Novell linked to 'Windows cheaper than Linux' statement

Quoting:Yep - that's *another* good reason that Linux may actually cost more.

Actually, Darren114, TalkBack commentator EnviroTO (not EnviroTCO!) directly addresses this in his ZDNet comment to the press release:

Quoting:Depends how you configure your infrastructure

The point being made is that they will go from their current setup which is expensive to maintain to another setup with an equal amount of linux which will be less expensive to maintain. They don't say that Linux can't be cheaper than Windows, they say their current configuration currently isn't cheaper than Windows. Costs of ownership can be driven up by lack of training, lack of standardization, lack of automation, lack of administrative tools, etc. and those same factors can drive up Windows total cost of ownership as well.

(from http://www.zdnet.co.uk/talkback/0,1000001161,39286295-390010...)

EnviroTO's last point is well taken; these same factors that could be driving up HSBC's estimated TCO for Linux could be readily applied to their TCO for Windows as well, should HSBC have decided to go upon this latter route. Also, do realize that HSBC is the sole customer of [Novell's and Microsofts'] joint technology brought down here for TCO-comparison purposes. There are likely to be found further case examples of this on either side of the TCO issue.

Now will the mighty MICROS1 / ZDNet even *try* to present more case examples of where the Linux TCO is actually *cheaper* than Windows ??

Quoting:The short-term TCO of rolling out Linux anything in a Windows shop may be higher than the equivalent Windows anything simply because it is new to the organization

Actually that is not always ture. It all depends on your plan of implementation. Compare that with XP or Vista rollout; with a good deployment plan, I still say Linux has less cost of deployment. To start with, HSBC deploying Linux could have been a hit and run and even with that, they still saved money. I think the reason they are now looking deeper into it is because they already see the potential of saving more money by deploying more Linux.

"The Microsoft-Novell agreement is a great catalyst to helping us reduce the complexity of our Linux environment as we standardize our Linux infrastructure with SUSE Linux Enterprise and continue to extend the use of Microsoft Active Directory®,"

Remember my prediction that they'd focus on pushing Active Directory into everything and slave Linux to it, and this is what they meant by 'interoperability'? :)

>It all depends on your plan of implementation.

It depends on a whole lot of things, hence the "may".

> It all depends on your plan of implementation.

/me hears MS mumbeling under their breath 'we don need no steenking interoperability!'

Quoting:Remember my prediction that they'd focus on pushing Active Directory into everything and slave Linux to it, and this is what they meant by 'interoperability'? :)

We haven't seen much of all the items that Novell agreed to in their contract with MS. The worst is yet to come. MS is not paying all that money for nothing, there is a lot more to see. Novell sold its soul to the devil and they will pay

Quoting:It depends on a whole lot of things, hence the "may".

("may be higher" simply because it is new to the organization) sounded like it is higher and the reason may be because it is new to the organization.

> We haven't seen much of all the items that Novell agreed to in their contract with MS. The worst is yet to come.

I think we've seen the majority of the 'code' part of the deal. The things I figured would happen (it's really not a code effort as I see it, the important parts were already written, the 'interoperability' is more to put a positive PR spin on Microsoft's attempts to secure itself as the 'platform'):

- Novell supporting the OOXML translator. This was kinda a given.

- Microsoft using the XenSource contracted source to slave Linux to the Windows hypervisor, with paravirtualization support, while refusing others access to Microsoft's hypervisor.

- Novell focusing its distribution around being slaved to Active Directory (pam, Samba, BIND, etc.).

- Novell providing commercial support for Microsoft's slaved Linux.

- Microsoft doing a patent attack, possibly by proxy, on Red Hat or the Free Software projects it has in common with Novell.

- Novell doing absolutely nothing to defend the freedom of the software from such an attack, despite past promises.

So basically, I'm just waiting for Novell to announce they've defaulted everything to expect Active Directory or have otherwise made any other solution more difficult, for Microsoft to start the patent war, for Novell to try and profit off of it at our expense, and possibly for the European anti-trust people to ask why Microsoft refuses to disclose how to talk to its hypervisor.

