Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Microsoft Paid Novell $356 Million in '07

Posted by timothy on Tue Jan 01, 2008 07:46 AM
from the mere-pocket-change dept.
Linux Business Microsoft The Almighty Buck Software Linux
Anonymous writes "At the end of this piece at Channelweb.com, it's reported that Microsoft paid Novell $355.6 million last year as part of their 'interoperability' deal. It's no small wonder, then, that Novell executives are saying the deal has been a huge success so far."
+ -
story

Related Stories

Submission: Microsoft Paid Novell $356 Million in '07 by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Microsoft Paid Novell $356 Million in '07 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • what did Novell give in return? (Score:5, Funny)

    by FudRucker (866063) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @07:49AM (#21873582)
    their soul?

  • Customers? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Weaselmancer (533834) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @07:53AM (#21873600)

    It'd be interesting to see if the money they got from their customers in '07 equals or exceeds that number.

    If it doesn't, I'd think they have a somewhat skewed and short-sighted definition of success. Me, I'd call it getting paid off.

  • Don't trust them (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nighty5 (615965) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @07:55AM (#21873610)
    It illustrates that Novell can no longer be trusted to push Linux technologies beyond that which is offered by Microsoft.

    • Re:Don't trust them (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Idiot with a gun (1081749) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @07:58AM (#21873620)
      Personally, I didn't trust them the moment they made the deal with Microsoft. It showed more of an interest towards their own pocket books than the software or their users. Unlike Red Hat, which promised to protect their customers, and change any infringing code, and Canonical, which I believe offered the same for *buntu users.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by einhverfr (238914)
        My first response on hearing about the deal is "no good can come of this." The fact is-- these companies directly compete in most areas and one is *far* stronger than the other.

        Apple was an unusual case because Microsoft was investing in them during the hight of the DoJ investigations of their anticompetitive behavior. My own thinking is that Microsoft was terribly afraid that Apple exiting the market would mean that they would be broken up or crippled behind very onerous consent decrees. Apple thus was
        • If a patent can be worked around, then changing the infringing code would be exactly the way to do it.

    • Re:Don't trust them (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DMoylan (65079) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @08:34AM (#21873752)
      > Don't trust them

      i actually pity them. been partners of any sort with ms just seems to be the kiss of death.

    • Re:Don't trust them (Score:5, Insightful)

      by slyn (1111419) <ozzietheowl@gmail.com> on Tuesday January 01 2008, @08:39AM (#21873774)
      They've done a lot of the work towards the FOSS drivers for the ATI cards, including recently releasing V1.10 of the RadeonHD adding support for the 3850 and 3870, as well as release 10.3 of OpenSuse, and (AFAIK) have continued business as usual since the MSFT agreement.

      Novell at the moment may not be the most faithful to the GNU ideals at the moment, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that Novell "can no longer be trusted".

        • Re:Don't trust them (Score:4, Informative)

          by jafoc (1151405) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @10:12AM (#21874220) Homepage
          after all they haven't done anything against Linux and the FOSS community yet

          That is not true.

          For example, their active support for Microsoft's attack on the ODF standard can IMO only be seen as an aggression against the FOSS community.

    • Upon hearing of the Novell-M$ "interoperability" deal I promptly switched all my SUSE machines to Debian [debian.org] GNU/Linux, and it works great.
  • I used to know some really rabid SUSE fans a few years ago. They would go on and on about how it was the best distro and great YaST was. I haven't heard anything from them in a while. I can only imagine what their opinion on the last year is.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by j_sp_r (656354)
      As long it's a great distro (OpenSuse) I don't see any problem using it. Novel made Yast open source btw, something SUSE never did.

    • Re:What do the SUSE people think of this? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by malkavian (9512) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @09:31AM (#21874020) Homepage
      Actually, I think it's a whole non-issue at the moment, until the waters are less muddy, and only time will tell that.
      For interoperability, Novell SLES is pretty pleasant. I work for the NHS in the UK, and moving hospitals away from being almost pure Windows is not an easy thing. SLES fills a lot of niches that Windows currently fills (file server, database platform et.), for a fraction of the cost. One of the things I'm working on is to make greater use of SLES. And if you point to Red Hat, and say "Well, they do the same product, except they're more idealistic", Red Hat don't have a current deal with the NHS (where Novell do, and provide fantastic pricing).
      Couple that with eDirectory, Identity Manager etc. and you've got a lovely heterogenous infrastructure to play with.
      I like Novell. Yes, they took money from the Beast. However, the Beast is currently being watched very carefully, and has a lot of other (probably unexpected) battles to fight.
      I tend to run Ubuntu and Debian for home use (and quick build servers/firewalls). But in business, you need to bring a lot of other factors in. And for something the size of the NHS, alas, you can't always choose the idealistic route. Pragmatism and practicality are large factors.
      As long as SLES keeps on being a great product, performing well, and being a really low cost product (for a commercially supported enterprise grade OS), I'll keep on using it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by RotateLeftByte (797477)
        I expect some Marketing Drone in Microsoft is at this moment cooking up their next FUD Campaign around the theme that SUSE is 'sort of ok' if you really, really have to use something other than our fantastic Windows products.
        As far as at least one Microsoft Account manager I know, if they absolutely have to lose a sale to Linux, then it had better be to Novell/SUSE than the devil incarnate called RedHat.

