Have you partaken in the conspiracy theories about Microsoft's recent investment in Vintela, a Unix-Windows integration software company? Vintela's association with SCO, and Microsoft's apparent interest in keeping SCO's legal battle against IBM afloat in order to undermine Linux, certainly provide plenty of kindling to keep the home fires burning at conspiracy central. But let's try to get the story straight first. OSNews interviewed Vintela President Dave Wilson.
Post a Comment
Well designed questions, and excellent answers.
But it really does seem that MS did a very calculated move with this investment. Tinfoil hats off everyone.
"Vintela has no involvement in SCO’s litigation and would neither benefit nor suffer from an outcome either way."
Isn't this a bit of a short-sighted view? ('scuse the pun)
I was under the impression that, although it isn't the major part of the case, SCO's team are vying to have the GPL labelled as "illegal".
Surely if SCO "won" their case, and the GPL was labelled deemed to be illegal, then Vintela would have some problems at least?
I know Vintela are not a Microsoft/Linux integration solutions company, but a Microsoft/*nix integration solutions company, but if Linux was taken out of the picture (by way of the GPL being "illegal"), then that would potentially knock out a fair-sized proportion of Vintela's customer base?
Or am I being the short-sighted one?
After reading this interview Microsoft's intentions with Vintela and their products became actually quite clear to me.
Microsoft can charge additional license fees for *nix and macosx clients, while at the same time keeping tight control over their proprietary management tools, authentication services and their related protocols, adding another layer of lock-in.
I don't think Vintela has evil intentions. There is definately a need for such products. I work at a large corperation myself and we are struggling with the same problems that Vintela's customers do.
I must also admit that I would be more enthousiastic to a different approach with a (preferably open) non-microsoft product holding all the strings. I guess Novell/IBM/HP and the like will solve that issue if they haven't already.
This guy was never going to admit that they are in bed with SCO and Microsoft. But you do the math,
1) You are in the same building as SCO
2) Share many of the same investors and parent companies.
3) Some of your current technology emanated in Caldera->SCO and now is being resold by them.
4) You both get money from Microsoft. It would make much more sense to have seen an investment in Vintela from HP, SUN or even Red Hat.
No need for tinfoil hats. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, it must be a ...
What SCO(TM) Litigation? You need to perview GrokLaw once and while to see how badly it is going for this company. The judges appear to have had their fill and are denying motions by this company.
They were mighty tightly tied to MS long before anyone spent a dollar on investment. Their thing is integration between nix and Windows. While there are many sources of nix, there is but one source of Windows. So MS has by far their largest single partner no matter how you slice it.
I've yet to see a smaller company turn down an investment from a corporation the size of MS. The idea of any business is to make a profit, and the capital from this investment will go a long ways to insure they do exactly that.
If you believe everything MS does is a conspiracy you are in for a very very long period of tension and stress.
They ain't going away anytime soon.
The idea of any business is to make a profit, and the capital from this investment will go a long ways to insure they do exactly that
How so true it is,however it's the goverments task to see to it that there aren't evolving unhealthy cartels.Great investment though.
I agree 100%; these were great answers.
I'd prefer to see a product that used *nix technologies to incorporate Windows clients, but I suppose the most marketable, unified way to achieve these ends would be the other way around (Windows technologies incorporating *nix clients), as Vintela is doing.
Vintela develops integration products that allow an enterprise organization to extend the infrastructure technologies and tools they use in the Windows world to the non-Windows world.
He's got a masters degree in nonsesical marketing speech, with focus on prolongation of solution feature list and repetition of approved industry-standard buzzwords.
Come on people, that aren't decent technical answers.
If Vintela is using GNU tools, they must provide the source for any of the altered GNU tools they are using.
"He's got a masters degree in nonsesical marketing speech, with focus on prolongation of solution feature list and repetition of approved industry-standard buzzwords.
Come on people, that aren't decent technical answers."
He doesn't owe anyone technical answers. He is marketing a proprietary product, and has no reason to give the world a tech briefing when all he agreed to was an interview.
He was asked, flat out, what is the relationship between SCO and Vintela. He never answered the question. He answered a different question by rewording it. I didn't exactly expect better from them, but I am disappointed that so many of the comments don't see through this.
These guys drank the Microsoft Kool-Aid by accepting the investement, and signing agreements. As soon as Microsoft sees potential for profit in the product, Vintela will be cast aside like a useless husk.
