[QCLUG] novell and microsoft agreements good or bad

Scott Lesnet scott@52761mail.com
Sat, 11 Nov 2006 18:00:02 -0600 

There's good and bad in every story.  I'm using C# to develop on both
Mono and Visual Studio and preparing to pilot a .NET web app on Apachy.
Life is good! I don't think the world will end if we start virtualizing
multiple OS severs on the same box. 

On Sat, 2006-11-11 at 12:44 -0600, Noah J Norris wrote:
> interesting , yet i dont think open source moment will buy into using a 
> microsoft linux  because everything they add will be closed im sure are made 
> in a way that a year down the road they will make us pay for it. plus 
> microsoft has no trust in the open source market we know the smoke and 
> mirrors tricks the buyouts of compation. there is concern that novell might 
> be in violation of the gpl for even having this aggreement. interesting point 
> pc makers are complaining that vista is going to cost to much and yet raise 
> prices for pc's being that no one will want the home version because its 
> striped down. 
> 
> In the end novell might regret doing this they could get dumped and even 
> forked sence they made suse linux open with opensuse . or i can see opensuse 
> disconecting from novell/suse alltogether 
> 
> In my gut i get a bad feeling of dajuvu . didnt microsoft do something 
> simulure with sco , didnt microsoft buy licness to use linux ..... and buying 
> something now from novell . ( novell does own the unix ip rights .....) could 
> a patent war start because of this , could microsoft try to buy novell and 
> try a sco as a last effert to kill open source . buy just making this 
> aggreement are they circumventing the gpl?  hmmm embrace extend and extengish 
> 
> remeber what happened to any company that partnered with microsoft 
> 
> ibm with os2 ....
> many companies that got bought out or destoried
>  
> microsoft and trust (two words in a sentecne that dont make sence )  how much 
> trust honestly does microsoft have?  with the open source community ? (-100%)
> 
> one last note if microsoft wants to be nice to opensource it dont have to buy 
> anything or make any agreements with companies it would publicly open its 
> formats api ( dark secrets ... ) etc. Im thinking this could be just a ploy 
> to get lawsuits off microsofts back too plus microsoft looks good in the 
> press right before vista comes out .......
> 
> oh with the changes in govment offiice could microsoft get another anti-trust 
> suit going against it?  
> 
> 
> On Saturday 11 November 2006 08:56, John Brun wrote:
> > Just an opinion:
> >
> > I believe Microsoft sees what is happening in the Linux community and
> > understands that it either embraces it, or ultimately trails behind it.
> > Servers, both business and web, are all starting to move towards a linux
> > based platform.  Slowly, as Linux grows, more and more home systems are
> > converting.  Office desktop systems are starting to slowly move towards
> > linux also. Novell saw that an enterprise system was a money maker, and it
> > seems to be, for them.
> >
> > When you're looking to launch Vista and once again charge people $100 -
> > $200 for an operating system, that will be in the testing stages for the
> > next two years, you can't overlook the draw linux is starting to have. 
> > Also, for microsoft, could they come up with a competing Enterprise edition
> > of Linux and conqueror both markets....probably.
> >
> > All that aside the saying "keep your friends close, and your enemies
> > closer" seems to also come into play.  Having control over some of the
> > linux market might also allow them to adjust windows to fight off the linux
> > makers.
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> > > > on other news redhat thinks there gona be the only big distro in a
> > > > couple years ... wonder why
> > > >
> > > > whats microsoft real plan for doing this  ??? leak ip/code to sue ???
> > > > go after
> > > > samba and mono projects ( guess suse works with mono alot ) ( mono =
> > > > opensource .net implamtation ) i hate rabbit holes ....... does novall
> > > > own the unix ip from sco suit ...... could this bring another sco type
> > > > suit even fud another microsft funded law suit not directly connected
> > > > .....
> > > >
> > > > yes i think any type of wedge would fail cause of linuxs growth but
> > > > could this
> > > > be also a way to port microsoft office to linux making sure nothings
> > > > open source . i dont think theres a wedge to make the kernel closed
> > > > source and all
> > > > the gpl apps correct if so it would only be for microsofts interface
> > > > maybe they will make a layer to run windows software fully on linux yet
> > > > charge a full fee for it . maybe we could see window gui on top of
> > > > linux kernel  . i think alot of these will not happen maybe office they
> > > > would make money ( perhapes they would charge for the copy of office
> > > > plus the windows layer so like 300-600 ... lol ) .
> > > >
> > > > why is novall doing this , i mean how many times do they have to get it
> > > > in the
> > > > rear .... novall netwear anyone. we will have to wait and see what
> > > > happens out of this .
> > > >
> > > > maybe theres no evil intent at all , but i can not even think this with
> > > > microsofts track record .
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday 07 November 2006 21:30, Jim Kristan wrote:
> > > > > Here is John Dvorak's take on this, he has good in site, or good
> > > > > sources in the past.
> > > > > http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2052320,00.asp
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/7/06, Leif Theden <leif.theden@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > ha.  well i personally wont miss suse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/7/06, McKnight, Lee <LMcKnight@bandag.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I agree with Noah - this can't be anything good for open
> > > > > > > source/Linux. Especially the way that documents can be shared by
> > > > > > > both environments (M$Office/OO), but what's that?  The documents
> > > > > > > won't be 100% sharable? That must mean M$Office documents can
> > > > > > > share OO documents 100%, but OO can only share 90% of M$Office
> > > > > > > document features?  Gee, do you suppose that's because if they
> > > > > > > were 100% sharable there would be no reason to purchase M$Office?
> > > > > > >  Naw, that can't be it, there must be a better argument than
> > > > > > > that.  Hmm, I wonder what that could be...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have you ever seen a company that partnered with M$oft that
> > > > > > > wasn't out of business in a few years?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mac....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: qclug-bounces@qclug.org [mailto:qclug-bounces@qclug.org] On
> > > > > > > Behalf Of Noah J Norris
> > > > > > > Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 7:23 AM
> > > > > > > To: qclug@qclug.org
> > > > > > > Subject: [QCLUG] novell and microsoft agreements good or bad
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >       I've been reading more and more about microsoft and novell
> > > > > > > working together .
> > > > > > > Whats everyones take on this . from what i have read its not good
> > > > > > > and can bring another sco type case against linux.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > link
> > > > > > > http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/1851
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > life is linux
> > > > > > > linux is life
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > QCLUG mailing list
> > > > > > > QCLUG@qclug.org
> > > > > > > http://qclug.org/mailman/listinfo/qclug
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > QCLUG mailing list
> > > > > > > QCLUG@qclug.org
> > > > > > > http://qclug.org/mailman/listinfo/qclug
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > QCLUG mailing list
> > > > > > QCLUG@qclug.org
> > > > > > http://qclug.org/mailman/listinfo/qclug
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > QCLUG mailing list
> > > > > QCLUG@qclug.org
> > > > > http://qclug.org/mailman/listinfo/qclug
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > life is linux
> > > > linux is life
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > QCLUG mailing list
> > > > QCLUG@qclug.org
> > > > http://qclug.org/mailman/listinfo/qclug
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > QCLUG mailing list
> > > QCLUG@qclug.org
> > > http://qclug.org/mailman/listinfo/qclug
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > QCLUG mailing list
> > QCLUG@qclug.org
> > http://qclug.org/mailman/listinfo/qclug
>