EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

04.15.09

CNET Senility of the Day: Sun Buying Novell

Posted in GNU/Linux, Java, Mono, Novell, SUN at 6:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Crazy girl

Summary: Sun can’t buy Novell; a former Novell engineer fights Mono

It’s hard to take CNET seriously. Megatrolls from CNET tend to include people like Don Reisinger, who generate outrageous headlines just to flame and receive attention. It’s sad to see similar nonsense from Matt Asay. His suggestion is so absurd that it’s hardly worth repeating and Savio Rodrigues has already swept it aside. But it’s the same Savio Rodrigues who said that Microsoft should buy Red Hat. Is this an exercise in thinking or an exercise in trolling?

Why would anyone even conceive a Sun acquisition of Novell? Novell competes against Java, competes against Solaris, and competes even against OpenOffice.org with its fork which seemed to just help Microsoft and OOXML [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7].

In other news, Gnote, which was previously mentioned in [1, 2, 3], has just received some more publicity. The project can assist the eradication of Mono in GNOME.

Ex-Novell developer releases port of Tomboy

A software developer who was sacked by Novell in the first quarter of this year has begun porting Tomboy, one of two Mono-dependent applications which is part of the GNOME desktop, to C++/Gtkmm.

Hubert Figuiere , who is based in Canada, says this has nothing to do with Mono at all, though he is admittedly not a fan of the .NET clone which has been developed by Novell vice-president Miguel de Icaza.

The port of Tomboy is called Gnote.

If widespread adoption of Gnote is a success, this may become a sign of changing tide.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

20 Comments

  1. Dan O'Brian said,

    April 15, 2009 at 7:35 am

    Gravatar

    Megatrolls from CNET tend to include people like Don Reisinger, who generate outrageous headlines just to flame and receive attention.

    I find it hilarious that you complain about other people doing the same thing you do every single day.

  2. JohnD said,

    April 15, 2009 at 8:25 am

    Gravatar

    That’s a good point.
    If you think someone is way off base with a prediction, why lend it credibility by posting links to it on your site?
    And I fail to see how Novell competes against Java when they include it in their products – yes even Netware has a JVM.
    M$ would have been able to bulldoze OOXML into a standard with or without Novell’s help. Novell is also contributing back to OOO so I don’t see how it’s a true fork or competition.
    While I use tomboy, I’d hardly call it a game changing app in the Linux verse.
    I will say that I just installed SLED 11 and apart from a minor sound problem, I like it a lot. It’s nice not having to jump through hoops to play media files. As I may have stated before, I don’t mind paying a reasonable price for something – it’s the foundation of capitalism after all. M$ stopped being reasonable decades ago.

  3. JohnD said,

    April 15, 2009 at 8:50 am

    Gravatar

    I will submit this link:
    http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Application-Development/Using-MoMA-to-Port-from-Windows-NET-to-Mono-on-Linux-184710/1/
    As “evidence” supporting my position that providing programmers with tools that allow them to easily port apps from Windows to Linux is a good thing.

  4. Dan O'Brian said,

    April 15, 2009 at 9:03 am

    Gravatar

    FWIW, Novell didn’t start the Tomboy project, nor did it push it into GNOME – in fact they were barely even a part of the discussion.

  5. JohnD said,

    April 15, 2009 at 9:34 am

    Gravatar

    After reading the article I find that the author was merely speculating about the potential upside of Sun buying Novell, I didn’t see him as advocating the merger. The title of the article pretty much sums up his view point: “Should Sun buy Novell?” That’s a question, not a statement. He also ends the article by stating that Sun should support Linux.
    Seems to me like the Roy meister kinda shot himself in the foot with this post.

  6. Dan O'Brian said,

    April 15, 2009 at 10:13 am

    Gravatar

    JohnD: see my first comment ;-)

    JohnD Reply:

    I saw it when I first read it. But you do know that your statements about Novell and Tomboy have provided “them” with more “evidence” about your Novell connection(s).
    I’m surprised that Roy hasn’t posted any responses to our posts, maybe he’s under the weather, or working on his PhD.

    Dan O'Brian Reply:

    It’s all a matter of public knowledge in the GNOME mailing-list archives at http://mail.gnome.org

    This is why no one takes Roy very seriously, he doesn’t bother to research things.

