Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
SuSE Businesses

IBM And Intel Help Rescue SuSE From Insolvency 251

Posted by timothy from the bread-gets-buttered dept.
mutantcamel writes: "A report on NetworkFusion states that SuSE has avoided insolvency thanks to a fresh round of investment that raised $45.5 million for the ailing company. IBM and Intel are among the players that have announced their support for the company. The rescue package comes after quite a turbulent time at SuSE HQ, but the company seems optimistic about the future."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM And Intel Help Rescue SuSE From Insolvency More

IBM And Intel Help Rescue SuSE From Insolvency

Comments Filter:

  • I bet (Score:3, Interesting)

    by aufecht ( 163961 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:07PM (#2236600) Homepage Journal
    "The rescue package comes after quite a turbulent time at SuSE HQ, but the company seems optimistic about the future."

    I'd be pretty optimistic too if someone raised 45.5 million for my company. But seriously, why SuSE?

    • Re:I bet (Score:2, Informative)

      by OS24Ever ( 245667 )
      SuSe is a major player for IBM in Europe. It is one of the more popular distros there.

    • But seriously, why SuSE? ... (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Here's why...... SusE runs on zSeries machines: Linux for zSeries [ibm.com] Don't let the UFOs abduct you.

      • Re:But seriously, why SuSE? ... (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        I am into Linux since 93, when I used Slackware. When I saw RH (4.0?) years later I adopted it almost immediately because of higher level administration and packaging system as well as the filesystem functionality.

        I switched over to SuSE in early 2000 after a purchasing several distros (latest RH, SuSE and Mandrake). I am into Linux for business and quickly ruled out Mandrake for the same reason I would rule out Corel: serious systems perform serious tasks which always require training; ALWAYS emphasize on FUNCTION and not on second guessing unprepared users. SuSE prioritizes function.

        I) Why SuSE?

        1. It's configuration utility is fabulous (YaST). Compared to the mess I had to code for automatic RH installation in the old days SuSE is almost too easy. YaST2, while not as practical as YaST1 for some things is a well-thought, solid, extensible, presentation-agnostic architecture which earns my respect. It's integration with KDE is also meritorious.

        2. LVM, Reiserfs and the best most stable kernels I know of. (Yes, I consider SuSE's kernels superior to RH's even though AC works for the latter.) These people KNOW the kernel. (WRT LVM and reiser: other distros probably use them now, but not before.)

        3. Active participation in the gory technical projects. SuSE contributes actively to Reiser, XFS (yes, it's SGI's but SuSE helped for the Linux port), XFree, alien kernel ports and probably many others. Remember when you had to get your X server for Trident and SiS from SuSE? I want my distro provider to possess INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE of the science involved in the systems I use.

        II) Why SuSE in real life?

        I work for a small consulting firm in Paraguay (South America, for the geographically challenged) which is dedicated to Linux in production systems for financial institutions, ISPs, offices and the likes. I say "dedicated" for no religious fervor about the OS, since Linux would end in the trashcan the minute an alternative with a better blend of features comes up. (Of course, not all problems are solved by the same blend, but SuSE Linux impresses us with the applicable problem domain.)

        Our firm has deployed several large Linux dominant networks. The most notorious is for a local bank which needed to switch from an *old* terminal based system to something new. You all know the conventional answer but these people chose wisely. Around 200 Linux workstations and 15 Linux servers drive the entire bank operation with databases, LDAP, image banks, CFS, SSL, rsync, KDE, etc. SuSE delivered in this scenario; it proved it is a valid choice in places where IT departments hesitate to put Linux: financial institutions and the end user desktop.

        You can tell an IT departmente is doing well when managers start wondering why they need one or they are unaware of the details of their networks. This has happened.

        SuSE facilitated that project enormously. YES, it could have been done just fine under RH, but even a marginal decrease in headaches is always desired.

        Systems wise, SuSE Linux is rock solid. RH has given me a bitter experience in an unrelated scenario where a failure somewhere along the storage subsystem forced me to hack all the way into kernel tcp checksum routines to resync partitions associated to an MD device.

        For the end users, SuSE is just a name under KDE except at the control panel. So besides congratulating SuSE for a well done integration, most of the merit belongs to KDE.

        OFF TOPIC NOTE:
        I don't believe Linux can compete with traditional alternatives for the home market. Emphasis and money allows traditional alternatives to provide more refined (often second guessing) interfaces to users. People outside of formal production chains can be happy with these.

        In real commercial situations where production is formalized and application availability is not an issue, Linux is a top choice.

