With OES 2.0, Novell Moves NetWare To Linux 125
apokryphos writes "Novell's long journey from NetWare to Linux is finally complete, with Open Enterprise Server 2.0. Linux-Watch takes a look at the newly-released OES 2.0: 'Now, with OES 2.0, the NetWare operating system kernel, NetWare 6.5 SP7, is still there if you run it, but it runs on top of the Xen hypervisor. You can also run the NetWare services, or a para-virtualized instance of NetWare, on top of Xen with the SLES (SUSE Linux Enterprise Server) 10 SP 1 kernel. So, if you're wedded to NetWare and its way of doing things, you don't have to wave good-bye to it.'"
Didn't they call this UnixWare? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It should also be noted that none of SCO's later actions under Darl McBride were under the direction of Ray Noorda in any way... Alzheimer's had set in before any of that happened. Ray Noorda believed in INNOVATING, not LITIGATING.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_Group#History [wikipedia.org] goes over some of this.
Skeptical (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The same thing happened with Word Perfect. They, too, couldn't manage the transition to Windows in a timely manner. Microsoft Word was pure joy compared to Word Perfect for Windows v1
Re:Skeptical (Score:5, Informative)
Ummm, Netware was going strong long past Win 3.1. MS didn't really get their act together until Win2k. Even as just a file server, Netware was way ahead of windows with easy-to-manage folder-by-folder (if you want) ACLs. Heck, Netware 4 still plays nicely with Windows XP.
Also, any idea how much of a PITA it would be to migrate from Netware without having to re-do all file and user permissions? Yeah, there are tools, but I've never had much luck with them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Skeptical (Score:4, Informative)
The reason I greatly preferred WP5.1 was because it was not a WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) word processor. Some of us actually liked the idea of What You Want Is What You Get. It might take alot longer to get used to a word processor where you can't just jiggle stuff about until it looks right but the rewards are far greater when you put in the practice.
The whole idea of a WYSIWYG text editor was a novel idea (no pun intended) but you only need to look at why no professional web dev uses dreamweaver in layout mode to understand why it is a failure in the long term. The results are sloppy. You end up with a document full of bloated markup that does not actually change what the page looks like, instead it just contains loads of elements that countermand each other.
eg: <B></B>some text<B></B>
Now most of the time this is just inefficient, but on some rare occasions it becomes an issue. When this happens you have a few choices:
1) Keep tidying up the document until you can make it look professional, unfortunately this can sometimes involve alot of tidying for very little reward.
2) Keep pushing stuff about in another WYSIWYG layout program until it looks right but is now even more inefficient that when you started (and hence harder for anyone else to work on). This still might take longer that expected (ie - quoted).
3) Bodge it and hope the client does not notice the minor layout issue you were unable to fix properly.
Since none of these are exactly ideal I would recommend thinking the choice through. I personally would recommend point 1, and since alot of companies are now crying out for websites where the code validates against W3C guidelines alot of companies obviously think the same way.
I know there are differences between an HTML page being as small and efficient as possible and a word document, but that doesn't change why I prefer WP over Word. WP allowed you to view and edit the markup directly more easily ten years ago than Word does today.
Re:Skeptical (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole idea of a WYSIWYG text editor was a novel idea (no pun intended) but you only need to look at why no professional web dev uses dreamweaver in layout mode to understand why it is a failure in the long term. The results are sloppy. You end up with a document full of bloated markup that does not actually change what the page looks like, instead it just contains loads of elements that countermand each other.
It's not a failure at all. It allows people who would not otherwise be able to produce even a slightly well-formatted document, do so. For those who are genuinely interested in "proper" layout procedures - and have the discipline and knowledge to use them - the ability to do so is not impeded by the existence of WYSIWYG tools.
The only way WYSIWYG is a "failure" is if you subscribe to the view that "we are worse off now that more people can be productive".
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a failure at all. It allows people who would not otherwise be able to produce even a slightly well-formatted document, do so.
This would be true if they produced a well formatted document, but usually they do not.
If you expect people to produce a well formatted document, the best way to do ensure they do is making sure they are correctly trained in that piece of software and what consitutes a decent document. It is certainly not by giving a very complicated tool to an untrained monkey and expecting them to produce something decent.
For those who are genuinely interested in "proper" layout procedures - and have the discipline and knowledge to use them - the ability to do so is not impeded by the existence of WYSIWYG tools.
Only someone who has never seen a document with a carriage return at the end of every line instead
Re: (Score:2)
This would be true if they produced a well formatted document, but usually they do not.
No, you are creating a false dichotomy. The choices are not "a well formatted document" or "a badly formatted document", they are "a formatted document of some description" and "nothing".
