Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Novell

Novell Cancels BrainShare Conference 102

Posted by timothy
from the just-before-it-could-buy-beer dept.
A.B. VerHausen writes "While OSCON and SCALE organizers ramp up plans for their events, Novell shuts down BrainShare after 20 years, citing travel costs and budget tightening as main concerns. 'Instead of the traditional in-person conference, Novell plans to offer online classes and virtual conferences to make education and training available to more people at a lower per-head cost to companies,' says the news story on OStatic.com."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Novell Cancels BrainShare Conference

Comments Filter:
  • Huh? (Score:3, Funny)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @03:20PM (#26149425)

    I think the real story here is people are still using Novell. They must be found and stopped! Oh god, the nightmares of NetBEUI and IPX/SPX... they haunt me.

    • Re:Huh? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Gr33nNight (679837) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @03:23PM (#26149467)
      We have a Novell backend, and use Groupwise and Zenworks. We do not use NetBEUI or IPX/SPX.
      • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        We have a Novell backend,

        Wow, that must make it tough to go to the toilet.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by garcia (6573)

        We have a Novell backend, and use Groupwise and Zenworks.

        I'm sorry.

        • by JoeZeppy (715167)
          Just be glad you're not using Lotus Notes. We've got a crew of IBM'ers running around right now fucking up a perfectly good Exchange environment to install their god-awful unreliable bug-filled piece of crap on 40,000 desktops.
    • Re:Huh? (Score:4, Informative)

      by spun (1352) <loverevolutionar ... m ['o.c' in gap]> on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @03:27PM (#26149519) Journal

      We use a Novell back end for file and print services. You know it's all based on Suse Linux now, right? Novell dropped Netware last year, I think. Almost all of last year's Brainshare was about Linux. Good times, I'm sad to see it go.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by IBBigPoppa (1433897)
      Novell has moved so far passed Netware, IPX, and NetBEUI. They actually have the second largest Linux distro, Suse Linux. Gardner has rated their Identity Manager Solution as a leader. They also own PlateSpin and Managed Objects. They are not the Novell most remember from Netware 5.0 and 6.0. They are have some interesting stuff like Dynamic Storage (policy based storage management) and Domain Services for Windows (AD integration/emulation with eDirectory and Linux).
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by KillerBees (36367)

        They are not the Novell most remember from Netware 5.0 and 6.0..

        Apparently not a lot of people remember the modern Novell either...

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        They are not the Novell most remember from Netware 5.0 and 6.0.

        I miss the Novell I (dimly) remember from Netware 3.0, when servers would stay up until you maintained them.

        Granted, they were sometimes difficult to bring back up after performing software maintenance as per documentation, but no plan is perfect.

        They are have some interesting stuff like Dynamic Storage (policy based storage management) and Domain Services for Windows (AD integration/emulation with eDirectory and Linux).

        I'm not sure what "policy based storage management" means, but you can implement Domain Services for Windows (AD integration with Linux) with OpenLDAP and BIND. My understanding is that it is not trivial, but entirely possible. :) Since Novell seems to be failing m

    • by Terje Mathisen (128806) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @03:46PM (#26149799)

      Disclaimer: I spent a year (91-92) working for Novell in Utah.

      That said, IPX was in many ways both more forward-looking and easier to administrate than IP networks:

      Instead of statically allocated local addresses or DHCP servers, IPX use the 48-bit MAC address as the only local identifier.

      IPX and IP both use 32-bit external addresses, but the IPX 32-bit address is simply the address of the network, with no addressing mask to split it into net/host parts. This meant that clients could be plugged in anywhere and just worked, without any DHCP servers, and since each Netware server was allocated its own internal 32-bit network address, it was trivial to install multiple network cards for load balancing and/or redundancy:

      If a single link went down, all traffic would automatically be rerouted to the other interface, while having a single unique server address.

      This same mechanism was a key part of Software Fault Tolerant (SFT) NetWare, which used a mirrored (over a separate fast/high-bandwidth link) link to replicate all inputs between two servers: This allowed Drew Major (the chief architect) to keep the two servers in lockstep, and handle pretty much any kind of single disaster (up to and including smashing a server with a 100-ton press) without a single client drop.

      As a programmer I really liked the way IPX used Async Event Blocks (AEBs) to control all send/receive operations, with optional application callbacks at interrupt time.

      At one point (around 1988?) this allowed me to write an IPX-based print server under Dos, which managed to fit a dual-buffered print receiver, interrupt-driven serial and parallel port printer interfacing plus all the housekeeping needed for a TSR, inside about 1600 bytes.