        IMHO, efforts should prioritize function, subjugating presentation to the dictates of function. The marketplace will know the difference. The home user won't. Those who pay are those who produce.

    • Re:I bet (Score:2, Interesting)

      by partingshot ( 156813 )
      I'm just a caveman, so maybe I'm missing
      something...

      If SuSE hasn't been able to
      become solvent by now, what makes IBM/Intel
      think they will be in the future?
      How is this a good investment?

      • Re:I bet (Score:2, Insightful)

        by notext ( 461158 )
        Well for one thing, maybe they are hoping that the market of oracle on linux grows. Since its only "tested" on SuSE running it on other distro's can be a real hassle.

        I got it working on slack8 but only after a hassle of upgrading and downgrading some things.

        I can only imagine that this market will continue to grow as companies look for alternate solutions. Oracle databases are still around 85% on Unix last time I heard.

      • Re:I bet (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Eloquence ( 144160 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @05:03PM (#2236913)
        Making money with SuSE would be desirable for IBM, but it is not the reason they have invested in them. It is a strategic investment, with the goal of keeping a good European Linux distribution alive. IBM's business with Linux will be in the system-making, everything from the hardware to the software (proprietary applications on the basis of an open-source OS) to the support. From their perspective, promoting Linux as a platform is much better than promoting Windows since, if Linux takes off, they cannot be forced to accept any Microsoft standards or solutions (especially since Microsoft can basically kill any IBM software solution by bundling it with their OS). On the other hand, should Windows take over the server market, IBM might face a grim future under Microsoft rule. So their engagement for Linux is strategically very clever, and has nothing to do with SuSE in particular, although IBM would obviously not allow certain decisions by SuSE where their own markets are concerned. Expect products that compete with IBM solutions to disappear from the distro.

    • Re:I bet (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Why? Because like a lot of greedy people around here that dont understand 'what' SuSe is and is about, they have shaped and forged linux in new directions that wouldn't have been possible before. They hire full time programmers that contribute to big projects that benefit all of us on a daily basis. Ontop of that, they are the most popular distro in Europe. Marketing a product does cost money, and if we ever want to win, were not going to do it for free, forever.

      If anybody in Europe wants to help the Linux cause in a positive way, I would suggest buying a copy of SuSe. Buying SuSe doesn't just get you a CD with a nice book, consider it an investment in the success of Linux. Without your support, You can kiss Linux goodbye.. (could I get any of you to buy a Loki game as well? they really need the help now..)

      This is much like American Public Television/Radio (PBS) and the fundraisers they have each year.. They need that money to pay the electric bills, studio personnel, managers, executives, etc, this doesn't come cheap. They also need that money to invest in NEW programming. The Linux model resembles this in many respects (except we get to keep the programming in Linux forever :)

      Public Television in america gets 50% of its funding from the government (or some figure like that.) Unfortunately Linux doesn't quite have this guarantee...

      Rob A.S.
    • Probably because of SuSE's dedication to s390.

      Probably because SuSE resells IBM stuff pre-packaged and integrated.

      Probably because SuSE tries to cover every little detail for major software like DB2 and Notes.

      Probably because SuSE pushes big-iron solutions for banks and the like, which just happens to be IBM's focus as well.

      Why SuSE, indeed.
  • Hrrm... insolvency is almost as good as commingling. (I love that word!)


    Insolvency: The state of being unable to meet debts or discharge liabilities; bankrupt.


    I'm glad Suse is getting this help. They are really well liked in Germany, and a GOOD Linux distro.

  • A lot of questions left unanswered by the article.
    So, what got them bankrupt? How many people do they employ? How big is their debt?
    Why is IBM dumping tons of money on Linux right now? (Trying to buy a competitor to MS is the obvious answer, but that might not be right.)
    • Well, it's sure not to replace Windows on the desktop. Despite their embrace of "peace, love and Linux", IBM refuses to port its desktop apps to Linux.

    • Re:Article does not say a whole lot. (Score:5, Informative)

      by scotpurl ( 28825 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:23PM (#2236712)
      1. SuSE is big in Europe (posted above).
      2. SuSE actually bundles Lotus Domino server (IBM owns Lotus), if you want it, for Linux. see http://www.suse.com/us/products/index.html
      3. It also support DB2, and comes bundled (but RedHat does that, too).
      4. Oh, and you can buy an S/390 version.
      5. They contributed a lot to various Linux projects, especially Matrox video drivers (but that's my personal bias).

