The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
Whatever the implications for the greater Linux and open source worlds, Novell says the Microsoft deal has been good for its Suse Linux and for IT shops that use both Suse and Windows. Customers wanted a "bridge between Microsoft Windows and Linux," says Microsoft's Hauser. Customers also wanted peace of mind over potential intellectual property disputes, since those can take products off the market or result in additional licensing fees. About 100 customers are covered by the Novell-Microsoft agreement, she notes."
Posted Nov 19, 2008 5:09 UTC (Wed)
by frazier (guest, #3060)
[Link]
Check out the video (dated November 2, 2006). Steve Balmer is the first speaker:
Notice the massive repetitive mentions of 'innovation' and of course, how much Balmer is taking about a leading Linux distro and cooperative efforts.
At least for this kid, this helped visualize the whole Novell/Microsoft deal.
Posted Nov 19, 2008 10:46 UTC (Wed)
by NigelK (guest, #42083)
[Link] (7 responses)
The self-selected leaders of FOSS who have been scaremongering these past two years should be ashamed of themselves.
If the GPL3 wasn't being formulated around the same time, I doubt any of the FUD would have been generated - this would have been rightfully seen as just another partnership between companies.
Instead it was turned into a FUD-factory in an attempt to encourage GPL3 take-up.
Posted Nov 19, 2008 13:10 UTC (Wed)
by pboddie (guest, #50784)
[Link] (6 responses)
As I recall, the FUD was coming from Microsoft: repeated claims about patent infringement and that they wouldn't litigate against anyone using a Linux distribution from a company partnering with them, leaving the impression that using or distributing a non-sanctioned distribution could result in a lawsuit. To claim that this is "just another partnership" is disingenuous.
The only people who should be ashamed are those who portray others as extremists whilst failing to understand how such matters can be damaging to Free Software and, given the continued threat of patent litigation, software in general.
Posted Nov 19, 2008 20:20 UTC (Wed)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link] (4 responses)
That said, I am still not a fan of Mono et al., all I am saying is, it's hard to forbid anyone to develop whatever they think they need to develop. Their problem. ("Mono" is a remarkable name for a project that contains contagious software patents. Why on earth did they choose the "kissing disease" to name their project?)
Posted Nov 20, 2008 12:05 UTC (Thu)
by epa (subscriber, #39769)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Nov 21, 2008 8:52 UTC (Fri)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link] (2 responses)
I just always thought it odd that mono was chosen as a name especially for this project. Mono - a disease that is, by some popular accounts, transmitted by kissing and then takes half a year to go away? Very weird choice.
Posted Nov 21, 2008 11:14 UTC (Fri)
by epa (subscriber, #39769)
[Link]
Really, I think it is blowing FUD to 'allege' patent infringement while giving no details of what those patents are. If anyone could cite the patents concerned, it would be a great help, because as Miguel said:
This kind of punditry is always light on details. We've grown used to this. Mono was criticized way before Novell acquired Ximian. There is an animosity toward "anything Microsoft," and it lowers the level of discourse that you can have.
I wish people focused on what the actual problems are. I am certainly against software patents. It is not only Microsoft that owns software patents, but hundreds of companies. But, I think Mono is singled out, and people give a free pass to lots of other projects.
Posted Nov 21, 2008 14:39 UTC (Fri)
by paulj (subscriber, #341)
[Link]
Posted Nov 19, 2008 20:45 UTC (Wed)
by frazier (guest, #3060)
[Link]
They also use these as value themes in the moreinterop.com site, both in video and text. Here's an example (from http://www.moreinterop.com/Solutions.aspx ):
Posted Nov 19, 2008 20:32 UTC (Wed)
by BackSeat (guest, #1886)
[Link] (5 responses)
Am I the only one that finds that magnificently underwhelming? Even if that were 100 big customers - and there's no indication that it is - that must represent an infinitesimal percentage of Microsoft customers that use some kind of Linux somewhere.
BS
Posted Nov 19, 2008 21:00 UTC (Wed)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Posted Nov 19, 2008 21:57 UTC (Wed)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link] (3 responses)
Anyway, if these are all big and reliable customers, such as investment banks or the automotive industry, why worry?
Posted Nov 20, 2008 3:26 UTC (Thu)
by tseaver (guest, #1544)
[Link] (2 responses)
Perhaps we should lobby our congresscritters to make adoption of FLOSS
Posted Nov 20, 2008 7:20 UTC (Thu)
by avik (guest, #704)
[Link]
Posted Nov 20, 2008 18:29 UTC (Thu)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link]
I'm enjoying the irony of your choice of industries there, at least
for the U.S.A., where we are actively debating / implementing bailouts
for both of them. "Normal" businesses are not reliable customers: if it fails it fails. But if investment banks or the automotive industry fails government steps up and the customer is still out there (may be with different name, but it's not goes away).
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
http://www.moreinterop.com/
"For anybody that runs a mixed Windows, and in particular SUSE Linux environment, this is all good news."
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
"Mono" is a remarkable name for a project that contains contagious software patents.
Can you cite any of these patents? The Mono project has a public commitment to remove any code that infringes software patents held by Microsoft or anyone else, so if you could give some examples you'll be doing everyone a favour.
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
Mono means monkey in Spanish.
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The position of the Mono project has always been that we believe .Net includes a lot of innovation along with a good mix of well-known technology. So, if people found a patent infringement, we would take it out. If there's prior art, though, the patent is invalid. This is the way it is done in the open source world. A good example is Freetype. They discovered that they could not use a byte code interpreter for fonts, so they invented a different approach.
(my italics)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
"And clearly defined intellectual property rights for each solution deliver complete peace of mind around intellectual property and integration."
About 100 customers are covered by the Novell-Microsoft agreement
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
for the U.S.A., where we are actively debating / implementing bailouts
for both of them.
a condition of bailout, along with limiting / eliminating the ridiculous
compensation being awarded to the ersatz capitalists at the top of the
dole-mongering corporations.
The Microsoft-Novell Linux deal: Two years later (InfoWorld)
And this IS why they are reliable customers, you know...