
Novell Vice Chairman on Ximian, SCO 228
dotnothing writes "microsoft-watch.com has an interview with Chris Stone, who is the Vice Chairman of Novell. Stone says that Novell will be introducing a Linux distribution with Novell products and the Ximian desktop, but that they are not out to compete with Microsoft. He also expressed some gratitude to Red Hat for countersuing SCO."
Red Hat/SCO legal docs (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Red Hat/SCO legal docs (Score:3, Insightful)
What Iwould like to know, is how do we know that the code SCO is guarding, wasn't taken from Linux in the first place?
SCO is guarding their code, because they say it's theirs, but with Linux code is already out in the open. So how do we know WHEN SCO created their code?
Re:Red Hat/SCO legal docs (Score:3, Interesting)
SCO has had a pretty extensive version control system for a number of years, which contains code checkin dates, code author, etc. It's easy to forge some dates at a superficial level, but I'm hoping the judge would require a code audit of some of the sources which are harder to forge, such as backup tapes or the institutional memory of some ex-employees (S
Re:Red Hat/SCO legal docs (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides the obvious issues - which compiler/linker, precisely what version, what patches, which static libraries, what versions, etc - there is also the issue of alignment. I've worked with compilers/linkers that would not zero out empty space within the created images. Therefore the binary image would contain random gibberish that happened to be in memory when the compile ran. Thus, the "same" binary could generate different checksums.
LOL (Score:5, Funny)
Just a thought,
Joe
Re:Red Hat/SCO legal docs (Score:2)
Re:Red Hat/SCO legal docs (Score:2)
Long-term Linux dies anyway, so what? (Score:2)
"Unix is dead, long live unix"
not to compete with M$? (Score:5, Insightful)
so, will they install Ximian on XP?
Re:not to compete with M$? (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, I work for a small company running Netware 5.1 and Win98 desktops. I'm looking into doing an LTSP+Mosix type setup, because we only use about 4 applications on older PII hardware.
I'd hate to give up my Netware box, file permissions alone (Inherited rights/filters) are enough to keep me on it. Getting a seemless login (legally - I have an awesome NDS Pam module from France ;) from a Linux box would be awesome.
So, no. In my case, they're not competing with MS, because MS isn't being considered.
Re:not to compete with M$? (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, I'm not saying that wouldn't work. (I had a web-app that used LDAP from NDS for auth) But I want MORE than just a user/pass auth.
That's what I can think of off the top of my head. IMHO, doing a 'PERFECT' PAM module leads to NDS integration. For a good exa
How come (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How come (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:3, Interesting)
I cannot imagine a world in which Microsoft would even consider allowing such a thing to happen.
Still this looks like a good thing overall.
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:2, Informative)
I seem to recall that Microsoft released over 1 million lines of code in their shared source effort to get
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, Microsoft loves to give back to the community out of the goodness of its own heart. I'm positive they did not have any alterior motives at all.
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:2, Interesting)
No, either they don't view Wine as a significant threat, or the fact that it can run Office apps == bigger market for one of the things that makes Microsoft money I don'
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering Microsoft has made moves against Wine before (copyrighted header files springs to mind) but have never mentioned patents, I am 100% confident that they cannot shut it down via that route.
In the unlikely event that they may have patents on the API implementations, Wine would do what every open source project does in such a scenario and work around them or get them
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:2)
Windows message passing and routing is just an implementation of message passing and routing. There's nothing innovative about that, and I can tell you if they managed to patent this they would go after bigger fish than Wine.
Well, I guarantee you that if someone created
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:2)
If they had such a patent, they surely would have used it before now.
Re:Oh yeah, they'll go for that. (Score:2)
It isn't like Microsoft can do much about code on another platform that happens to be compatible with what third-party developers are writing....
Right... (Score:5, Funny)
"Uh... Yeah... We want to sell this but, uh.. not a lot of it..." - Chris Stone
Bet they hadn't thought of this (Score:5, Funny)
I'd 'just hope' Linux users aren't against the idea.
