07.02.08
Posted in Red Hat, Microsoft, Windows, SLES/SLED, Servers, Patents, Interoperability, Virtualization, FOSS, Interview at 2:13 pm by Roy Schestowitz
Last week we explained what Microsoft had done with Hyper-V. It’s using such products to promote the Microsoft-taxed SLES at the expense of companies that refuse to pay for mythical software patents. Here is Microsoft’s attempt to sneak out of it when questioned about this.
As for Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V, it allows customers to consolidate applications running Novell SLES 10. As for Red Hat, Microsoft and Red Hat both realize the importance of virtualization and interoperability needs of our joint customers, and we are actively discussing how to support Red Hat Enterprise Linux on Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V.
It’s important to emphasise that Microsoft put a patent barrier inside Hyper-V, probably in order to prevent interoperability with Free software. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend 
View as PDF
07.01.08
Posted in Novell, Opensuse, SLES/SLED, Review at 3:09 pm by Roy Schestowitz
The morning week+ after
It hasn’t been long since the important release of OpenSUSE 11.0. Novell is already trying to downplay the viability of OpenSUSE in order to sell its proprietary software-enhanced SLES/D. Watch this:
The differentiation for corporate customers is what comes next. Why is openSuSE not well suited for corporate use? It’s built by great people, with the purest of intent, and they will want to make things better. The problem is that corporate needs something more.
Given an in-house skilled person (or people), this just isn’t true. Moreover, support can be called from the outside even for a community-driven distribution. That’s how Free software works, and that’s how profit is extracted. Acquisition costs are belittled by maintenance costs no matter if the software deployed is Free or proprietary.
Unconvinced Users
The above example may seem like a bit of a stretch, but OpenSUSE’s woes needn’t be tied to Novell’s attempt to overshadow its presence. Quite a few people were displeased with the following elaborative report, whose conclusion is as follows.
openSUSE 11.0 is a difficult system to qualify. Highlights include good availability of current packages and YAST GUI configuration tools for some advanced features. However, these advantages are largely eclipsed by a chaotic, dysfunctional package management system and marginal performance. New Linux users with more complex network configurations or challenging hardware may be forced to use openSUSE due to its unique innovations in GUI system configuration. Yet, experienced and inexperienced users alike may find themselves increasingly frustrated by the grave lack of refinement in what is an otherwise capable Linux distribution.
Here is another interesting take from Steve Carl (BMC).
As usual, I have to ask the question, is OpenSUSE 11 a viable desktop for an enterprise. Not for geeks like me but for the average computer user that does not want to know anything about the computer itself: they just want a tool to get a job done.
The desktop itself is easy to use, easy to configure, easy to update, and a strong preview of what is to come in the next release of SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop). It has all sorts of standard Open Support, from Wikis to mailing lists to online doc.
There are still those who suggest that Ubuntu, for example, is an inch ahead.
In my own choice of categories and tests, and in my own judgment alone, Ubuntu 8.04 has beaten openSUSE 11 but only by a very slim margin. It only shows that openSUSE is worthy to be called the second most popular Linux distribution at the moment, and Ubuntu is still the cream of the crop.
Admittedly, it’s very user- and PC-dependent, but the reviewers in this case are experienced ones and their PCs are definitely not Linux-hostile.
Technical Assessment
We gave some examples of technical deficiencies a few days ago. There are some more minor peeves, which probably ought to be seen as bug reports. Here is one about suspend to RAM.
In my notebook computer, HP Compaq NX7300, the “suspend to RAM” functionality had worked without any problem in OpenSUSE 10.3, with kernel 2.6.22.5-31. However, it suddenly did not work after an upgrade to OpenSUSE 11, with kernel 2.6.25.5-1.1. I became nervous, tried to find out the solution, and fount out: downgrading kernel to 2.6.22.5-31.
This one is about Beagle-ReiserFS incompatibility. The former is Mono and the latter is better off forgotten.
I installed OpenSuse 11.0 today. Beware that if you install using reiserfs andl KDE your computer will freeze periodically in KDE. It took me 6 hours of debugging to figure out that beagle was causing the problems.
We apologise for being hard on OpenSUSE, but it’s clear that Novell continues to use OpenSUSE as a ‘free sample’ to lure users in to its Microsoft-taxed distribution. It’s also a case of free labour.
