-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 15 March 2004 07:16 am, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote:

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:02:00 -0000

Ben Higginbottom wrote:

...

In this months Linux User and Developer there's a quote from Juergen Geck saying that they are going to try and remedy the situation of the inclusion of proprietary software from suse, but I doubt that Yast and Sax will be released under the GPL for next month

Do you doubt they will be released GPLled next month or do you doubt they will ever be released GPLled?

I appreciate the step of dividing Free (OSI approved license) from non free software in CDs. I'd like to hear they are going a step further.

Novell has a nice opportunity to be felt welcome by the community.

Perhaps, but it is also arguable that the proprietary nature of YaST and SaX is the essence to SuSE's business success. It's not as if they do harm to the Open Source products they bring under management. If anything YaST is a means of formalizing the LSB, and ensuring that commonly used apps can play nicely together. You can read the source, and you can see how things are done. It should not be all that hard to emulate without violating, if you have the will to do so. Personally, I'm satisfied with how things are. If it would be harmful to SuSE (That part of Novell that produces SuSE Linux), I would not want to see it done. If Novell simply GPLed the code against the better interests of SuSE merely to please the Open Source community, I would consider that equal to any other form of corporate raiding. STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAVacYwX61+IL0QsMRAva2AKCcR7A5hMgru31S1OmRrPDN367QJgCdHrPQ GrMIbrvOMQJvONZ3/HqQez8= =iccS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Alle 14:39, lunedì 15 marzo 2004, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo ha scritto:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 07:52:27 -0500

"Steven T. Hatton" wrote:

...

Perhaps, but it is also arguable that the proprietary nature of YaST and SaX is the essence to SuSE's business success. It's not as if

Maybe. Hard to prove. People copied illegally for years MS Software. It is legal for any office to buy a copy of SUSE Linux and install thousands. The cash is in the service when you've 1000 PCs to take care of.

It has been remarked multiple times here that you can do it with SUSE - e.g. buy (or download) and install how many times you wish. We cannot blame them for what, in my opinion, is just a marketing decision. [...]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 15 March 2004 09:29 am, John Pettigrew wrote:

In a previous message, "Steven T. Hatton" wrote:

...

it is also arguable that the proprietary nature of YaST and SaX is the essence to SuSE's business success.

This seems blatantly obvious to me. The single greatest differentiator between the different distros is their different management tools. Thus, YaST is the greatest single thing that characterises SuSE linux. And it is probably that more than anything that keeps most people using SuSE (well, that and laziness!).

What's the difference? :-) You're a Brit from the looks of it, so you may not be familiar with the true guiding principle of the US enunciated in the 18th Century by Benjamin Franklin "Lazyness is the mother of invention". But if you consider Ivan's assertion that support not boxes is where the bucks are, it still make sense to use YaST as a market differentiator. If they have 1000 desktops are they going to go with a harder to manage system just to be different? YaST still makes sense if they are going to need support. Why buy/use a product that is hard to support? And if they do populate their office with chameleons, are they going to call the the guys with the hats to support it? I don't think so. YaST needs a _lot_ of work. Yes you heard me. Sure it is amazing how much it has changed since SuSE 5.1, but they have far too many unfinished good ideas to consider it close to finished. If you dig really deeply, you will realize there are a few 'out the door, ready or nots' in there. But it will always be that way.

John

STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAVc1DwX61+IL0QsMRAsXeAJ4oWCQr22c4phe78seuHiqcd6hCDACfUSjq waRQIhxKLQAZFxMUr+8CDC0= =kl83 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Ivan Sergio Borgonovo [15 Mar 2004 18:10]:

It is well known that Software with an OSI approved license develop faster.

It ain't that simple :) I could name you some software projects that would simply die if it weren't for companies that pay their core developers. Who, other then SUSE developers would honestly work on adapting YaST2 to their needs? I guess it would go the way of YaST1, i.e. a sourceforge project that never went beyond the planing stage.

We should sell services and development, not chains.

I do not believe that a linux distributor can live on services and development alone, at least if it wants to be among the big players. Services and development alone won't support hundreds of employees.

SUSE Linux is definitively a good product and SUSE techs definitively know what they are doing (kudos), but this business model is not going to last forever in the Free Software market.

Only time will tell and I'm still not convinced that I'm going to witness the decision in my lifetime. Philipp

tisdag 16 mars 2004 08:47 skrev Silviu Marin-Caea:

Yeah, but if the software gets better and easier to administer, what's preventing the companies that should pay money to IT industry from hiring their own admins of medium competence and doing their own services?

Most admins, that companies prefer either Windows 2000 because of it's GUI or prefer installing something banal like BSD, with only a console interface to make it look so horrible to the user. While they show their extreme expertese, by their immense knowledge of the shortcut keys. The point of all of this here, is that the future of any Linux is not in the Enterprise. Years ago, Enterprises were the place where computers were being run, and therefore the most income in IT came from these sites. This however, has turned around since then and the home user, is by far the largest market. Many have the illusion, that home users only run Pyrated copies. This is not true. Fact of the matter is, that every Enterprise I've entered was running almost entirely pyrated copies. The home user, was used to getting his operating systems with the computer along with most of what she needed to run her system. Today, the system with the most functionality and the most included applications is linux. However, the enterprise is not the place to earn cash on. Enterprises don't earn money, by selling solutions that work out of the box. They earn money, as you pointed out yourself, by selling services to users who are running systems they can't have work properly on their own. And you can't beat Unix or Windows at that ...

On Monday 15 March 2004 03:52, Steven T. Hatton wrote:

Perhaps, but it is also arguable that the proprietary nature of YaST and SaX is the essence to SuSE's business success.

Nonsense. Do you really think some other distro would adopt Yast? Its more than a little complex. SuSE is successfull because (with the exception of 8.1) they put out a solid distro with far less dicking around needed to get it up and running and productive. It installs far more securely out of the box than many, and most things just work. Peopel recompile SuSE kernels because the WANT to not because they HAVE to. Yast is not particularly better than some of the other configuration tools, and often makes it hard to known what is being set and where the settings are stored. But to its credit it does cover lots of settings. -- _____________________________________ John Andersen