Re:Bet they hadn't thought of this (Score:5, Interesting)
Why not Java? (Score:2)
So the question is, why not focus on Java?
Re:Bet they hadn't thought of this (Score:2)
That's true of C also, and various other languages as well, but the big catch is the "If done right...". I think history proves that it will not be done right.
Re:Bet they hadn't thought of this (Score:4, Informative)
I don't really think the promise of portability bewtween Win and Linux is the important part of mono. It is rather that the system is a pretty clean, well-designed one. Also, it _does_ offer excellent portability between Linux versions - run the same binary on whatever distro, on whatever hardware. Redhat on x86, Linux on an iPaq, Debian on a Sparcstation, RH on an IBM s390 - it will just work, without recompiling or installation issues.
The core of
In fact, given Linux' steadily increased prescence as a server, if MS goes off and makes mono incompatible with their own version (whether by API changes, implementation secrets or licensing stupidity), chances are developers who use
Re:Bet they hadn't thought of this (Score:5, Insightful)
(a) have some software layer that can use windows .dlls in linux, just like Wine. Software will be significantly slower, however.
(b) have something that can compile .Net code the way .Net does, but uses Linux libraries instead. You'll get things to run a bit faster than option a, but it's going to be quite an undertaking to rewrite every microsoft library to be completly compatable with linux, especially the DirectX stuff. Wine has already done a lot of that, but thier windows libraries don't function exactly like the native windows ones.
(c) Microsoft decides to open-source thier libraries, embraces linux. Then I'll be able to port my copy of Duke Nukem Forever to Linux. This will be the second largest article on slashdot that week, right behind the second coming of Christ.
Re:Bet they hadn't thought of this (Score:2)
There is no speed penalty to using MS native code on Linux, whether it's via Wine or Mono. When to use, or not to use, native code is an interesting topic in its own right, but speed rarely plays a part in it.
Re:Bet they hadn't thought of this (Score:2)
Fund (Score:4, Insightful)
He knows what to do, with the fund and all.
Novell should be cheering for SCO. (Score:2)
Re:Novell should be cheering for SCO. (Score:2)
No they wouldn't, because they'd be violating the GPL, and therefor violating the copyrights of all the various contributors who didn't plagarize SCO code. Care to take bets on which group represents a larger portion of the Linux codebase?
This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Stone: We are going to continue to push it.
And therein lies the fatal flaw in pushing a Microsoft-controlled (and possibly patented) standard on a free platform
It isn't about 'sucking up valuable developer time and effort' (plenty of things suck up valuable developer time and effort, indeed, that is the very essence of free software and the freedom for people to explore solutions wherever they lead)
We dismiss such concerns at our own, rather substantial, risk.
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:4, Interesting)
Remember OS/2? No? See? Nobody remembers OS/2 (Bill Gates quote!).
OS/2 ran Win3.1 apps natively, so nobody wrote OS/2 apps, but Win3.1 apps.
The lesson is that as soon as you support somebody else's standard, then nobody has any reason to use your standard.
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)
If OS/2 hadn't run Windows apps, nobody would have ever used it. The reason it died was the high price and poor hardware support (it didn't run on non-IBM machines without a lot of tweaking). Stop using that example, for fuck's sake.
The lesson is that as soon as you support somebody else's standard, then nobody has any reason to use your standard.
Does linux have anything remotely resembling
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:3, Informative)
Does linux have anything remotely resembling .Net? Other than mono, of course.
You mean, somthing like dotGNU [gnu.org]?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2, Insightful)
I found OS/2 much simpler and reliable than Windows to implement, and deploy (once you weeded the bad memory and MBoards out), especially 2.x on.
Early on, Microsoft eliminated certain network DLLs from their OS/2 SMB network distributions which prevented browsing, etc. from an OS/2 machine. making it's viability worse, but hedging their bets in case it took off.
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe you're not familiar with Internet Explorer, or Windows, or Microsoft Word?
