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. Links 23/8/2016: GNOME 3.22 Beta, Android 7.0 Nougat

    Links for the day



  2. The Linux Foundation Gives Microsoft (Paid-for) Keynote Position While Microsoft Extorts (With Patents) Lenovo and Motorola Over Linux Use

    This morning's reminder that Nadella is just another Ballmer (with a different face); Motorola and Lenovo surrender to Microsoft's patent demands and will soon put Microsoft spyware/malware on their Linux-powered products to avert costly legal battles



  3. Not Just President Battistelli: EPO Vice-Presidents Are Still Intentionally Misrepresenting EPO Staff

    Evidence serving to show that EPO Vice-Presidents are still intentionally misrepresenting EPO staff representatives and misleading everyone in order to defend Battistelli



  4. Battistelli the Liar Causes a Climate of Confrontation in French Politics, Lies About Patent Quality (Among Many Other Things)

    Battistelli's lies are coming under increased scrutiny inside and outside the European Patent Office (EPO), where patent quality has been abandoned in order to artificially elevate figures



  5. The Collapse of Software Patents and Patent Law Firms Trying to “Overcome” Alice

    The United States continues its gradual crackdown on software patents (which are viewed as abstract and thus unpatentable), whereas in Europe things are murkier than ever



  6. Apple's Patent Wars Against Android/Linux Make Patent Trolls Stronger

    Apple's insistence that designs should be patentable could prove to be collectively expensive, as patent trolls would then use a possible SCOTUS nod to launch litigation campaigns



  7. Links 22/8/2016: Linux 4.8 RC3, Linux Mint 18 “Sarah” KDE Beta

    Links for the day



  8. Links 21/8/2016: Apple and Microsoft Down, Systemd Spreading to Mount

    Links for the day



  9. Links 20/8/2016: Android Domination, FSFE summit 2016

    Links for the day



  10. Patents Roundup: Trolls Dominate Litigation, PTAB Crushes Patents, Patent Box Regime Persists, and OIN Explains Itself

    Another roundup of patent news from around the Web with special focus on software patenting



  11. The Cost/Toll of the 'New' EPO and Where All That Money Goes or Comes From

    The European Patent Office has become a servant of the rich and powerful (including large foreign corporations) and even its own employees now pay the price associated with misguided new policies (or 'reforms' as Battistelli habitually refers to these)



  12. Links 19/8/2016: Linux Mint With KDE, Linux Foundation's PNDA

    Links for the day



  13. The End of an Era at the USPTO as Battistelli-Like (EPO) Granting Policies Are Over

    The United States is seeing the potency of patents -- especially software patents (which make up much of the country's troll cases) -- challenged by courts and by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)



  14. Battistelli's European Patent Office Goes to the United States to Speak About the UPC and Software Patents

    The European Patent Office is showing its utter contempt -- not just disregard -- for the very fundamental rules that put it in its place and brought it into existence



  15. Turkey Subjected to the European Patent Convention (EPC) But Benoît Battistelli is Not?

    The ‘constitutional crisis’ at the European Patent Office in the context of Turkey, which has signed "the EPC and as such recognises the competence and the decisions of the institutions which have been introduced in the convention."



  16. Links 18/8/2016: EFF Slams Vista 10, Linux Foundation Makes PNDA

    Links for the day



  17. Links 17/8/2016: GNOME and Debian Anniversaries

    Links for the day



  18. Personal Audio LLC and Patent Troll Jim Logan Demonstrate the Harms of Software Patents and Why They Must Never Spread to Europe

    Jim Logan of Personal Audio (a notorious Texas-based patent troll) is still fighting with his bogus patent, having already caused enormous damage with a single software patent that should never have been granted in the first place (due to prior art, not just Alice)



  19. The Patent Microcosm Hopes That the Originators of Software Patents Will Undermine the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

    Now that the actions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which have been consistently upheld by the CAFC in precedential decisions, are suddenly being questioned the patent microcosm gets all giddy and tries to undermine PTAB (again)



  20. That Time When the Administrative Council Helped Battistelli Crush Oversight (Audit Committee) and What ILO Said About It a Month Ago

    Things are becoming ever more troublesome at the EPO as the Administrative Council enjoys inaction from the International Labour Organization (ILO), in spite of its role in destroying much-needed oversight at the behest of Battistelli



  21. The EPO's Administrative Council Keeps Postponing Debate About Grounds for Firing the President

    A recollection of events prior to the latest Administrative Council meeting, where Benoît Battistelli's failings and accountability for failing to correct them never even came up



  22. A Surge of Staff Complaints About the European Patent Office Drowns the System, Disservice to Justice Noted

    Self-explanatory graphs about the state of the justice [sic] system which is prejudiced towards/against EPO workers, based on internal reports



  23. Links 16/8/2016: White House Urged by EFF on FOSS, Go 1.7 Released

    Links for the day



  24. Links 15/8/2016: Linux 4.8 RC2, Glimpses at OpenMandriva Lx 3.0

    Links for the day



  25. Clawing Back the Staff Benefits at the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Staff of the EPO is leaving (or retiring) in droves as abusive management continues to be the norm and staff benefits are being taken away or gradually revoked



  26. The Patent Microcosm is Panicking and Spinning Alice/§ 101 Because US Software Patents Are Still Dying

    A look at recent developments in the software patents scene in the United States, with increased focus on (or fear of) the Patent Trial and Appeal Board



  27. 21,000 Posts in Techrights in Less Than a Decade

    This post is the 21,000th post and the next one will make it more than twenty-one thousand posts in total. We are turning 10 in November.



  28. Patent Microcosm Shuts Out the Poor: Unified Patent Court (UPC) Promotion by Practising Law Institute (PLI) Only for the Wealthy

    The people who are profiting from patent feuds, disputes, lawsuits etc. are still trying to muscle their will into European law and they keep the general public out of it by locking down (or pricing out of reach) their meetings where they influence/lobby decision-making officials



  29. The United States Has a Growing Patent Trolls Epidemic as Very High Proportion of Lawsuits Filed by Them

    A look at the high proportion of patent lawsuits that are filed by entities that make nothing at all and thus serve no role whatsoever in innovation



  30. Pushers of Software Patents Outside the United States (Which is Belatedly Squashing These Patents)

    How patent law firms are distorting the debate about software patents in hope of attracting business from gullible people who misunderstand the harsh (and worsening) reality of software patenting


CoPilotCo

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

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts