Comments on: Novell’s Hovsepian: Off the Mark http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/ because technology is just another ecosystem Tue, 02 Dec 2008 16:30:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Miguel de Icaza http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-351796 Miguel de Icaza Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:57:54 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-351796 Jaime Cardoso, You are wrong on two counts regarding your Xgl claims. Xgl was released under the MIT X11 license, the same license that the rest of the X server is released under. The same applies to compiz, as opposed to the majority of the window managers out there. As for lookingglass, it was an interesting research prototype, but it was too large (the vernacular used to describe this I believe is "bloated pig"). Who wants to be running the JVM to display their windows on their desktop, as cool as 3D windows might be? The core is not really Xgl. Its compiz. Xgl was merely an X server implementation that had the features requires (I believe 3 server extensions, Composite, Damage and Render plus a texture extension to the GL protocol) As those extensions are making its way into the native drivers (NVidia has them now at least) there will be no need for Xgl, all you would need is the window/composite manager (Compiz today, others tomorrow, I believe KDE its doing its own). Miguel Jaime Cardoso,

You are wrong on two counts regarding your Xgl claims.

Xgl was released under the MIT X11 license, the same license that the rest of the X server is released under. The same applies to compiz, as opposed to the majority of the window managers out there.

As for lookingglass, it was an interesting research prototype, but it was too large (the vernacular used to describe this I believe is “bloated pig”). Who wants to be running the JVM to display their windows on their desktop, as cool as 3D windows might be?

The core is not really Xgl. Its compiz. Xgl was merely an X server implementation that had the features requires (I believe 3 server extensions, Composite, Damage and Render plus a texture extension to the GL protocol)

As those extensions are making its way into the native drivers (NVidia has them now at least) there will be no need for Xgl, all you would need is the window/composite manager (Compiz today, others tomorrow, I believe KDE its doing its own).

Miguel

]]> By: Scott Sanders http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1903 Scott Sanders Fri, 21 Apr 2006 04:00:31 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1903 Great post, Stephen. Perhaps you could ask Novell directly why they have 3 groupware solutions, 2 of which are open source? <a href="http://dotnot.org/blog/archives/2005/03/10/novell-and-groupware-which-way-did-they-go/" rel="nofollow">http://dotnot.org/blog/archives/2005/03/10/novell-and-groupware-which-way-did-they-go/</a> Great post, Stephen. Perhaps you could ask Novell directly why they have 3 groupware solutions, 2 of which are open source? http://dotnot.org/blog/archives/2005/03/10/novell-and-groupware-which-way-did-they-go/

]]> By: Erik Dasque http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1902 Erik Dasque Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:06:32 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1902 Hovsepian is a glorified sales bot who was put in a position where he also oversees the product line but without any real understaning of it. He latches onto some sentences heard here and there and tries to include them into his shock the world - sales pitch. Just like most executives at Novell, he'll underperform and will get canned. But he'll get a very large bonus, salary and golden parachute. Meanwhile, Novell will prepare their next layoff. Hovsepian is a glorified sales bot who was put in a position where he also oversees the product line but without any real understaning of it.

He latches onto some sentences heard here and there and tries to include them into his shock the world - sales pitch.

Just like most executives at Novell, he’ll underperform and will get canned. But he’ll get a very large bonus, salary and golden parachute. Meanwhile, Novell will prepare their next layoff.

]]> By: Erik Dasque http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1901 Erik Dasque Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:05:27 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1901 Hovsepian is a glorified sales bot who was put in a position where he oversees the product but no real understaning of it. He latches onto some sentences heard here and there and tries to include them into his sales pitch. Just like most executives at Novell, he'll underperform and will get canned. But he'll get a very large bonus, salary and golden parachute. Meanwhile, Novell will prepare their next layoff. Hovsepian is a glorified sales bot who was put in a position where he oversees the product but no real understaning of it.

He latches onto some sentences heard here and there and tries to include them into his sales pitch.

Just like most executives at Novell, he’ll underperform and will get canned. But he’ll get a very large bonus, salary and golden parachute. Meanwhile, Novell will prepare their next layoff.

]]> By: Jaime Cardoso http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1900 Jaime Cardoso Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:48:49 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1900 Stephen, I too agree that the Xgl methodology was the necessary one but I can't criticize that method on one side and do the same thing on the other. Stephen, I too agree that the Xgl methodology was the necessary one but I can’t criticize that method on one side and do the same thing on the other.