  7. Yfrwlf said,

    April 15, 2009 at 3:27 pm

    Gravatar

    “Why would anyone even conceive a Sun acquisition of Novell? Novell competes against Java, competes against Solaris, and competes even against OpenOffice.org”

    Because that’s the point, to get rid of competition. Companies buy other companies that are in the same business all the time, it’s how the land of the monopolies works. :P

    As for Mono, it’s not an open project because it relies upon any data Microsoft wishes to release just like it was with Samba and their difficulties in porting, neither is it patent-free, but it is instead controlled in every way by Microsoft. They just want to control development on Linux is all so they can have everyone under their umbrella. While cross-platform programming is good as long as the “scary” bits that actually interoperate are disposable should the relating platform try to be jerks about that point of interoperability, the entire Mono project is completely in Microsoft’s camp and cannot be shed.

    I do agree that most likely non-exclusivity at this point will help Linux out more than Windows, but a purely Windows-based project with closed standards trying to follow a closed source project controlled by the group behind Windows? Sorry, no thanks.

    JohnD Reply:

    Sorry but I think you’re a little off base.
    While it’s true that many companies buy companies to remove competition some buy other firms to expand their product portfolio. Like Novell bought Platespin to improve their virtualization offerings. Platespin is now owned by Novell, but their products still exist. Where I disagree with Roy is that I don’t see how Novell can be considered a Java competitor when Novell doesn’t really offer any standalone programming languages and actually includes Java in it’s offerings.
    Mono is actually built upon defined public standards and the code is available so it’s open in that regard. Where most find the sticking point is that M$ created the standard and they are free to change how .NET works anytime they wish, which could adversely affect Mono projects.
    Samba is actually not encumbered by patents because it’s all reverse engineered by watching Windows network communications. Samba 4 should be better because the are using the information that the EU forced M$ to cough up. I think Samba.org actually bought the license (at a reduced rate thanks to the EU antitrust court) so they can develop version 4 without having to worry about M$.

  8. Dan O'Brian said,

    April 16, 2009 at 6:55 am

    Gravatar

    JohnD: I’m pretty sure that reverse engineering doesn’t protect against patents. Nor does documentation. There’s nothing stopping Samba from infringing on patents.

    I’m not saying Samba does or does not infringe on patents. I do not know whether it does or not.

    JohnD Reply:

    Dan: I think it would depend on what was actually patented. Given that Samba is reverse engineered, I find it hard to believe that the Samba code looks even remotely like the M$ code. We also know that Samba doesn’t perfectly interact with Windows so there are some obvious holes. I liken it to multimedia codecs – there are several open ones Flac, ogg etc do they infringe upon the proprietary? M$ was not the first company to create client server communication protocols and I’m willing to bet that if you dig down in the M$ code you will find that they at least “borrowed” some things from Novell.
    At any rate, my real issue is the assertion that Samba is “controlled” by M$ – given that Jeremy Allison left Novell because of the patent deal.
    Yfrwlf is entitled to his/her opinion, but like I said – I think the stated opinion is a bit off base.

    Shane Coyle Reply:

    I find it hard to believe that the Samba code looks even remotely like the M$ code.

    resemblance to code is immaterial in a software patent suit, the wording of such patents are usually “a method, using a computer, …” and a vague description of the process, with the idea that if anyone else implements that process using a computer (regardless of originality of code) it’s an infringement.

    it’s the equivalent of patenting a “method of killing rodents without human intervention” and then saying no one else could ever build a mousetrap without paying a royalty. software and method patents are utterly absurd.

    similarity of code would be more relevant in a copyright suit perhaps, but no one is doubting that Samba is original code (that I’m aware of).

    pcolon Reply:

    According to Jeremy Allison (and he is an integral part of the Samba project). The work accomplished by the Samba team was not “reverse engineering”. He clarified that on a discussion, in one of Glyn Moody’s posts, of the Wine project being equated to Samba development. Coding was done through careful “Network Analysis”. If he said it was not reverse engineered, then it was not.

    JohnD Reply:

    Patent talk is taking us away from the original thread – I was disputing that Samba is controlled by Microsoft. While I agree that if M$ changes their protocols Samba will cease to function correctly, that does not imply control of the project in my opinion.
    My apologies for digressing.

