Novell software 4 or 5

[Dustin Decker]

On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Jonathan Hutchins wrote:

[snip]
> > "What do you expect it to do?"  If the Novell folks ask themselves
> > this question, the answer is the same today as it was last
> > week/month/year, then why would you expect them to upgrade?  Just
> > because they can?
> 
> One word answer: reliability.

And right after that paragraph I typed:

> Besides - if it ain't broke, why would you need to fix it?

Again - technology for technology's sake - a waste of resources.

> Someone said that Novell uses the MS TCP/IP stack - I know they can, but
> they also like to use their own proprietary version (which they have always
> have insisted, incorrectly, adheres more closely to open standards).  Their
> stack is not 100% compatible with either MS or *NIX TCP/IP, which is one of
> the reasons they're such a pain to deal with .

Admittedly I haven't worked with Novell since I hung up my CNE back in the 
4.11 days, so I can't authoritatively comment on this.  I would, however, 
like to know what value is currently filling the "someone" variable.

> Or we could, of course, use IPX.  Next slide please.  We'll wait for the
> retching to quiet down.

It appears to be working fine for a lot of un-upgraded folks.  Yeah, it's 
bursty, chattey, and broadcast heavy.  Never the less, it's out there, and 
it works.  _I_ don't work with Novell any more, but anyone who is serious 
about maintaining two of my favorite habits (living indoors, and eating) 
who can do so via supporting Novell, my hat's off to them.  Jobs are tight 
these days.

> A company that clung to Novell quite simply did not do a reasonable analysis
> of how quickly they should amortize their investment in it.  They may have
> invested late, swayed by anti-Microsoft zealots, and have been reluctant to
> move to NT at first, but by now they are clinging to old technology that
> should have been replaced.  [snip]

Or they might just plain old fashioned not want to spend money right now - 
on anything, be it Linux, Windows, Mac - whatever.  Novell isn't going to 
go away just because you say it should, and I perceive that's really what 
you're hoping for here.  

> I'll say it again: In every environment where I have removed the Novell
> clients from workstations, there was a dramatic improvement in reliability
> and performance.  

That's every environment that has opted to do so - those that have the 
intention, and the means.  I don't know if you've been watching the 
industry lately, but IT spending is WAY DOWN.  I expect it will rebound, 
but most prudent companies are smart enough to hold onto their cash as 
prices bottom out... in ALL categories, hardware, software, whatever.

> Every network that I eliminated IPX traffic from showed noticeable
> improvements in performance.  As for servers, I had problems with Novell
> servers just as I did with NT, they weren't inherently more reliable. In
> new installations, we usually spent less time troubleshooting an NT
> server than we did a new Novell server, but that may have been
> subjective. Admittedly, problems with Novell servers didn't tend to be
> trivial, obvious things, whereas NT was frequently just dumb mistakes.

I don't suppose eliminating IPX traffic stands alone here does it?  My 
assumption is that it doesn't.  The elimination accompanies a great many 
factors such as newer OS installation on newer equipment.  Naturally one 
would expect better performance with new gear - that's why we like to get 
new gear.  (Oh well yeah, some of us really just like to spend money.  And 
it's always so much more fun to spend TONS of it if it wasn't yours to 
begin with.)

> With Free software out there that will do anything you can do with a Novell
> system, there's no reason to perpetuate errors of the past.  If you have a
> problem with Novell, or a need that could be filled by Novell, use Linux
> instead.

And again - this is all fine and dandy if you're in the market for
something new.  If you aren't, the argument remains moot.  A company with
a substantial investment in Novell could very well go out and get a Linux
server, run Novell emulation on it, and be happy about it.  But then
again, this would be spending money too - Linux may be free, but the new
hardware isn't.  I would wager that they would be much more likely to make
use of Samba if they did this anyway (providing they've heard of it),
because the majority of their clients are are STILL running Windows if 
they're using Novell in the back.

Like I said earlier, nobody since DR-DOS has been running anything Novell
_as_ the desktop OS (and even _then_, they had WINDOWS 3.x on top of it
usually) so it really doesn't matter.  Yes, Novell is on the downward 
slope - but they've been there for what now, 7 years?  If they're so damned 
terrible, why are they still breathing?

I'm taking my ball and going home happy.
D.

-- 
*-----------------------------------*
| Dustin Decker                     |
| dustind at moon-lite.com       *-----------------------------------------*
| http://www.dustindecker.com | "And it should be the law: If you use   |
| Moon-Lite Computing         | the word `paradigm' without knowing     |
| 913.579.7117                | what the dictionary says it means, you  |
*-----------------------------| go to jail. No exceptions."             |
                              |                                         |
                              |		-- David Jones                  |
                              |                                         |
                              *-----------------------------------------*