      I tried RedHat in the beginning, and then I tried SuSE. I found SuSE to be better, smoother implimentation of Linux, and I found the YAST sysadmin tool to be great at reminding me where to find things (transitioning from OSF/1 and AIX). Plus my hardware was never fully supported in RedHat, but it was in SuSE (which never made sense to me).

      Plus, I find it easier to rally behind the bad rendering of a cartoonish gecko than to rally behind a hat. (I mean, if we're talking kewl logos....)
    • So, what got them bankrupt? How many people do they employ? How big is their debt?
      I don't know. SuSE is not publicly held, so their finances are not available.
      Why is IBM dumping tons of money on Linux right now? (Trying to buy a competitor to MS is the obvious answer, but that might not be right.)
      Why is Sun a somewhat grudging Linux supporter? Or Compaq? I think that the answer has a lot less to do with M$ and a lot more to do with UNIX. Linux is causing a meltdown in many (but not all) areas of the UNIX market because it is free. Note the free licensing of Solaris binaries, etc. The IDC also mentioned last February that Solaris was the only bright spot in the UNIX market, but that Linux's market share had grown substantially in both the server and workstation segments.

  • My brother in law (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SquadBoy ( 167263 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:12PM (#2236632) Homepage Journal
    works for Intel. They use a lot of Linux there. ~%90 of his work is done on a Linux box. They really like the idea of not being tied to microsoft in the server room. I just really wish that we had an Exchange Killer then I could start converting my clients to pure Linux environments. That would be cool.

    • Re: Exchange Killer (Score:3, Interesting)

      by scooby-doo ( 23932 )
      Well it's not a complete exchange killer, but Insight Server from Bynari [bynari.com] isn't a bad replacement. It has had some big press lately. It doesn't use MAPI, only LDAP, POP3, IMAP, various standard protocols. Outlook works if you configure it correctly (very easy). It has a few drawbacks, such as the Outlook configuring, but overall it's a decent product. I've implemented it before and my clients were very pleased. It's $299 for 100 users, so it's not free but it's darn cheap compared to Exchange.

    • Exchange killer (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Run Lotus Domino on a SuSE Linux box. That's what I've been evaluating for the past month.... about to roll it into production for 250+ Lotus Notes client workstations.
      • I am running a Domino Server on linux and it works great. Awesome collaboration and workflow apps Exchange can only wet dream about. Of course I'm not biased or anything... but seriously Domino rocks.
      • Domino is hardly a great solution because they don't offer a 'great' linux based solution for calandering, contacts etc. You can use Wine for the Notes client, but just doesn't work with my configuration.

        Basically I use Mozilla Mail and scribe my apointments into my Palm by hand.

        The nice thing about it, for the Windows users they are quite happy once they got over the Outlook hangover. (Notes has to also be one of the WORST user interfaces I have ever seen on an email client...) IBM builds great technology, but they have a -LOT- to learn about the human side of computing.

  • Waiting for the other shoe to drop? (Score:3, Funny)

    by wrinkledshirt ( 228541 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:13PM (#2236641) Homepage
    I'm just wondering if anybody else is hating the fact that they might have to start liking Intel because of this.

  • Stating the obvious (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jayhawk88 ( 160512 )
    The rescue package comes after quite a turbulent time at SuSE HQ, but the company seems optimistic about the future."

    Yeah, I would imagine two Fortune 500 tech giants writing you a check for a substantial amount of money would tend to make you optimistic under any circumstances.

    If this had just been IBM, one would have thought this might be the beginning of an "official" IBM Linux. Even with Intel in there though, does this mean IBM is shopping for a distro to get behind with their recent Linux push?

    • Re:Stating the obvious (Score:4, Informative)

      by _Swank ( 118097 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:38PM (#2236794)
      No, IBM has stated numerous times (sorry, no links) that they don't want an "IBM Linux" of any sort.

      However they do have strategic partnerships with 4 different distributions -- Red Hat, SuSE, TurboLinux, and Caldera. These partnerships basically state that IBM and the distro company will ensure that IBM server software (DB2, Lotus Domino, WebSphere, MQSeries, etc) runs and is packaged properly for these distros. The partnerships have been in place for a year or two at least but were originally chosen to get a very wide coverage throughout the world (RedHat in US, SuSE in Europe, TurboLinux in Asia, and Caldera in Antartica(?)).

      Since SuSE and RedHat are probably the main 2 left of the original 4 (yes, TurboLinux and Caldera are still kicking -- some less than others) there is good reason that IBM make sure SuSE stay afloat.
    • If this had just been IBM, one would have thought this might be the beginning of an "official" IBM Linux. Even with Intel in there though, does this mean IBM is shopping for a distro to get behind with their recent Linux push?