  9. JohnD said,

    April 16, 2009 at 12:21 pm

    Gravatar

    pcolon: I think you’re splitting hairs. I did not mean to imply that Samba was reverse engineering the M$ code itself. That is done by analyzing the compiled code. But by analyzing the network traffic that the M$ code and then creating new code to recreate it – you are doing reverse engineering.
    It would probably be more correct to say that Samba is reverse engineering the network traffic/protocol.
    I is my understanding that the Samba org was at least planning on purchasing the license to the M$ communications protocols so hopefully they will be able to figure out what the “brilliant” minds at Microshaft have created – and make something even better.

    Roy Bixler Reply:

    My understanding is that Samba has already paid the fee for Microsoft’s SMB/CIFS protocol documentation under the terms of the last EU anti-trust settlement.

    JohnD Reply:

    That gives them access to the source code, but did they ever decide if it would allow them to keep Samba open/free?

    Roy Bixler Reply:

    I’m sure they’d be smart enough to avoid the trap of looking at the source code. If not, then it wouldn’t be hard to imagine a future SCO-like lawsuit directed at them.

  10. Roy Schestowitz said,

    April 16, 2009 at 1:19 pm

    Gravatar

    For reference: Why Mono and Samba Are Patently Different

What Else is New


  1. As European Patent Office Management Covers up Collapse in Patent Quality Don't Expect UPC to Ever Kick Off

    It would be madness to allow EPO-granted patents to become 'unitary' (bypassing sovereignty of nations that actually still value patent quality); it seems clear that rogue EPO management has, in effect, not only doomed UPC ambitions but also European Patents (or their perceived legitimacy, presumption of validity)



  2. António Campinos -- Unlike His Father -- Engages in Imperialism (Using Invalid Patents)

    Despite some similarities to his father (not positive similarities), António Campinos is actively engaged in imperialistic agenda that defies even European law; the EPO not only illegally grants patents but also urges other patent offices to do the same



  3. António Campinos Takes EPO Waste and Corruption to Unprecedented Levels and Scale

    The “B” word (billions) is thrown around at Europe’s second-largest institution because a mischievous former EUIPO chief (not Archambeau) is ‘partying’ with about half of the EPO’s all-time savings, which are supposed to be reserved for pensions and other vital programmes, not presidential palaces and gambling



  4. Links 15/6/2019: Astra Linux in Russia, FreeBSD 11.3 RC

    Links for the day



  5. Code of Conduct Explained: Partial Transcript - August 10th, 2018 - Episode 80, The Truth About Southeast Linuxfest

    "Ask Noah" and the debate on how a 'Code of Conduct' is forcibly imposed on events



  6. Links 14/6/2019: Xfce-Related Releases, PHP 7.4.0 Alpha

    Links for the day



  7. The EPO is a Patent Troll's Wet Dream

    The makers of software and games in Europe will have to spend a lot of money just keeping patent trolls off their backs — a fact that seems to never bother EPO management because it profits from it



  8. EPO Spreading Patent Extremists' Ideology to the Whole World, Now to South Korea

    The EPO’s footprint around the world's patent systems is an exceptionally dangerous one; The EPO amplifies the most zealous voices of the patents and litigation ‘industry’ while totally ignoring the views and interests of the European public, rendering the EPO an ‘agent of corporate occupation’



  9. Guest Post: Notes on Free Speech, and a Line in the Sand

    We received this anonymous letter and have published it as a follow-up to "Reader's Claim That Rules Similar to the Code of Conduct (CoC) Were 'Imposed' on LibrePlanet and the FSF"



  10. Links 13/6/2019: CERN Dumps Microsoft, GIMP 2.10.12 Released

    Links for the day



  11. Links 12/6/2019: Mesa 19.1.0, KDE neon 5.16, Endless OS 3.6.0 and BackBox Linux 6

    Links for the day



  12. Leaked Financial 'Study' Document Shows EPO Management and Mercer Engaging in an Elaborate “Hoax”

    How the European Patent Office (EPO) lies to its own staff to harm that staff; thankfully, the staff isn't easily fooled and this whole affair will merely obliterate any remnants of "benefit of the doubt" the President thus far enjoyed