MS has made their market by supporting other folk's standards and--this is the important part--GIVING THE USER A REASON TO USE MS! Historically, this has been cost...
and I'm sure that an OSS
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2)
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Your other side of the argument is basically the "not invented here" thing. If Microsoft invented it, it must be bad for free software. It's not like Microsoft can force Mono to change its ways, so I fail to see your point. Mono is not a Wine clone, it's a development framework for Linux, one that could potentially be very useful for writing portable software.
I don't see anyone here bitching about Java, even though it's also a similar, proprietary technology controlled by one party -- Sun. Hell, I would say that Linux is more of a threat to Sun than Microsoft. So why isn't Java a threat to Linux?
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2)
The "underlying Mono infrastructure" in itself is of little interest, other than possibly as some sort of "neat" technology.
This is like saying that Java runs on every platform except for swing only works on Solaris.
Microsoft may not have sued Wine (who sh
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2)
I believe that ECMA require RAND, which is not RF (Score:3, Interesting)
Who marked this insightful, when it is wrong?
ECMA only requires RAND, which means almost nothing in real terms.
In some cases, Microsoft and others have said "royalty-free", which is still clearly not GPLable and does not seem to extend much beyond a very basic core of C#, which I believe is far less than you get with a Java distribution, for example.
On the reference implementations I find mention of the mplementations being limited to "non-commercial" uses.
I complain about Java's lack of openness all th
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:3, Informative)
Quote from Steve Ballmer: Responding to questions about the opening-up of the .NET framework, Ballmer announced that there would certainly be a "Common Language Runtime Implementation" for Unix, but then explained that this development would be limited to a subset, which was "intended only for academic use". Ballmer rejected speculations about support for free .NET implementationens such as Mono: "We have invested so many millions in .NET, we have so many patents on .NET, which we want to cultivate."
You [ffii.org]
If anyone is "ceding authority" it is you (Score:2)
You're yielding, not those building Mono.
You Mean ... (Score:2, Troll)
You mean, like the way a motorist cedes authority to a precipice they drive along, by chosing not driving over the edge?
Microsoft has a history of bullying tactics and abuse of their monopoly to shut down competitors, even small upstarts who pose no real immediate threat. They have a history of moving development targets and changing standards with little or no warning (a
When did we start sowing our own FUD? (Score:2)
At the very most your scenario of Microsoft atacking Mono is nothing more than a possibility. (It's also not a possibility that people are blind to. The approach of the Mono team to potential IP related problems seems completely sensible).
So perhaps it's akin to driving along the edge of a precipice. I've driven up my fair share of mountains and perhaps it is a bit more dangerous than a trip down to the local shops but sometimes the place you want to go to hap
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean ECMA. Not Microsoft controlled. Guaranteed royalty free.
Indeed, were the GNU/Linux desktop and server implimentations to fully embrace it, Linux servers and desktops could well put themselves in the position of existing solely at the pleasure of Microsoft
Indeed, my ass. Does that mean that Bjarne Stroustrup can call to term th
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)
1) ECMA requires RAND not "free and clear"
2) MS controls patents on ado.net and forms and many other parts of
3) MS has publicly said that they will enforce their property rights when it comes to
4) MS sues businesses all the time.
5) Giving away
Let me help you with your brain logic blockage. (Score:2)
Not surprisingly the locals normally love these criminals and more often than not are willing to do anything (and here I mean anything) in favour of their patrons.
Draw your own analogies, it is not difficult (keep a sense of proportion, there are degrees of black here), but to say that someb
Re:Let me help you with your brain logic blockage. (Score:2)
Comparing Microsoft to a Columbian drug lord? Right, and you think I need help with my logic.
Draw your own analogies, it is not difficult (keep a sense of proportion, there are degrees of black here), but to say that somebody does not behave like a truly bastard in one field because he be
Re:Let me help you with your brain logic blockage. (Score:2)
Personal computing was pushed by the Commodore PET, by Apple's II and successors and by the hundreds and thousands of companies building IBM compatible personal computers.