      I know many people probably disagree, but i think that an IBM Linux distro would be FUCKING SWEET!!!

      Just imagine walking down the hall to your PHB's office and throwing that deep blue box on his desk. Ahhhhhh :)

      Also I'd like to see IBM throwing a bunch of money/developers after the Wine project, and integrating it in their distro.

      On a final note, IBM buying lokigames, I think would do wonders for the Linux Desktop.

      • Just imagine walking down the hall to your PHB's office and throwing that deep blue box on his desk. Ahhhhhh :)

        You could also drop the "No one ever got fired for buying IBM" line on him. That would be a good feeling.

  • Meanwhile at SuSe.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by CaffeineAddict2001 ( 518485 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:16PM (#2236659)
    $45 Million is a truely disturbing ammount. Now is the time on sprockets when we dance.

  • The Frog and the Penguin (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Suse's biggest mistake was using that green frog in their advertisements and on their boxes. While everyone in the whole world was swooning over that cute and adorable Tux the Penguin, Suse had some cold and clammy unattractive green frog. From a PR perspective it was a big mistake. Everyone loves a Penguin, but folks are indifferent to frogs. More importantly, when folks see Tux, they say ``this is really cool--it's Tux''. It is instant brand recognition. On the other hand, when people saw the Suse frog they said ``what the hell is this? Sesame Street?''
    • Uh,... it a chameleon. [eapps.com]

      And people like Kermit. People like Michigan J. Frog.

      • Hey that gives me an idea someone should pitch to TechTV, give Tux his own saturday morning cartoon, beating script kiddies and crackers with the power of open source, they could make John C. Dvorak the village idiot/comic relief, it would be good for a 10 share.
        • And Bill Gates can be the evil villain who resembles Gargamel, constantly inventing evil hairbrained plans to eliminate Tux, but always making stupid mistakes which cause failure and disgrace.

          I'm not sure how to work Ballmer into this cartoon. Some type of loud, obnoxious, lunatic buffoon I suppose, but I can't think of any obvious parallels with other cartoons.
  • I hope that by IBM and Intel throwing some weight behind a Linux distro. it will help it gain some ground.

    By this I hope that with IBM's encouragement more directed development and standardization will occur along with a few more applications making it more appealing to others.

    One of the things that helps keep linux like linux is that it does take some work to get everything working right, however this does frighten people away. Perhaps Intel's endorsement will help this image and make it easier to get things to work correctly.

  • IBM and Linux (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by Alien54 ( 180860 )
    With IBM haviong said that they would put One Billion dollars usian into Linux, what's a measely 45 million dollar in the mix?

    I figure they probably what to keep as much diversity as possible going. So IBM makes sense in a way.

    But what about Intel? I'm not up to speed on their involvement.

    - - -
    Radio Free Nation [radiofreenation.com]
    "If You have a Story, We have a Soap Box"

  • Finally IBM puts it's money in something other than advertisements for linux.


    When IBM announced they were to spend $1B on advertising this year I cringed a little. That money could have been used paying developers to develop free software they really like full time. Glad to see some of it is going to a good cause.

  • This explains the recent news that the founder of SUSE has stepped out of the company. Usually investors offer their help to suggest executives in the company and companies usually follow (!) these suggestions.
  • This is something I wouldn't really expect from Intel, IBM I can see funding some money, but Intel.. I wonder whats in it for intel?



    Ah well, its a good gesture, I probably will still buy an athlon over a p4 (1.4ghz chip for about 130 bucks, they just cut a lot of prices today) but it puts intel in a better light then before.

    • SuSE, will port their distro to any hardware, and they have one of the strongest consumer desktop distro's. Plus IBM can return Microsofts gut punch that killed OS/2...

  • re: IBM And Intel Help Rescue SuSE From Insolvency (Score:3, Insightful)

    by emissary47 ( 184269 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:19PM (#2236689)
    i suspected that SuSE was in trouble [suse.com], glad that the are saved.
    i'm using SuSE for a very long time and i like the distribution.

    the future of SuSE seems to be good:
    look here [suse.com]
    and here [suse.com]

    SuSE has put much effort into supporting development of open source projects like, kde, alsa, reiserfs, ...
    hopefully the future will be better for SuSE, if they go, it will be a lost for the open source community.
    • It's interesting that you point out SuSE was "in trouble" for the CEO leaving - 2 days before this announcement was made. My brother manages a tech fund, and he has stated that a common thing he (and others managing such investments) expects is the ability to shake out management as a contigency to investing (also like requesting a board seat or three). My bet is the CEO's leaving was directly tied to SuSE getting $$$.