As a side note, I received my new PC just a few hours ago. Without going into specifics, the plan is to multi-boot it, with a 64-bit distribution that’s already installed and probably Mandriva 2008, which I’ve just downloaded. All the setups (e.g. need to buy another monitor tomorrow morning) are likely to affect activity on this site for a few more days. Summertime is a good time for readjustment. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.28.08
Posted in GNU/Linux, SLES/SLED, Debian, Servers, HP, Mail, xandros at 6:15 am by Roy Schestowitz
In what could be seen characterised as a battle between Microsoft partners, there’s this comparison between the ASUS Eee (with Xandros) and SLED on the HP Mini-Note.
The biggest complaints I hear about the Eee PC are that the keyboard is too small and there’s not enough screen real estate. Even the new 8.9 inch only offers 1024×600 screen res. Some people also complain that the Eee PC runs a knobbled version of Xandros Linux. A Mini-Note running SuSE Linux Enterprise should address these issues.
Read the rest of this entry »
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.27.08
Posted in Red Hat, Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Novell, SLES/SLED, Servers, SUN, Virtualization, Xen at 3:13 pm by Roy Schestowitz
“Working behind the scenes to orchestrate “independent” praise of our technology, and damnation of the enemy’s, is a key evangelism function during the Slog. “Independent” analyst’s report should be issued, praising your technology and damning the competitors (or ignoring them). “Independent” consultants should write columns and articles, give conference presentations and moderate stacked panels, all on our behalf (and setting them up as experts in the new technology, available for just $200/hour). “Independent” academic sources should be cultivated and quoted (and research money granted). “Independent” courseware providers should start profiting from their early involvement in our technology. Every possible source of leverage should be sought and turned to our advantage.”
–Microsoft, internal document [PDF]
H
yper-V, Microsoft’s newly-announced hypervisor, is prominent in the press right now despite its market irrelevance and lack of presence. Think of it as a self-fulfilling prophecy, just as the quote at the top suggests (Yankee Group is already at it, accompanied by more lies). But Hyper-V not good for anyone. Microsoft intends to limit choice, not to offer any (contrary to claims that it’s good for VMWare to have more competition). The only company set to gain from it is Microsoft (plus its very small group of partners).
It is no secret anymore that Novell and Microsoft are self-serving virtualisation partners. Novell could not care any less if it helps Microsoft shut the door in the face of the rest of GNU/Linux; au contraire — it works to its advantage.
We were going to write about PlateSpin tomorrow (in a positive tone of course). It is currently boasting a new product that it has just released under Novell’s wing. One thing stood out for being suspicious though.
PlateSpin updates server workload migration tools
[…]
A key feature is the ability to move a workload from a physical server into a virtual machine or vice versa, with support for virtual machines running under Microsoft Virtual Server, Virtual Iron, VMware or Citrix XenServer.
For the uninitiated, what we always see where Microsoft gets involved is limited or no support for GNU/Linux. Only Microsoft-taxed distributions receive attention, so the impact on PlateSpin will be interesting. We wrote about it before and here is another fine new example where SLES gets inserted among the very narrow range of choices, as if it’s a surrogate of Microsoft Windows:
At that time, Microsoft said the list of tested and qualified guest operating systems include Windows Server 2003 SP2, Novell SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10 SP1, Windows Vista SP1 and Windows XP SP3.
That’s it? Just Novell and Microsoft? Sun Microsystems sure seems to be complaining already.
3. Hyper-V only addresses Windows-based servers despite the fact that most datacenters are incredibly heterogeneous and require support for more than just Windows workloads. Aren’t you underestimating the complexity and diversity of your customers’ datacenters?
4. How do you see Hyper-V aiding in the reduction of energy consumption when it can only consolidate Windows-based servers?
It’s not too hard to get the overall picture. Microsoft is being anti-competitive again. It only offers support (compatibility) for product from which it extracts revenue; the rest it just ignores. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.26.08
Posted in Microsoft, Novell, SLES/SLED, Marketing at 1:04 pm by Roy Schestowitz
Marketing: an art of twisting facts, sometimes lying
A few month ago, Bruce Lowry left Novell. It happened around the same time that the company’s General Counsel, Joseph LaSala, left as well. A week after the departure of a Vice President, the belated replacement of Bruce Lowry finally arrives.
Quick, late introductions – I’m Ian Bruce, the new director of PR at Novell. I’ve taken over from Bruce Lowry (being called ‘Bruce’ is a requirement for the job), who held the position for over 8 years and did amazing work driving visibility and awareness for Novell.
