Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th Oct 2007 16:10 UTC, submitted by elsewhere
Novell and Ximian "Novell's long journey from NetWare to Linux is finally complete. On Oct. 8, Novell released Open Enterprise Server 2 to its customers worldwide. Shortly after acquiring SUSE and its enterprise-focused Linux distribution, Novell announced that its follow-on to NetWare 6.5 would ship as a set of network services that could run atop the NetWare and the Linux kernel, OES 1.0. OES, which began shipping in April 2005, was the first major step in Novell moving NetWare's services from its native operating system to Linux. Now, with OES 2.0, the NetWare operating system kernel, NetWare 6.5 SP7, is still there if you run it, but it runs on top of the Xen hypervisor. You can also run the NetWare services, or a para-virtualized instance of NetWare, on top of Xen with the SLES 10 SP 1 kernel. So, if you're wedded to NetWare and its way of doing things, you don't have to wave good-bye to it."
Permalink for comment 277467
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Goodbye Novell
by segedunum on Wed 10th Oct 2007 14:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Goodbye Novell"
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'll agree that they lag behind Microsoft in this regard.

They log a long way behind, and there's no reason they should because moving to Linux should have given them what they needed.

There is no bare metal 64-bit version currently, nor will there be ever.

Basically, Novell couldn't afford to maintain it or keep up with the hardware world. We all understand that.

The same goes for drivers. Everything I've been lead to believe, it's a huge undertaking involving a heavy rewrite of the OS for little or no benefit over running those same services on the Linux kernel.

That's exactly what they needed to do if they wanted their customers to go with them. Not everything is going to work, and the concept of NLMs would have to go the journey, but everything else needed to fit and Novell needed to get everyone so excited about it that they would want to go along. That's also what I'm hinting at when I talk about graphical tools.

In terms of pure performance and feature set, you have to take the two products out of the politics and put them head to head.

Same difference. Windows Server has been eating share at the expense of Netware for years, and in terms of features Novell needed to arrest it. They havent.

It will be one product.

It isn't though, and it shouldn't have been until they released it.

The issue is, you can't just up and do away with NetWare in one movement. You have to continue to support it and provide a migration path.

That's Novell's problem, and they've done it very badly. In fact, they don't have any kind of adequate migration path. Mostly, it's left up to customers all in the name of choice. People don't want that - they want a network operating system and they want Novell to tell them what they are selling.

This is a phasing out process and OES2 is just next step of that process.

Phasing out shouldn't be necessary. At the moment, many people are caught in limbo between one and the other. Virtualisation provides Netware with something of a future for people who need all of it, but OES should have been released with all the tools necessary for people to migrate from Netware to Linux and have it be a drop-in replacement. Many jumped ship when that didn't happen.

Moreover, OES2 has been turned into an add on package to SLES10 rather than a separate operating system for lack of a better descriptor.

That's good, yes, but the two are named completely differently, and really, there should still just be one product.

To sum it all up, my main point is that NetWare is a dead end in terms of development and Linux is the best option as a successor.

I think everyone can understand that, but Novell's customers don't care and simply want a network operating system to do what Netware did with quite a bit extra. Frankly, Novell have failed to provide it.

Open sourcing NetWare would be a very time consuming and expensive process.

I'm not saying they should open source all of it - just the parts that they can get up and running on Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 2