Look for seamless Unix/Linux authentication in the next big version of Windows server, and curtains for Vintela. I hope that the execs at least negotiated decent golden parachutes.
Vintella is a spin-off of SCO, the interview did not make that clear enough. Caldera & Vintella were once a single company.
They are currently funded by the same people, are in the same building, have extensive collaborations etc.
Anybody can draw their own conclusions but there is no need to obscure these facts if there is no conspiracy.
Was he the CA guy that was hired at Center 7 after the $40 Million CA deal with Canopy?
Just curious if that was Dave of someone else. I know one of th CA guys went to Vintela.
AO
Here is my take:
if Linux was taken out of the picture ... then that would potentially knock out a fair-sized proportion of Vintela's customer base?
No, not really. That is why I love IT: it changes all the time.
Yes, it was Linux integration to Windows networks yesterday, but today or tomorrow it will be Solaris integration into Windows networks.
With MS and Sun as close to be bedfellows as ever, Vintela sudenly finds itself in the position when Microsoft and UNIX vendor are willing to work with it, help it financially and with all other means, to make Vintela software work seamlessly.
I would not be surprised if some time from now Chairman Bill will be able to show the great wonders of heterogenious Solaris-Windows network, thanks to Vintela.
Linux is yesterday news. With Sun in the picture, with free (as in free of charge) Solaris for x86 platform, Vintela happened to be in the right place at the right time.
Imagine the future, when Microsoft recommends Solaris for UNIX-and-Windows environment, and Sun proudly shines "Designed for Windows Active Directory" logo on its free (CAL not included:) Solaris for x86 desktop.
Linux? What Linux?
The questions made and answers given were excellent. It looks like you guys got the scoop on this interview and created the reference Q&A for the entire situation.
Good work.
I appreciate that he uses buzz words in quotes. It makes them less annoying somehow.
"Imagine the future, when Microsoft recommends Solaris for UNIX-and-Windows environment, and Sun proudly shines "Designed for Windows Active Directory" logo on its free (CAL not included:) Solaris for x86 desktop."
Exactly. It will alter a lot of landscape instantly. Even at significant cost this would be very popular. Active Directory is the ace in the hole in the entire deal, either you have it or you don't. Once you have it in-house, it's likely there to stay.
The spokesperson for Vintela did not mention when asked about the current affiliation/relationship that SCO does in fact have (or had) a financial stake in Vintela in the form of a $500k promissary note per page 29 of this SEC filing
www.shareholder.com/Common/Edgar/1102542/1047469-04-5973/04-00.pdf (search for Vintela within the PDF). So it seems that via this financial relationship SCO is/was funding Vintela.
Vintela is a great investment. SCO thought so several years ago, and MS thought so lately. Frankly if I had a few million in cash floating freely, I would be doing the same.
It's simply a damn good investment to buy into companies with potentially explosive growth potential.
Vintela is setting in an extremely prime situation, MS is their largest partner, and they happen to be tied to one of the larger Unix suppliers. When we get to the end of the rainbow, a huge chunk of this makes sense considering they are after all a Unix/Windows infrastructure company.
If Vintela is using GNU tools, they must provide the source for any of the altered GNU tools they are using.
Try reading the GPL: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
Not everyone who modifies any GPL code is required to make it available to anyone that requests it.
If they distribute modified binaries to you, then you may request the source code. The party also reserves the right to charge you shipping on said code.
This is a common misconception, please think before you attack.
Actually, you're wrong.
From the GPL:
"3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code."
It says if you distribute object code, not modified object code. Basically if you buy Vintela's product, you can request the source code and they MUST comply. Either by allowing you to download the full source code of that program and any modifications made to the source code, or by sending you a CD and charging the cost of the media and shipping only. I'm sure that charing you $30 for a cd would not be considered reasonable for the cost of the media and shipping.
Actually, you're wrong.
Maybe sort of.
Nicholas was referring to Vintela's "altered GNU tools".
In my response "If they distribute modified binaries to you" I was referring to Nicholas's statement.
And you missed my point, Nicholas did not purchase Vintela's product and therefore is NOT entitled to the source code. Not even for $30 whole dollars.
The $500K note you refer to was for the IP that Vintela acquired from SCO 2 years ago. SCO was getting ready for their IBM litigation and was putting on a fire sale of anything that wasn't core to their new "business" model. The founders of Vintela saw some potential value in that IP, and guess what? It looks like they were right.