And by Microsoft when they looked away when students used their pirated version of MS Works or MS Word.
Re:Let me help you with your brain logic blockage. (Score:2)
And why were the "hundreds and thousands of companies" (nice exaggeration, btw) building all of them? To run Microsoft software.
And by Microsoft when they looked away when students used their pirated version of MS Works or MS Word.
Nice way of discounting reality! I wish I had that power, too.
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2)
You mean `charities' like Planned Parenthood? Yeah, sure, support Bill Gates the baby-murderer.
Re:This is why Mono is such a bad idea (Score:2)
Well, considering Microsoft didn't kill off any endangered species the analogy is incredibly flawed.
Microsoft destroyed it's competitors by using very shrewd (and in the case of Netscape, illegal) business tactics. They guaranteed their place in the world by making software that p
Re:A little semantics is in order here... (Score:2, Insightful)
Yay! (Score:5, Interesting)
They aren't going to destroy Evolution AND they're going to make it work with GroupWise. Ahh... for those of us running Novell/Linux in the academic world who are getting rather tired of Microsoft's mafia-esque licensing tactics (software assurance, anyone?), this is great news. One less major hurdle between now and a Linux desktop rollout. Yay Novell!
Re:Yay! (Score:4, Interesting)
(and more market share for Linux)
who in their right mind would place a windows server in an environment, when linux(novell) is a choice?
so what do we call this, Novell's GNU/Linux?, or Novell/GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux + Novell NDS? better yet GNU/Linux/NDS...
Re:Yay! (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, we would. The masses like their M$ Office apps, and they run okay on 2000 Server boxes running Citrix Metaframe. Although this wonderful little deal may (read: probably will) give us a better way to do it.
As far as the naming goes, my vote is for Ninix ;)
Re:Yay! (Score:2)
"the copyright thing" (Score:4, Interesting)
These VPs can ham it up all they want, but if they worked for me, I wouldn't let them out of the executive wash room. I'm sorry, but Novell's copyright stunt embarassed them at least as much as it did SCO. To allude to it ominously like the preview of a summer reality show is just tacky.
Re:"the copyright thing" (Score:2)
Or he could just be blowing smoke :)
what a hypocrite (Score:3, Insightful)
This coming from the company who has zero interest in the long term survivability of Linux...
Reread On Title... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm sure it was just me, but did a first glance at this headline read sorta like "Novell Vice Chairman on Ximian *and* SCO?
I got chills up and down, but then I read the article.
Whew. Close one.
Re:Reread On Title... (Score:3, Funny)
There's your problem. As anyone on
SCO Teleconference (Score:5, Informative)
Call 1 (800) 238-9007 and enter 274040 as the access code.
Great exposure for Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Great exposure for Linux (Score:2)
Knowing Novell, they'll probably call it LinuxWare.
10 years later (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft Watch: Now that you are buying Ximian, will Novell offer a Linux desktop distribution?
Stone: Yes. The plan is to package the Ximian desktop with some of our products. Specifics are yet to be determined. But we want to cover Linux from the desktop to the server.
Ten years ago, Novell was the owner of DR-DOS, Netware, and Unixware, and had the potential to be a solutions provider for everything from the desktop, to medium sized workgroups, to enterprise scale solutions, but what did they do? They tried to compete against Lotus Smartsuite and MS Office with an office suite based on Quattro Pro and WordPerfect.
NT wasn't even ready yet, they coulda been a contender...
Re:10 years later (Score:2)
Ray had the right idea of combining Unix and Netware. It seems like he had some sort of a vision but just couln't carry it out.
Bad management, bad decisions, bad outcome. Predictable really.
Re:10 years later (Score:3, Interesting)
Novell didn't fail because the market wasn't ripe, Novell failed because they bungled the whole thing.
Don't forget, the market was also rigged. Even if they had made nothing but perfect decisions, they still would have failed.
