Comments on: Novell Continues to Show Signs of Crumbling

By: beast feast

beast feast — Mon, 26 May 2008 06:40:23 +0000

“Spoken like someone afraid of the truth.”

Sorry, you into enemas more than sandwiches? I can’t keep up with the breakfast of shills anymore……

By: self_liar

self_liar — Sun, 25 May 2008 04:41:01 +0000

Exists a c# to java converter?

By: David Flax

David Flax — Sun, 25 May 2008 04:28:42 +0000

True Red Hat is not part of the discussion but there is nothing wrong with using them as an example. You make the unfounded point that Novell is weak because a promotion was made in house as though that is a bad thing. My point is it happens in all companies including those that are largely supported by the open source community. I’m not using a diversion tactic. I’m using Red Hat as an example. I could have used any number of companies, I chose Red Hat because they are the market leader in the Linux world right now.

We learn for the past and its use as examples helps all of us understand why tactics do and don’t work.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 25 May 2008 03:57:18 +0000

David,

We are not discussing Red Hat though, do we?

Repeatedly I see vigorous defense of Microsoft* that comes in the form of presentation of old IBM corruptions. What does IBM have to do with it? Nothing, of course. It’s a tactic of diversion though. Also s see:

http://boycottnovell.com/2008/04/05/microsoft-ibm-epa-proxy/

__
*Last seen yesterday at night when I brought up the subject in a forum I participate in.

By: David Flax

David Flax — Sun, 25 May 2008 03:47:26 +0000

I think you misunderstand. You seem to be making the point that losing executives is a bad sign for any company. I disagree. You mention that a promotion means someone has left. OK I agree but it happens to all companies including Red Hat. I just used as an example that Red Hat seems to be doing fine since Szulik left and he is a much bigger hitter in the F/OSS world that Ann McAuliff is. You make it sound like Novell is a frail company because someone left and people are promoted. If Red Hat and other companies do fine when executives leave why can’t Novell or for that matter Microsoft do OK as well? It’s OK for people to leave for a myriad of reasons and overall it becomes a small bump in the road that is compensated for over time.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 25 May 2008 03:23:04 +0000

David,

Please explain to me why the departure of X people is OK and only the departure of X*Y makes it a sign of weakness. It’s like saying “I’m just a little bit pregnant.”

By: David Flax

David Flax — Sun, 25 May 2008 02:43:39 +0000

Spoken like someone afraid of the truth.

By: Microsoft = Corruption

Microsoft = Corruption — Sun, 25 May 2008 02:17:18 +0000

David,

blah blah blah blah blah

go eat some eggs

By: David Flax

David Flax — Sun, 25 May 2008 01:52:15 +0000

Why because Alex and I have other facts that are not mentioned. We also speak the truth just not the truth that you care to believe. Anyway let’s again look at Red Hat. Did they not lose two executives this year? I believe the answer is yes. They lost Sean Connolly and Matt Szulik. Both much heavier hitters than Novell promoting a new person from Canada to lead Novell Americas. I guess it just depends on who you want to report on and what you want to believe.

I can’t reallly look at Canonical and Ubuntu since they are private and don’t have to report anything.of substance to the public so we really don’t know what has and has not happened with them.

What Andy and I are doing is taking a different look at what Roy is discussing. Isn’t that what the community does as well?

By: ham

ham — Sat, 24 May 2008 23:03:11 +0000

Sounds like Alex & David would enjoy a Ballmer egg sandwich.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Sat, 24 May 2008 15:51:18 +0000

“Much like buybacks (Novell recently resorted to them [1, 2]), changing of heads in a company is a great sign of weakness.”

Stock buy-backs are rarely a sign of weakness. The only way a stock buy-back is bad for a business is if the business pays too much for the stock. That really doesn’t look the case at Novell.

I agree with David; executive departures are also not such a sign. If people were departing en masse, then yes. But a company as big as Novell will inevitably lose employees year-in year-out; it’s the same at any other business. They may not like to trumpet those people going, but it’s natural wastage and not really a sign of weakness.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sat, 24 May 2008 13:41:35 +0000

Changing executives is a sign of weakness. Are you serious?

Yes, I certainly am. You need to see what I wrote previously when I first saw this head-change in progress. This in-house promotion means that someone is leaving or has left. Microsoft too tried to stage/spin top executives jumping ship as a victory by claiming in-house promotions. That was a recent incident that was too big to be missed. See: How to Spin Executive Exodus as Wonderful News Companies are quieter about departures (low-noting) and louder about hires and promotions. That's how it's done.

By: David Flax

David Flax — Sat, 24 May 2008 12:34:27 +0000

Changing executives is a sign of weakness. Are you serious? Novell promotes from within their company and that’s a bad sign.? No I think that’s a good sign. You really don’t know what you are talking about. Novell is not frail. Look at their balance sheet, they are cash heavy with over $1 billion in cash and cash equivalents. Compare that to leader Red Hat who has almost $600 million in cash from their latet 10-Qs. That’s why the stock buybacks were a good idea for Novell not a bad one. They have a ton of cash.

You take things out of context only show small parts and then criticize that which you do not understand. I understand that you don’t like Novell for what they have done but you should at least have some understanding of the facts.