Comments on: Red Hat: Moving beyond 'rip and replace'

Software maker is missing out on a big opportunity by demanding that prospective customers make wholesale switches to its technology.

[dragonbite]

So maybe Novell isn't as crazy as people are saying they are?

I've alwasy liked Red Hat as a company and I like the direction they are turning. Even with Fedora they are softening their stance on codecs and non-OSS such as Adobe Flash (slightly). I don't want them to abandon the FOSS-centered stance but there are some times when FOSS just doesn't cut it.

[daverosenberg]

This is one of those really good posts that no one will read.

[Matt Asay]

@daverosenberg: You are, unfortunately, right. (Actually, the pageviews have been surprisingly good. But if I put "Apple" in the title they'd go through the roof.)

@dragonbite: I think Novell's big mistake was naivete on patents. Its interop work was dead on, but the patent covenant was destructive. Now that Novell has distanced itself from that aspect of the deal (as has Microsoft, really), it's a much more productive relationship.

[sysadmin1138]

One of the bigger fruits of the Novell/Microsoft partnership shipped today. SP1 for OES2 is now out, and it includes both the Novell proprietary CIFS stack and the Domain Services for Windows pieces, which allow it to integrate into Windows/AD environments to a level Samba doesn't allow (yet, give it time). That really allows the "and" for, say, Linux shops being forced to use a Windows-only product for some reason.

Whether or not that's enough to infiltrate Windows environments remains to be seen, but it improves interop from a linux perspective.

[jaymeyer]

Brilliant post, Matt. I have been preaching a similar approach to software development teams who fear adding Hibernate and Spring software techno to older systems. Or even adding Java to a geriatric Perl or ColdFusion app. The first thought for software developers is (as you say) "rip and replace", and I tell them that its too risky. Instead just add Java with Spring and Hibernate by adding a new feature set or mix-in the new technology while fixing a broken feature.

Your "and" vs. "or" way of thinking is a great way to think about technologies of all types - hardware, OS's, app servers, and software tools. Let your working techno KEEP working, "and" bring in different techno to add more features and tools where appropriate.

Thanks for the eye-opening perspective.

[Matt Asay]

@jaymeyer: You get "commentator of the year" from me for saying so many nice things about me in one place that I think I'm going to frame your comment. :-)

[sgdryer]

Great comments here, Matt. You're right, customers want "AND." It's hard to believe that someone actually beat me to mentioning Novell's Open Enterprise Server here. Novell knows that Windows is the big dog in most (every?) shop - so they decided to help customers simplify mixed environments without the headaches & costs of rip-n-replace. You can even lose the Novell Client now.... very cool.

[admoore]

Seems to me the only downside to the "and" approach is that MS understand that Linux and FOSS is a threat, and is working to make "and" more difficult than it could be. In my experience once you start using MS technologies, moving to a 100% MS environment ends up being the path of least resistance.

I acknowledge the wisdom in your sentiments, but at the same time MS is very good at making anyone else's solutions look second rate in their environments. How do vendors deal with that?