Novell and Microsoft Claim Customer Support 158
munchola writes "Novell and Microsoft have commissioned a survey to prove that customers love their interoperability and patent deal. According to the survey 'Ninety-five percent approve of the collaboration between Novell and Microsoft,' while 'four out of five believe their organization would consider doing more business with Linux dealers if Linux providers establish an alliance with Microsoft.' As CBRonline notes, however: 'Few people have claimed the deal is bad for Novell or Microsoft's customers. The question has been whether it is good for the open source movement, open source developers, or indeed Novell itself. Those issues do not appear to have been addressed by the survey.'"
Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
Just saying.
Re:Marketing auto-fellatio? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Marketing auto-fellatio? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Marketing auto-fellatio? (Score:2, Insightful)
As predictable as snow in winter (Score:4, Insightful)
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/963
Did I miss Casual Friday ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Did anyone here actually participate in this survey ?
Re:Just one survey? (Score:3, Insightful)
spred the fud (Score:2, Insightful)
it's not news, it's BS.
I suggest slashdot and others ignore it altogether instead of indignantly reporting it.
PSB (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Paying MS Customer != open source movement (Score:3, Insightful)
You sound like a typical sales guy, not that that's bad. They are always focused on what they can sell this quarter, and not concerned about two years out. Novel is probably also listening to their sales guys. I find they under-estimate the power of the open-source community, and resent it for not paying any commissions. Most paying customers for Linux ask a real geek which distro to buy, and that generally means one of us open-source guys. I had a client company ask me just this question last week, and the decision I helped them make (RedHat - definately NOT Suse for EDA), will probably grow with that company for at least a decade. I figure over the long-run, Novell is out possibly a million bucks, just for pissing me off. And I'm just one geek. Yeah, they ought to care.
this whole deal is pure bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)
The question that was missing from that survey is "do you trust Microsoft to keep their promises and not attempt to lock you into proprietary products?"
Re:But some of us are. (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting. So Novell enter an agreement that protects you from being sued by Microsoft, and as a result you'd recommend not using their products in future? What's your business case for that?
Re:Marketing auto-fellatio? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm on the fence myself, 1 windows PC, 1 linux box. I use the right tool for the job. I game on the windows box, program on the linux box. People here give Microsoft too little credit for a good enough job well done.
Great for PHB / Gartner Group / Rob Enderle Types (Score:2, Insightful)
These sort of 'surveys' and the type of 'research' by these sorts of people/organizations is such a waste anyway. It is the equivalent of Cliff-Notes(TM) for the IT world so it makes perfect sense that some PHB will now come to one of us and say 'Hey, did you hear about the MS/Novell agreement, should make things even better for us eh?'
Geez, get back to work...
How do you know they "protect" me? (Score:5, Insightful)
Since the actual wording of their agreement is still a secret, how do you know that they're providing any "protection" at all?
Since they've both stated that this agreement will expire in 5 years, why would I want to risk their products 6 years from now? Migrations are expensive.
When was the last time an end-user (not a distributor/vendor) was sued for patent infringement?
Statistically, if an end-user is being sued by Microsoft, that end-user already has a license agreement with Microsoft.
Microsoft does that all the time. Many of those stories are posted on
One of the PRIMARY advantages of Open Source for the end-user is the absence of license requirements. I have to spend time/effort/money making sure that the copies of MS-Office we use are licensed and that I have proof of those licenses. And that proof is acceptable to Microsoft should they ever audit us.
Yet I can deploy Linux without any CAL's or anything. And OpenOffice.org without any per seat requirements. And so on.
So, the "business case" is savings TODAY versus a nebulous threat that has never been exercised against any end-user in the past