Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Patrick Farrell,

>
> Apple is sitting on almost 35 billion in cash.. Maybe they should buy a
> controlling interest so they can have an enterprise directory.. I'm sure
> they can salvage some other components to add to their portfolio.
>


It would be really sad if eDirectory went down with Novell's sinking
ship. It (and the apps that rely on it, like IDM) just might be the
only best-of-breed product they have left.

0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

DougB;1888148 wrote:
Patrick Farrell,

>
> Apple is sitting on almost 35 billion in cash.. Maybe they should buy a
> controlling interest so they can have an enterprise directory.. I'm sure
> they can salvage some other components to add to their portfolio.
>


It would be really sad if eDirectory went down with Novell's sinking
ship. It (and the apps that rely on it, like IDM) just might be the
only best-of-breed product they have left.


While I agree, the sad thing is that I see more and more things doing AD only and sometimes supporting SunOne (the old Netscape stuff). So perhaps eDir will live on in the future but I have a feeling that 5-10 years from now we'll all be doing AD (or the vast majority).
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

kjhurni,

>> It would be really sad if eDirectory went down with Novell's sinking
>> ship. It (and the apps that rely on it, like IDM) just might be the
>> only best-of-breed product they have left.

>
> While I agree, the sad thing is that I see more and more things doing
> AD only and sometimes supporting SunOne (the old Netscape stuff). So
> perhaps eDir will live on in the future but I have a feeling that 5-10
> years from now we'll all be doing AD (or the vast majority).
>


Maybe by then AD will be a true (X.500-compliant) directory. Or maybe
the standard will be redefined instead...



0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

I hope so. I will admit AD has gotten better, but still lacks many things about eDir that I like (although does have at least two items that eDir cannot do--dynamic groups with file rights, and able to assign intruder lockouts to users and groups and not just containers). But that's about it.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Hi,

David Howe wrote:
>
> Seriously? all the stuff they currently run on windows servers (even if
> they shouldn't) that they can't on Netware.


In all seriousness, all of my customers have *a lot* of Windows
application servers. 90% of the applications they run on Windows plain
and simple don't exist on Linux either, as much as they don't exist on
Netware. There are *very* few exceptions.

>
> Java on netware isn't terrible,


It is *now*, because Novell abandonded it several years ago, like they
did with many other similar things on Netware.

>
> However, it isn't just that Novell want this stuff - Novell want this
> stuff for free, with someone else carrying the load of development and
> support, which is what linux has and windows has, but Netware doesn't. I
> agree (from their point of view) its a bit unfair that Netware isn't a
> Supported Platform for a lot of this stuff, so they have to pay to keep
> it updated and other (completing) operating system providers don't, but
> that's reality.


And a self-inflicted one. See market share, and down spiral. Yes,
stopping such a trend *does* in all cases require effort first. And
Novell isn't and wasn't willing to provide that effort.

> Should existing Netware customers care about this?


Probably not. But they care that the now 5 years or so old replacement
product suffers from exactly the same problems, yet i ndifferent areas.
Again, NOvell wants everything for free, and doesn't care if "free"
provides less value than what customers are used too. Granted, this time
they did correct some of this (See DNS, DHCP, CIFS), but other issues
they still ignore (SLP), but that is too little, too late, and OES1 just
added a lot of damage. And additional damage is exactly waht Novell did
*not* need.

> > If you add a functionality to your product, and that never properly
> > works, you're actively driving customers away, even more so than if
> > you would have never added it in the first place.

>
> Doesn't seem to have hurt Ms Office sales.


Oh yes, it did. As Vista did hurt Microsoft. It's just a: a different
Level they come from, and Microsoft *can* take some damage without going
down, and b: Microsoft usually quickly and swiftly repair or correct the
damage they do.

> > And that's again different from Linux how? 😉

>
> Linux is a server os with a flag saying "I am a client workstation,
> honest" 🙂


Oh come on. That claim is based on what? Linux is an all-purpose jack of
all trades OS every single bit as much as Windows. In fact, NT, which is
still the mother of all current Windows versions was strictly born as a
*Server* OS, and only much later became a Desktop. Linux was born as a
programming experiment.


> Agreed. Calling MS Fileshare "CIFS" doesn't change the reality that it
> is MS Fileshare.


Right. And pushing customers to use it is akin to saying "their stuff is
better than ours". Too bad that this is actually starting to become true
recently, because Novell has sort of abandoned their own, previously
vastly superior protocol.

>
> Again, you are preaching to the choir here - we already *know* Novell
> appear to be being driven by their marketing department to be "just as
> Microsoft as Microsoft are" without actually having MS's market share to
> get away with that.


Again, I disagree. Microsoft never did, nor ever will, pull such stunts.
Novell has in all reality long overtaken Microsoft in terms of
"evilness". And Microsoft would *never* get away with this. Why? Because
they would get all the bad press immediately. Novell is so unimportant
that they can do whatever they want with hardly anbody left to even
notice. If Microsoft would announce to charge for Patches starting in
February, imagine the public outcry. It would most likely make the news
headlines in prime-time TV. And lawyers all over the world would
immediately start to prepare class actions.