      This allowed 2x512 bytes as print buffers, 256 bytes as the local stack and about 300+ bytes for all the remaining code and data.

      Terje

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by dedazo (737510)

        Agreed. There was nothing wrong with IPX at all. The standardization on TCP/IP and the death of other packet protocols is not so much going for something "better", but rather for the least common denominator. Not that that's particularly bad, since it's important for a more open internet and better interop, but it doesn't take away anything from the technical value of other implementations.

        Anyone remember LANtastic? As long as you didn't use Token Ring it was pretty good as well.

        • by rickb928 (945187)

          I remember LANtastic. The UI was pus, Microsoft would make it work poorly every time they hosed the MUP to hose up NetWare, but it sure worked fine otherwise. Beat the hell outta Personal NetWare, and could really do as well as NTAS.

          • by dedazo (737510)

            Well, compared to anything nowadays it was crap, but back then if you wanted to network DOS/Win3x machines, it was the cat's meow, especially if you didn't want to shell out $$$ for Netware.

            That's one of the reasons it was also very popular in the 3rd world. It was a low-cost alternative. Windows NT eventually did it in.

        • by Omega996 (106762)
          jesus, I had forgotten about that product until you mentioned it. the first IT job I had involved LANtastic for the company's pitifully small LAN and an IBM System/36. We used their proprietary adapters to get 2MBit/sec! Ugh, that was also my introduction to the joy that was Windows for Workgroups....

          Wow... that's some serious flashback from an epoch long past...
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by virtue3 (888450)
          Uh... guys, it's called UDP, which has pretty much entirely replaced IPX. Mostly because it's the same protocol more or less running through IP. It saves you from having to install multiple network interfaces on your system. And it's all going through the same layers. That and UDP can work through NATS/Firewalls, which I'm not totally sure IPX did successfully (at least back in teh day when I was still learning how to use port forwarding when I was playing star craft games over a LAN).
        • I'll see your LANtastic and raise you a 10-Net.

          I'm holding Netware Lite, SageNet and Infaplugs (anyone remember them!!??) in reserve.

          I use to install Netware Servers - I think my first would have been with Netware 2.0A. I also used to run a whole raft of Netware Training courses, but 'lost touch' with things Novell around Netware 4.11 when I changed jobs.

          Anyone remember fixing ESDI/SCSI Netware disk driver issues by attacking various files with a hex editor, and having to key in the hard disk defect lists!?

          • by dedazo (737510)

            Oh - and which disk drive manufacturer used to print their defect list on a label affixed to the top of the drive and had to send dealers and distributors a note telling them not to photocopy the list by putting the drives on the copier as this was killing the drives with static!?

            I seem to remember Micropolis (remember them!) used to do something like that. But I might be wrong.

            They used to make some sweet disks though. And I think they were the first ones to release a standalone, stackable SCSI RAID produc

            • Yes, you're right, it was Micropolis - I'd been racking my brains (unsuccessfully) on that one!

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Whoa! OK, I'll get off your lawn.

      • by IGnatius T Foobar (4328) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @05:37PM (#26151225) Homepage Journal

        Instead of statically allocated local addresses or DHCP servers, IPX use the 48-bit MAC address as the only local identifier. IPX and IP both use 32-bit external addresses, but the IPX 32-bit address is simply the address of the network, with no addressing mask to split it into net/host parts. This meant that clients could be plugged in anywhere and just worked, without any DHCP servers, and since each Netware server was allocated its own internal 32-bit network address, it was trivial to install multiple network cards for load balancing and/or redundancy

        Yup. And now there's a push for IPv6. Automatic address assignment on IPv6 turns the 48-bit MAC address into a portion of the IPv6 address. It's startlingly similar to IPX. If the Internet had been based on IPX, and they figured out a way to make IPX run at a global scale (finding equivalents to things like BGP) we wouldn't be in the impending address exhaustion pickle we are today.

        • Automatic address assignment on IPv6 turns the 48-bit MAC address into a portion of the IPv6 address.

          whatcouldpossiblygowrong

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        Instead of statically allocated local addresses or DHCP servers, IPX use the 48-bit MAC address as the only local identifier.

