Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
SuSE Businesses Linux Business

Novell/SUSE Prime for Aquisition? 218

Posted by CowboyNeal from the big-ticket-companies dept.
Ho Kooshy Fly writes "Supposedly Novell/SUSE looks like a good buyout target now. The likes of the obvious, IBM and the less obvious Cisco might be interested in integrating in the new Novell/SUSE company into their portfolio." Lucent, AT&T, and HP are also mentioned as possible buyers, but it's important to remember that it's all still just speculation.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Novell/SUSE Prime for Aquisition? More

Novell/SUSE Prime for Aquisition?

Comments Filter:

  • Not HP. (Score:3, Funny)

    by DAldredge ( 2353 ) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:04PM (#7426536) Journal
    Not HP/ComDEC! That is the place where tech goes to die. Besides, they would rather spend their money on new GulfStream 5's.

    • Besides, they would rather spend their money on new GulfStream 5's.

      Well...honestly...who wouldn't.

      *Kicks Self* for turning down the job at Gulfstream...

    • Sad but true. The last thing HP needs to do right now is buy yet another company.

      • Re:Not HP. (Score:2, Insightful)

        by bangalla ( 648729 )

        Sad but true. The last thing HP needs to do right now is buy yet another company.

        If HP wants an OS to invest in they should take a look at OpenVMS. DEC and Compaq almost criminally neglected their VMS customers and yet they STILL sold new licenses.

        OpenVMS has unlimited potential, if only its new owner would get past a little bit of "Not Invented Here" mentality and get over their Redmond worship.

  • IBM? Why? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by baldass_newbie ( 136609 )
    IBM seems to be content NOT having an OS.
    And face it, the only thing that could kill Suse quicker than Novell would be IBM marketing.

    • Re:IBM? Why? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by DAldredge ( 2353 )
      That might be news to the MVS, OS/400, and other OS teams that IBM pays each month.
      • Alright, how about 'desktop OS'?
        I was referring to OS/2. (Sorry I didn't point that out more explicitly.)
      • o ya, they have OS teams, but i don't think they want them. IBM is like apple(only bigger), a hardware company that creates software to sell their hardware. Yes, they have mainframe OSes that they maintain, but they would rather have a medium size team of linux hackers to port linux to the mainframe, than to create the mainframe OS.

        IBM should, and i think are, get rid of all their OSes, all that code that is 'competing' with linux, put all the good stuff into the kernel, and then port linux to any architec

        • IBM is doing the right thing.

          Provide exactly enough support for the legacy OS that paying customers require.

          Move OS development into those features of Linux that help to promote IBM's business strategy where those features are lacking. Let the community of Linux developers scratch their own itches which will probably save IBM a lot of money in development costs.

          Commoditisation of commonly-used software won't be denied.

          IBM is wisely riding ahead of the Linux wave where they can, to some degree direct wh

    • Both of these companies are more likely to buy Suse than IBM. IBM has nothing to gain by buying Novell/SUSE, IBM does not make money in that market, IBM is a more upscale enterprise based company and would buy Redhat before buying Novell/SUSE simply because IBM has no use for the Novell part of the picture or the Ximian part. I think Oracle would have the most to gain by buying Suse, I think Lucent is on a roll right now and could buy them too but really there arent many companies who have the money to
      • If Apple wanted to prove they were serious about being in the server room, they could purchase Novell and incorporate the directory stuff into OS X. But they're probably not ready for such a thing.
    • Open source not ready for desktop, IBM told UK government IBM Says its not ready [theregister.co.uk]

  • Ripe why? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bsayer ( 149333 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:05PM (#7426541)
    I don't see why IBM would want the combination of them. SuSE by itself I can see, but why would IBM be more interested with Novell as part of the deal? IBM has Notes, so it doesn't need GroupWise.

    • Re:Ripe why? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by 56ker ( 566853 )
      "IBM has Notes, so it doesn't need GroupWise."

