EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

02.16.09

Novell the Biggest Loser in New Red Hat-Microsoft Virtual Agreement

Posted in Deals, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Novell, Red Hat, Servers, SLES/SLED, Virtualisation, Windows at 12:12 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

RED Hat has just made an announcement that is less important than reporters might be led to believe. Given some initial details, it’s clear that Red Hat wants nothing to do with Microsoft’s software patents.

As Glyn Moody pointed out, there is “Nothing Novell-ish here.” Matthew Aslett got that right as well.

There is no Linux-support coupon scheme, although that was exclusive to the Novell-Microsoft agreement anyway, and no patent or intellectual property agreement either.

Ultimately, this developments makes Novell’s SUSE a lot less necessary and therefore it provides an escape route from Microsoft’s patent coupons. In other words, Novell got screwed for paying for something that’s potentially free, owing to reciprocity. This isn’t the first such example where Novell looks like fool for these reasons. Bada boom!

Drums Novell

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

12 Comments

  1. Jose_X said,

    February 16, 2009 at 1:32 pm

    Gravatar

    Market pressures is apparently why Red Hat did it.

    I hate interop with Microsoft. It’s a lie. They can see all our code. We can’t see a bit of theirs. It’s wasteful to spend time on their hooks and crannies.

    The reason to control the OS was to avoid Microsoft entirely. So the weed now is doing VMs so they can get into our fertile land to choke everything else off.

    Weeds are untrustworthy. They bring no good. They have no self control.

    Avoid interoperating with weeds as much as possible (easier to do if you aren’t a public business needing to make quarterly numbers).

  2. anonymous said,

    February 16, 2009 at 1:40 pm

    Gravatar

    I had all these questions on why you’re boycotting novell if you have no problems with other vendors doing ms agreements, but then I realized you’re just an idiot getting payed to do this (well I hope you’re at least getting payed, otherwise you’re a lunatic instead of a sellout), so asking you to be logical or consistent is probably beyond your capabilities (or at least pay grade).

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 16, 2009 at 1:47 pm

    Gravatar

    In case you haven’t seen the news, the analysis is very consistent. Groklaw sort of endorsed this too.

    http://blogs.computerworld.com/red_hat_microsoft_partner_up
    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009021611190551
    http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2009/02/red_hat_and_mic.html http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2009/02/update_red_hat.html
    http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2009/02/red_hat_and_mic.html http://www.businessreviewonline.com/os/archives/2009/02/update_red_hat.html

    I’ll write about this later.

  4. Roy Bixler said,

    February 16, 2009 at 2:06 pm

    Gravatar

    Most of this site’s raison d’être has to do with the patent portion of Novell’s deal with Microsoft, which at least implicitly concedes Microsoft’s rhetoric that Linux violates its IP and any customer of a Linux vendor somehow owes Microsoft money. There is also the concern that the patents deal violates the GPL, at least in spirit if not legally. To someone who supports FLOSS and wants to see it reach new heights, both of these points give many grounds for objection.

  5. Shane Coyle said,

    February 16, 2009 at 2:30 pm

    Gravatar

    True interoperability requires no agreement, just adherence to open standards (or at least working documentation).

    That being said, it appears there were no IP or even monetary exchanges, just merely a marketing announcement that aids both companies, and their customers. Relatively benign, methinks.

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 16, 2009 at 6:00 pm

    Gravatar

    I tried to represent the views of skeptics that I’ve also been seeing in some other sites, mostly in comments.

    This one is the latest that caught my eye:

    At first glance, this is a significant win for Red Hat and Microsoft’s mutual customers and partners. But The VAR Guy thinks Novell’s close relationship with Microsoft forced Red Hat to the negotiating table.

    He does have a point.

  7. Shane Coyle said,

    February 16, 2009 at 7:21 pm

    Gravatar

    Many valid points are to be made all around, but, as in their differing approaches to FOSS, Red Hat’s move is in sharp contrast to Novell’s in both nature and effect.

