Novell and Microsoft Claim Customer Support

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.'"

Just one survey?

[faloi]

Or did they commision multiple surveys with different wording and cherry-pick the one they liked most? It is marketing, after all.

MS and Novell Can Do Whatever They Want!

[codepunk]

Neither MS or Novell control our software, only we control our software. It is a hard lesson that many companies need to learn, they are not in control the developers are ultimately in control. The minute you alienate the developers in this type of environment you have already set up your ultimate demise.

Well, Not Always

[jack_csk]

As far as I concern, some of the businesses do care if they can transfer their infrastructure among different Linux distros / Unices.

By forming alliance with Microsoft, Novell is promoting some sort of vendor lock-in, which will eventually lead to Microsoft's eclipse of Linux's (including Novell and other Linux vendors) market

The Focus on Interoperability

[dsci]

Warning: Opinion and Anecdotal discussion to follow; one size does NOT fit all.

All this focus on interoperability is ASSUMING businesses care about operating with Windows. Certainly some do, and they may care about interoperability issues. Others don't; I know my consulting business is a near-nonexistent speck in the grand scheme of things, but I care not one whit about interoperating with Windows. My business is Linux based, and when I set up protocols for dealing with clients, they include cross-platform data formats.

The only time I care about interop with Windows is when a client has a specific need - like the VPN I designed for a client last year. And what I found in that project was 99.99% of ALL the project headaches came from Windows - activation issues, 2003 Server licensing issues, 2003 Server MTU problems, etc.

Anymore, if a client is completely Windows centric and demands a Windows centric solution to their problem, I typically to not even submit a proposal. That's how I view all this interoperability stuff - it is the OTHER players that must conform to the Windows way of doing things; there is no INTERoperability (imho) - it's "operate with Windows' closed way of doing everything, or go play somewhere else."

Well, my business is playing somewhere else. My experience, and those of my clients, is that the solutions I provide LAST and don't force them into Vendor Lock-In and similar, related nonsense. As I said above, this approach is not for everybody.

Get the facts?

[feranick]

Is this a new version of Microsoft "Get the facts [microsoft.com]"?

MS should play nice

[businessnerd]

The thing I don't get about Microsoft, is that they don't really need this deal with Novell. This is afterall about the server market. In the server market, Microsoft is not just an OS vendor, they have other mission critical software that connects to many other machines. For instance, Active Directory. If Microsoft made Active Directory interoperable with *nix clients, then I think that Active Directory use would go up. Afterall, Active Directory's market is limited to those whose datacenters are mostly Windows. What about the rest of the world that probably has some kind of hybrid. Some Windows here, some Linux there, maybe some Unix or even a Mac server thrown in somewhere. For these types of situations, they either use something like OpenLDAP or maybe use a third party AD add-on for the interoperability. Most are probably using a *nix based solution. If Active Directory were able to handle any client, I think more companies would consider AD since it would be more flexible. If you're all windows, using AD locks you into more windows and makes adding a linux server very difficult. On the desktop market, MS have a monopoly they can exploit, but not so much with the server market. The same should be applied to MS SQL server, Exchange and all the rest. The more flex you give the customer, the more likely they are to choose your product (unless it's a complete piece of crap)

Understandable Response

[Christopher_Edwardz]

Customers aren't qualified to comment, as in political surveys. They also tend to be management types who have a pathological need to seem smart.

Coupled with the psychological predisposition, given no additional evidence, an affirmative response will be provided.

Such that if you asked:

Do you think, in general, that it is a good idea that Wizerbangslopinpop and Akerwhackdoodle are snifflewagging the shooterscoots?

They'll say yes most of the time. Nor will they be inclined to ask questions as this would mean they are not "in the know", which is presumably why the survey people are asking them in the first place. (Of course, the marketdroids just tell them this because it gets them in the door and some face time.)

The smarter ones will try to hedge around the unknowns to glean some sort of contextual meaning, but still are likely not to know what they are talking about.

Hence, the exercise is good for comic relief and spin-value, but not for much else.

On a personal note: When I was in High School (way too many years ago...*sigh*), I did a survey for extra credit in Psych. I had a simple survey for science class with a single question:

"For extra credit equivalent to a 9 weeks exam, would you take a frontal lobotomy instead?"

I admit that I tinkered with the context clues in the sentence by equating taking a test with the likely unknown "frontal lobotomy", however 65% (roughly) of the respondents (out of a pool of ~100) said they would be happy to.

The psych instructor got pretty irritated at having to explain that he was not going to perform lobotomies on students in lieu of a 9weeks exam. But, I did learn a great deal, laughed myself to tears, and I got an A!

The reason is...

[Eric Damron]

That the Open Source community IS the goose that lays the golden eggs. How WE feel is everything.

Well, I guess I'm not a customer anymore!

[lotho brandybuck]

I run Suse on my machine, a desktop I depend on every single day for engineering work. I wasn't thrilled when Novell bought Suse, but I upgraded to Suse Linux 9.2 anyways. It says "NOVELL" on the box. I think it was about $80.

Well, guess what. Next time I build up a new 'puter or upgrade the OS on this one... I'm not going to use Suse, even thought it may not be as seamless a transition for me.

I feel a little bad, because the Gecko is kinda cute, and the "random phone support lady" that came up on the while-installing screen was really really hot (I cannot be the only one to notice this). But I depend on Open Source Software and I know who my friends are and aren't.

Becuase I don't like the deal, I'm not a customer anymore, and wouldn't be involved in Novell/Microsofts little survey. Does this prove my point or prove theirs, or both??

GPL v3 and this "deal"

[lawaetf1]

It strikes me as a little unusual that nobody is making a bigger deal out of GPLv3 and how it will essentially nullify this deal or at the least put Novell in a very awkward situation. Even if Linus doesn't move the kernel over to v3, you can bet that glibc, gcc, etc, are all going to go that way. Try shipping a distro without either of those two.

Obviously Msft and Novl are more than aware of the licensing change so the question is what sort of insidious deal has msft given Novl in the back room? Truth is, if Novell ships GPLv3 software in SuSe then they stand to be liable for enormous damages, injunctions, etc. The patent indemnification nonsense they got from msft will be more than overshadowed by the ruckus created when Novell ignores the license that a significant section of code it ships is released under. Nothing would make msft happier than another round of FUD about Linux but what gain to Novell? cui bono for this upcoming crime? When asked about GPLv3 the Novl CEO said something casually dismissive like "oh, that license, it's still in development."

Something far more sinister is afoot than just Novl opting to be msft's lap dog.