Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 6th Nov 2006 18:26 UTC
Novell and Ximian "Someone just asked me whether, now that Novell's become buddies with Microsoft, I'll be turning away from Novell/SUSE as one of my favorite Linux distributions. My answer is no. I'm sticking with SUSE Linux on both my desktops and servers. Here's why."
Thread beginning with comment 179293
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Microsoft funded advertising
by tsume on Mon 6th Nov 2006 18:46 UTC
tsume
Member since:
2006-07-24

Everyone has to remember, Ziff Davis is an advertising frontend for Microsoft. A simple search of google will show it to be true.

In all seriousness, this article needs to be labeled as marketing material. They're just trying to stop the affects of the merger. Many of the Linux savvy users are switching to another Linux distribution.

Reply Score: 5

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Everyone has to remember, Ziff Davis is an advertising frontend for Microsoft. A simple search of google will show it to be true.

Then Google is wrong. Before throwing around accusations, please look at the author. Steven J-something-Nichols is a Linux zealot. Has been, always will be. Ziff Davis or not.

Reply Parent Score: 1

twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

I'm not sure it's fair to label someone who praises SCO OpenServer (but not SCO in general), and has come out in favour of the MS/Novell deal a "Linux zealot". Unless of course you believe that anyone who advocates Linux (by which I mean "does something as innocuous as using it but never telling anyone about it") is a Linux zealot. In which case I would say you're just a troll.

Reply Parent Score: 5

somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

Then Google is wrong. Before throwing around accusations, please look at the author. Steven J-something-Nichols is a Linux zealot. Has been, always will be. Ziff Davis or not.

and

Linked by Thom Holwerda

??? This just makes me wonder how OSNews is desperate for articles. To link at something you consider zealotry articles? Or you just enjoy pushing obvious flamewar articles? Either way, it doesn't reflect good on OSNews.

Beside the point, SJN is often wrong, even "very, very wrong",... but "zealot"...? No, he's not. If you think he is, then I suggest you read his articles instead of looking at the pictures.

Reply Parent Score: 2

NotParker Member since:
2006-06-01

Many of the Linux savvy users are switching to another Linux distribution.

That is an excellent reason why businesses should stay away from Linux.

If a business does choose one distro over another, and the cult gets offended by something that distro does, then suddenly all the Linux "Admins" will be demanding the business switch to a more "ideological pure" Linux distro.

Stay away from cults. It will bring you nothing but grief.

Reply Parent Score: 1

KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

I'm not a system admin, but I would guess that they are more driven by how good a product is than by ideological purity. It's one thing post on OSNews, but it's quite another to move your company from one product to another.

Reply Parent Score: 5

startxjeff Member since:
2006-09-29

That's the exact reason why I advocate NOT using Windows.

Anytime MS comes out with a new OS, MS "Admins" demand that the business switch to the more "updated" Windows, else the business can't recieve updates and "fixes".

And no thought is given to the fact that some applications don't work on the new MS windows.

I agree. Stay away from cults and forced upgrade artists. They will bring you nothing but grief.

Reply Parent Score: 5

twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

I believe that business should confine themselves to ethical business practices, and since MS have no type of regulatory or governmental authority over anyone, spreading FUD like "if you don't use our approved version of Linux, we'll sue your asses" is not one. I may be more vocal on the subject when it comes to MS, but if I am it isn't because of any double-standard: it's because I feel I can do more to make sure they are eventually confined only to ethical business practices.

If you believe that the most important thing is money, then that's your business, but if you do, and I ever find out I've been dealing with your company in any way, I reserve the right to drop you like a hot potato.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Murrell Member since:
2006-01-04

That is an excellent reason why businesses should stay away from Linux.

If a business does choose one distro over another, and the cult gets offended by something that distro does, then suddenly all the Linux "Admins" will be demanding the business switch to a more "ideological pure" Linux distro.

Stay away from cults. It will bring you nothing but grief.


Speaking as a Sys-Admin in a predominantly (85%+) Linux company, we run Ubuntu, because it works, and because the GPL makes sense from a bussiness perspective. We use propietry nVidia drivers because they work, and if they became an issue*, we could switch to something else.

Ideaology is set by the owner of the company. If I decided to change the software on the machines to something more 'pure', I'd be out of a job.

Also - generally speaking, a cult is something associated with religon. If someone confuses the use of an a particular operating system with the worship of a god, then that person probably needs to get out more.

* An issue being along the lines of unfixed security problem or spyware issues.

Reply Parent Score: 4

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""Stay away from cults. It will bring you nothing but grief."""


NotParker,

One thing that I have noticed is that you like to pidgeon-hole Linux advocates all into one neat category.

You can't do that and retain an accurate view of that nebulous thing we call "the community". (This is really true of any group.)

I've been an advocate and administrator of Unix, and later Linux, since 1988. My primary attraction to Linux is that it is a great unix and has done a lot of things right that the proprietary vendors never got around to, like having a usable desktop. I am also a strong open source supporter; I strongly prefer open source software to proprietary for various reasons. Some of them practical, some of them could be considered idealistic. I would never go as far as RMS and the FSF on that point since I feel that being an extremist does more harm than good. And sometimes I am forced to go the proprietary route because I don't have an OSS solution that would work as well for my customers as a proprietary one. (For example, business accounting and Point of Sale are very weak areas for OSS.)

And guess what, NotParker? There are a *lot* of people in the community just like me; more than your realize. And the reason you don't realize it is that *we don't talk as much* as the people with more extreme opinions. (This is also probably true of most any group.)

I believe that this is the first post that I have made in *any* of these threads about the Novell-Microsoft deal, mainly because I am still making sense of it all. I've never really liked SUSE (personal preference) so I don't have any SUSE installations to delete.

If I did though, I suspect I might be considering a move to a different distro for my own workstations, since my feelings about SUSE's move are generally, at this point, negative. As an individual user, I have that luxury.

Now, if I had clients' servers on SLES or SLED, that's a whole different ball of wax. To move them to something else, I would have to have some good solid business reasons to do it. Oh, I could make up something and my customers would believe me because they have confidence in our company. But I would not do that. It would not be ethical. There is more to ethics than software freedom; There is my responsibility to do what makes the most business sense for my clients. That does not always have to mean "in the short term", though. Sometimes I recommend things, like a move from Windows to Linux, based upon gains that I see after the initial migration is over, and I'm usually pleased with the results, and so is the client. (I've never had anyone ask to move back, or say that they were dissatisfied, but then again, I only move the ones that I know will benefit.)

Certainly, at this point, there is not nearly enough reason to uproot a client and move them to a new distro.

And I consider myself to be a big Linux advocate. I sympathize with some of the FSF philosophy, but believe that if I let my attraction to OSS overshadow my responsibilities to my clients, I am doing a disservice to both the client *and* to OSS.

So please remember that "the community" has more depth to it than may sometimes be immediately apparent.

Some of us live our lives in what sometimes seems like a perpetual moral dillemma. ;-)

I don't really want to make a long thread out of this. But please, just think about it, OK?

Sincerely,
Steve Bergman

Edited 2006-11-06 21:31

Reply Parent Score: 5

hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//Everyone has to remember, Ziff Davis is an advertising frontend for Microsoft. A simple search of google will show it to be true.

In all seriousness, this article needs to be labeled as marketing material. They're just trying to stop the affects of the merger. Many of the Linux savvy users are switching to another Linux distribution.//

Exactly.

Why?

"I like the KDE 3.5.5 interface. I like -- now that's it's finally fixed -- the easy YAST update system. And, I like the combination of powerful and up-to-date software programs like Evolution, OpenOffice.org, GAIM, and Firefox."

I like these things as well. I have just one word to say ... Kubuntu.

Reply Parent Score: 1