]]> By: stephen ogrady http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1899 stephen ogrady Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:10:17 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1899 Luis: i can see the point, i suppose, but i don't think it's as simple as saying that Sun should have just donated the good pieces of technology. first, it's technologically non-trivial, as i'm sure you're aware, and second, there's the Solaris installed base to consider. while it's smaller than it was, thanks to Linux, it's still substantial. given Sun's fortunes of late, i think it would have been difficult - to say the least - for them to transition to Linux and not lose an even larger portion of their customer base than they already have. i'm also a believer that having Solaris around pushes Linux in a useful way. Jaime: good points, but while i know a lot of folks would have agreed w/ you re: Xgl, i'm not entirely convinced. open sourcing later in development is not my favorite methodology, but in this case might have been necessary. Simon: agreed on the competition angle, but i'm not sure i align with your last contention: it may be precisely b/c he sees that ;) James: that is true (although Jonathan Schwartz did verbally give developers the go ahead to port DTrace to Linux at last summer's OSCON), but i don't believe it's a fault that can be attributed to Linux. Linux, being licensed under the GPL, is not compatible with either MPL derivative (such as the CDDL) or BSD licensed projects. it's the nature of the license. code from OpenSolaris, for example, has been ported to FreeBSD, but this is not possible with Linux. to me this isn't a fault thing, it's a regrettable consequence of the differences in open source licensing. but i would reject it as a criticism of OpenSolaris specifically. Luis: i can see the point, i suppose, but i don’t think it’s as simple as saying that Sun should have just donated the good pieces of technology. first, it’s technologically non-trivial, as i’m sure you’re aware, and second, there’s the Solaris installed base to consider. while it’s smaller than it was, thanks to Linux, it’s still substantial. given Sun’s fortunes of late, i think it would have been difficult - to say the least - for them to transition to Linux and not lose an even larger portion of their customer base than they already have.

i’m also a believer that having Solaris around pushes Linux in a useful way.

Jaime: good points, but while i know a lot of folks would have agreed w/ you re: Xgl, i’m not entirely convinced. open sourcing later in development is not my favorite methodology, but in this case might have been necessary.

Simon: agreed on the competition angle, but i’m not sure i align with your last contention: it may be precisely b/c he sees that ;)
James: that is true (although Jonathan Schwartz did verbally give developers the go ahead to port DTrace to Linux at last summer’s OSCON), but i don’t believe it’s a fault that can be attributed to Linux. Linux, being licensed under the GPL, is not compatible with either MPL derivative (such as the CDDL) or BSD licensed projects. it’s the nature of the license. code from OpenSolaris, for example, has been ported to FreeBSD, but this is not possible with Linux.

to me this isn’t a fault thing, it’s a regrettable consequence of the differences in open source licensing. but i would reject it as a criticism of OpenSolaris specifically.

]]> By: James http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1898 James Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:38:57 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1898 Liferay doesn't restrict the folks from eXo from borrowing ideas or even code across portals but Solaris prevents Linux from doing so in my limited understanding. If this is even somewhat true, does he have a point? Liferay doesn’t restrict the folks from eXo from borrowing ideas or even code across portals but Solaris prevents Linux from doing so in my limited understanding. If this is even somewhat true, does he have a point?

]]> By: Simon Phipps http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1897 Simon Phipps Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:00:08 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1897 Nice piece; very restrained, Stephen! I have a long list of questions I'd love to ask Mr Hovsepian , but I'd argue especially with his third contention. Since we opened Solaris, we've seen the *BSD community take OpenSolaris code and run with it, we've seen the Debian community experimenting with new ideas, we've seen the Linux kernel community trying to better DTrace. I'd argue that, even ignoring the richness opening Solaris has brought into the OpenSolaris community, it's also injected code, creativity and competition into the wider open source community of communities and even at less than a year old is doing immeasurable good. The fact he can't see that suggests he's way out of touch with his own open source people (Sun is a huge GNOME contributor) and with the wider communities. I'd suggest that's the really worrying sign, at least for Novell's shareholders. Nice piece; very restrained, Stephen! I have a long list of questions I’d love to ask Mr Hovsepian , but I’d argue especially with his third contention.

Since we opened Solaris, we’ve seen the *BSD community take OpenSolaris code and run with it, we’ve seen the Debian community experimenting with new ideas, we’ve seen the Linux kernel community trying to better DTrace. I’d argue that, even ignoring the richness opening Solaris has brought into the OpenSolaris community, it’s also injected code, creativity and competition into the wider open source community of communities and even at less than a year old is doing immeasurable good.