If you expect people to produce a well formatted document, the best way to do ensure they do is making sure they are correctly trained in that piece of software and what consitutes a decent document. It is certainly not by giving a v
Re: (Score:2)
You sound just like all the other elitists lamenting about how much it sucks now you don't need years of study and experience to be competent with a computer.
Nope, you miss my point entirely. My opinion is that it does take years of study and experience to be competent a computer. Someone with no experience soon gets out of their depth and needs support performing even the most basic of tasks. The main difference nowadays is that most people start using computers alot earlier so don't notice the experience they have.
Re: (Score:2)
Novell subsequently took MS to over the Word Perfect and other antitrust issues (as above) and settled for $536,000,000 US.
Re: (Score:1)
The same thing happened with Word Perfect. They, too, couldn't manage the transition to Windows in a timely manner. Microsoft Word was pure joy compared to Word Perfect for Windows v1
I don't know how you get scored "informative"... Other than Hating, you provide no information. Mods! Please use some REAL Judgement before casting your Karma to the win
Re: (Score:2)
The State of Georgia is one of Novell's single largest clients. When I worked for GA DHR [georgia.gov] about two years ago, we weren't technically even allowed to put any Linux boxes on the network.
Re: (Score:1)
Besides Netware, Novell has also produced some pretty cool technologies such as iFolder, but I digress.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've heard stories of Netware servers that got lost, physically misplaced (one, according to legend, was drywalled into a building by a work-crew that didn't know it was there) that ran for a very long time (years) without anybody knowing where they were.
It pretty much takes a hardware failure to bring down a Netware box. A bad cpu fan killed one of mine, and a bad pow
Re: (Score:2)
I'll pour out a little liquor for the "real" Netware on this, its death day, for that operating system let me sleep soundly through the night more often than anything else when I
Re: (Score:1)
one, according to legend, was drywalled into a building by a work-crew that didn't know it was there
Oh, come on -- now you're stealing IBM mainframe lore? I think I first heard that story about the System/360 or something. The key point in the story was that nobody knew where the machine was until an IBM tech showed up to swap out a part that had failed (IBM big iron had ways of phoning home when something went bad and it switched to a spare; then the technician just came out to swap the FRU).
Re: (Score:2)
Well guess what. When you migrate them to NetWare running on a Xen hypervisor, you're going to have some downtime. ;-)
Seriously -- the "NetWare is 100 percent reliable" argument, I get that. The "change a reliable NetWare system into a different system that looks just like a NetWare system, but isn't, yet is just as reliable" argument ... like I
Re:Skeptical (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally, I can't stand netware. But, the did a lot of the good stuff way before MS or Sun picked up on the concepts, hence they haven't had a major reason to make any massive changes. In case you haven't noticed, Unix, linux included, hasn't had any massive redesigns in the past 10 years either. Its all just minor updates to things along as needed to cope with new hardware technologies.
Re: (Score:2)
Except, I guess, to change it so that henceforth it runs on top of Linux.
Not exactly ... (Score:1)
Nope. If anything, it is MORE risky because now you have Linux added to the bottom of the stack. That is where Novell went wrong with this. Instead of putting everything on top of Linux (including DOS which boots NetWare), they should have replaced DOS with Linux. Yes, DOS is still needed to boot NetWare.
What a hoot (Score:2, Informative)
Next thing you'll be telling me is that you need to boot Linux to get to VMWare ESX!! LOL, ROFL!!!!
> The problem is that Novell has (at best) remained a static target. Microsoft has been improving Windows. Linux has been improved. So now, there's really not much of a reason to run Novell's products IN A NEW DEPLOYMENT.
We like those old deployments, the ones that have been working since about '89. Oh yeah, they dropped IPX for IP, and got a life after eDirecto
Problems Problems Problems (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes it is. I can test and deploy this easier than starting fresh with anything else.
couldn't you have spent some of that time constructively
I did spend that time more constructively. The boss said "I've got other things for you to do that will actually make me money. Don't worry about something that basically works."
hese arguments usually seem to hinge on some specific minor capability
It works in Netware and I can't do it as easily on any other platform. Don't denigrate something you know nothing about.
One of the fundamental premises behind your opinion is the "constant upgrade cycle" mentality.
Is IT's job making work for itself by breaking things that work or making users/systems more productive? My boss and I both choose the latter. That's why I'm happy and work lots of very regular hours.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Skeptical (Score:5, Insightful)
For comparison, one company I worked for had 3000 users, 280 servers and about 3600 workstations/laptops. They were a Windows shop and had over 180 full-time IT personnel. Another organization I worked with, though not for, had 1800 users, 40 servers and about 2200 workstations/laptops but they were a Novell shop. They had better service uptime (email/file/print/web) and faster workstation services (break/fix/moves/upgrades) and were able to do it with less than 25 IT people.