        This is a bad idea because if you decide you need to draw addresses from a pool of more than 48 bits for whatever reason, you will have to extend Ethernet at the same time you extend IPX. The advantage of having a wholly separate address for a wholly separate layer is that you can replace one layer or another with minimal disruption - which is why we can move from a 32 bit address to a 128 bit address or any other bit length without changing Ethernet one bit. If you need to actually have physical connection

        • If you ever need to have more than 48 bits to address unique items on interest, on a single network segment, then you'll have a problem.

          2^48 is a pretty big number though. It is big enough that every human being on the planet can have about 60.000 addresses, on every single possible IPX network segment.

          IPX won't run out before you do need that many single-segment addresses, and IPv6 is doing much of the same as IPX, by (at least by default) having the 48-bit MAC as the least significant part of the 128-bit

          • by drinkypoo (153816)

            You actually have a lot less than 2^48 usable addresses if you use your MAC addresses publicly, because the MAC includes a vendor code, and vendors have subdivided that space. MACs are not unique as it is, and can not always be changed (at least not trivially.) IP's logical network subdivision makes good sense. Not to mention, it can be used with non-ethernet devices without any fudging. It's all fudge :) Of course, IPv4 is lacking. But that's why we have IPv6. Someday, it too shall likely be superseded.

      • by thehunger (549253)
        Yes, IPX/SPX was ok and with its broadcast mechanism easier to use - no need for DHCP servers and manual router configurations. The problem I had with Novell was with their use of the Ethernet_802.3 ethernet framing. The idiots grabbed and implemented the draft spec too early and ended up with their own implementation, one WITHOUT the 802.2 header. Result? The only protocol you could use was IPX/SPX because there was no protocol ID field. Idiots! Anyway, I do remember we struggled with router tables fi
    • The drafting department at Montachusett Regional Vocation Technical School in Massachusetts uses Novell, and everything seems to work great. Not sure what you are haunted about. The rest of the school runs off of an (Apple?) X-server (at least, it did when I graduated in 2005).
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by paesano (784687)
      Please don't blame NetBEUI on Novell. That is Microsoft's atrocity. Last I checked, they still use that crap tunneled in TCPIP.

      Perhaps you meant NCP?

    • YES, these Linux users must be stopped. How dare they use SUSE, Gnome, KDE, etc. Novell still has their Edirectory, Zenworks, etc that are pretty decent products. They also sell (sort of, more like support) a very good Linux distro.
    • by rrohbeck (944847)

      Come on. IPX/SPX wasn't all that bad. I wrote a lot of code on it, around '85. Anything NetB* was crap of course.
      Good times, cracking the Novell keycard code... that was soo primitive.

    • by plazman30 (531348)

      NetBEUI was a Microsoft invention, and IPX/SPX was a damn good protocol for it's time. No address conflicts EVER, large packet sizes. Very nice protocol.

      Andy

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I heard they cancelled the show because of complaints from Zaphod Beeblebrox.

  • Are their any official virtual conferences where every one uses collaborative technologies to hold a conference with out flying all over the world? It might cut down on "hallway chatter" but social services like Twitter might make up for that.
  • At first I read "Novell causes brain cancer." I need more sleep.
  • People still use Netware?
    • Re:Netware? (Score:4, Informative)

      by IceCreamGuy (904648) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @03:39PM (#26149685) Homepage
      Yes. I run Netware 5 on HP LC3s. They have been up and running since 1998. We're migrating to AD right now. Get off my case!
      • by Juggz (1181257)
        "We're migrating to AD right now" Im so, so sorry.
      • by mpapet (761907)

        We're migrating to AD right now.

        My deepest sympathies for the mid-project nightmare about to unfold before your very eyes. Your employer will lose a bunch of "productivity," but you won't be fired.

        • Actually it's going great, and the project's almost over. I've had one office over for about a year, and another office just went over a couple weeks ago; only had one day of confusion and the productivity gains from migrating have been well worth it.
          Not only does it make administration easier, but it also makes HIPAA compliance a billion times easier, enterprise-wide management systems easier, provisioning is easier, data sharing is easier, well, pretty much everything's easier than with Netware, and the
          • Yes, well, scale your "very roughly" up to every office in your org and add a bunch of proprietary apps and you've got Enterprise-class trouble.

            One office at a time, with one person doing it is blissfully simple. Have a great holiday.

            • About 50% of our apps are written in-house, and yeah, they certainly have caused the most trouble, but nothing that testing and tinkering didn't fix. Like I said, though, the last office that I did went over great. I prepped scripts to do pretty much everything, perpared the entire domain, users, OUs, policies and all, did it in one weekend and literally by that Wednesday everyone was back to normal productivity levels. The "very roughly" part happened in the very beginning, when myself and the previous adm
      • We still use an HP LC3 at work.
        After it crapped out we put it on it's side and set our Midway classics arcade game on top of it. It elevates the game to just the right height and is heavy enough to make a nice solid base.