The fact he can’t see that suggests he’s way out of touch with his own open source people (Sun is a huge GNOME contributor) and with the wider communities. I’d suggest that’s the really worrying sign, at least for Novell’s shareholders.

]]> By: Jaime Cardoso http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1896 Jaime Cardoso Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:28:33 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1896 Yes, and Novell could have released key components of Xgl as a BSD licence and avoiding duplicating efforts by the BSD community. It's kind of sad to see Novell to enter the RedHat bandwagon of OSS=GPL (ops, but we need a browser to fight IE so, let's make it OSS=GPL+Mozilla) and Good=us => Bad=everyone else. It's sad to see this discussion comming again. Sad and worthless. It's over. Reality proved Hovseppian wrong. Before the governance model being presented at the Opensolaris community, I could even have understood a discussion of Opensolaris isn't really open because the contribution model didn't existed so, no one outside Sun could influence the direction of the code before it was released but, even that point has been addressed and, even if it didn't, Novell would be the last company that could bring up that issue (not that I was against the Xgl development methodology but, let's be consistent, OK?). Instead of all the baby cry of "mommy, they are mean to us", Novell should really be proving to the world that they are right. Clean up glib, make the Linux kernel to scale linearly up to 144 cores or more, prove to the world that Opensolaris really is redundant, then, take your cheap shots at Sun for betting on the wrong horse. Speaking of the Xgl, why didn't Novell simply developed upon the work made with lookinglass? At least to an outsider, Xgl smells very much like a bad case of NIH Yes, and Novell could have released key components of Xgl as a BSD licence and avoiding duplicating efforts by the BSD community.
It’s kind of sad to see Novell to enter the RedHat bandwagon of OSS=GPL (ops, but we need a browser to fight IE so, let’s make it OSS=GPL+Mozilla) and Good=us => Bad=everyone else.
It’s sad to see this discussion comming again. Sad and worthless. It’s over. Reality proved Hovseppian wrong. Before the governance model being presented at the Opensolaris community, I could even have understood a discussion of Opensolaris isn’t really open because the contribution model didn’t existed so, no one outside Sun could influence the direction of the code before it was released but, even that point has been addressed and, even if it didn’t, Novell would be the last company that could bring up that issue (not that I was against the Xgl development methodology but, let’s be consistent, OK?).
Instead of all the baby cry of “mommy, they are mean to us”, Novell should really be proving to the world that they are right. Clean up glib, make the Linux kernel to scale linearly up to 144 cores or more, prove to the world that Opensolaris really is redundant, then, take your cheap shots at Sun for betting on the wrong horse.
Speaking of the Xgl, why didn’t Novell simply developed upon the work made with lookinglass? At least to an outsider, Xgl smells very much like a bad case of NIH

]]> By: Luis http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/18/novells-hovsepian-off-the-mark/#comment-1895 Luis Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:01:11 +0000 http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=806#comment-1895 I'm guessing what Hovseppian should have said was to compress and rewrite #2 and #3 into 'the spirit of good engineering is to avoid reinventing the wheel when possible'. Here, Sun fails- they could have released the key components as GPL and ported them to Linux; instead they chose to duplicate tons of code and duplicate an existing community. At least to an outsider, OpenSolaris smells very much like a bad case of NIH. [And as I've <a href="http://tieguy.org/blog/2005/11/07/mon-07-nov-2005-2/" rel="nofollow">argued elsewhere</a>, Hovseppian/Novell's support of both GNOME and KDE angers me as a stockholder. Novell should pick one to lead the world with one instead of duplicating effort and being merely good at both. Ideally they should also pick the one that presents a united front with Sun and Red Hat to ISVS.] I’m guessing what Hovseppian should have said was to compress and rewrite #2 and #3 into ‘the spirit of good engineering is to avoid reinventing the wheel when possible’. Here, Sun fails- they could have released the key components as GPL and ported them to Linux; instead they chose to duplicate tons of code and duplicate an existing community. At least to an outsider, OpenSolaris smells very much like a bad case of NIH.

[And as I've argued elsewhere, Hovseppian/Novell's support of both GNOME and KDE angers me as a stockholder. Novell should pick one to lead the world with one instead of duplicating effort and being merely good at both. Ideally they should also pick the one that presents a united front with Sun and Red Hat to ISVS.]

]]>