      But then again, maybe not...

  • See the difference... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by joestar ( 225875 )
    between SuSE and Mandrakesoft! In a similar situation, Mandrakesoft has been bought [mandrakesoft.com] (20%) by its community of users and is now traded on a European market. SuSE is more and more locked by rather proprietary companies. I wish them good luck!!!

  • Enlightened self-interest (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mr_Huber ( 160160 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:20PM (#2236697) Homepage
    This is the perfect example of the sort of corporate altruism I think we can expect to see over the next few years. As some people have pointed out, SuSE is one of the most popular European Linux distributions. It is in IBM and Intel's best interest to ensure that there is are a few solid European based distributions around for them to build their business on. It avoids vendor lock to a particular distro (Red Hat anyone?). It maintains a company doing the tricky task of localizing the bulk of Linux. Plus, that shop may later be used to help localize IBM software at a later date.

    All and all, it is in IBM and Intel's best interest to have a thriving SuSE (and Mandrake, for that matter), regardless of whether the company is actually profitable. This sort of enlightened self-interest could lead to a sort of patronage system for some of the major Linux distributors.

  • Sooo many cookies! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Rocky Mudbutt ( 22622 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:20PM (#2236698) Homepage
    NWFusion.com tried to forcefeed me 32 cookies to read the article, I think I have indigestion.

  • Would anyone save Loki? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Wolfier ( 94144 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:22PM (#2236702)
    Hm...only 1 or 2 millions would do...IBM, please?

  • Maybe it would have been better if they died (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ur@eus ( 148802 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:23PM (#2236715) Homepage
    Hate to say it, but it might have been better if they had gone under. It would have increased the chance of other companies like Mandrake and Red Hat making good profits. This new investment to keep Suse alive might just help cement a situation with no real moneymaking distro's.

    • Re:Maybe it would have been better if they died (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I am at a big computer software development company that you all have heard of, and the main thing stopping management from porting our applications to Linux is the fact that there are so many flavors of Linux to port to. Just an semi-interesting tidbit.

    • Re:Maybe it would have been better if they died (Score:5, Interesting)

      by henley ( 29988 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @05:08PM (#2236931) Homepage

      This is a very partisan approach to the issue. Success for Linux in the market place is not tied to the financial success of it's most well-known distro. It may not even be linked to RedHat's success.

      I also believe you have mis-understood the fundamental premise on which one company may choose to support another. Let's take a worked example:

      IBM is a global IT provider. And it has a very strong presence in non-US markets. It may surprise you to find that those markets have different requirements to the US. In particular, support for other languages & keyboards is higher on the priority list. And there are Distros that do indeed recognise this and cater for it: SuSE is one (mainly European) and TurboLinux is another (mainly Asia-Pacific).

      As a result of this, these Distros are much more popular in their respective geographies than RedHat. MUCH more popular. (and not only for "good" reasons: there's as much senseless product jingoism in the computer biz as there is in any other (e.g. all those pissing-on-ford/chevvy badges one can observe on trucks in the US).

      As a result of this effect, Linux's penetration world-wide is increased over and above that which would be observed if there was only One True Distro. And IBM therefore has a bigger global market into which it can sell it's value-add services and products.

      It can therefore be observed that this isn't altruism on the part of these companies, it's just plain business sense: support the infrastructure that provides your ability to sell. RedHat is a part of, but by no means all of, that infrastructure, globally, and it behoves us all to remember that.

      • Well I did mention Mandrake also, which if I am not mistaken is bigger than Suse is in France.
        And here is Norway (which is also in Europe) Suse
        is a non-player really. So while germans would have to find a new number 1 distro, the rest of the world would probably not register them gone.
      • This is a very partisan approach to the issue. Success for Linux in the market place is not tied to the financial success of it's most well-known distro. It may not even be linked to RedHat's success.

        I also believe you have mis-understood the fundamental premise on which one company may choose to support another.

        I don't think the original poster's argument had anything at all to do with RedHat. He mentioned RedHat and Mandrake as examples, but there's no argument at all for "One True Distro" in the original post. The original post also didn't say anything about why one company (IBM) would support another (SUSE).

        The point of the original poster's argument is simply the old argument in favor of consolidation - fewer players means that each individual player will be more successful. Of SUSE's business is spread among the remaining Linux distros, then that's good for the remaining distros.

