<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet title="XSL_formatting" type="text/xsl" href="rss_style.xsl" ?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
        <title>ZDNet Blogs</title>
        <link>http://blogs.zdnet.com</link>
        <description>ZDNet Blogs Focus: Microsoft Novell</description>
<item>
<title>Novell: Microsoft open source deal has halo effect</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=7351</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 07:43:23 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=7351</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Novell reported its fourth quarter results and its Linux business continues to post strong growth. However, the growth characteristics are changing. What used to be Microsoft-fueled growth--courtesy of an interoperability and cross-selling arrangement--is now broadening via other partnerships with companies like SAP, Dell and Lenovo. Putting a hard number on what was dubbed a Microsoft halo effect is difficult. But Novell CEO Ronald Hovsepian touched on it during the company's conference call with analysts Wednesday: It   s very difficult to decipher the overall halo that Microsoft has. I will tell you the other relationships, like the SAP one that I had indicated in our early rollout, we saw some up-tick there and I am tracking the Lenovo and the Dell numbers. I   m just ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Microsoft-Novell: What a long, strange year it's been</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=916</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:56:42 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Mary Jo Foley</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=916</guid>
<description><![CDATA[In what's been a controversial (to say the least) partnership, the Microsoft-Novell technology partnership and patent-protection arrangement has reached its one-year anniversary. Microsoft issued on November 7 a press release to mark the occasion, citing "30 new customers" that have signed up for certificates for three-year priority support subscriptions for SuSE Linux Enterprsie Server from Novell. The new customers include Costco, Southwest Airlines and the City of Los Angeles, according to Microsoft. Not surprisingly, Microsoft isn't saying much about the part of its collaboration with Novell which has generated the most publicly outcry: The patent-protection component. The press release simply states that the 30 new customers are "join(ing) the ranks of all other Microsoft and Novell customers currently benefiting from the companies    ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Red Hat, Sun deal reflects power shift driven by open source </title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1647</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:21:55 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Paula Rooney</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1647</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Three years ago,  a Red Hat-Sun pact seemed as unthinkable as a Novell-Microsoft partnership -- or World Series championship for the Boston Red Sox. The BoSox were down 0-3 games against the Yankees in the American league playoffs, Red Hat was eating up its  Unix rival   s bread-and-butter customer base and Microsoft was paying Netware customers to defect to Windows. The rivalries were well established: Red versus Blue, and proprietary platform vendors versus open source vendors. My, how times have changed. Today, the competitive dynamic has turned on its head:  proprietary (or once proprietary) platform vendors have forged partnerships with their Linux rivals. The Microsoft-Novell is designed to improve interoperability of Windows with SUSE Linux but also is intended to slow Red Hat. The ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Will GNOME split give Microsoft Open XML standards win?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1616</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 06:43:06 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Dana Blankenhorn</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1616</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Microsoft's efforts to overturn a vote earlier this year denying its Open XML "fast track" standards certification seem to be getting a boost from the GNOME Foundation. GNOME Foundation founder Miguel deIcaza is a Novell employee, and his actions have been closely scrutinized since Microsoft signed its controversial "patent licensing" deal with the company a year ago. OpenXML, also called OOXML, was denied "fast track" International Standards Organization (ISO) approval in September, but a final vote on making it a standard will take place in February, and Microsoft is anxious to get the earlier decision reversed. To that end Microsoft is working with the ECMA TC 45 group to answer detailed questions which accompanied the negative ballots in September, in hopes of changing ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Add TurboLinux to the Microsoft patent-protection roster</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=856</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 06:17:34 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Mary Jo Foley</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=856</guid>
<description><![CDATA[It's been a while since Microsoft signed up any more Linux distro vendors to participate as patent-protection partners. But on October 22, the Redmondians announced they've added TurboLinux to the fold. Microsoft's deal with TurboLinux -- like the interoperability/technology partnership arrangements it has cemented with Novell, Linspire and Xandros -- has several components. According to the Microsoft press release, the new Microsoft pact with TurboLinux, a Japanese vendor with a strong presence in the Asia-Pacific market, will cover the following areas: Single sign-on collaboration: Microsoft and Turbo will develop a "single sign-on solution, enabling customers to use one set of credentials to log on to Windows-based and Turbolinux devices." Protocol licensing: Turbo signed a Workgroup Server Protocol Program (WSPP) evaluation license in order ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Acacia denies patent claim is an attack on open source, denies any Microsoft role </title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1571</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:59:49 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Paula Rooney</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1571</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Acacia Research Corp. on Friday released a statement to ZDNet's Open source Blog writers regarding the patent infringement case it filed against Red Hat and Novell on October 9.  In the statement, which appears below in its entirety, Acacia insists that its patent claim is not in any way an attack at open source software and vigorously denies that Microsoft has any role in it, directly or indirectly: "Many inventors, whether individuals, small corporations, research institutes, universities or even large corporations, do not have the scale, expertise or experience to license their patent rights directly for products or services which might incorporate their inventions.  These inventors partner with Acacia   s subsidiaries to generate a financial return for those inventions.   ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Novell Open Enterprise Server 2, NetWare Services and Xen</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/virtualization/?p=261</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2007 03:00:08 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Dan Kusnetzky</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/virtualization/?p=261</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I've been following the market for system software for quite some time and have watched Novell's efforts, which include the venerable NetWare and SUSE Linux, with some interest since the 1980s. The company's announcement of Open Enterprise Server 2; an amalgam of one part Linux, one part NetWare services, one part ZENworks management software and one part Xen virtual machine software; appeared to be an innovative way to serve their customer's needs, move forward to provide ever-better features and functions while still maintaining a tight control of the company's research budget. Here are a few of Novell's words on the topic: Open Enterprise Server 2 features innovations in storage management and enhancements to simplify user access in Microsoft* Windows* environments, along ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>IP firm sued, settled with Novell on different patent in August </title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1564</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:14:56 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Paula Rooney</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1564</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The IP firm that filed patent litigation against Red Hat and Novell mounted legal threats against many other U.S. software companies in 2007 including Oracle, SAP, Computer Associates, EMC, Adobe, Autodesk, Apple, SPSS --  and Novell. That   s right.  In late August, the Newport Beach, Calif.    based  Acacia Technology Licensing' subsidiary Disc Link Corp. entered into a licensing agreement with Novell covering patents related to portable storage devices with links to the Internet. That deal settled litigation pending against Novell in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Oracle signed a similar agreement with Acacia less than a week later. A Novell spokesman confirmed the case was settled in August but declined to specify the Novell product or ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Microsoft claims it is not party to patent claims against Linux</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1558</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:36:27 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Paula Rooney</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1558</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Contrary to speculation, Microsoft is not behind the patent litigation filed against Linux distributors last week, the company insists. "Microsoft is not a party to Acacia's lawsuit against Red Hat and Novell, nor are we involved in any way in this litigation," according to an official statement from the company, released Tuesday by Microsoft spokesman Mark Martin. Industry pundits speculated about Microsoft's possible role in the case in light of predictions about patent litigation made by chief executive Steve Ballmer earlier this month and the appointment of Microsoft's former general manager of IP licensing -- Brad Brunell --to Acacia's top management team just days before the lawsuit was filed. Brunell's new job was announced on October 1 and the case was filed ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Linux patent suit: In search of the Microsoft smoking gun </title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=828</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 06:43:53 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Mary Jo Foley</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=828</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Now that the "first ever" suit for patent infringement has been lodged against two major Linux distributors, many Microsoft watchers are looking for the smoking gun that will somehow connect Microsoft to the case. I have to say that it's hard to believe that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer's recent railings about the likelihood of someone suing Red Hat for patent infringement were purely coincidental. His timing makes it look like he had knowledge that such a suit was in the pipeline. But so far, at least, there's no proof that Microsoft was behind this case in any way. However, there are still some interesting Microsoft connections to the suit, which pits IP Innovation and Technology Licensing Corp. against Red Hat and Novell. ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Are Microsoft's patent lawyers really this dumb?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=557</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2007 06:47:57 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Mary Jo Foley</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=557</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Are Microsoft's patent lawyers playing possum? Or are they really as clueless about what makes open-source software tick as they seem? Consider the latest patent-related statement Microsoft published to its Web site on July 5 a statement claiming it is not party to the GPLv3 and is not bound by it. "While there have been some claims that Microsoft   s distribution of certificates for Novell support services, under our interoperability collaboration with Novell, constitutes acceptance of the GPLv3 license, we do not believe that such claims have a valid legal basis under contract, intellectual property, or any other law. In fact, we do not believe that Microsoft needs a license under GPL to carry out any aspect of its collaboration with Novell, including ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Microsoft: We're not a party to GPLv3</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5592</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2007 04:22:54 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5592</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Microsoft says it's not a party to the third version of the General Public License and assumes it's not under any legal obligations under the license.   The statement, made on Thursday, is the first remarks on the GPLv3, which was released in its final form June 29.  Here's what Microsoft says (see Techmeme discussion):      While there have been some claims that Microsoft   s distribution of certificates for Novell support services, under our interoperability collaboration with Novell, constitutes acceptance of the GPLv3 license, we do not believe that such claims have a valid legal basis under contract, intellectual property, or any other law. In fact, we do not believe that Microsoft needs a license under GPL to carry out any aspect of its collaboration ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>FSF publishes 'last call' draft of GPLv3; looks good for Novell</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5242</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:31:35 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5242</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The Free Software Foundation published its near final draft of the third version of the General Public License and expects to officially publish the license on June 29.    The GPLv3--you know the one that's a big risk to the Microsoft-Novell pact--has been tweaked to incorporate feedback and address license compatibility. Overall though the latest GPL (blog focus, all news and Techmeme) looks good for Novell. eWeek's Peter Galli concluded that the latest GPL preserves Novell's Microsoft deal.    For its part, Novell said the following on its blog:    Nothing in the last call draft of GPLv3 suggests that the final version of GPLv3 will inhibit Novell   s ability to include GPLv3 technologies in SUSE Linux Enterprise, openSUSE, and other Novell offerings as these technologies become ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>What happens to Novell, post Microsoft?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5221</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 07:25:08 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5221</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Novell reported fiscal second quarter earnings of $110,000 on revenue of $239 million in a so-so quarter that illustrated how the company's non-Linux businesses--Netware and its identity management software--struggle to grow.   The good news: SUSE Linux continues to deliver solid growth for Novell courtesy of the company's partnership with Microsoft.   The bad news: Novell is becoming too reliant on Microsoft. And given the third version of the General Public License could hamper the partnership that's no idle concern.   First let's look at the numbers regarding just how important Microsoft is to SUSE Linux in the enterprise.   In the quarter Novell reported $19 million of revenue from its Linux platform products, up 83 percent from a year ago. Novell also added ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Parsing the details of the Microsoft-Novell pact</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5169</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2007 07:07:52 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5169</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Novell dropped its annual report Friday and with it three exhibits offering details of its SUSE Linux pact with Microsoft.    Two key points:       A lot of the good stuff about the partnership was redacted, opening more questions.    The third version of the General Public License seems to have some teeth--at least enough to worry Novell a bit.     And while it's suspicious that Novell dropped these filings late Friday before a long weekend, I'll give the company a pass. The filings were ridiculously late due to stock options backdating so why make the Securities and Exchange Commission wait? Just get the filings over with already--it's not like we didn't know they were coming.   Now let's get to the money shot: Novell ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Novell document dump makes it look like a scandal</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1082</link>