Novell networks are easier to maintain, more secure and much more stable than a Windows environment. The only areas where Windows beats (soundly) Netware is in ease of installation and application selection. Unless you absolutely must have an application that runs exclusively under Windows, there is no compelling reason to use a Microsoft network.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
But.. Given patches, and installation of software, security fixes, etc, reboots "several times per year" isn't necessarily a bad thing... assuming they're all planned.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There are, as I see it, some big problems with Windows:
1. You're much more likely to get an inexperienced boob running your network than you are with any other system out there. Most people I know (insert witty comment about "plural of anecdote != data", etc.) start off with Windows, then go to Linux or something else once they have their feet wet. Put another way, if you started off with NetWare, it's because you started off
design principle of loose coupling is ! The MS Way (Score:3, Insightful)
Some layers or comp
Yeah, we just happened to get 180 incompetent ppl (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Or it's patch Tuesday. We run a mixed shop. Fairly balanced too. I have 12 Windows servers, 15 Netware servers, and 8 Linux servers. Netware and Linux both issue patches, but I find myself rebooting those servers far less then once a month. When I hear about Netware or Linux servers running for years on end, I think.. Wow don't these people p
Re: (Score:2)
If you're rebooting Windows2000+ "Several times per year" you aren't applying patches in a timely manner.
Re: (Score:2)
So Novell networks are great for IT managers, but lousy for end users (because of poor application selection). And it seems to me that this has been the main problem with NetWare for years and years now. I guess it depends on your organization's priorities.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Skeptical (Score:5, Insightful)
And I recall getting my NetWare 5 server running at home sometime around 1998, or was it 2000? I had my trusty modem autodialing into my own ISP bank. BorderManager as my firewall, happily blocking ads, logging the few (back then) attempts to probe my connection. I ran the NAMP stack (NetWare/Apache/myQL/Perl/PHP) and having fun. I ran Websphere just to see if it would. Tomcat, the Advantage xBase engine, Mercury SMTP alongside GroupWise. At the time, Microsoft didn't have all of that so well done.
Oh yeah, and my personal record on a NetWare server is 1300+ days. My home server ran over 960 days at one stretch. The story of a NetWare server being walled in by accident is attributed to a New York-based Fortune 50 headquarters. Perhaps the only other platform that can easily claim that sort of reliability would be the AS/400 series, which is also reputed to have had at least one server walled in and 'lost'. It was looked for only when the lease expired. I don't doubt it.
None of that really mattered. Microsoft was running NetWare over and backing up to go over it again.
The NetWare Client for Windows was bloated mostly to accomodate the problems of Widows Networking. For one thing, if the Windows AD client did a lookup for something and didn't find it, it would happily look 'everywhere else'. The NetWare client, if not finding it in NDS or Windows, stopped and said 'not found'. The concept of looking everywhere else when it wasn't found within the directory you had struck me as ludicrous. But for Windows, it was SOP. And cost you a minute or two waiting for the inevitable failure. At least in NetWare you got an answer in 2-3 seconds, depending on network performance.
I miss NetWare. But the fight is over. Just don't try and tell me Windows IS any better, even today. It's just more popular.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it was the University of North Carolina, back in 2001. It's possible this has happened before or since. I just did a quick Google for netware server drywall. Everything I found referred to the 2001 UNC event.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surprised. UNC and NC were both big NetWare houses until all hope was lost.
Fixed that for ya. (Score:1, Funny)
Or were you talking about an ADP server? You mispelled "day", then.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Lemme think for a momen--yes.
Seriously. They've even kept it binary compatible with NLMs. The same apps run. This is not your home network of three gentoo boxes you're talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
NetWare ------> Linux + Xen + NetWare = Less Risk.
Doesn't make sense to me. How can you assume that the NetWare services running under Xen running under Linux are 100 percent as reliable as the native NetWare services? That seems like an unlikely result.
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest benefit to NetWare ------> Linux + Xen + NetWare is drivers. The Xen environment provides (standardized/generic) Novell written drivers to the NetWare OS, and it becomes SLES' job to fulfill those calls. NetWare can be pretty brittle (the trade-off being high speed). This new environment provides a whole additional layer to buffer the ugliness of actual hardware calls away from the sometimes b
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all. The reason is because it works.
Netware still works just fine for a lot of companies. It really was/is a very good server. A company may have a LOT of money already invested in Netware Services that work just fine and dandy. So if you can still get support why go through the cost and time to re-write you code?