    Somehow, despite Microsoft dismissing FOSS as communistic, or Novell claiming that end-to-end open source is not fully enterprise ready, Red Hat has consistently delivered quality solutions to their very loyal and expanding list of customers, while creating shareholder value and adhering to their FOSS philosophies all-the-while.

    There’s nothing better than good, clean, business… except maybe some monkey-business – (all apologies to Rodney Dangerfield). Yes, this will help both companies to make more money, and yes I believe that was their motivation. Hopefully, customers will benefit as well.

    I see it as not much more than a marketing announcement, but of course there is some significance in the nature of the announcement – has Microsoft ever done any deal (of any kind) with a GNU⁄Linux distributor and not garnered an IP deal to crow about?

    That speaks either to Red Hat’s strength, or Microsoft’s softening of their stance somewhat. The future will reveal which, I suppose.

  8. twitter said,

    February 17, 2009 at 11:01 am

    Gravatar

    I have to agree with the dimmest view of this deal. “Interoperability” with non free software is a lie by definition and there is nothing more harmful to free software than M$’s “Marketing”. M$’s intentions and the fate of companies that make deals with them have been extensively examined here through coverage of Comes vs Microsoft and the Microsoft Novell patent deal. As Roy noted, Novell is the biggest loser in this deal and that is the usual end of cooperation with M$. The best thing to do with Windows is to dump it like the second rate and toxic sludge that it is. The more M$ tech you bring on board, the more pain you invite because of M$’s court proven record of technical sabotage. Anything that argues otherwise is a move in the wrong direction. The only good thing that can come from M$ is a full software patent surrender and liberation of their own code. Nothing short of this should be trusted, especially by one of the principle targets of M$’s long running software patent extortion.

    This deal needs to be studdied, not to know if it’s bad but how bad it really is. Here is Red Hat’s press release. Here is their earlier announcement. I look forward to more insightful commentary from Boycott Novell and add my preliminary analysis below.

    At face value, nothing has been gained for free software. M$’s customers may very well demand virtulization of Windows and GNU/Linux may be the best way of doing it. The whole point of virtualizing Windows is to put something more stable in charge of hardware and to get around the need for a dedicated machine for each set of incompatible non free “solutions” users have. If M$ had the customer’s best interest at heart, no “certification” or other permission would be required by users to solve these problems with free software. Because M$ does not have the customer’s best interest at heart, the deal can’t be trusted and everyone knows it.

    Endorsing a lie is always harmful. Red Hat has implicitly endorsed M$’s customer hostile behavior for their own benefit. Once again M$ has created a favored GNU/Linux distribution for a particular task in the name of “ineteroperability” Tactically, this is damaging because M$ can shift favorites and create costs for GNU/Linux users. More damaging than that is the idea that M$ can tell people how they can and can’t run software. M$’s EULAs specify which versions of Windoze can be run virtualized and which can’t – it’s a power grab that should never be endorsed. The zeroth software freedom is the right to run your software. The only “major hurdle to more widespread adoption of virtualization” is M$’s customer hostile business model.

  9. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 17, 2009 at 11:20 am

    Gravatar

    “Interoperability” is hostility towards standardsreal standards.

  10. Shane Coyle said,

    February 17, 2009 at 3:06 pm

    Gravatar

    Let me say it this way, the Novell deal – sans the patent covenant – probably wouldn’t have spawned this site. Or, if it was Novell SUSE Enterprise BSD, I likely wouldn’t have cared about some silly marketing announcement with Microsoft.

    Yes, there are myriad other issues such as Antitrust and such, but without the betrayal of the GPL (in my opinion), I personally wouldn’t have been so offended. I took Novell’s actions as a betrayal of the GPL and the community, and I took it personally.

    At it’s core, that’s all I see this Red Hat announcement as – a marketing move that will hopefully garner both companies more business. From a technical standpoint, yawn, honestly. If it actually yields good results for customers, great.

    I have no problem with the existence of closed source/proprietary software, it takes all kinds – I prefer Freedom, and try to teach others that such options exist, but I don’t wish to push my beliefs on others. Like Novell, I don’t hate Microsoft, I just take issue with many of their actions.