        IMHO, SLES/SLED is just different enough from RHEL/Fedora that I get frustrated when I have to make chang

  • Full Service? (Score:3, Funny)

    by themoneyish (971138) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @08:15AM (#21873682)
    Did Novell provide Full Service? Greek? Microsoft, were you happy the encounter? If yes, I have my wallet ready.

  • Was blackmail involved? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Many of us suspect that Microsoft is behind SCO. Could it be that Novell somehow has Microsoft over a barrel?

    It may be that Novell hasn't sold its soul at all. It is really hard to see that Microsoft got any value for its money.

  • This is looking like what happened to Corel (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 1mck (861167) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @08:42AM (#21873800)
    Years ago Corel was developing WordPerfect for Linux, and the along come Microsoft, and gave them a huge sum of cash to cease all development of WP for Linux, and now look at where they are now...Novell is going to suddenly realize years down the road that they really did sell out, and there's no going back, and it's obvious that the owners of the company don't give 2 shits, so now Microsoft will find some way to weasel Linux from the world. Yay for interoperability...whatever the hell that means, and what is involved!
  • I thought that, in the IT world, progress was supposed to lower costs - witness many technology items that have gotten cheaper over the years. However, when it comes to anti-Linux FUD, it seems the price keeps going *up*.

    Why is that?

  • "Future Periods"? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by erroneus (253617) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @08:47AM (#21873830) Homepage

    Major Customers

    No single customer accounted for more than 10% of our revenue in fiscal 2007, 2006, or 2005. During fiscal 2007, we received $355.6 million from Microsoft related to the Microsoft agreements discussed above, which is being recognized over future periods.
    They received it but aren't recognizing it until later?! What does that mean exactly? Will it be passed on as bonuses to top execs and board members? It sounds like some sort of trick in reporting requirements. "We received a bunch of money, but we don't want to show that we're giving it to the people who made the deal... until later when no one is looking."

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by slashchuck (617840)
      Since it does not represent current year income, the income will be allocated over the number of years represented. Expenditures such as bonuses and other compensation, which may or may not be monetary, are never tied to specific income items. They could be recorded or buried as ordinary expenditures at any time.
    • It may be so that their stock doesn't do a rollercoaster as the show a 50% increase this year and then a ~50% decrease next year. If they spread it out over 10 years, then it just pads their bottom line a few percent.

      • Re:Can someone explain this wallstreet-ese (Score:4, Informative)

        by bgat (123664) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @09:39AM (#21874044) Homepage
        There are many ways of accounting for income. Most individuals use "cash" accounting, which among other things means you pay taxes on your income in real-time, as you receive it. In contrast, many businesses use "accrual" accounting which is slightly more complicated but in summary gives them more flexibility on when to pay taxes on monies received--- and also prevents them from using one-off events to sway their tax burden unfairly. Standard stuff for corporations, nothing nefarious here.

        In layman's terms, all Novell is saying is that "We received this huge influx of cash all at once, but the money doesn't represent income in the traditional sense. Thus, to prevent us using this number to misrepresent our actual earnings, we have to spread it out over several years."

        • It's not a tax trick - it's required by the SEC (Score:4, Informative)

          by donutello (88309) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @12:29PM (#21875132) Homepage
          Accrual accounting isn't a trick used to balance out taxes or any of the other stuff you mentioned. Accrual accounting is part of the GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Practices) and is required by the SEC. You don't recognize revenue until you actually expend the effort required to earn that revenue.

          If you sell someone a 3-year contract which they pay you for upfront, you don't declare the money they gave you as income on this years balance sheet because you haven't incurred all the costs associated with that revenue yet. You prorate the income over the period of the contract and each year or quarter you recognize both the revenue and the cost associated with that contract on that year or quarters balance sheet. It's the only way to keep your balance sheet from grossly misstating your business situation.