Mr. Bruce will need to get used to preaching about the wonderful relationships between Microsoft and GNU/Linux (or Novell), which essentially means lying . Mr. de Icaza could kindly teach him.
Speaking of PR, be careful what you read about SUSE and Novell at the moment. Novell recruits boosters and it also has talking heads in the media. █
“Our partnership with Microsoft continues to expand.”
–Ron Hovsepian, Novell CEO
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.25.08
Posted in Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Novell, SLES/SLED, Virtualization, Xen at 3:10 pm by Roy Schestowitz
Yes, it’s true. Citrix Systems, the company which grabbed control of XenSource roughly a year ago and then bent it in Windows’ direction, is nothing less than Microsoft’s latest Partner of the Year. Sounds like a reward more than an award.
Today, Citrix Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ:CTXS), the global leader in application delivery infrastructure, announced it has won the 2008 Microsoft Partner of the Year Global ISV – Infrastructure Special Recognition award. This award recognizes the global independent software vendor (ISV) for superior technology, delivering innovative infrastructure solutions based on Microsoft platforms.
Novell, by the way, is part of these virtualisation pacts as well. This new post from Network World reminds us just why
Another downside is that Hyper-V is sadly lacking much support for Linux, with the exception of super special partner Novell’s Suse Linux Enterprise Server 10.
What we have here is a case of Novell, Microsoft and Citrix+Xen versus VMWare (and just about everybody else). This has been clear for quite some time. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.22.08
Posted in Red Hat, Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Novell, SLES/SLED, Intellectual Property, GPL, Oracle, IBM at 1:03 pm by Roy Schestowitz
In Part 1, we wrote rather cautiously about Oracle’s relationship with Red Hat and then reiterated known facts about IBM. This is where it gets trickier because we now introduce what’s not sufficiently substantiated but nonetheless worthy of consideration. It seems to have received a nod from Novell.
Some Background Information
Who is Ron Hovsepian? According to Wikipedia, “Hovsepian held management and executive positions at IBM Corporation over a 17 year period, including worldwide general manager of IBM’s distribution industries, managing global hardware and software development, sales, marketing and services.”
Our sources are close enough to Ron Hovsepian himself and it’s interesting to note that he was appointed and made CEO between the time that IBM helped Novell acquire SUSE (Hovsepian Joined Novell in June 2003 and in November 2003 Novell bought SuSE) and just shortly before negotiations with Microsoft began, namely around May or June 2006. Hovsepian was appointed CEO in June 2006 when he replaced Jack Messman. Pay careful attention to the proximity of dates.
Linux as Power, Not Freedom
According to the Linux Foundation’s annual conference (the Summit), which last took place in Austin, representatives might insist that they only care for Linux solutions, not desktops. Novell says that too: “solutions”. In other words, the key element which is Free software, with the GNU GPL at its very core, is viewed as a nuisance, as though its kind of stands in their way. Proprietary or Free, to the big vendors it’s all about power, not freedom.
Richard Stallman’s philosophy and the accompanying licence are seen as discomforting to those who want to produce “solutions”, so ways of working around the licences seems desirable. While every company is acting selfishly for sure, some remember to respect their supplier (volunteer programmers) and recall what they came from. Mutual honour is definitely a prerequisite to the success of this relationship.
Over at IBM, with Irving’s departure (he retired quite recently, having put the company’s focus on GNU/Linux and Free software), one can only hope that the leadership is still truly dedicated to the cause. Bob Sutor makes some solid migrations to GNU/Linux, but he still uses non-Free platforms sometimes. Being a decision-maker, he has impact.
Prelude to Assumption/Hypothesis
We finally turn our attention to the theory of a large-scale collusion — a gentle one nonetheless. At the heart of it we picture a battle played by executives and lawyers behind some people’s backs. Our source never really took the allegations of the OpenDocument Foundation working for Microsoft in disguise too seriously, but they did hurt the ODF cause a lot. Before that, Gary Edwards was leading a small but influent band of OpenOffice.org forkers and disruptors.
According to our source, a lot of what’s at play is related to Novell. Factors and forces that include Novell, Microsoft and ODF are part of it, and surely enough IBM feels bitter with Novell’s ambivalent yet receptive approach to OOXML. The same goes for Sun. We know this for a fact. Miguel’s OOXML affinity, for instance, is a big pain in the neck to them.
Novell informed several different ‘camps’ of FOSS developers about the agreement with Microsoft before it got signed. Mono and Samba developers, for instance, knew about it in advance and had time to voice their opinion. Jeremy Allison told us that he regretted not protesting more loudly.
