Novell software 4 or 5

[Jason Clinton]

Dustin Decker wrote:
> I don't suppose you've ever heard of IPX or SPX.

Refer to Jonathan Hutchins comments of the managability of IPX/SPX. Ugh.

> Novell's (still spelled with two L's Jason) software these days amounts to 
> little more than the result of trying to compete only in the server market 
> at a time when desktop ubiquity of another company made it a moot point.  
> they did what they could to keep things alive with what at the time was 
> the defacto standard for directory services... only to be co-opted and 
> supplanted by the same company holding the desktop aces.

I do agree that proprietary software these days is usually suplanted by 
Microsoft at some point or another. I do believe though that if Novell (got it 
this time) had adapted like Sun or Netscape had (yes, they're different 
products, but same priciple) they could have somehow maintained its prestige 
(sp?) if not its revenue. Both of which it's now losing.

Something along the lines of 'standards' compliant network management would suit 
my fancy. They could have easily inserted some of those R&D people someone 
mentioned earlier in to some standards bodies and became the authority on 
implementing those standards... but, alas...

> Saddly, you are correct in assuming that they are going the way of the 
> Do-Do bird.  You are (not surprisingly to me) unfortunately assuming that 
> Linux is the replacement.  Look around you - in those cases it's Windows 
> 2000.

Yes, we all know Microsoft is still winning. I would prefer having one opponent 
and one proprietary set of network protocols in an area of competition than two. 
If Novell goes away, we'll get some of their clients and MS will get most... 
Someday, though... someday.