    • by dedazo (737510)

      Not Netware so much as they use Novell's Linux-based enterprise stack (SLES, ZenWorks, etc).

      And the opnSUSE community is very much alive. They released a new version a few days ago.

      But some companies still do use Netware to some extent. I know a few in Canada that do.

    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      People still use Netware?

      Apparently people still ask stupid questions too.

      Novell uses a Linux platform these days. You would have known that if you had bothered to consult Google, Wikipedia, or if you realized that several people asked this question before you did and others have already answered them. You fail.

      As for me, I'm conducting something of a social experiment. I wonder if the mods will mod you down for being redundant and for asking what really was a dumb question that the slightest research would have answered o

      • by Anonymous Coward
        Dude... what are you talking about? What does asking if people still use Netware have to do with the fact that eDirectory runs on Linux? Seriously! Do you not know what Netware is? People do still dun it; it was the most popular EIM system for 10 years. The author clearly knows that people still run it, and it's funny to think about the fact that people still deal with the antiquated system in today's world. If I had mod points I would mod you down, because... you're an asshole. Was your hypothesis correct
    • Yeah, I have a two node file server cluster, attached to a fibre channel-based SAN, running on current server hardware and a recent Netware release. I don't even have to spend minutes per month making sure it works correctly. We're planning on moving it to OES Linux, but it's a bit hard to get excited about that when Netware's providing the entire organization's file/print services with almost no downtime. And if we have a hardware failure, well, the services just fail over to the other server. A lot of use

  • I see Novell daily. Many of the customers we have ( I work in tech support) use Novell servers for their database machines and they are actually very reliable. seems like they just chug away for much longer than a windows server running the same systems. I agree that it is a beast when something breaks on a Novell server and there just dont seem to be many experts on them anymore. (I am so not one, even though I do know some basics). all in all Novell did many things right.
    • "...it is a beast when something breaks on a Novell server?" Fraid not. You can actually fix it, generally in short order, without having to reinstall the whole damn OS like you do with M$. Good old Netware just worked and worked. I had one server that was up for 18 months and only restarted due to an extended power outage.
      • Indeed. I have had Netware servers with 4 years uptime at branch offices. Right now I have one that's been up over 2 years. You'd regret it if you tried that with Windows.
      • by Amouth (879122)

        Its and older story but every time i think Novell i remember this

        http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=6505527 [informationweek.com]

        i remember talking with one of the admins the day it happend - can't seem to find the pictures he sent me.

        • by Cyrus20 (1345311)
          I think its a beast for us when on the off chance they do break because we need the least amount of down time possible due to the fact that these are radio stations we deal with and time down means money lost. (such is the case with almost anything I know...LOL)
  • At Networld in 1990 (I think it was) I recall some MS person talking about how Lan Man 2.0 was going to blow Netware out of the water speed-wise. Drew Major calmly responded "Maybe if you ever release it, we'll see."

    Ah, those were the days.
  • by Quiet_Desperation (858215) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @03:55PM (#26149921)

    ...the whole sharing brains thing was just too messy. Everyone always went home all sticky.

    Eew.

  • Novell pulling out of an expensive conference? Only one explanation - Ron Hovsepian [sltrib.com] must be about to perish!

  • One more crippling bombshell crushed the already beleaguered Travel industry when Novell cofirmed they were going to move to cancel Brainshare conferences and use online resources. Ntecraft confirms that oil is at already at umprecedented low levels collapsing in complete disarray, as more people use online networking instead of hotels. You don't need to be a Kreskin to see where this headed. We're all going to have internet implants rather than using airplanes. Let's look at the numbers...

  • Mmmmmmm... Braaaaiiiiinnnsss......
    -Taylor
    (err... I mean Taaaaaaaayyyyyyloooorrrrr)

  • The zombie lord and his minions have been finally put to death by a small faction of Novell employees loyal to the human race. Our brains are safe for another day.
  • Computer conventions are on the way out. Comdex, E3, and Macworld are dead or dying; now Novell. The SF Convention Bureau says that two Cisco conventions and one from NetApp have been canceled for 2009.

    Doctor conventions are up, though.

UNIX is many things to many people, but it's never been everything to anybody.

Working...