Hello Reginald,
A couple of comments about your post ...
> I noticed that everybody on this thread repeatedely states that NOVL > will lose the low end of the server business.
I don't agree that 'everybody' states this. I can definitely see where NT is currently able to offer a very attractive solution with their existing product line. However I believe that in the near future that model might start to change. As more and more Java applications come out, and the distributed model of application execution starts to set in, Microsoft might just have it's hands full.
> Forgive me for my ignorance, (if that is truly the case), but isn't
> MSFT headed for the higher end, higher margin side of the server
> market as well.
Well ... they're trying to enter into this. But they made numerous choices in developing their product which are now limited how far they can go. NT will soon have to be replaced with NT++. With NT v4.0 they had to make several architectural changes in their execution model to provide the performance they have never had. And they are currently not designed to scale very well. Try to put 200GB of storage and 1GB of RAM in an NT server ...
> NT 5.0 due out in less than a calendar year will feature 64 bit
> capability and should (again) shatter price/performance barriers
> when married to INTC's Merced RISC/(w. CISC on chip emulation)
> architecture.
I'm not sure about the dates and capabilities that you are quoting here. I do not believe they will have a full 64-bit rewrite in less than a calander year. And as for shattering price/performance ... I don't know that they ever have!
Since NetWare was the first to be a true 32-bit OS for the 386 processor ... I'm sure that there are people hard at work to make sure that NetWare excels on anything coming out of Intel!
> This porteds doom for NOVL if they don't up the ante from a
> technology and marketing perspective in the short term and for all
> relevent markets, not just the low end server arena in the
> intermediate term.
Yes ... I hate the word doom ... but if Novell doesn't have an impressive release to combat this hype we'll be having more problems in the market! ;-)
In another area, on another posting Paul said:
> I would love to have invited any one of these employees to sit in my
> place today and watch a Novell VAR tell my departments that:
Well ... first off, I would suggest that this is *not* a "Novell VAR", but is a "VAR" or a "Microsoft and Novell VAR" ... with Microsoft listed first!
> (a) IntranetWare couldn't run on a PCI bus with more than 16MB being
> available
I'm not sure what this means. I have a server, with a PCI bus, with 1GB of RAM, and a disk subsystem running at 36-38MB/sec throughput. And this is just a basic Compaq machine. What is the 16MB limitation?
> (b) NT had a more stable Win95 client
A more stable Win95 client for what? Client for NetWare? Fine ... let them use the NT client to access NetWare. A more stable Win95 client for NT server? Sure they do ... we don't offer a client for NT server. Again ... I'm not sure what he was indicating here ...
> (c) installing an NT web server would work just super with the
> existing Netware 3.X systems.
This is true ... but not cost effective. Upgrading to IntraNetWare give them a Web Server for free. And the migration is cleaner. The performance is better. No relearning for employees.
From my experience, this VAR has a great financial incentive to sell Microsoft products. If this is the real issue, then we at Novell need to better incent our channel. But these issues are unclear and don't relate to product limitations that I know of ...
Scott C. Lemon |