  • 640k (Score:4, Funny)

    by rgravina (520410) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @08:55AM (#21873860)

    Microsoft paid Novell $355.6 million last year

    I would have thought 640k would be enough for anyone.

  • Patents? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Fri13 (963421)
    Okay, so Microsoft tells that GNU/Linux (or is it just Linux?) has 253 (?) Microsoft patents and companies should pay for Microsoft for using that technology. BUT, Microsoft pays for Novell big amount of cash and it looks so silly, like Microsoft would be the one who is using 253 ideas of technology and is paying for those companies for using it ;-)

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Locutus (9039)
      but they made sure that Novell also paid them some for each Suse Linux coupon Microsoft sells. But you got the just of it, Microsoft pays Novell because Microsoft says Linux has Microsofts IP. It's because it is all a plan to scare away business from Linux and just a step in the process.

      In the 90's, Microsoft paid a UNIX company to do a port of MS Internet Explorer to HP and/or Solaris and they paid them well. Nobody wanted IE on UNIX but the reason for this was that this one company was a licensee of Micro
  • This is hush-money to make sure Novell doesn't drag MS to court to find out what went on behind the curtains of the SCO show.
  • OK, I am willing enter into a non compete agreement with MSFT. Bill, where do I collect my money?
  • I've got a list of all the reasons Novell sucks now. I'm making a note here: "Huge success".

  • Here's what Microsoft bought .... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jerry (6400) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @11:23AM (#21874692) Homepage
    A "confession" by Ron Hovsepian that "Linux" contains Microsoft IP, even though Microsoft has yet to prove any infringements exist.

    How? By paying Microsoft a ROYALTY for each copy of SLES that it sells Novell is making an implied statement that its distro contains MS IP.

    Ballmer called the payments "an IP bridge". He could have said the payments were an admission of guilt.

    Microsoft has a problem though. They've been claiming that Linux violates their IPs for several years now. The law requires that they inform infringers of the exact infringements so that damages can be mitigated. Microsoft has not done that.

     

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mangu (126918)

      in a Free Society the government is supposed to be for The People. and it should act as an arbiter of fairness in respect to the above, insuring that access to the market is available to entrepreneurs, and that monopolies do not form, either in fact or by collusion

      Unfortunately, it's the government itself, through patents and copyrights, which is acting to perpetuate the existing monopolies.

      A fair society shouldn't have the current intellectual property laws. Patents shouldn't be given to processes and meth

        • Re:Two ways to control corporations (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Znork (31774) on Tuesday January 01 2008, @10:29AM (#21874320)
          "patents and copyrights are what entice entrepreneurs to make improvements"

          So, let me tell you about this opensource thing...

          "our protection of intellectual property is one of the elements that has made us the prosperous society that we are"

          Our 'protection' of intellectual 'property' has kept us as far less prosperous society than we could have been.

          Competition is what drives innovation and the evolution of technology. Handing out intellectual monopolies slows that innovation and evolution. Protecting someone from competition makes them slow and inefficient; to realize exactly how inefficient you just need to look at the former Soviet state-run businesses, or other state-protected monopolies in the west.

          Just imagine the world we'd be living in today, had technology been allowed to develop competetively. Imagine the medicines we'd have if 'protected' pharmacorps couldnt spend 80% of their revenue on administration and marketing. Imagine the operating systems we'd have if most of the resources spent on them didnt get tied up in a single company that cant even produce a product better than their last one after six years (nevermind being outevolved by a rag-tag bunch of companies and individuals working in a _competetive segment_ with _unprotected_ software).

          Patents and copyrights are a blight upon the economy and upon innovation.
    • The "People" don't need to control the government. The people are the government, that's what democracy (or representational democracy) is all about. Get involved with the political process, work on campaigns, talk to your representatives, vote. Don't just complain about it in Us versus Them terms.
    • 3. Unfair competition
      4. Moral/ethical pressure
      5. Union actions
      6. Fraud
      7. Monpoly manipulation
    • Because who is a bigger threat Microsoft or the NSA?

      Microsoft.

      1. The reason the NSA has become a threat to individuals is because corporations like AT&T and Microsoft collaborate with them to betray their customers.
      2. The current government in the USA is driven by lobbyists from companies like Microsoft. The goals of the government and its agencies, including the NSA, are generated from corporate agendas. Threats to Microsoft profits have become threats to the nation.
    • Which GPL? GPLv3 includes changes aimed very specifically at preventing another of these patent protection deals, and putting a spike in Microsoft attempts to encumber open source projects with patent agreements. The GPL needed to evolve to prevent this and some of the DRM craziness being attempted, and has. But will Novell follow suit by publishing its own software or changes under GPLv3?

      I think not.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.