      Yes - but if you buy up the competition you can then raise prices as there's less competition in the marketplace.

      • I doubt there's any significant competition between Groupwise and Notes. Each would see Exchange as their main competition.

        As for their corporate customers, Netware shops will go for Groupwise, and maybe some companies that have been burned once too often by the Exchange virus platform. Companies wanting to incorporate database functionality into their groupware will go with Notes. Again, not much overlap, therefore not much competition between the two.

    • Re:Ripe why? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bhtooefr ( 649901 ) <bhtooefr@bhtoo[ ].org ['efr' in gap]> on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:24PM (#7426622) Homepage Journal
      An IBM controlled Novell will be the straw that broke the SCO's back...

      Novell has full control of SCO's UNIX license, and an IBM controlled Novell would yank it in a heartbeat, securing Linux for IBM.

      • IBM doesn't need Novell (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Ayanami Rei ( 621112 ) * <rayanami@@@gmail...com> on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:29PM (#7426638) Journal
        to beat SCO. That's a done deal.

        It may be, however, that IBM wants "the whole package". That is, Novell and SCO, and all their combined trademarks and patents. They'd have the whole Unix kit and kaboodle, in addition to some nice file system, network protocols, directory, client management etc. tech. to add to their portfolio.
        • I know that, but Novell would make it a whole hell of a lot easier. IBM has the knife in, now they just need Novell (or a slightly competent judge) to twist it.
          • They already have a slightly competent judge. Its probably better for everybody for IBM to fight this out based on the case they already have. We need a legal affirmation of the GPL, for one thing, which is unlikely to come up if IBM has another, better case based on the Novell copyrights. After SCO loses, then IBM can buy Novell.
      • And what is to stop SCO from buying Novell/SuSE ? I think they could get the financial backing from the same place that they have been getting backing for the farce so far.
        • Would Novell WANT to be bought by SCO?
        • And what is to stop SCO from buying Novell/SuSE ?

          Money. Since Novell just paid $210m for SuSe, and SCO's market cap is below that, and sales are below that, they do not have the resources to do so. The best they could hope for is a stock swap where each would own part of the other. SCO would be the smaller of the two. A hostile take over is impossible simply because they lack the cash, even at inflated stock prices.

          Novell is not likely to want to merge with SCO in a stock swap. What exactly does SCO

    • Re:Ripe why? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by _Bunny ( 90075 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:43PM (#7426681) Homepage

      One word: eDirectory [novell.com]

      One feature that Linux lacks in the datacenter is a directory. eDirectory is what used to be known as NDS. Novell ported it to Linux a few years ago...

      I am the sysadmin for a NetWare shop. Having a replicated, partitioned directory tree is wonderful. It's one of those things that "just works".

      - Bunny

      • I'm not sure about the partitionable part, but IBM has had a directory server in several products for some time now. It also has hooks for db2 IIRC. Don't remember links to notes however.

  • Novell would make a great buy for IBM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:07PM (#7426547)
    Suddenly, they'd hold all of Novell's rights vs. SCO. Since they sold SCO those rights to begin with, SCO could quickly wind up in a pickle... :]

    Especially since Novell has those rights to direct SCO to do whatever it wants with respect to the contract between SCO & IBM.

    In other words, IBM buying Novell would draw the noose more tightly around SCO's neck (okay, true, that's overkill, but...)
    • IBM might like the idea but look if they do, Ximian is dead. I really hope they dont because IBM would have too much influence on the Linux community

    • Not likely, though (Score:5, Insightful)

      by A nonymous Coward ( 7548 ) * on Saturday November 08, 2003 @11:27PM (#7427007)
      IBM made a point a few years ago of emphasizing that they wanted to be a service company and work with all Linux distributions neutrally, not make their own. If they were to suddenly favor one distro so strongly, it would discard their neutrality, and I think that would hurt their current business model.
    • Do note however, that IBM wants to take SCO to court. Purchasing Novell would (if the rumour is true and Novell actually holds the rights needed) put IBM in the clear and as such the case would probably be dismissed. The result most likely being that SCO would start pestering someone else, possibly someone with a lesser legal team. IBM is after what most slashdot readers are, a squishing sound as the bug is squashed into goo.