    Someone had said that RedHat had caved in to pressure from customers – yep. They should, Red Hat is a business and they need customers – preferably happy ones – so long as they do not violate any explicit or implicit contracts with the community that provides their products, I say good luck – go get ‘em boys…

    At face value, nothing has been lost for Free Software, either. But, Red Hat – a Free Software distributor and friend of the community, certainly may have something to gain here. And, if Microsoft does too, okay.

    (As I understand the deal at this time, I always retain the right to start yelling if there are details that come to light…)

  11. twitter said,

    February 17, 2009 at 10:03 pm

    Gravatar

    The thing lost for free software is the appearance that M$ cooperation is required to run M$ junk and the appearance of cooperation with M$ by Red Hat in this. You will see all sorts of FUD about it later. The continued use of Windows is a losing situation for everyone concerned but M$. People who work in the industry owe it to their customers to tell them this but they continue to cooperate, even as the money in it evaporates.

    I don’t mind that non free software exists either, even though most of it was stolen from the public domain in the first place. The problem is what society does to back the limitations non free software makers try to impose. The power granted to organizations like the BSA is completely out of proportion to the social good done by non free software. My hatred of M$ comes from seeing through the myth of a free market to the reality of extensive limits on my freedoms, privacy and ownership of my property. Non free software companies have aggressively pushed their wares and beliefs onto everyone. Everyone is poorer for it and the few laws in the public’s favor are woefully unenforced.

  12. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 17, 2009 at 10:17 pm

    Gravatar

    The theme will be: Microsoft is helping open source.

What Else is New


  1. Links 24/2/2017: Ubuntu 17.04 Beta, OpenBSD Foundation Nets $573,000 in Donations

    Links for the day



  2. IAM, Greased up by the EPO, Continues Lobbying by Shaming Tactics for the UPC, Under the Guise of 'News'

    The shrill and well-paid writers of IAM are still at it, promoting the Unitary Patent (UPC) at every opportunity and every turn



  3. Patent Scope Gone Awry: European Vegetable Patents Office?

    In its misguided race to raise so-called 'production', the EPO lost sight of its original goals and now facilitates patent royalty payments/taxation for naturally-recurring items of nature



  4. Yes, There is Definitely Brain Drain (Experience Deficit) at the European Patent Office and Stakeholders Feel It

    The direction that the European Patent Office has taken under Battistelli undoes many decades (almost half a century) of reputation-building and progress and naturally this repels existing staff, not to mention hampers recruitment efforts



  5. The Sickness of the EPO – Part IV: Cruel Management That Deliberately Attacks the Sick and the Weak

    The dysphoric reality at the European Patent Office, which is becoming like a large cell (with bolted-down windows) where people are controlled by fear and scapegoats are selected to perpetuate this atmosphere of terror and maintain demand (or workload) for the Investigative Stasi



  6. Links 23/2/2017: Qt 5.9 Alpha, First SHA1 Collision

    Links for the day



  7. UPC Roundup: War on the Appeal Boards, British Motion Against the UPC, Fröhlinger Recalled, and Fake News About Spain

    Taking stock of some of the latest attempts to shove the Unitary Patent (UPC) down Europe's throat, courtesy of Team Battistelli and Team UPC



  8. The Sickness of the EPO – Part III: Invalidity and Suicides

    An explanation of what drives a lot of EPO veterans to depression and sometimes even suicide



  9. The Appeal Board (PTAB) and Federal Circuit (CAFC) Maintain Good Pace of Patent Elimination Where Scope Was Exceeded

    The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues to accept about 4 out of 5 decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) refuses to intervene



  10. Software Patents Are Ebbing Away, But the “Swamp” Fights Back and Hijacks the Word “Fix”

    The club of patent maximalists, or those who profit from excess prosecution and legal chaos, isn't liking what has happened in the United States and it wants everything reversed



  11. Report From Yesterday's Debate About the European Patent Office (EPO) at the Bavarian Landtag

    A report of the EPO debate which took place at the Bavarian Landtag yesterday (21/2/2017)



