign that a company is about to go "South", many times layoffs prove just the opposite by alowing additional revenue to go back into R&D, marketing, etc.

    • Re:Novell still has cash (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You mean "a biiilllllion dollars!" Spread that over umpteen employees, marketing, paying the rent, taxes, health care ... it's not an infinite amount of money. Companies need revenue.

      Look at who the majority stakeholder in SuSE Linux is though (*cough*IBM*cough*), and it should be clear that SuSE doesn't have a lot to worry about.

      Redhat might.

      Then again, judging by how poorly IBM execs understand the underpinnings of the F/OSS movement, IBM might just bury SuSE. It's not like they don't know how to bury
      • Red Hat's market cap is 25% higher than Novell's and they are consistently reported to outperform. Novell is highly mismanage and consistently reported to underperform. Also, last I checked IBM had more contracts with Red Hat than they did with Novell, granted that may have changed.
        Regards,
        Steve

  • Nice (Score:4, Funny)

    by vurg ( 639307 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @06:18PM (#13892922)
    Good to see that there is someone there to feed that chameleon.

  • NoveGPL (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @06:24PM (#13892951) Homepage Journal
    A much more plausible option for Novell is to factor out redundancy in their products in favor of their OSS. And to convert more of their products into OSS, either by publishing the source, or by phasing them out in favor of supporting, maybe even buying, their OSS competition. If the market thinks their OSS divisions are worth buying, it will think Novell is even better suited to keep them, if its overall strategy is consistent (and they market that strategy correctly). Novell made its empire making DOS network, almost lost it to NT's "network OS" PR, kept it by making Win32 network to old Novell standards, and generally is known for making others OSes interoperate. Novell should see the light and make the jump. They could ride the Linux tide to do what MS did with PC desktop/LANs, without that nasty (and cyclic) vendor lockin.
    • Hmm.. this doesn't make much sense. Novell seems to be of a similar mind to IBM. Give the OS away for free, but charge for the apps. That means they won't be open sourcing (most) of their apps. They've already open sourced a few (like NetMail.. er.. i mean Hula) that were albatrosses, but I really don't see them open sourcing GroupWise, or BorderManager, or any of a number of other products.
      • Ximian.

        • Re:NoveGPL (Score:3, Interesting)

          by man_of_mr_e ( 217855 )
          Ximian's products were already open source when they bought them.

          That purchase is still kind of a mystery to me, since they've not really leveraged the products much. It's good they're giving the Ximian guys a salary, but what's it doing for Novell?
          • Except for Ximian connector for evolution, but that was the first ting they opened when taking over. Other than that I agree with you.
          • Novell makes money supporting the Ximian products they develop. And creates customers to whom they sell other products and services. It's working for IBM and Red Hat - and it's probably saving Novell from becoming synonymous with WordStar.

        • Re:NoveGPL (Score:3, Insightful)

          by IGnatius T Foobar ( 4328 )
          I'm guessing that the Ximian acquisition happened because "somebody knew somebody" up in the Boston area. Ximian's investors were losing money on the company and were able to make the right connections to get Novell to acquire the company. That's how these things tend to happen in the business world -- often it has nothing to do with technology. Ximian didn't really have anything Novell needed, and the former Ximian people certainly aren't doing anything now that Novell needs. Basically all they got was
          • Bullshit. (no offence, it is overall reaction about "Ximian sucks" expierence witch is *so* popular with Slashdot)

            SuSE could be nice, but Ximian products rocks in desktop world. They got Evolution, Mono (I *don't* know perfectly nor Java, nor Mono, nor legal background of this, but simply saying that Mono is mistep is actually pure zealotry and afraid-anything-connected-with-Microsoft atitude), and lot of expierence in desktop field. Calling them worth nothing would be like calling GNOME worth nothing, but

  • Yes, Novell have plenty of cash in the bank (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DiamondGeezer ( 872237 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @06:28PM (#13892978) Homepage
    ...but that just makes them an acquisition target. I'm still not sure that Novell's shareholders won't get together and fire the board (Jack Messman and all) before an acquiring vehicle (and it could be a VC-led consortium) does it anyway.

    It takes real genius to fail to meet the market in the way Novell has, but Novell has so many failed strategies, failed relaunches, failed products that never quite delivered, that it amounts to a sort of genius.

    It has too many consultants, but more importantly far too many managerial layers to ever be nimble. Novell corporately is sclerotic, and its upper management is utterly remote from the cutting edge.

    SuSE wasn't making money before the acquisition, and SuSE Linux needs more corporate sponsors.

    Perhaps Google should buy SuSE Linux - I'm sure Eric Schmidt would like the irony.

  • All about the shareholders (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I thought this layoff was all part of the plan to appease shareholders, that and perhaps Messman is trying to buy himself more time, since the general consensus is to get rid of the guy.