      Also as has been pointed out, IBM has struck alliance with both Suse and Redhat an
    • It would the dumbest thing IBM could do. SCO is just minor problem compared to the future IBM might face if they bought Novell.
      Nobody can own Linux, and there's a (yet to be destined) number of companies which will be able to live from the pure linux market. If IBM would try to monopolize this market, there would instantly be a space for newcomers. So I think they're better of in continuing what they are doing now, that is holding close ties to companies and that way cover everything they need to deliver fo

  • AT&T vs. SCO (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Elf-friend ( 554128 )
    Just imagine: AT&T back in the Unix biz, and batling in court with SCO. That would be very interesting indeed. Probably not pretty for SCO, though.
    • AT&T my not be long for this world if the bankrupcy courts let MCI/WorldCom off the hook for most of the debt that ran up. If they are allowed to drop that debt, they will have the lowest debt ratio in the entire telecom sector.

      And thay say crime doesn't pay.

  • Win Win for IBM (Score:5, Informative)

    by c1ay ( 703047 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:07PM (#7426552) Homepage
    Since Novell, as part of its sale of the UNIX licenses to SCO, retained the right to require SCO to "amend, supplement, modify or waive any right" under the license agreements (and if SCO did not comply, Novell could exercise those rights itself on SCO's behalf)....See http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=13 03_0_3_0_C
    • Playing Caldera's game, eh? I don't have a huge amount of respect for IBM, but I have some, and would think they're above that.
      • 1. The new SCO is not Caldera. Ransom Love and company, though they made plenty of bad business decisions (incl. the per-seat licensing fiasco), were actually a pretty good group.

        2. Using Novell's agreement with SCO to order SCO to put up and/or shut up or even revoking the agreement would not be "descending to their level", it would just be moving this forward- SCO, who promised to show the evidence in June, realized long ago that they have no case, and isn't going to let evidence come out to that effect
        • Just because Caldera under Ransom Love was better than SCO under Darl doesn't make it good. You need to go back a decade before Caldera was a good company. Two changes of management ago.

          (Of course, Mr. Love was able to hold onto some good staff from the prior managers, because a) he wasn't terible and b) that was where they had a job working with Linux. But if you review his decisions you will see that Caldera has been headed towards the current SCO stance for a long time.)

  • Why no OEMs? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Sheetrock ( 152993 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:08PM (#7426555) Homepage Journal
    I'd think owning a combination of network/operating system technologies would be beneficial to an OEM that deals heavily in selling machines to businesses, particularly point-of-sale terminals.

  • Can't See this being good for anyone, right now (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Of the companies mentioned, IBM seems the only one likely to be able to do something with Novell/SuSE. But do they really need them? They've got plenty on their own and 1 merger is risky enough, merging with a recent merger (actually 2) would be pretty risky and likely to fail. Of the other companies mentioned, Cisco would be asking for trouble, stick to Network hardware, it's what made you rich and the others just don't need the trouble. I was excited to see Novell eat up Ximian and SuSE, I believe the
    • I'm wondering if they are trying to posture themselves as an infrastructure company, a solutions brand, not a hardware company.

      Novell and it's assets (particularly app servers, resource management and clustering stuff) would make that a possibility.

  • Novell needs to be on Linux (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    We need novell to have significant Linux client support. It should work to support both Linux and Windows clients to novell working together nicely. This way, companies could roll out Linux (SuSE) clients without windows licenses, and people could use them for accessing the internet, editing office documents, etc.

  • The end of Red Hat? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by todesengel ( 722281 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:12PM (#7426572)
    If there was a buy out of Novell, it would definately spell the end of Red Hat. Imagine how strong of a Linux powerhouse IBM or Cisco owning Ximian, Suse, and Novell would be. Both desktop and server would benifit immensely. A little side note: check out these two stock graphs of Novell and Red hat, on the day Suse was aquired. Redhat [yahoo.com] Novell [yahoo.com]
    • i dont think so. red hat is stronger than you think. while novell's recent press is astoundingly good news for novell, it will only have short term effects on red hats stock. they are in a prime position right now, how long will it take novell to start selling enterprise systems with its new OS? red hat is not going to sit and wait, they are going to do everything they can to maintain their grasp on the enterprise market and will make moves to secure more lucrative contracts before novell gets a chance to r

    • Nope (Score:2)

      by bogie ( 31020 )
      Red Hat would survive because to many Red Hat IS Linux. There are many many companies out there that use and buy Red Hat specifically because they are independant from IBM et al. I've also seen no hints that IBM wants to be a Linux vendor. They are much happier to pimp other OS's and make their money being a service provider. IBM has no desire to repeat the DOS->WARP->FAILURE cycle.

      IBM makes money the smart way. They service whatever OS's are on the market. That way if any particular OS become irrel
    • Apple wants to sell clusters to the scientific, creative,
      and academic market -- witness Xserve, and the
      decision to put Virginia Tech at the front of the
      queue for 1100 G5s. Buying RedHat gives Apple a
      (Linux) customer base in those machine rooms -- just
      like buying Shake gave them a (Linux) customer
      base in CG. And just like Apple Shake supports Linux,
      but makes it financially advantagous to move to
      OS X, RedHat-the-Apple-subsidiary could do
      a similiar migration strategy, underpricing service
      this time to win OS
    • Answer: "Is this good or bad for Red Hat? (Good, Aberdeen Group analyst Bill Claybrook decided, as it makes Red Hat (Nasdaq: RHAT - news) the largest Linux distributor in the world but also the only major independent one left)."
    • It's an interesting thought, Novell being acquired by some successful IT giant up in the sky... but I doubt the fact they acquired SuSE and Ximian has anything to do Novell trying to position itself favorably for its own acquisition.

      I just can't see Novell saying: "OK, we are going to buy SuSE and Ximian so that we can get acquired." It would devalue the company to do that - that kind of approach would minimize the percieved value of Novell and trivialize the somewhat major moves that Novell is making. Com
    • If there was a buy out of Novell, it would definately spell the end of Red Hat.

      I doubt it. I don't use RedHat because they are the biggest. I use RedHat because they make a good product, they have good service, and they always HAVE, so I have invested a great deal of time and resources learning it. All Linuxs (Linuxi?) is NOT alike.

      I just bought a bunch of hard drive racks from computergate.com so I can swap out drives with different OS's and compare/test/learn on a testing platform I built (amd 2500x

  • Hang on a minute! (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...but it's important to remember that it's all still just speculation.

    You're new around here, aren't you?
  • "Not HP/ComDEC! That is the place where tech goes to die..." Oh, I could not agree more, this would be certain death. Even Wall St knows that.

  • Not any time soon... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mwooldri ( 696068 )
    This article is merely pure speculation. And nothing more. Unless that guy who runs Canopy still has a significant Novell share holding, and wants to get a bit more richer quickly, by somehow getting the speculation out there that Novell itself might be ripe for takeover.

    As the article states, the only obvious candidate to take Novell over is IBM.

    The reason I feel Novell wont be going anywhere soon is because you need these middle sized computer companies to exist. You can't have companies the size

  • I really like Novell / SuSE on their own. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Dr_Marvin_Monroe ( 550052 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:24PM (#7426623)
    Other than the obvious anti-SCO move by taking Novell, I don't see that much for IBM. To me, it seems that IBM is in a better position by having Novell as a "friend" in this dispute rather than a subsidiary. I've seen the bit about Novell's contract with SCO regarding the sale, and it does put them in a great position. They could still exercise that right to the benifit of IBM without being purchased.