Quoting:So basically, I'm just waiting... ...and possibly for the European anti-trust people to ask why Microsoft refuses to disclose how to talk to its hypervisor...

Nah, we don't like waiting, do we?

Quoting:The Commission encourages citizens and firms to inform about suspected infringements of competition rules. There are two ways to do this.

Be my guest: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/antitrust_mail.html

I wish I would know more about the hypervisor case, but since I don't know that much about it, it is kind of hard for me to complain.

Yaknow, that whole slave Linux to windows thing almost makes sense in light of the EULA restrictions on running Vista in a vm. "No No, you can't run Vista lower editions in a vm under Linux! But you can run Linux in a vm under the lower versions of Vista!" Almost sounds like they had it all planned out that way...

swbrown

Good list you made. I am also concerned about what wasn't written or said publicly (verbal agreements) yet. All in all, Novell's intentions are pretty bad all around. When they are in bed with MS, they can't be differentiated from MS. They simply can't be trusted anymore.

Suse was my favorite distro but no more. It was removed from all my home machines. Who needs it when other distros are as good or even better.

>sounded like it is higher and the reason may be because it is new to the organization.

Yeah. That was ambiguous, wasn't it?

Oh yes, it is painfully obvious that Novell's intention has been to restrict your freedoms with Linux.

Look at all the horrible things they've done: 1. created a way for OpenOffice.org users to read the most current MS file formats - OH the HORROR of letting those nasty Linux users communicate with MS-Office users. 2. created a collaboration site for developers similar to sourceforge - OH the HORROR of providing storage and repository space for those nasty Linux developers who want to further develop FOSS applications.

Too bad I didn't actually read in any PR or other statement by Novell of forcing Active Directory onto their hapless SUSE customers.

Gaarrrr Active Directory. It is teh poo and stinketh to the heavens. Novell's own directory services are far superior. If their strategy really is major AD support, they might as well move to Redmond.

It's not Novell's intentions I have a problem with as much as Microsoft's. I kind of agree with swbrown's sentiments, but am not sure it's Novell's intentions. Frankly, though, it does look as if Novell is becoming Microsoft's puppet, willingly or not. It's kind of like saying, "Mr. Microsoft? Can we play on the playground?" Never mind that it's a public playground. I could be wrong, but time will tell.

Rev -

There's an old saying "politics makes strange bedfellows", and the same is true of business.

People act as if Novell management woke up one day, smiled, and said "Hey! Let's cut the guts out Linux for our good friends over at Microsoft. Won't that make Billy happy!!!"

Novell and Microsoft have been rather bitter competitors for years. For those short of years and/or/memory, the whole Novell acquisition of WordPerfect and and Quattro was to help Novell compete against Microsoft.

Even before the agreement, Novell had managed to sting Microsoft for half a billion dollars through legal action. With the agreement, the $ transfer is the better part of a billion dollars.

Thanks to Microsoft's market presence and the current generation of numb-nuts management types, Novell's business is imploding. They HAD to do something, and sitting down with the devil is what they did.

Time will tell if that works out for them, but Apple made a similar call ten years ago when it made a $150,000,000 deal with Microsoft at a time when Apple was on life-support. Took a lot of doing, but that one's worked out pretty well.

Maybe Novell can come out with the NetPod.

> Maybe Novell can come out with the NetPod.

For some reason I don't think there's a Steve Jobs at Novell.

>For some reason I don't think there's a Steve Jobs at Novell.

Yeah. The Novell management team seems closer to "no" than "novel".

> Too bad I didn't actually read in any PR or other statement by Novell of forcing Active Directory onto their hapless SUSE customers.

I'm betting we will. :) Not 'force' mind you, but something like how Ximian modified OpenOffice.org to save in Microsoft DOC format by default. It'll likely be pushed as the standard path. This press release pointed towards Active Directory and SUSE integration being a upcoming focus.

> I kind of agree with swbrown's sentiments, but am not sure it's Novell's intentions.

Other than the initial payout, I think Novell saw poaching Red Hat's customers through their partners patent war as the main benefit. Otherwise, we wouldn't have seen things like the simultaneous modification of the patent pledge to exclude them defending such an attack. They see it coming.