> Remote permissions management is still a pain; no doubt they will have a
> fix for that to soon. Otherwise yes, MS is eating Novells lunch,
> including the cheese and crackers...


While Novell is busy buying random products as far away as possible from
their own core business, just to run them and the effort into the
ground, instead of focussing on their core competence.

> >
> > 'xactly. And as originally planned, the ability to run NLMs. That
> > would also had given Novell more time to move their products
> > properly, instead of the rushed out the door approach they had to
> > use.

>
> As I understand it, one of the *problems* with oes is that it runs some
> netware code in emulation;


Not that I'm aware of.


> but I agree, it would have made sense to
> support legacy code though a compatibility layer, to ease migration
> pains. This just highlights the same thing though - Novell aren't
> interested in a smooth transition, they just want to force everyone into
> the new business model and retain as many customers to milk as they can.


Correct. Quite seriously, it would have been very doable to allow an
inplace upgrade from Netware to Linux. Seriously. I outlined it several
times to some Novell people how that could have been done, and I
basically got either completely blank stares, or a more hones "now, why
didn't we do that?". Yeah, good question.

> >
> > When I wrote this, I was looking for a good example. Now it came to
> > me: VMWare ESX. That is a Linux underneath too. That's *exactly* how
> > OES should look like and how it should have been planned by Novell.

>
> Its a bit complex; the esx core co-runs with the linux environment, and
> can pre-empt that if it needs to; I think the analogy is more like
> running a xen host on a xen server, where both are aware of the other,
> and can take advantage of that.


No, I didn't meant technically. I meant in the way that for normal admin
tasks, a VMWare ESX admin *never ever* sees the underlying kernel, i.e
more from an administrative POV.

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Product Support Forum Sysop
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Micro Focus Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Hi,

David Howe wrote:
> I can see how, if Novell wants to be "another linux provider" what they
> are doing now is trying to force as many of their legacy customer base
> onto that new business model as possible, no matter how inconvenient
> that is for said customers, and slough off the remainder so they don't
> have to support them.
>
> A lot of recent moves seem to make more sense seen in that light.


That is assuming Novell could in any way exist as yet another Linux
provider. Just for the records, Novell still makes > 80% of their
revenue *not* with Linux, or linux related services. How can a comapny
that makes less than 20% of their revenue (and I bet, if you'd put the
costs against it, almost certainly *lose* money on it), survive on this
alone, or be called a "linux provider"?

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Product Support Forum Sysop
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Micro Focus Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Stop making fun of my proboscis!

Craig wrote:
> ...and these forums are always good, especially NCCI, regardless of your NOS.
>
>

0 Likes
Community Manager kgroneman Community Manager
Community Manager

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Hey magic31:

>but feel it could have been much more
>by now.


Just in time for SP2

--
Kim (11/12/2009 5:25:57 PM Mountain)
--
My computer used to beat me at chess all the time, but then I changed the competition to kick boxing.......
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Your nos always knows 🙂


"dan c." <dytcheungDEL@hotmail.com.del> wrote in message
news:T71Lm.2462$K62.1114@kovat.provo.novell.com...
> Stop making fun of my proboscis!
>
> Craig wrote:
>> ...and these forums are always good, especially NCCI, regardless of your
>> NOS.
>>


0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Being a rural person, just tried to order the mail out disk to upgrade from SLED 10 sp2 to SLED 11.


Finding where to order took a while, why not put SHOP NOVELL in the Novell menu links ?

Often get lead to phone numbers... that can not dial...

Finally found the Novell Shop page and was able to go through the order process to have the disk mailed out.



End of order payment, am told to download the product... no confirmation the mail out disk sort was coming...


Unable to find how confirm the DVD sort being mailed out to me... am hoping one of the several people I spoke to is going to email me this later....


This does not help migraines !



Those organising the online ordering need realize many out here are NOT technical, we order mail out disk to be sure we can have a good, clean, install...
0 Likes
jmarton2 Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Massimo Rosen wrote:

> How can a comapny
> that makes less than 20% of their revenue (and I bet, if you'd put the
> costs against it, almost certainly *lose* money on it), survive on this
> alone, or be called a "linux provider"?


Perhaps because their only growth area at this point is Linux? All the
"legacy" products continue to see revenue declines each quarter. It'll
be interesting to see if the trend continues when the next results are
announced in a few weeks.

--
Joe
With great power comes great responsibility.

Joe Marton Emeritus Knowledge Partner
0 Likes
Marcel_Cox Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Novell has killed all Novell shops

Tommy Mikkelsen wrote:

>>So why couldn't/didn't Novell develop a Netware 64-bit OS

>
>They did, and it had a codename called Modesto.....


They did not. Modesta never went beyond a research project and there have
never been more that just a handful prople involved. In a sense, it was a
bit like the superNOS project. Just smoke and mirrors and nothing behind
it. Actually, superNOS was even worse. It was just a vision but nothing
was every really done to implement it.

--
Marcel Cox
http://support.novell.com/forums
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcel Cox's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=8
0 Likes
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.