    Sun is also an interesting bit-player in this drama too. Didn't they ink some deal with SCO regarding rights/licensing?...they could strengthen their hand by purchasing Novell.

    Any move by MS to take Novell might be blocked on antitrust grounds. HP would be the best bet for action as an MS proxy, another wierd longshot proxy for MS might be someone like DELL. That's just speculation though, but the alignment is right and a deal like that couldn't be blocked outright on antitrust grounds.

    How about SCO?...laugh...yeah, the've got LOTS of new money from MS, that might get the noose from around their necks. Do they have enough money to really buy their way out?

    All this movement makes me really glad that the kernel is GPL. I've seen TOO many companies bought by MS just to put them out of business. I believe that this is what scares MS the most about Linux, they can't simply buy the company and shut it down.....

    Whatever happens, it should be interesting for all of us to watch. We can be somewhat relieved that nobody can take our kernel's (and the rest of the work too) away from us.

  • IBM? Maybe. HP? Probably not now. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ayanami Rei ( 621112 ) * <rayanami@@@gmail...com> on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:24PM (#7426624) Journal
    IBM would be duplicating a lot of software effort if they were to purchase Novell and it's tech portfolio. For example NDS and ZenWorks would compete directly with Tivoli.
    SuSE might be useful as they have global acceptance which may help to sell more Linux products and solutions to the global marketplace vs. RHES.

    HP probably won't buy it (yet). If they do it will be to take SuSE for use as their Linux solution provider, and to put down Novell to garner further favor from Microsoft- who also power their midrange backoffice offerings. But HP is still cooling down from the Compaq merger. It's too soon to look at Novell while simultaneously keeping it's current investors happy (they should be focusing on ops as is).

    Maybe it'll be Oracle, to use as another pawn in their game to beat everybody else (read: Microsoft) no matter what the cost.
    • ZenWorks would compete with Tivoli, NDS would not. IBM has nothing like NDS in their portfolio of tech. Also, when Tivoli was acquired by IBM years ago, they already had a lot of overlapping technologies (Netview, Netview Distribution Manager, etc.)

      I'm not saying it is likely that IBM will by Novell, but your arguement is slightly flawed.

  • I don't think so. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sjvn ( 11568 ) <sjvnNO@SPAMvna1.com> on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:28PM (#7426635) Homepage
    Please! IBM and HP buy a Linux company? 'Why buy a cow when milk is free' has been their attitude towards Linux for a while now. Besides, IBM will soon own a small share of Novell anyway--more than sufficient to do them good if there's anything to the stories of Novell having enough Unix IP rights left to protect any Linux with a Novell brand on it from SCO attacks.

    As for the others, sorry, I keep an eye on all of them, and I haven't see any sign of any of them having any interest in getting into the OS business. AT&T & Lucent have their own problems to fix, and Cisco is finally coming around quite nicely by having stuck to their main business lines.

    Steven
    • Novell has products, and a name..

      So they are purchasing something of 'value', not something they can get for 'free'.

      And linux/bsd really isnt 'free' in the sence of compaines, it costs $ to develop to their needs...
    • Well... though your thoughts are well intentioned, I've been thru the IBM/HP route before. The problem with any big corporation is that they don't invest in developing something beyond what they get originally; the cost-benefit doesn't add up for them. So while a company like SuSE whose has a great track record of support development in areas requiring enhancements (because its key to their business) gets gobbled up by a bigger corporation,that focus is lost. Look at HP-UX for an example.
      That is not to say
  • I'd just like to point out that I predicted [slashdot.org] an IBM buyout of Novell/SUSE before anyone else did ;)

  • I somehow doubt Lucent could afford to buy Novell, they aren't even profitable anymore. Their stock price is around 2 - 3 dollars. I know that not the only thing that matters, but it's a good inication that it isn't the best off company right now.
  • I think of all the companies which could buy Novell Cisco would be the best company to do it, they have the money, the strength to not be influenced by Microsoft, and they are the smartest most profitable company.