<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2007 08:54:38 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Dana Blankenhorn</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1082</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The Washington game of dumping incriminating documents late on a Friday is well-known. When someone does it, suspicions are raised. (Image from the blog of La Shawn Barber.)    Now Novell has done just that with its Friday night document dump on the Microsoft agreement. Just to make us even more suspicious, the dump isn't complete. Tons of (presumably good) stuff is "redacted."    Our own Mary Jo Foley notes that, among other things, the documents reveal Microsoft will cease to distribute SUSE Linux "get out of court free" cards once the GPL v3 is approved with restrictions against agreements like this.    Groklaw reports that, as suspected, the SCOSource fiasco may have just been a dress rehearsal for the legal battle to come. The idea ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Novell publishes details on its Microsoft patent deal</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=477</link>
<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 08:43:45 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Mary Jo Foley</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=477</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Novell has posted to the Securites and Exchange Commission (SEC) Web site redacted versions of the company's patent, business and technology agreements with Microsoft, which it signed in November 2006.    Novell officials said earlier this week they would post these documents before the end of May. The company released the filings late on May 25, the start of a three-day holiday weekend in the U.S.    Did anything juicy make it past the "marked as confidential" cuts? Groklaw has  highlightsof some of the documentation specific to the Microsoft-Novell patent arrangements:    "If the final version of GPLv3 contains terms or conditions that interfere with our agreement with Microsoft or our ability to distribute GPLv3 code, Microsoft may cease to distribute SUSE Linux coupons in ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>New Microsoft-funded study finds developers don't want GPL to cover patent deals</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=462</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 06:55:10 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Mary Jo Foley</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=462</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Microsoft is expending an awful lot of time and energy to try to derail the next version of the Free Software Foundation's General Public License (GPL). On May 22, yet another in a long line of Microsoft-commissioned open-source studies made its debut. The latest, conducted by Harvard Business School professor Alan MacCormack in conjunction with Keystone Strategy Inc., is titled "A Developers Bill of Rights: What Open Source Developers Want in a Software License." You probably can guess what the study concludes, given Microsoft's decision last week -- in the name of attempting to derail the looming GPL version 3 -- to claim that open-source software violates 235 of its patents. The Bill of Rights study found that rank-and-file open-source developers don't want ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Which is the better investment, IBM or Microsoft?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1052</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 07:50:54 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Dana Blankenhorn</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1052</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Here is a fun fact to know and tell.    Let's say that, with the corks popping at Y2K, you made a bet with your rich Uncle Jerry.    He would pick a stock, you would pick a stock. Whoever's stock had done better when he passed on would control his fortune. He would give it to God. You would give it to yourself.    Well, if your Uncle passed on yesterday, the poor won.    Since January 2000, IBM stock is down 1.76% in value. But Microsoft's stock is down 47.07%. (Check it out with the Google.)    Now, unfair you say. What about the dot-bomb? But if you look at the chart produced by comparing IBM and Microsoft shares, since January 2000, there is no point in time, ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Microsoft: Free and open source software violates 235 Microsoft patents</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=436</link>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2007 04:46:29 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Mary Jo Foley</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=436</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Microsoft finally has thrown down the gauntlet and is claiming publicly that free and open-source software (FOSS) violates 235 Microsoft patents.  That tally comes from a newly published article in Fortune. In that article, Microsoft licensing chief Horacio Gutierrez wouldn't talk specifics. He declined to specify which Microsoft patents are being violated or how "lest FOSS advocates start filing challenges to them," according to the Fortune article.  Nonetheless, Gutierrez claimed that Linux is violating 42 Microsoft patents. Linux GUIs (graphical user interfaces) violate 65, Open Office violates 45, various free/open e-mail programs violate another 15, and assorted, sundry free/open-source software programs violate 68 Microsoft patents, Gutierrez said.  That total is quite different from the last alleged count ... ]]>
</description></item>
</channel>
</rss>