Re:10 years later (Score:2)
When the house is cheating, the solution is to take your money and play elsewhere.
Yeah, I hear the software market on Mars is really starting to heat up.
WordPerfect never had any technical rationale at Novell. UnixWare (sold for pennies to SCO) and Linux (spun off to Caldera) did.
Did I say anywhere in my previous post that Novell had made good marketing decisions?
IBM? (Score:4, Insightful)
Evolution-Groupwise by itself is enough for this merger to produce some great things.
-Erwos
Chris Stone and Novell Linux Distributions (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I have to wonder about the wisdom of producing yet another Linux distribution, particularly one aimed at the desktop arena. Although you may not know it from the figures, many internaional companies have already standardised on SuSE or Red Hat for their Linux vendors and the name Novell still has some bad connertations in the Corporate world.
Much of Novells strategy today seems to be selling very high value (expensive) products based around XML and Web Services (see their Silverstream aquisition) to Fortune 500 / FTSE 100 companies. I know as an implemetor for their excellent DirXML Meta Directory in a 100,000 employee company.
To my mind they would be better forming an alliance of the sort that SuSE and Sun announced yeterday, where Sun support and Distribute SuSE Linux and SuSE use Sun's Java in all their distributions. Novell could add their tools to SuSE and Red Hat, such as Directory Clients and Xen Works clients, concentrate on selling their servers on the SuSE and Red Hat platforms they already support and bundle SuSE and RedHat desktops for Netware customers. This would give them client penetration and server sales opportunities without having to compete with the Linux vendors. They could also leverage the relationship these vendors have with Sun and IBM who would be happy as the Novell server components also run on Solaris and (I think) AIX. Thoughts?
Re:Chris Stone and Novell Linux Distributions (Score:2)
I'd say their strategy is to sell add-ons to NetWare, of which DirXML is only one example. And, of course, they license per-seat/per-client and offer incentives to pay for support contracts.
My read is that Novell would rather control the client. In my view their Windows (& DOS) clients have always tried to "ta
Re:Chris Stone and Novell Linux Distributions (Score:4, Informative)
My read is that Novell would rather control the client. In my view their Windows (& DOS) clients have always tried to "take over" the client machine and duke it out with Windows rather than peacefully coexist with it. That's my personal bias from years of Novell clients on Win boxen, though. (Windows is far from blame itself.)
That is a backwards reading of how things happened. When DOS and Windows were just desktop OSes, there was no other network client on the box for the NetWare client to "duke it out" with, so there was no conflict. When Microsoft decided to destroy Novell they began introducing dirty tricks into Windows to hamper the Novell client. One example is the NT GINA (the gizmo that asks for your login credentials on boot-up) which will only pass credentials on to the Microsoft networking client. In order for the Novell client to get a login, they had to replace the GINA. While this appears to be a "take over", it's actually their only choice if they want the client to work without asking the user to reenter their credentials (and then everyone would bitch about how clunky that was.) The Novell GINA is egalitarian in that it passes credentials on to all clients on the box. The "take over" line is FUD.
I just had an odd thought. You've seen the available Java GUI on the NetWare console, right? I wonder if they'll try to make that the Linux client desktop? . . . Nahhh, they aren't that crazy.
That would be kind of silly since they just bought Ximian. The Java GUI was just a quick-and-dirty implementation used to impress the PHBs. I don't know anyone who actually uses it unless they have to (like during the install). It's for people who say, "Man, that Ferrari is really nice...except it doesn't have an automatic transmission."
Ain't skeerd (of a command line)
Re:Chris Stone and Novell Linux Distributions (Score:2)
Okay, my Java GUI comment was stupid, too. It's just one of those things that popped in my head while typing, and Novell s
Re:Chris Stone and Novell Linux Distributions (Score:2)
Re:Chris Stone and Novell Linux Distributions (Score:2)
I doubt if Novell would actually evangelize a new distro. They're more likely to create one that works seamlessly with their server and directory software and include it with those products. That would grease the path of Linux into the corporate environment without precluding the use of other distros. Novell would effectively be saying, "You want to use Linux? Here, we'll make it easy for you. Want to use a different distro? Knock yourselves out, it's a free country and an open OS. More power to ya." It's a
Re:Chris Stone and Novell Linux Distributions (Score:2)
For another perspective (Score:5, Informative)
Seems like all is well, for now anyway.
I dont like this.. (Score:2)
Their plans only talked about bundled versions with novell's products noting about any standalone versions.
We'll have to wait for the announcements at linuxworld I guess.
Don't buy SCO. (Score:5, Insightful)
To buy SCO you would need a reason why this is a good use of money, to make them go away is probaly not a good use of corporate funds.
Those millions could do a lot of legal fighting, or development, or even advertising. All with a better ROI then removing SCO.
I really wish (Score:2)
Unfortunately, there's no way I could see to buy out SCO and put those in the "idiot management division" or "idiot shareholder division" out on the streets without first handing them a hefty chunk of change. But really, SCO and the OS community used to get along to some extent, and I'm sure there
Re:Don't buy SCO. (Score:2)
A few million in development work would probaly give a better return.
Re:Won't somebody end this already? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Won't somebody end this already? (Score:2, Redundant)
as much as I would like to see SCO go away, it pains me to think that the SCO crooks can walk away from this with pockets full.
also, buying SCO to 'go away' sets a bad precedent and I would really rather not see this kind of business plan to be considered successful one.
Re:Won't somebody end this already? (Score:2)
Welcome to hell, Darl.
Ooops (Score:2)
Welcome to hell, Darl.
Re:Ooops (Score:2)
Re:Won't somebody end this already? (Score:2)
Wait until their stock drops when it's apparent to Wall Street that IBM's gonna trounce them.
Ah, would you negotiate with terrorists? (Score:4, Insightful)
Wouldn't buying out SCO be just like negotiating with terrorists? Make no mistake: they want to be bought out! McBride and his cronies get themselves a golden parachute, SCO disappears, and the lawsuit disappears, and everyone is happy. Until one fine day a new piddly-ass failing SCO wannabe corporation with some semi-valuable "intellectual property" tries to do the same. There will be no end to it then.
IBM and RedHat and everyone concerned should do their utmost to grind SCO into the dust, so as to give a clear message that this sort of "terrorism" will never be tolerated.
Absolutely DO NOT buy SCO (Score:3, Interesting)
To those who wish that IBM or whoever would simply buy out SCO, consider the following:
1) America is rampant with frivolous lawsuits. Hell, we invented the term, along with nuiscience suit. What big company doesn't have one or more?
2)There will be more to follow. Count on it. When you get big enough, you get sued. If you're intimidated now(or your manager is), then you might as well drop Linux because this won't be the last. This lawsuit is as full of s*** as they come, and if we as a community
Re:What did Novell buy ? (Score:3, Interesting)
there are many answers to this question (of which i know none), but the one that forks in my mind is the actual 'control' of the future 'direction'. This will be used for Novell, and their purposes (which happens to be 'making money'). That in itself should be worth the dollars that were spent...
Re:What did Novell buy ? (Score:2)
good question. is all of the code that is submitted to GNOME, used in the project? or, are there some regulations, some stuff that is cut, some 'direction' given by someone? ofcourse, Novell will run 'control' and 'direction' simply by stating what goes into the final product (of Ximian products)...that and paying Miguel De Icaza to keep him onside....
Re:What did Novell buy ? (Score:2)
and I understand that it is 100% Volunteer work, but my point was this: if i decide to write some really buggy/shaky code, and submit it, will it be included?
probably not...
so ofcourse, it is 100% voluteer work, but, the decisions of what to include, and what not include of ALL of the volunteered work, has to be done by someone....
now, i have no idea of what 'actually' goes down with the GNOME or Ximian projects...if I did, I'd probably not be posting on slashdot...
but, inrega
OT: Vertu (Score:2)