  • Obligatory SCO connection (Score:5, Informative)

    by hsa ( 598343 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @09:56PM (#7426706)
    Look at the name of the analyst - Laura Didio.
    Maybe you remember her from her SCO kernel source code news [smh.com.au]?
    • Q: The sample evidence - what programming language, e.g., "C", was it written in?

      A: (It was in) C.

      Q: Have you any previous experience in reading code?

      A: No. And I am not a copyright attorney either. However, for the purposes of authentication, I had a code developer present to review the materials with. No one has greater respect for their inherent limitations than I do!!!

      (emphasis mine)

      Err ... what the hell?

      Some analyst - how can you analyse anything if you can't bloody read it? What authori
    • DiDio doesn't know the meaning of "journalistic integrity" or "independent analysis" so my bet would be she's a shill for SCO on this one too. So, the real question becomes, how is the threat of Novell/SuSE being an acquisition target somehow beneficial to SCO? IBM buying the combined entity is obviously bogus given IBM's investment of $50M that was part of the deal. Also, if IBM had wanted SuSE they could have easily outbid Novell and Novell has been down and out for so long, IBM could have bought them
    • And, IIRC, she has personal ties to some of the SCO managers (wasn't she in the same company as McBride, one time). I read that somewhere on the net (she herself acknowledged it), maybe someone has a link, maybe there's something in groklaws citation database.

  • ...and combine both distributions into one called OS/2!

  • Soviet Russia is claimed to be one also.

  • How much would it suck for linux if the assets of SuSe and Ximian were bought up and shut down by a certain Redmond software giant?
  • I would have thought Fujitsu, possibly Apple or Sony. Nokia?

  • Analyst (Score:5, Informative)

    by lovelace ( 4159 ) on Saturday November 08, 2003 @10:53PM (#7426880) Homepage
    Just look at who's predicting that Novell will be aquired. It's Laura Dido, the same analyst that said SCO had a case. Why should anyone believe her now anymore than they did on the SCO code thing?
    • There's an "L" missing between the "i" and the "d" in that name above, which would properly demonstrate what her analysis is and has been worth.

  • This could be interesting (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jd ( 1658 ) <imipakNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Saturday November 08, 2003 @11:19PM (#7426984) Homepage Journal
    IBM buying SUSE would be logical. After all, IBM paid to get SUSE certified under the common criteria. Owning SUSE would be a logical way to get some return on the investment, as well as improving their markets in Europe (where SUSE is strong).


    IBM owning Novell is less obvious, as Novell lost their claim to the UNIX rights, in the early parts of this bout. Nonetheless, Novell is no trivial force and is a well-known name in the markets SCO is aiming at (low-end business). IBM is better-known in the high-end of the spectrum.


    From a muscle-flexing standpoint, things look very different. SCO pulls the licenses for IBM's AIX and SGI's IRIX. Both companies ignore it. IBM gorges of Novell and SuSE, barely noticing.


    Which giant would you be the more scared of?

    • IBM owning Novell is less obvious, as Novell lost their claim to the UNIX rights, in the early parts of this bout.

      UNIX schmunix, that would be incidental. Novell's technologies like eDirectory and their groupware suite would be what really interests IBM. Linux has no directory service, and eDirectory is one of those fantastic things that Just Works once you get it all set up. That and its interoperability with the rest of Novell's offerings would be the icing on the cake, especially with Novell's push tow

  • Oh come on (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Spare me, a bunch of analysts one of whom is Laura Didio speculating on the purchase of Novell? I know this is Slashdot and I know there are alot of rumors propogated from here but the simple fact remains that Novell isn't attractive yet, they have to produce a product. Minus their existing infrastructure and you still have the same Novell as a year ago.

