It looks like in all these discussions the point is missed. I'll try to put the questions which concern me the most:
1. I see what Novell gets from this deal. I still do not see the MS benefit? Since when are they charity? Or since when they are software retailer, not software manufacturer? Does someone knows another competitors product, which MS sell as part of their offerings? 2. Do Novell realize that with this agreement it helps MS to spread its FUD (for the patent infringements in the linux code)? 3. Do Novell realize, that accepting this FUD, it destroys its own foundation? Will there be SUSE at all, if the competition in the field was not as open as possible? Is SUSE possible if there were no so many components, developed by other vendors? Now, with that agreement, the message to business users is: if you do not use SUSE, you may be sued by MS. Every big business manager will play safe - thus killing the competition - and the innovation. One may argue and support Novell's move as much as she wants, but without Novell revealing the _real_ parameters of the deal - the MS benefit, etc., concerns will exists. They may state as much as they want that there are no patent problems in SUSE, but then why in first place they signed such a clauses? And ... "to protect our customers from being sued for something which does not exists" sounds plain ... unconvincing. -- Svetoslav Milenov (Sunny) Even the most advanced equipment in the hands of the ignorant is just a pile of scrap. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
