Novell's controversial pact with Microsoft reflects the desire of the number two Linux seller to position itself as a mixed-source company. Speaking to ZDNet Asia last week, Maarten Koster, the newly-appointed president of Novell Asia-Pacific, noted that the company positions itself in the market differently from its rivals. "You've got Red Hat as a pure open source company, and you've got Microsoft as a [commercial] license-based company," Koster said. "The reality is, most Novell customers run a mixed-source IT environment."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-06
Novell has tried for some time to peddle this both source thing for a while, and it just can't work. You can't promote open source software on the one hand and then say "Right, no further. This is proprietary".
Of course you can.
What happens if Red Hat's directory server becomes an awful lot more popular and well used than eDirectory. Will Novell knee jerk to that as well?
There's no reason why Novell can't pursue a phased move from closed-to-open source. It may not make sense to open source their directory services because it's selling reasonably well, but that may not be true in a couple years. Point is, they can make that decision when they come to it.
It just creates conflicts in the minds of your users and customers, not too mention the support angle. What can I freely install on different machines, and what can I not? People used to have that problem with YaST. A company like Red Hat has no such problems because they're very clear on where the lines are drawn.
It's not as difficult as you're trying to portray. The licensing terms are pretty clear.
Additionally, keeping a lot of their software closed makes absolutely no business sense either. In the minds of a lot of IT people, Novell and their software is now dead - whether it be closed or not. The key is not that Novell isn't making the money they once were out of their software, it's that people are now not even using it either. Properly open sourcing a lot of their software would ensure that more people started using Novell software again, and they wouldn't lose any money because the support side of their business is still very large.
No offense, but I trust Novell to decide and run its own business more than some random guy on the Web.
Member since:2005-07-06
Of course you can.
No you can't. It gives an utterly confused and inconsistent message to your customers, not to mention the 'what you can and can't install without a license' type of confusion.
Novell gives out enough confusion as it is.
It may not make sense to open source their directory services because it's selling reasonably well
Considering that its usage has been declining for some time now to the point that many people don't even know that Novell is still around, I think not. That's what is killing Novell.
It's not as difficult as you're trying to portray. The licensing terms are pretty clear.
For customers trying to deploy software, and certainly with Red Hat, you need a consistent message. A message of "We're using open source software so you can deploy it everywhere without a license and pay for support" on the one hand, and "Oh, that doesn't apply to this, this or this bit of software" on the other just creates yet more confusion and barriers to people using your software and then handing over money for it.
This isn't an idealogical argument, but one rooted in the kinds of messages you give out to your customers. Red Hat has a clear message there, Novell doesn't. If Novell didn't like that then they shouldn't have got involved with open source software.
No offense, but I trust Novell to decide and run its own business more than some random guy on the Web.
Forums exist for people to give their views and opinions, so if you don't want to listen to some random guy then you're in the wrong place ;-). No offence, but that comment is absolutely worthless. If you're going to write a response, by all means do so, but don't let your frustration get the better of you.
Quite frankly, I trust what many Novell customers have been telling Novell for years in order to run their business rather than Novell themselves or some random Novell fanboy who can't even defend them properly.
Edited 2007-01-06 00:52
Member since:
2005-07-06
Novell has tried for some time to peddle this both source thing for a while, and it just can't work. You can't promote open source software on the one hand and then say "Right, no further. This is proprietary". What happens if Red Hat's directory server becomes an awful lot more popular and well used than eDirectory. Will Novell knee jerk to that as well?
It just creates conflicts in the minds of your users and customers, not too mention the support angle. What can I freely install on different machines, and what can I not? People used to have that problem with YaST. A company like Red Hat has no such problems because they're very clear on where the lines are drawn.
Additionally, keeping a lot of their software closed makes absolutely no business sense either. In the minds of a lot of IT people, Novell and their software is now dead - whether it be closed or not. The key is not that Novell isn't making the money they once were out of their software, it's that people are now not even using it either. Properly open sourcing a lot of their software would ensure that more people started using Novell software again, and they wouldn't lose any money because the support side of their business is still very large.
Novell have to be brave and clever to arrest their continuing slide and turn it into a flat line and an upturn, and they're not doing it.