    Not only that but Gartner is usually off with things like this; infact Gartner is usually off with many things regarding Linux in specific. Laura Didio?? T
  • Novell eats Ximian, next eats SuSE. A couple a days later IBM or someother much bigger dinosaur eats Novell. Hah do i remember the dinosaurs legal department once claim: 1 + 1 = 3 . I now understand why! It must have been a dinosaur dinerparty!!

    Whats for Lunch? I would't be suprised to find in 6 months that the complete SuSE Engineerung department is sitting at home without a job. The Engineerung jobs have of course been transferred to a ultra low-cost far east country. Thats currently the only financial

  • Am I unjustly concerned that Microsoft could see this as a great oppurtunity to squash Linux on the desktop? Redhat continues with Fedora but closes down Desktop support in a year. This leaves a hole in desktop linux. Now imagine if Microsoft bought out Novell/Suse and swallowed the IP, disbanded Suse and reallocated the brains. There would go another large Linux Desktop player. What remains at that point? TurboLinux in the far east and Mandrake and Gentoo? Slackware, though great, is in a decline (s
    • . Now imagine if Microsoft bought out Novell/Suse and swallowed the IP, disbanded Suse and reallocated the brains. There would go another large Linux Desktop player.

      That's the beauty of linux. Every SuSE employee who wouldn't want to get his brain reallocated could go out with a bunch of others and "fork" the SuSE distribution. The only stepping stone would be YaST, and this should be not too hard to recreate.
      After that, old SuSE clients knew where to go.


  • For some reason I am reminded of that one Dilbert episode where the search for some company to merge with was compared to a desperate female's last ditch effort to get picked up a bar.
  • that Lucent, AT&T or HP acquire Suse.

    I would much prefer see it go to IBM, at least IBM will most likely keep it alive and probably thriving. If IBM played it right they could inflict serious hurt on M$.

  • I was recently at a Novell/IBM/VMware session in Omaha, NE last Thursday. Novell harped on nothing but their detication to Linux and how they are integrating Ximian with what they are offering. It appears they want to be one stop shop from client to servers. Also it appears they are accumulating quite the zoo (penguin, monkey, and chamelion). First, about Ximian. Red Carpet is here to stay. IBM uses it extensively in several of their deployments, and Novell will continue to fulfill those obligations.
  • Yes, it will most probably be IBM, and most probably be a gentle affair based on a growing partnership and sense of common purpose.

    IT has come to its middle-age crisis point where some parties have more to lose than to win through further change. It's a defining moment when a young revolutionary becomes a reactionary dictator, but we're here.

    On the side of stability, we have Microsoft, Intel, and HPaq. On the side of change, we have IBM, Nocel/Suse and the unwashed foss hordes. And in the middle, watch
  • In general, everytime a technology is passed one more step up the food chain, it get obscured and lost more and more. Eventually the technology vanishes altogether. I'm not a big SuSE fan, but it sure would be a damn shame if XD were to become a merger casualty...
  • As a recent Novell admin, I must say that Novell is one of the few companies, whose products, even though visciously confusing at times, have been a joy to use. I found NDS (eDirectory) to be an order of magnitue easier to configure and admin than AD or LDAP. Novell's NPDS (iPrint) is truly brilliant in the level of control it gives in printing workflow and Zenworks is an excellent tool that even works well with older Windows versions.

    The things that Novell had going against it were Netware, which is an ar

  • Lucent? AT&T? huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by anothy ( 83176 ) on Sunday November 09, 2003 @08:38AM (#7428340) Homepage
    as much as i'd love to see AT&T or Lucent buy back the UNIX IP rights Novell retains ("Look, we gave you the UNIX thing, but you blew it. Sorry."), wouldn't they need, um, money to buy out another company? Lucent in particular seems laughable. i love the company, but they've got a ways to go before they're out of their existing hole enough to look at buying companies with quite substantial assets.

    still, the irony would be rich...

Slashdot Top Deals

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell

Close