  • Novell still ha a very good marketshare... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bubulubugoth ( 896803 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @06:40PM (#13893057) Homepage
    Outside Usa...

    Also, and more importantly, those clients are used to pay. So, the SuSe offering of novell, with the tools used by novell admins, is cheaper, then they will maintain, and grouth their market share.

    Also, Microsof pricing as a Network Operating System, is way more expensive than Novell offerings, and for example, a iDirectory with Identity Manager, are good solutions, and their OpenSource counterpart, needs a LOT of time to implement it correctly, lot of hack and slash, and Novell provides clients from windows/linux/mac...

    So, big & medium size co, searching for a cheaper infrastructure, and wanting to still have somebody to sue, and have WorldWide support, then Novell SuSe is the way to go...

    • You can take the part about linux client back. It works almost exactly like the Novel Client (yes, one l) right now. No pam integration in sight. Im currently doing a big project where i desperately would need the pam integration but i have to ditch the Novell Linux Client and run with pamncpfs or LUM instead. It really sucks for me.
  • I recently made the switch from Windows XP to SUSE...I have ran FreeBSD boxes as servers but decided to go with something different on my main machine. Tried Redhat ages ago and didnt find it was for me, tried Debian and after it failed to recognize my hardware decided to drop it instantly (after trying it on a virtual machine didnt like the install procedure either), then tried SUSE and was sold instantly... I still run Win XP as dual boot for games and Dreamweaver (tried some KDE editors but hated them)

  • Who cares about Suse? It's Mono that matters... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cartman ( 18204 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @06:59PM (#13893166)

    Suse is unimportant. It's yet another linux distro, one among many, and it isn't even that different. If Suse disappeared, its users could just switch to another distro.

    Mono, however, is vastly cooler and far more important than Suse, for two reasons. First, there is no open source alternative to Mono--they're actually writing something new instead of just putting together yet another distro. Second, consider Mono's impact--Mono is an implementation of the .NET CLR and C# compilers that will allow future applications written for the Microsoft platform to run seamlessly on Linux (!!). It would be difficult to overstate how important that is. Mono is a major contribution.

    Novell funds both Suse and Mono. But only Mono matters. If Novell has problems (and I'm not sure they even are having problems), it shouldn't be Suse that concerns us.

    • Suse is unimportant. It's yet another linux distro, one among many, and it isn't even that different. If Suse disappeared, its users could just switch to another distro.

      Hobbyist users, maybe. The point of Novell backing Suse is that they provide enterprise support for the distro and they are in a position to respond to their customers as to what should go into that distro. For example, they put more effort into hardware support than some other distros do. For a large company running mission-critical oper

    • At one point I was really excited about Mono. But I've got a little bit less excited about it in the last few months. MS is about to release VS.NET 2k5(along w/ SQL Server 2k5 and probably some other odds and ends), which will feature .NET 2.0. And, I don't think that VS.NET 2005 will be able to compile apps for .NET 1(atleast not out of the box). Mono doesn't even support everything for .NET 1.1 yet, and how long has that been promised. How many years will it take for Mono to catch up to .NET 2? I me
      • Mono is not a monolith, its made up of different components. Some of those components are completely supported and some are not (we did a detailed description in our 1.0 release notes).

        Today the VM, C#, ASP.NET, ADO.NET, System.XML and the core from .NET 1.1 are very well supported and used by many commercial products and companies to deploy applications and services. Some other areas are not completed (Windows.Forms and some Windows-specific APIs) and some others are unique to Mono (Gtk#, Mono.Cairo, Mon
    • I don't have a single application at home, work or anywhere else for that matter that needs a .net runtime. We do not develop for it at work and that is not about to change either since it offers us absolutely no benefits. Both .net and mono could drop off the planet tomorrow and I and anyone else on our programming teams would not even notice. I hear a few fan boys talking about how great it is but really there is not a single compelling thing about it that would make me want to invest more than 30 seconds

    • Re:Who cares about Suse? It's Mono that matters... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      mono is the only one? are you kidding? you should really try using google more.
      theres a crapload of c# compilers out there.
      Gnu's portable dot net had a working windows.forms library way before mono did.
      http://www.dotgnu.org/ [dotgnu.org]
    • I hate to disagree but I've tried Fedora, Debian, Gentoo, Yoper, and gods know how many more, but I keep comming back to SuSE because it works with minimal effort on my part. Put in a DVD and go, and YAST is one of the best tools I've come across.

    • Mono is ho-hum. Hula really matters. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 27, 2005 @08:30PM (#13893716)
      Mono is not innovative. Mono is just a misguided open source implementation of proprietary crap.

      Hula (another Novell incubator project) is innovative. Hula implements integrated open standards based calendaring, scheduling, email etc. Hula doesn't copy MS API's; Hula, should it succeed, could overshadow Exchange in the collaboration software arena. To date, Exchange has had no real competition. But imagine what standards based collaboration would mean. It would be analogous to HTTP/HTML on the web, or SMTP/IMAP for email. Exchange lets you collaborate with other people in using the same Exchange server. Open standards for collaboration could allow you keep in sync with stuff going on all over the damn place. Keep in sync with your family, friends, work, community, business relationships, your kid's school, whatever. Think about it.

      Bury Exchange. Long live (the bright lights at) Novell.

      • Hula (another Novell incubator project) is innovative. Hula implements integrated open standards based calendaring, scheduling, email etc.

        May I ask how this is different from the open standards of iCal? I'm sure this isn't simply a case of "so many standards to choose from", so I'd be interested to hear more. I'd truly like to see an open alternative to Exchange & Outlook, but I suspect that success depends on many factors, with technical qualities being only one item on the list.

      • > Mono is not innovative. Mono is just a misguided open source implementation of proprietary crap.

        False. http://mono-project.com/ECMA [mono-project.com]

        Feel free to rant and rave about open standards (I love'em too:) but in this case you're pissing into the wind. C# and the CLR are slick as, so what they're M$ designed, the main C# man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Hejlsberg [wikipedia.org]) knows his stuff.
  • to see how it's alright whatever happens to Novell, as long as it doesn't hurt one of our precious Linux distros, it's okay to the slashdot community.

    Not that I would dare to ever disagree.

    *Quickly looks around hoping no-one read this unpopular statement*

  • they've been deassimilated.

  • Analysts talking junk again (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FishandChips ( 695645 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @07:18PM (#13893283) Journal
    Hate to say it, but the notion that troubles at Novell won't affect SUSE is complete bullshit. They need enterprise sales. The enterprise generally doesn't invest in troubled companies that might have gone down the tubes one year into a five-year support package. And that's excluding any impact on Novell Linux if a new strategy vaporizes their R&D budgets. Any long-term cloud over Novell is going to be a killer for SUSE. In Linux terms, it would be a case of no one ever went broke buying Red Hat.

    That wouldn't be attractive for many companies. I mean, why change from Windows to Linux when the only credible Linux game in town is Red Hat and they want to be just like Microsoft anyway. This sounds much more like analysts talking up SUSE because they know full well that if it comes to a showdown at Novell, the Linux part is the one that will sell for decent money, if they can keep it untarnished.

    • I'd have to agree with the analysts (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Novell's only hope is Suse. There is no future in Netware, there hasn't been a future for netware for nearly a decade.

      For Novell it's either Linux or bust. There is no alternative that they can go after. This is it. It's the end game.

      And I damn well hope that they make enough money to be solvent...

      open source Mono...
      open source Yast...
      open source Novell Netmail.. (Hula)

      Developers working on X.org. Developers working on Gnome desktop. (they completely turned around Evolution email client to a nice outlook ki

  • Now who might want to see Novell disembowelled? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Bullard ( 62082 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @07:25PM (#13893328) Homepage
    Microsoft has an extensive Old Boys' Network in the tech industry, but in particular within the financial industry. There's no lack of money managers eager to do Microsoft's bidding in exchange for a piece of Microsoft's money laundering business.

    A revitalized Novell-SUSE-Ximian combo is a massive threat to Microsoft (Hello New Zealand!) and if there are any even barely semilegal (under the current US regi... administration) wink-wink-nod-nod ways of getting the large financial firms to undermine Novell's image and finances, the goebbelsesque masterminds within the Strategic Acquisitions and Finances department of Microsoft are certainly pulling all their strings to that effect. That's their sole reason d'etre!

    One recent example: When MS wanted their "Linux Powerhouse" and Office competitors Corel dead (but actually managed to buy it instead through a proxy; DOJ who?), they used ex-MS executives and their former or current colleagues and an MS-affiliated Vector Capital venture firm (financed by certain Paul Allen and operated by ex-MS execs) to do the probing, buying, insider bribing (offers of a glittery parachutes and a get-out-of-jail-free cards, anyone?), doctored "third party" evaluation of the company finances and its business projections (by top Wall St firms) etc. Even Corel's new and supposedly independently created pro-MS business strategy in 2001 was devised by a consultancy firm (McKinsey and Company) with links to people involved in the shady takeover.

    Innocuous manipulation of competitors' share price (Down, boy!), or interference in competitors' corporate affairs through seemingly neutral investment houses or venture investors (Split 'em up for quick short-term profit!) is probably taking place all the time. The corporate hijacking of Corel was an amazingly outrageous maneuver, taking place as it did so soon after MS had nominally "lost" their monopoly case against the US-DOJ, and Microsoft's strategic planners certainly feel that they have even more leeway these days.

    "Should Novell go south... blah blah blah?"

    At the time of the MS-engineered takeover Corel was finalizing its turnaround and had loads of cash left (they were eventually bought out for a mere $30-40M for the dozen or so products!) but for some reason the larger investment firms and certain media kept referring to the company as "beleagured" (Hello Apple!), keeping up a constant stream of negative speculation. That is, of course, intended to have an effect on potential customers...

    So now we have the even cash-richer Novell in the unenviable position of being a major MS competitor and yet having its "missteps" and future disembowellings spculated in the press.. But this time Novell also has some big backers (Hello Big Blue!) in its corner and I'd expect Novell to break through any glass ceilings or FUD campaigns instead of laying down its arms and capitulating before the Barbarian Gates.

  • Somebody is looking to get flamed... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by burnin1965 ( 535071 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @07:27PM (#13893340) Homepage
    Exactly how did we go from layoffs to folding?

    It doesn't take much research to discover that Novell grew their business in the early 90s to the mid 90s from less then $500 million to over $2 billion. And when they hit their peak in the mid 90s they had over 7000 employees. In the late 90s Novell's business was cut in half to about $1 billion and they have held there for some time. Currently the number of employees is at 6000+ and their costs to run their business just about overwhelm their revenue. Which begs the question, does this billion dollar company have more people than are necessary to run the business? I know what the numbers say, but I'll let everyone figure it out for themselves.

    The point to keep from all this, while Novell has not done a good of keeping costs under control they have done a good job of keeping their revenues up since Microsoft sucked away soo much of their business. So it is not likely Novell will be folding anytime soon and if anything they will become a leaner and more profitable company which currently has an excellent business plan point directly at the burgeoning open source market.

    burnin

  • Zenworks (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 27, 2005 @07:31PM (#13893363)
    Zenworks is such a killer product that alone should be reason enough to stay or switch back to Novell. With Zenworks we are able to manage over 2500 computers with two that's right two administrators.

  • Stable OS != Stable company (Score:4, Interesting)

    by u2pa ( 871932 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @07:54PM (#13893509) Journal
    I've run novell netware servers for 9 years, and literaly NEVER had it crash. And after power outages, its never failed to come right back up online. Its the only OS i have ever run that have never given me Guru Meditation/kernel panic / BSOD / filesystem corruption. (and the opposite is just as true Stable company != Stable OS... just think of Windows)

  • It's all in the numbers (Score:3, Insightful)

    by grazman ( 926478 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @08:00PM (#13893551)
    It's been suggested they will follow some shareholder advice. 1. Spin-off GroupWise (a profitable product line that needs better marketing) I'm not sure it will sell as well. GroupWise needs more developers attracted which requires marketers and in-house consulting and developers. 2. Spin-off their consulting arm (which is manpower bloated since their acqusitions) which is how they got current their red headed step-child CEO. 3. Reduce head count. They have money in the bank. Their top product lines (indentity management and portal design/content management applications) are 2-3 times what the market price (very good stuff mind you) is for a "close" product match. Obviously they always have had issues in successfully marketing. Rumors fly around every 2-3 years that big blue will buy them and Redmond will crush them. It's better and easier for IBM to continue their "corporate adoption" of Novell, because it keeps Redmond from going ballistic at IBM for being parents. It's also much cheaper for IBM than nuying them. IBM is realstic in the true accounting facts: if IBM bus the company, the product prices go up. Novell needs to be smart and find ways to lower prices to make more inroads to market share, garner the support of the open-source community (which they have, but find few open-source developers savvy enough to develop for edirectory). Head count is a GREAT place to do that, seeing how they have acquired so many companies in the past few years, something has got to give. Oh, and I really hope they start picking a product name and sticking with it. Right now they change some product names every 6-9 months. Noone can sell their stuff without asking what the product is named this quarter. Probably a result of different product managers who had their own ideas at product inception. What would also help them is if they wrote connectors for edirectory to "link" to some of the better known open source projects out there (Mambo/Joomla, Nagios and the like). Then watch people at the corporate level start flocking to Suse with edirectory for web applications instead of the Redmond stuff.

  • Good Article (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 27, 2005 @08:54PM (#13893833)
    Businessweek has a good article [businessweek.com] regarding Novell's current difficulties.
  • when vendors have an agreement with microsoft that punishes them for shipping a competitors product.

    Hello - DOJ are you watching?
  • My first exposure to Linux was RedHat and second was SuSE. I've used many after SuSE and still think SuSE is pretty good. It has all the best apps from the open source and proprietary world and it's use of the new KDE is good. SuSE is simply cool.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Close