There are still multi-milli
Re: (Score:2)
Wait... if you're only using it because it "just works," how come you say you're "dependent" on it? "Dependent" sounds like you have a vested interest in not changing -- which is what I mean by "risk averse." Change = risk, always. (Note: "Risk" does not equal failure, just greater statistical chance of failure than you'd incur from changing nothing.)
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is change for the sake of change is worthless. If your systems work and are still supported which Novell is then there is no reason to rush into a migration.
Re: (Score:2)
It only takes a day to set up a new server running whatever OS and copy the files over, but now you've got to reproduce the equivilent of your NDS (or whatever they call it now) database, your login scripts, your ZEN install packages etc. etc. That infrastructure has grown up over years, maybe even decades.
%DEITY% help you, there might even be GroupWise in the mix
aixelsyd (Score:5, Funny)
er... wait a second
LinuxNovell (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
For the additional apps. (Score:5, Interesting)
GroupWise
ZENworks
On the other hand, Novell has ported all of them to Windows
Anyone care to comment on how nice it is to depend upon the good will of your biggest competitor for the stability of your apps?
Re: (Score:2)
Novell has ported eDirectory to SUSE Linux. They're working on a Linux GroupWise client. ZENworks integration is also being worked on.
It's not their job to support the applications they've created on every distribution of Linux. Has Ubuntu relased LaunchPad for every other distro?
Ummm, Microsoft owns Windows. (Score:2)
Did I say they did? No, I did not.
And Novell has ported eDirectory to Microsoft Windows. And who is Novell's biggest competitor?
No, Novell is not working on a "Linux GroupWise client". They're working on a Java-based one that pretty much sucks right now. And
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Novell has made Linux and a lot of open source software its platform - everything from the Desktop to the Server, is on top of Linux.
SUSE Linux Enterprise Dekstop is their desktop OS (SLED 10)
SUSE Linux Ent. Server is the server in the back room.
eDirectory,
That's always possible. (Score:2)
That's quite possible. I only run 6 of their servers (and GroupWise 7.02 and ZENworks). But let's see what you have ...
Again, no. It is "on top of" SuSE. Not Linux. I've already pointed that out.
You asked if it was Novell's "job" to port it. I asked if it wasn't Novell's job, what REALLY was Novell
"Yet not a single one of them will run on Debian." (Score:2)
What Novell sells, Novell has to support. They have trained practically everybody in the company to use SuSE, and the tech support people have been trained enough to troubleshoot and isolate bugs - in SuSE. And now you want them to be subject matter experts for RedHat / Debian / Ubuntu / Kubuntu / Slackware / Damn Small / Joe's Own / ...?
At what point does it end?
And from a system administrator's point of view: if you can run Debian, can you run SuSE? Of course you can. ssh into t
Re: (Score:1)
I have no idea what you know and what you don't know. The tone of your reply has an air of "looking down from a marble pedestal," and I really don't feel like wasting any more of my time trying to discuss this sensibly.
In the future you would do better to not try to get in a duel with someone on the Internet. "You catch more flies with honey" as the saying goes.
So basically (Score:1)
iFolder once open sourced, now exclusive to OES (Score:1, Offtopic)
They later produced a Windows version, then rewrote it in Mono. Still few customers were willing to pay for it.
Then someone at Novell had a bright idea: "why not make it open-source?" This was back when Novell's Linux-bet was new and they had to prove themselves. They thought giving away YaST, iFolder and some other stuff would give them credibility.
Since then, the iFolder project has struggled, wit
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's right: if you want to setup an iFolder server with the new 3.6 features, you need to buy OES2 at the premium price Novell is asking (and
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Point me in the right direction and I'll take it from there!
Re: (Score:2)
SCO? (Score:2)
Not a vote of confidence for OES (Score:1)
Everyone knew this would happen (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What I mean by that is NetWare can still run older NetWare-only NLMs, but it can run on platforms and architectures that don't have any NetWare support (AMD64, RAID cards that don't support NetWare but do have Linux support), etc.
Why does Novell moving to a new platform that has a lot of industry buzz (Linux, open source) automatically make you sound the death knell for them?
Re: (Score:2)
The reason this makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
By moving NetWare into Xen they gain the driver support SUSE Linux Enterprise Server will have, and at the same time create an environment that makes it easy to upgrade.
To the top poster - it's not exactly easy to migrate away from a platform like eDirectory once you've committed to it, and yes Virginia, eDirectory does scale better than Active Directory any day.
For those who don't know netware ... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, two things come to mind immediately - TCO, and the netware permissions.