Ron Hovsepian and other top executives tried to explain to leaders of several projects (primarily those impacted by the Microsoft deal) what that agreement all about. It was essential in order for friction to be reduced before the bomb is finally dropped. After all, Novell needed to make sure that, at least in the future, if possible, these projects will could continue working with Novell. It’s collaboration under Microsoft’s claws.
People who are associated with the FSF knew about this deal in advance as well (at least 2 of them). The legality questions — specially w.r.t. GPLv2 — was explained, but the wound was well understood by Hovsepian et al who disregarded it. There was too much at stake and the GPL wasn’t a priority high enough.
The Theory
Some believe that he idea of the Novell/Microsoft agreement came from IBM and Oracle. They went to Novell with the following plan: Microsoft would be very much interested in two things with Novell: polluting/diluting the Linux brand and message (Microsoft could also have a dent in the Linux market). This is always overlooked,
“Microsoft is very much interested in Novell’s IP. Remember SCO?”Microsoft is very much interested in Novell’s IP. Remember SCO? Remember e-directory? Remember Netware, Groupwise, etc? Well, Novell has a very nice IP portfolio that many companies of similar yield cannot enjoy. In short, that agreement was a boon for Microsoft but we all know this.
From the other side, the whole plan was a poker game that would tie down the hands of Microsoft with Novell and in the end neutralising Microsoft’s IP while IBM and Oracle could attack.
“Perhaps”, says the source, “and I would tend to buy into that option, Novell was quickly overthrown by Microsoft’s dance of the dead. I don’t know.
“The ultimate plan was to strangle Microsoft’s IP and that it was all the idea of IBM and Oracle.”
Take this part with a grain of salt and decide for yourself if it makes sense to you. It sure seems to have struck a nerve with Novell’s CEO.
A Reader’s Take
One reader who was intrigued with the first part about possible secrets behind the Microsoft-Novell deal wrote:
“It sounds as if the whole point of that deal was the patent protection element that Microsoft supposedly slipped in at the last minute and to which Novell didn’t really agree and sloughs off as unimportant. I’ll have to wait and see.
“The comment I really wanted to make here is that I am not really surprised at all at IBM’s involvement here. First, in the days prior to Microsoft’s monopoly, IBM had a similar monopoly in the market for mainframe hardware. They employed similar tactics to Microsoft to fend off competition that wanted to make compatible hardware. See Amdahl. It was IBM who coined the tactic of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Part of the reason Gates took such a hard-core stance in the anti-trust case was that he saw what happened to IBM after they complied with the anti-trust decision that went against them.
“I suppose it’s a bit unreasonable to think that a leopard could completely change its spots. While IBM has undeniably done some important things to promote Linux, one should never forget that their motivation isn’t out of any love for free software. They use Linux as a competitive tool against Microsoft. There is no love lost between these two companies. Consider what happened with OS/2, which was originally a joint project between IBM and Microsoft. Even more recently, consider the time when Microsoft announced their Palladium project, which is embodied in Vista. IBM came out and tried to assuage the fears of the Linux camp that they would be locked out by announcing support for “Trusted Computing.” In the current scenario, obviously without knowing any of the details, I suppose I would nonetheless be safe to say that the Novell-Microsoft deal is something that Novell gets credit for initiating - “coopetition.” That used to have such a nice ring to it, but not anymore.” █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.21.08
Posted in Red Hat, GNU/Linux, Novell, SLES/SLED, NetWare, IBM at 2:04 pm by Roy Schestowitz
SUSE’s advancement was perhaps somewhat overshadowed by the more important release of OpenSUSE 11.0 just a couple of days ago. Magnitude matters.
Nonetheless, a few reporters kept their eyes also on the commercial versions of SUSE and here is a story about adoption at a university
De Montfort University has chosen Novell Open Enterprise Server 2 as the foundation for its IT infrastructure for students and staff. The Novell system, built on the SUSE Linux Enterprise Server SP1 operating system, is designed to reduce storage costs, and using Novell’s Xen virtualisation technology, improve resilience and flexibility.
The university is one of the largest in the UK, with more than 20,000 students and 3,000 staff across two campuses in Leicester, and offers 400 undergraduate and postgraduate courses.
OES2 is based on Linux and here is a firm that claims to be cannibalising Netware for OES.
Read the rest of this entry »
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
« Previous entries ·
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.