        I think the counter-argument you're looking for should be an elaboration on this statement: "SUSE is stronger in particular (European) markets because it's well-suited to those markets and those markets may not want to switch to another Linux provider." If you're trying to argue that only SUSE, and not Mandrake, Caldera or any other distro can continue to penetrate European markets, then say that. It's a good argument. But you seem to have gone off track which this whole line of argument against a "One True Distro" style of thinking which simply wasn't present in the original post. And if you do make that argument, expect counter-arguments. I could see how Mandrake (a French distro) might want to see SUSE die so that it could expand its European presence, for example.
      • As I see it, the money to be earned making distributions is growing small (linux is not a novelty anymore, Linux expertise is spread and requests for support can be satisfied locally more often than from the distributor). As the distributors will realize this, they will move to other markets (see the move of RH with databases). They will loose interest at differentiating themselves at the system software level, and will gain interest in reducing the costs to mantain the platform on which they build their 'solutions'.

        At this point, one possible scenario (which I'd quite like to see happen) is that they leave the hassle of packaging the base system software to the community, merging in a common base distro (I'd like to say Debian, but probably it will be rpm-based), with common packages for all base software.
        Then, maybe not.

    • Why don't let Mandrake and Redhat die too? Actually Mandrake is based off of Redhat, why need both? SuSE was based off of Slackware...

      Getting funding in this environment is not easy as you have to prove your product is worth it. This is what SuSE have done, only trouble with SuSE is their marketing sucks, unlike Redhat.

      SuSE have in fact done more for Open Source than you'd realise...And really, if you think just having one less large distro would effect the profit margins of Mandrake and Redhat in this economic environment?

      Its much more to do with the current economic downturn than with too many distro's. I base this on the fact that I worked for a Linux company (and got laid off) and see other industries struggling just as much, if not more.

      StarTux

  • This would be a good time... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mblase ( 200735 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @04:24PM (#2236723)
    ...for all you longtime SUSE freeloaders to buy copies of their CDs. (Yes, I know it's free-as-in-beer to download, but do you want a new distro next year or not?)

    • The most current releases of SuSE are available for download as "Live Evaluation" only, which means that they run from the CD only.

      • Ummm, you obviously didn't look very hard. Check out this directory [suse.com].

        Actually, how in hell did you miss it?

        Oh wait, I forgot. This is Slashdot, you didn't even bother checking, did you? You simply believed someone else, who has a stupid grudge, without proof.

        • My apologies. When I was looking I was only looking for ISO's.

          • The ISO's contain software packages (not SuSE's) that are not to be downloaded. You are allowed to install on multiple computers, share the discs, etc. as long as those packages (a couple in the 'pay' series) are not put up for public download.

            Rather than maintain two sets of ISO's plus the full tree, they maintain one sellable set and allow users to install from the distribution tree directly from them or one of the mirrors. You only need one to three floppies (depending on your hardware) to install over 6GB of software. I find it much quicker than downloading 6 ISOs, burning them, and then installing them so the users don't usually mind.

            You may mirror it yourself as well. I buy the discs (but I only use the DVD to install) *and* I keep a tree on a server at work so I don't have to get the DVD whenever I want a certain package.

    • I agree. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Nick Driver ( 238034 )
      I have actually paid for three different copies myself (6.1, 6.3, 7.1) and felt like I got a good deal just due to the convenience of getting all the cdroms and books.

  • Linux companies are going to hell in a handbasket (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Faster than you can mod this down.
    Look, Stormix and Corel are already history.
    Linuxcare has had all sorts of managment problems.
    Mandrake and Suse both had layoffs not too long ago. The Suse prez just walked out. VA linux recently got rid of there hardware and dumped some people including Samba hacker Jeremy Allison. Now Suse is out of cash. It seems like every major Linux company is in the toilet now.
  • I wonder if this type of news is related with the departure (was he fired ?) of the previous Suse CTO and President. This was reported on slashdot yesterday or the day before.
  • I still can't for the life of me understand why they put everything in a bsd-like /etc/rc.config, yet still have a SysV style init. Maintaining information 2 places (links in /etc/init.d/rcX.d and also in rc.config) is bad. very very bad.

    if they wanted to build a bsd-like system around the linux kernel, then why go half-assed about it?
    • Well, have a look at HP-UX sometime...

      The rc.config is basically used for local configuration changes. The /etc/init.d/* are used for the start-up/shutdown scripts themselves.

      BTW older versions used /sbin/init.d exactly what hp-ux uses. Admittedly hp-ux use rc.config.d with lots of little scripts for local configuration, but the effect is the same.