From my experiences when I ran netware servers, a system could be thrown together for about $5-600 (thats hundreds,
not thousands...) that could serve directory services, files, and print jobs to 200 clients simultaneously without batting an eye, and do it nonstop for months. Its hard to get anything else to match those numbers for that little $$.
Though one of the true hallmarks of netware is the permissions set that it has, that I really haven't seen an equal to in anything else. IIRC, there were 8 different permissions that could be set in netware, as opposed to the 3 in *nix. It is particularly valuable if you want to use directory structure as part of your workflow - for example a user could have a directory where they could write, read, but not modify or delete. I ran this for a newspaper, and the utility of this should be quite apparent.
So just to answer it for all those people who are speculating why netware is still relevant - yes, it is. There are plenty of good reasons for people to keep it around. Though I'll admit it will likely become yet another good product killed by the micro$oft marketing machine.
Re: (Score:1)
What about undelete? (Score:2)
It's still better than windows for file and print services. I don't miss trying to get the BTrieve settings for ArcServe and Solomon to play nicely together, though.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, why is novell 3.1 still better than whatever latest windows server os is out there?
Re: (Score:1)
While on the other hand, some people seem to realize that indeed, file servers should only need to serve files (hence the name!) and therefore shouldn't be expected to have thousands of dollars worth of RAM and video options.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The permissions for netware, on the other hand, are all done server side, are very easy to set up (being as the server OS is made to do it), and virtually transparent to the user. In a good windoze / netware environment, the user doesn't even know when t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I look forward to the day that Linux's permission structure catches up to the level of twelve-year-old NetWare 4.
Novell didn't kill Netware... (Score:4, Funny)
Nothing to see here unless you're crusty. (Score:2)
But I refuse to take anything seriously involving Novell and Linux. At one time we were expected to believe that Caldera would change the world, and look where that went. Nowhere.
Just a few things (Score:4, Informative)
1) eDirectory - Done. Has been multiplatform for years. Continues to be the single best meta directory repository on the market. There is not a single environment of any decent size that can get away with one directory to service all the business requirements, but eDirectory continues to be the best option for consolidating the directory data using Novell's Identity Manager suite of drivers and tools.
2) zenWorks - Pretty much anyone who has used it considers it the premiere tool for managing Windows clients. Only in the next release will they not require Netware for some of the components. The middle tier design and agent-based client make it a pleasure to work with compared to the fat Novell Client days.
3) Management tools - someone else already said it, but Novell cannot seem to stay focused (and enforce discipline on their own development teams) to provide a consistent management tool. They have gone from NWAdmin to ConsoleOne to iManager - except you still pretty much need each of them depending on what you are going to manage.
4) File permissions - The NSS file system is pretty damn good, has been ported and made available on Linux for a few years now. It still provides the leading access controls / inherited rights / filtered rights that other file systems should be ashamed of for not offering.
For sure, Novell is just as if not more screwed up than any other company. They have squandered many opportunities to reestablish themselves as a significant technology player, but they are hardly on the verge of going out of business. They are profitable and still growing as a company. Product lines die out and Netware has been dying out for years, but they are considerably more than Netware.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1) eDirectory - Done. Has been multiplatform for years. Continues to be the single best meta directory repository on the market. There is not a single environment of any decent size that can get away with one directory to service all the business requirements, but eDirectory continues to be the best option for consolidating the directory data using Novell's Identity Manager suite of drivers and tools.
OpenLDAP connects all my operating systems and servers just fine, thanks. It is more difficult to implement because it requires more knowledge and skill, but we happen to have that already on site. Once it's up and running, it is as stable as NDS (and the underlying linux servers are more stable than post NW3, pre-linux Novell servers) and it's easier and quicker to modify (command lines instead of slow guis and java apps) and backup (just dump LDIFs every night). I have automagic replication and propag
Good Move (Score:1)
I admit it is far harder to setup correctly, but once it's done, it's done! And Active directory... if anyone thinks it's easier then eDirectory, they obviously haven't really worked with both.
Like many things M$, It's only better the M$ way because most people don't know any better.
Re: (Score:1)
What about UnixWare? (Score:2)
You must kill your NetWare. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Some of the stranger spam I've seen, I'll say. Apparently whoever is behind that one doesn't know how to work the slashdot url tag?
Re: (Score:1)
- Original post: -1, redundant
- First reply: -1, troll
- reply to first reply: -1, troll
And of course several AC posts on the same thread auto-modded 0 since then. Oh, if your keeping track, feces man is actually the troll that replied to the troll that replied to the redundant post. And they were all AC posts as well, IIRC.