  12. Links 22/2/2017: Wine-Staging 2.2, Nautilus 3.24

    Links for the day



  13. French Politician Richard Yung Tells the Government About Abuses at the European Patent Office (EPO)

    The subject of EPO scandals has once again landed in French politics, just a couple of months since it last happened



  14. The Sickness of the EPO – Part II: Background Information and Insights

    With a privatised, in-house (sometimes outsourced and for-profit) force for surveillance, policing, justice, public relations and now medical assessment (mere vassals or marionettes of the management) the EPO serves to show that it has become indistinguishable from North Korea, where the Supreme Leader gets to control every single aspect (absolutely no separation of powers)



  15. EPO Cartoon/Caricature by KrewinkelKrijst

    A new rendition by Dutch cartoonist and illustrator KrewinkelKrijst



  16. Inverting Narratives: IAM 'Magazine' Paints Massive Patent Bully Microsoft (Preying on the Weak) as a Defender of the Powerless

    Selective coverage and deliberate misinterpretation of Microsoft's tactics (patent settlement under threat, disguised as "pre-installation of some of the US company’s software products") as seen in IAM almost every week these days



  17. The Sickness of the EPO – Part I: Motivation for New Series of Articles

    An introduction or prelude to a long series of upcoming posts, whose purpose is to show governance by coercion, pressure, retribution and tribalism rather than professional relationship between human beings at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  18. Insensitivity at the EPO’s Management – Part VII: EPO Hypocrisy on Cancer and Lack of Feedback to and From ECPC

    The European Cancer Patient Coalition (ECPC), which calls itself "the largest European cancer patients' umbrella organisation," fails to fulfill its duties, says a source of ours, and the EPO makes things even worse



  19. Links 21/2/2017: KDE Plasma 5.9.2 in Chakra GNU/Linux, pfSense 2.3.3

    Links for the day



  20. EPO Caricature: Battistelli's Wall

    Battistelli's solution to everything at the EPO is exclusion and barriers



  21. The 'New' Microsoft is Still Acting Like a Dangerous Cult in an Effort to Hijack and/or Undermine All Free/Open Source Software

    In an effort to combat any large deployment of non-Microsoft software, the company goes personal and attempts to overthrow even management that is not receptive to Microsoft's agenda



  22. PTAB Petitioned to Help Against Patent Troll InfoGation Corp., Which Goes After Linux/Android OEMs in China

    A new example of software patents against Free software, or trolls against companies that are distributing freedom-respecting software from a country where these patents are not even potent (they don't exist there)



  23. Links 20/2/2017: Linux 4.10, LineageOS Milestone

    Links for the day



  24. No, Doing Mathematical Operations on a Processor Does Not Make Algorithms Patent-Eligible

    Old and familiar tricks -- a method for tricking examiners into the idea that algorithms are actual machines -- are being peddled by Watchtroll again



  25. Paid-for UPC Proponent, IAM 'Magazine', Debunked on UPC Again

    The impact of the corrupted (by EPO money) media goes further than one might expect and even 'borrows' out-of-date news in order to promote the UPC



  26. Lack of Justice in and Around the EPO Drawing Scrutiny

    The status of the EPO as an entity above the law (in Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and so on) is becoming the subject of press reports and staff is leaving in large numbers



  27. Links 19/2/2017: GParted 0.28.1, LibreOffice Donations Record

    Links for the day



  28. The EPO is Becoming an Embarrassment to Europe and a Growing Threat to the European Union

    The increasingly pathetic moves by Battistelli and the ever-declining image/status of the EPO (only 0% of polled stakeholders approve Battistelli's management) is causing damage to the reputation of the European Union, even if the EPO is not a European Union organ but an international one



  29. Patent Misconceptions Promoted by the Patent Meta-Industry

    Cherry-picking one's way into the perception of patent eligibility for software and the misguided belief that without patents there will be no innovation



  30. As the United States Shuts Its Door on Low-Quality Patents the Patent Trolls Move to Asia

    Disintegration of Intellectual Ventures (further shrinkage after losing software patents at CAFC), China's massive patent bubble, and Singapore's implicit invitation/facilitation of patent trolls (bubble economy)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts