Suse Linux Founder Exits Novell

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."

Re:Novell moves to GNOME; SuSE founder resigns?

[oever]

You are suggesting the GPL software cannot be for profit software. Also, if you want to keep your code private, using the GPL version of Qt is fine. Only if you publish a program under a different license that the GPL do you have to pay the license.

This should be no problem, since KDE is compatible with this requirement. Any software Novell might want to add would probably be GPL anyway, because that's the most common license for Linux distros.

Only if Novell wanted to develop a closed source program would the Qt license be a problem. But even then, it would be easy to use a different library if the license fee, (which is not that hight compared to dev. wages) was too much.

Re:Time to Fork Suse

[RedNovember]

"SUSE LINUX 7.1 with the new 2.4 kernel was highly anticipated by the Linux community and reviewers were writing "SUSE 7.1 is Chockful Of Goodies" (byte.com) and named "An Embarrassment of Riches" (linuxnovice.org). Although many reviewers did not agree to the Linux Planet statement: "Pack It Up and Go Home: SUSE Created a Windows-Killer", all of the reviewers agreed, that there is now a serious competitor lighting the radar screens. Offering a cut down, simple "Personal" version, did the important step towards the non-technical "non-geek" home desktop users."

Sounds to me too like it's not Novell talking. Hype is not the sole responsibility of the company.

Re:Novell moves to GNOME; SuSE founder resigns?

[Waffle Iron]

Now, the *rest* of the context:

The Qt Commercial License is the correct license to use for the construction of proprietary, commercial software. The license allows you to:

Build commercial software and software whose source code you wish to keep private.

...

It doesn't say here that the GPL doesn't allow you to do these things, only that the QT commercial license does allow them. What the GPL allows and doesn't allow is in the GPL. The GPL is one of the licenses included in the software; that is the place to look for what you can and can't do with the software, not some website summary.

It's true that the website's tricky wording is probably bordering on FUD in an effort to encourage license sales. However, it doesn't actually say that you can't develop commercial open-source software without the pricey QT license.

Re:Avoid disappointment

[LnxAddct]

If memory serves, Debian is having problems of its own from the leadership down. Red Hat on the other hand has never been more successful. Red Hat has contributed more to the kernel than any other entity. They are responsible for getting SELinux integrated with the kernel. They maintain and enhance GCC, and glibc. They've given us so much from a directory server, to major enhancements in the desktop. They played a key role in getting OpenOffice.org a native interface, and they contribute code to Apache. The amount that Red Hat has contributed to the community is astounding and the list could go on for ages, lets not forget GCJ allowing java to run natively on linux (this is how openoffice.org and eclipse are included in Fedora). Unlike many other distros, Red Hat doesn't just repackage other people's work... they actually code alot of it themselves. The only reason that linux is enterprise ready is because of them, the only reason that the kernel has such a good security track record for getting patches out fast is because of Red Hat. They are taking linux into whole new directions by working on Xen and Stateless Linux. Through SystemTap, they are working on giving us the capabilities of Solaris' DTrace. I think you should think before you speak. Without Red Hat, OSS would be no where near where it is today. Oh and Fedora is more free than Debian (Fedora infringed not a single patent, which Debian does), so yea choose something really free and pick Fedora.
Regards,
Steve

Re:Time to Fork Suse

[Software]

Novell didn't issue that press release, SuSE did. Novell bought SuSE long after April 2001. I think the "About Novell" boilerplate at the bottom is just tacked on to all Novell press releases in that folder.

Re:Novell moves to GNOME; SuSE founder resigns?

[Jason Earl]

It's not that Novell can't afford the price of a few development licenses, but rather it is that Novell can't afford to put another company between itself and customers that want to develop for Novell's desktop. Imagine the following discussion between a Novell salesman and a potential development partner.

Novell salesman: "You want to develop software for the Novell Linux Desktop? Ok, well go talk to some tiny company in the Netherlands," (yes, I know that the company is actually Norwegian, I am making a point), "they own a critical piece of our development toolkit."

Development Partner: "Let me get this straight. You want me to develop software using an oddball development framework written in C++, and you don't even own the framework."

Novell salesman: "That's correct, on the plus side if you skip our fancy KDE libraries you can run your software on Windows too. Of course, QT-only applications also don't take advantage of some of the nice features of Windows, but if the cell phone industry ever comes out with a useful Linux-based cell phone you could probably port to that as well."

Development Partner: "I think that I am going to talk to Red Hat now."

Any way you slice it the fact that Novell doesn't own QT is problematic for Novell's use of KDE. Throw in the fact that most of the applications that Novell wants to sell as part of the Novell Linux desktop are either Gnome applications or allied with Gnome, and the fact that with Mono Novell can point Microsoft developers to a "way out" while still reusing their C# code and its no wonder that KDE is getting the short end of the stick at Novell. KDE is getting the short end of the stick from all of the big Linux players. IBM based SWT on GTK for the exact same reasons, and Firefox is based on GTK as well.

Re:13 years for what

[vawlk]

I am using their solutions because they are the best for my needs.

Re:Not Unexpected. Next Stop Bankruptcy

[deviator]

Hi. No, you're slightly incorrect about OES -
I have always been a huge fan of Novell's software; it tends to be stellar stuff. But they have never been able to market their way out of a paper bag since Microsoft decimated Netware back in the NT 4.0 days. Still, products like GroupWise and eDirectory (NDS) have no _real_ technical equivalents in the market.

OES is not "Netware on top of Linux" - it's actually a collection of java-tomcat (web-based) services that previously ran on Netware that now also run on Linux. Things like iPrint, eDirectory, iFolder, iManage, NSS, etc. You can run these enterprise-value-added services on Netware 6.5 or on SuSE Enterprise Server 9. The management tools are the same for both platforms. It all works quite well--and they've had rave reviews, actually. Once again, their software is stunning - but their marketing sucks.

I have been playing with OES here - and really, really like what I see. Imagine being able to deploy SuSE 9 across a large enterprise and having _real_ tools to manage them all! That's the promise of what Novell can deliver - but again, the message has somehow been completely lost on the appropriate people.

I doubt they will declare bankruptcy - Novell has come back from the dead many, many times in the last decade (just like Apple!) But they definitely have some serious challenges to deal with in the coming months, as their traditional Netware revenue base has all but dried up.

Re:Not Unexpected. Next Stop Bankruptcy

[plieb]

> Open Enterprise Server is a bastardised Linux OS with Netware running on top of it.

I have to take issue with that one. OES/SLES9 is pure Linux. It is a complete install of SLES9 with some great Novell services that run on it. There is nothing bastardised about it.

My take on this is that Novell has done a great service for its NetWare customers by giving them an easy migration path to Linux. This may not pay off very well for Novell because once their customers are on Linux they may realize that they don't really need Novell anymore.

Re:Novell moves to GNOME; SuSE founder resigns?

[Jason Earl]

I have never really liked KDE, and I personally think that Gnome has the better set of applications (especially when you lump in the GTK-only applications with Gnome), but I will agree that the *desktop* part of KDE is much more solid than Gnome.

Any way you slice it, however, Novell has a long row to hoe with Linux. Basically Novell is in the same situation that Caldera was in after in bought SCO's Unix. Everyone knows that Linux is the future, but the current revenues all point at Netware, and competing with pure play Red Hat (with its much lower R&D requirements) is definitely tricky. Novell can't afford to develop three different email servers (Netmail, Groupwise, and OpenExchange) and so it spun off OpenExchange and "freed" Hula. Novell can't really afford to develop KDE either, especially since a huge part of Novell's message is that Windows C# developers can easily port to SuSE Linux. There was a time when it looked like Novell might consider Mono bindings for QT, but licensing issues nixed that pretty thoroughly.

Novell also had little choice but to open up YaST and create a Free version of SuSE. SuSE has always had a nicer distribution than Red Hat (as did Caldera back in the day), but the fact that Red Hat's installation tools were GPLed guaranteed that Red Hat's tools were the ones that got spread far and wide. If Novell is to survive it needs to be able to compete with Red Hat for marketshare and mindshare, and that means that a Free Software version of SuSE has to be at least as usable as Red Hat's Fedora.

Hopefully Novell will be able to make the transition from a proprietary software company to a company that is far more "services" based, but right now the company is in freefall. It's Netware core is dying, and the Linux business just can't make up the slack. This means that a lot of the choices that Novell would *like* to make simply aren't viable.