Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 27th Sep 2007 07:55 UTC, submitted by Augusto
Permalink for comment 274746
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
This is not true. They've persistently said that Microsoft have no grounding on that point at all.
Then the deal wasn't necessary.
So really it just makes Microsoft look silly.
You're just exceptionally naive if you believe that. All that's happened is that Microsoft have managed to create the impression amongst Novell's customers, and corpote customers elsewhere, that Linux and open source software infringes on Microsoft's patents and property.
Which part of Novell getting a lot of money, boosting its Linux engineering team significantly, selling more copies of SUSE Linux Enterprise, growing stocks... is Novell looking "naive"?
Which part of Novell getting a one-off payment to give Microsoft what it wants, Novell getting very little in the way of the interoperability we've all heard of and selling copies of SLES through Microsoft, where part of the agreement is that these servers have to be members of a Windows domain with Windows servers, did you fail to understand?