      If it was BSD like init then it would just have a single large script per run level.

      In case anyone is wondering, I just sorted my password out... I was that AC...
    • You obviously know very little of either BSD or SuSE... or maybe both.

      BSD, like the other poster said, has one giant script per runlevel. If you want to have something start, you add the necessary shell code, usually a check for the existence of the binary, a message echoed to the screen, and therunning of the program itself.

      rc.config is *nothing* like that. It's just a huge list of shell variables (well commented, like Apache's httpd.conf) that gets sourced by every init script. That's useful because you have 'START_X' variables for various programs. If a program's start variable is set to "no" then the init script will exit. Also, any init script requiring an IP or some other piece of information, can get it from the variable in rc.config. This way, you *never* have to edit your init scripts and re-edit them when you upgrade the RPM's or the entire distro.

      It's also used by SuSEconfig, which reads the variables and sets up a number of configuration files, such as resolv.conf or the sendmail configs, or sets up symlinks, if necessary to various things.

      How you've concluded that rc.config is "BSD-style" is totally beyond me.

    • One of the points of splintering the rc scripts from bsd to sysv is so that apps won't step on other apps's toes when placing themselves in the startup sequence. No need to use sed, etc., to edit rc.local or rely on a sysadmin to put it in to get a daemon to run at startup.

      By placing all the config information in rc.config, SuSE went back to the bad old days, requiring the hack of fillup(8) to allow apps to edit rc.config. Since 7.1 (at least), SuSE has realized their folly and now have splintered rc.config into a bunch of config files in /etc/rc.config.d/. For example, all the sendmail config information is now in /etc/rc.config.d/sendmail.cf.

      However, there will always be a tension between putting config info in one big file and putting it in separate files. What if a setting is needed by more than one app? SuSE seems to be trying to get a good balance, at least.

    • Maintaining information 2 places (links in /etc/init.d/rcX.d and also in rc.config) is bad. very very bad.

      Last time I looked, SuSE violated the FHS by using /sbin/init.d and having the distribution install software into /opt.

      Has this changed, because its bloody annoying having SuSE users complain nothing works on their systems because SuSE can't be bothered following standards.

      • /sbin/init.d, FHS, LSB (Score:2, Informative)

        by muffel ( 42979 )
        Last time I looked, SuSE violated the FHS by using /sbin/init.d and having the distribution install software into /opt
        7.2 has it's init scipts in /etc/init.d. (Don't know about 7.0/7.1 -- skipped those)
        SuSE "aims at FHS [pathname.com] conformity" and is actively participating in the LSB [linuxbase.org] project.
        So they are getting there...
      • Suse did this back in the old days before FHS was
        partcularly known... I'm not going to say existed... :-)

        They've since moved /sbin/init.d to /etc/init.d. I suspect the original placement came from someone familiar with hp-ux. hp-ux uses /sbin/init.d for the startup scripts. It also uses /etc/rc.config.d for customization of those scripts.

        If you want to turn sendmail on or off you run the
        script /sbin/init.d/sendmail. If you want to make the change permanent then you edit /etc/rc.config.d/mailservs and change the value for SENDMAIL_SERVER (1 for on, 0 for off).

        That way when you want to change the boot time defualt you don't need to remember was sendmail started at /etc/rc2.d/S15sendmail or /etc/rc2.d/S20sendmail? I much prefer this to the way that Redhat deal with rc scripts... But that's MY personal opinion.

        Definitely when I first looked at SUSE it had compatibility links to bring it more in line with the then draft FHS...

        As for installing software into /opt The version I'm currently using here hasn't... But I know that if I had installed some of the optional bundled software it would have.

        Much as I like standards I can't see what is wrong with, for example, SuSE installing the bundled copy of Applixware under /opt. This is a sensible place for it IMHO. It's optional, it's not required for the OS, it certainly shouldn't be in /usr/bin if you ask me...

        Ah well, As Horace would say, De Gustibus Non Est Disputandem.

        Zwack
  • Hmph...

  • Why Intel? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Intel is investing in Linux, because Intel is trying to do something against Sun. Isn't that obvious?

    The tactics is partly the same as Microsoft's: from desktop to the data center. Since Linux can be used (without most of the ease-of-use issues) on desktops by people who will be admins on the big systems, Intel is trying to bind them to Intel's technology. With the hope that they'll be completely ignorant about anything that doesn't run on Intel's processors.