  13. Measuring Patent Quality and Employer Quality in Europe

    Comparing the once-famous and respected EPO to today's joke of an office, which grants loads of bogus patents on just about anything including fruit and mathematics



  14. Granting More Fundamentally Wrong Patents Will Mean Reduced Certainty, Not Increased Certainty

    Law firms that are accustomed to making money from low-quality and abstract patents try to overcome barriers by bribing politicians; this will backfire because they show sheer disregard for the patent system's integrity and merely lower the legal certainty associated with granted (by greedy offices) patents



  15. Links 11/6/2019: Wine 4.10, Plasma 5.16

    Links for the day



  16. Chapter 10: Moving Forward -- Getting the Best Results From Open Source With Your Monopoly

    “the gradual shift in public consciousness from their branding towards our own, is the next best thing to owning them outright.”



  17. Chapter 9: Ownership Through Branding -- Change the Names, and Change the World

    The goal for those fighting against Open source, against the true openness (let's call it the yet unexploited opportunities) of Open source, has to be first to figuratively own the Linux brand, then literally own or destroy the brand, then to move the public awareness of the Linux brand to something like Azure, or whatever IBM is going to do with Red Hat.



  18. Links 10/6/2019: VLC 3.0.7, KDE Future Plans

    Links for the day



  19. Patent Quality Continues to Slip in Europe and We Know Who Will Profit From That (and Distract From It)

    The corporate media and large companies don't speak about it (like Red Hat did before entering a relationship with IBM), but Europe is being littered and saturated with a lot of bogus software patents -- abstract patents that European courts would almost certainly throw out; this utter failure of the media to do journalism gets exploited by the "big litigation" lobby and EPO management that's granting loads of invalid European Patents (whose invalidation goes underreported or unreported in the media)



  20. Corporate Front Groups Like OIN and the Linux Foundation Need to Combat Software Patents If They Really Care About Linux

    The absurdity of having groups that claim to defend Linux but in practice defend software patents, if not actively then passively (by refusing to comment on this matter)



  21. Links 9/6/2019: Arrest of Microsoft Peter, Linux 5.2 RC4, Ubuntu Touch Update

    Links for the day



  22. Chapter 8: A Foot in the Door -- How to Train Sympathetic Developers and Infiltrate Other Projects

    How to train sympathetic developers and infiltrate other projects



  23. Chapter 7: Patent War -- Use Low-Quality Patents to Prove That All Software Rips Off Your Company

    Patents in the United States last for 20 years from the time of filing. Prior to 1994, the patent term was 17 years from when the patent was issued.



  24. The Linux Foundation in 2019: Over 100 Million Dollars in Income, But Cannot Maintain Linux.com?

    Today’s Linux Foundation gets about 0.1 billion dollars per year (as explained in our previous post), so why can’t it spend about 0.1% of that money on people who write for and maintain a site that actually promotes GNU/Linux?



  25. Microsoft and Proprietary Software Vendors a Financial Boon for the Linux Foundation, But at What Cost?

    The Linux Foundation is thriving financially, but the sources of income are diversified to the point where the Linux Foundation is actually funded by foes of Linux, defeating the very purpose or direction of such a nonprofit foundation (led by self-serving millionaires who don't use GNU/Linux)



  26. The Linux Foundation as a Facilitator of Microsoft's Abduction of Developers (for GitHub, Azure, Visual Studio and Windows)

    There’s a profoundly disturbing pattern; in a rush for influence and money the Linux Foundation inadvertently (or worse — consciously and deliberately) paved the way to Microsoft’s more modern version of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (EEE)



  27. Links 8/6/2019: FreeBSD 11.3 Beta 3, Git 2.22.0 and IPFire 2.23

    Links for the day



  28. Microsoft Peter is a Pedophile, Arrested Without Bail

    "Microsoft Peter" turns out to be a very sick man, much like people who apply for a job at Microsoft, knowing the company's dirty dealings and crimes



  29. Links 7/6/2019: IceWM 1.5.5, IBM Layoffs, Kdenlive 19.04.2

    Links for the day



  30. This Week's US Senate Hearings on Patents Are a Farce, Just as Expected

    With few exceptions like the EFF, Senate hears testimonies from stacked panels (full of lobbyists and think tanks), set up for the sole purpose of misleading Senate and helping them buy a law


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts