Novell and Microsoft: Stop with the FUD already

The Need for Collaboration

You know, it toolk Microsoft quite a few years to get it through its thick skull that open source was a legitimate and viable software platform for large enterprises -- and that it had simply better learn to live with that fact.

Commercial open source vendors like Novell have come to realize the reverse is also true -- i.e., that Windows is also here to stay and that open source had better lern to live with that fact as well.

There is a fundamental reason why both sides of the software divide need to learn to co-exist and collaborate with each other. And that is that smart CIOs now maintain and will ALWAYS insist on maintaining heterogeneous computer systems in theie data centers. They will never want to be dependent on only one vendor.

So cooperation is necessary. Red Hat negotiated in secret with Microsoft for a year and a half and very nearly reached the same deal that Novell did -- not out of any love for Microsoft, but rather just because that's what their customers demanded.

So for the open source majority that just wants to build good software and serve their customers rather than wage some sort of software holy war, collaboration will be the name of the game going forward.

And don't be surprised if Rd Hat and Microsoft get back to the negotiating table. It's in everyone's interests, including open source's interests.

The fact that some of these

The fact that some of these customers were quoted on their need for IP assurance in Microsoft and Novell press releases is irrelevant to the key issue -- i.e., that many customers DID and STILL DO believe that IP assurance is important.

Vaughan-Nichols claimed no customers were worried about IP issues -- that IP was just a red herring designed to spur FUD.

But unless you think these quotes are made up -- and please say so if that's what you really believe -- they show that Vaughan-Nichols doesn't know what he's talking about.

In addition to resolving customer concerns over IP, the deal has also been very good for Novell, which because of it, went from a paid subscription growth rate of only 2% in 2006 to a growth rate of 37% in 2007 -- the highest growth rate in the industry.

According to IDG, Novell also gained 5 points of market share in 2007 against Red Hat. And since most red Hat customers are on 3 year contracts, industry analysts expect to see many more Linux customers switching from Red Hat to Novell.

If you think the deal is bad, or that customers are wrong to worry about IP issues, just state your reasons. But don't claim that customers don't care worry about these IP issues, because the actual real-world evidence shows otherwise.

There are many legitimate pros and cons to collaboration between Microsoft and open source, and debate over these issues is valid. But it must be based on facts, even if these facts are inconvenient. And the fact is that customers were extremely worried about the effect that IP disputes could have on their business. The RIM-NTP case, the SCO suits, and the many, many customer comments in the press prove that beyond a doubt.

Your statement boggles the mind

Vaugn-Nichols claimed that “I talk to a lot of business people who have already committed themselves or are considering using Linux in their data-centers and offices. Not one of them is seriously concerned about Linux’s IP issues.”

Really?

Leave aside for a moment his apparent amnesia for the widespread fear that just two years ago had rippled through the nation’s large data centers over the NTP-RIM patent suit’s threat to Blackberry communications. Forget about the customer fears widely reported in the media during the SCO-Red Hat litigation. Vaughan-Nichols statement simply boggles the mind. Indeed, one has to ask: To whom has he been talking -- or rather, not talking?

Consider, for example, the following published comments from major Linux customers:

“At Nationwide, it is important to us that our software is compliant with all IP licensing requirements,” said David Zelle, Director of Systems Engineering and Administration at the lender. “We are actively looking to migrate to [Novell’s] Linux versus other brands of Linux.”

Added Nancy Stewart, Wal-Mart’s Chief Technology Officer: "We have wanted information technology vendors to deliver interoperability and IP assurance between multiple platforms for some time now. We are pleased that Microsoft and Novell are fulfilling that need."

Then there was this comment from Eugene Roman, Group President for Systems and Technologies at Bell Canada: “This agreement is a positive example of how companies with different business models and approaches to intellectual property can work together. Hopefully this is a model that others in the industry will repeat.”

Meanwhile, Jonathan Zuck, President of the Association for Competitive Technologies, had this to say: “Microsoft and Novell should be commended for putting customers and innovation before ideology. This is the kind of achievement that can only be reached when parties respect one another’s innovations and intellectual property and put their customers first.”

As for Mark Popolano, Global Chief Information officer for the insurance giant AIG, he said simply: “Microsoft and Novell’s commitment to working together to deliver interoperability and IP assurance helps us achieve [our] mission.”

And finally, here’s what the community’s own Open Source Development Labs had to say: “We are glad to see these two companies collaborating to further diminish the legal threat posed to developers and customers by patent assertions,” declared CEO Stuart Cohen. “This is good for customer confidence in Linux, the open source community, and the IT ecosystem.”

One wonders if Stephen J. Vaughan-Nichols actually lives in the same world that real-life information technology customers and businesses inhabit.

Worth what you pay for it

If Linux was any good, you could charge for it and actually get paid for your work. As it is, its worth exactly what you can get for it: nothing.

Unless and until I can sell my proprietary code to run on top of it without having to give away 20 years worth of IP development and patented technology for free, I might use it. Until then, all you FOSS fanatics can go suck rocks.

Opensuse =

Windows 2020.

Balmer is doing a 'Next step/OSX' type transition for the future of the windows operating system using OpenSuse as the skunkworks - it'll just take 10 years is all - and nobody even suspects a thing!

With the acquisition of Yahoo he'll have FreeBSD in his grasp, and now they're on the Apache foundation I think we can safely say it's future is subject to 'incorporation peril' as well.

I'd say just about all the branches of the Open Source tree are now neatly guarded.

you know what I love about

you know what I love about all of these anti Novell pro Red Hat comments is that what do you all think would happen if Red Hat becomes THE dominant player that MS is now? I am sure they are going to be altruistic. I would love to see some positive comments about Novell. They have been around a long time and have extensive experience and knowledge about networking. For decades they have had innovative software and have been working for years with MS and apple software to make sure they are inter operable. They are one of the few companies that have survived MS onslaught.
Since Novell has won the SCO suite you don't hear how benevolent Novell is considering SCO was out to sue everyone. Where were all of the donations from the community to help Novell win the suite? They have done a lot for the Open Source community, they still need to make money to survive.
Its time to pick a new scapegoat.