    Investing in SuSE makes further sense because SuSE is very much trying to create a distribution which does not look like Unix.
  • These corporations would do something like this. The smart move would be to provide a grant to OpenBSD and let the chips fall as they will. Just my opinion. Flamebait.com

  • Good (Score:1)

    by archen ( 447353 )
    Well I'm glad SuSE got pulled out. I've never actually used it myself, but I've seen them doing good things. Despite what most people say, I think it's important that there be more than one major distro. Do you need a distro? Not really, but these are companies that not only work on Linux itself, but work on figuring out how to make installing Linux easier - and from my experience that's sometimes the hardest part. I've been using RedHat for a while (and a couple versions) and I have yet to have an install come off clean the first time without some stupid problem cropping up. On the other hand a friend of mine has been using SuSE for a while and has never had a problem. Maybe it's just luck, or maybe I'm doing something wrong... or maybe it's time I switched.

    I like the lizard logo too
    • I just installed SuSE personal on my Dell Latitude. It's my first Linux distro and I got it because they also make a PPC version. (I have the one Dell laptop and 4 Macs) I liked the idea of having the same distro for two dofferent platforms. I plan on installing it on one of my Macs... if I get the TiBook.

      Also, the fact that userfriendly.org displays it uses SuSE so prominently had a little to do with my decision also.

      So, yeah, this is definitely good news.
    • I like SUSE. It's the niche distro for folks who want every-dang-thing-ever-written-for-Linux: Slackware + everything else + the kitchen sink on 9 CDs.

      The install is smooth, although decidedly germanic. Package "live updates" are smooth. Debian, RPM, and other packagers are supported. And I think it conforms well to the standards (e.g., it doesn't overwrite motd just for kicks)

      I really like having a choice of distros. I think we as a community should simultaneously encourage standards *and* competition among the distros. Their continued survival insures we don't have another 800-pound gorilla of the OS world.
  • Caldera is on its last legs and from checking out the CALD stock chart [yahoo.com] it looks like they'll soon be facing NASDAQ delistment. They've been trading below a dollar for a while and are under $35 million market capitalization.

    One wonders which of the Linux companies will be left in a year that isn't IBM?

  • They saved suse because suse supports them! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cybrthng ( 22291 ) on Thursday August 30, 2001 @06:10PM (#2237158) Homepage Journal
    Suse is the only distro that will support

    1) IBM Products
    2) Oracle Products
    3) Commercial Software.

    Suse knows linux is an operating system. Suse is very stable yet ahead of the game compared to US based distros.

    If i use Suse linux i can replace expensive NT and Solaris servers running Oracle 9iAS and Databases. Redhat, many times over has told me to buy there 2,500.00 Redhat for Oracle (which is 6.0 based and pretty crappy) and do all sorts of hacks to get any recent rdbms working.

    On the other hand, sude made sure that 7.0, 7.1 and 7.2 works with these commercials apps because that is where they get the demand for the OS.

    Believe me, free software doesn't demand anything, but business requirments do. Redhat database doesn't cut it for anything other then a website and frankly, its very microsoft of Redhat to try and produce everything under the sun for there os.

    So yeah, under suse you can run Domino, DB2, Oracle 9ias, Oracle 9i, Oracle8, oracle forms and reports, oracle forms developer and all the crap every other distro supports.

    And usually people pay for OS support when business software relies on it.
  • I'm delighted that SuSE has received another cash infusion. I've used SuSE for years, and it's solid, stable, a cinch to install, and comes with the entire contents of Freshmeat.net [freshmeat.net] (OK, so I exaggerate - but not much!)


    The most important thing is that it's the number 2 distribution, behind RedHat. They keep RedHat on their toes, and vice-versa. A little competition is a Good Thing. Besides, you've got to love a distribution that urges you to "Have a lot of fun..."

  • I installed and ran SuSE way back (5.x). It was cool because it was a big distro, and pioneered a few usability enhancements.

    Today though, I don't see what sets them out as unique. For example, Mandrake is different because they have LOTS of usability enhancements (like SuSE used to, but more so). Red Hat is, well, Red Hat. ;-) Debian is the only non-commercial distributionn (arguably volunteers make the most dedicated workers).

    But SuSE?

    Of course, none of this matters if the Linux Standards Base gets adopted by ALL the distros (ahem.. RH.. cough)

    -Scott
  • There are two Linux distros that run on IBM mainframes. One of them is SuSE the other is TurboLinux. Everything else is still in development and not officially sanctioned. IBM props up SuSE if no other reason, that one. For $45 million dollars they protect their investment in being able to run thousands of Linux images profitably in the CoLo business.

Slashdot Top Deals

Brain off-line, please wait.

Close