Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PJ Strifas who wrote (30331)	2/15/2000 12:27:00 PM
From: Scott C. Lemon	Respond to of 42771

Hello PJ, I agree, with only a couple of points that I wanted to ask about ... > There's only one flaw with this message/tactic. Even if MSFT can > create the applications or the development tools to build > custom-apps that enhance their position MSFT will STILL NEEDS A > STABLE DIRECTORY PRODUCT THAT OUTPERFORMS NDS FOR THOSE APPS TO TIE > INTO. Good enough just won't cut it in the Directory space as it > did in the desktop OS!!! Stable, I'll agree with as I do agree that there has to be a platform which provide "repeatable" operation for the admin. However, this has to be viewed carefully. I've talked with more than one NT Web Server administrator who has an automated process reboot the server every night! They do this because, to them, it restores the "state" of the machine, and provides them with a "predictable" operation. It might sound funny, and people will argue for perfection, but these admins will tell you to go jump in a lake. They reboot every night, and it's completely automated, and they don't even think of it ... As for the second part, outperforming NDS, I only agree in one respect ... and that's in integrated use of the directory ... not performance. If we get pulled down into the "directory performance" battles, I believe it will only hurt Novell. This was proven with the old "Betamax vs. VHS" debates ... the "best" technology does not automatically win ... and "good enough" is usually the winner. Look at the Novell "file/print" market ... although Novell provided a much better product in many ways, Microsoft continues to make inroads into this space ... with a product that is "good enough". But "outperforming" ActiveDirectory, through the use of the directory, the integration of applications and services ... this is a very key space that, I think you agree, is where the money will be made. > This tactic pushed their product out to end users while other > companies needed to sell shrink-wrapped versions fighting that > extra mile to lure users to buy then install their product. Why > should the average user do that when their shiny new PC already had > a word processor, spreadsheet etc and there was no additional > charge? (the charge was hidden in the price of the PC so what does > the average consumer know?) I've heard this argument before, but think it's a "sour grapes" argument. I have tried to use a large number of other "Office Suite" applications, and have not found a single one that offers me the functionality of Microsoft Office. I compliment them on listening to end-users, using their own products, and building something with provide a high-level of integration and functionality. I was recently reminded of this last week while helping my sister with her web site ... IMHO, Corel Office sucks! Sure it's got a following, but they really haven't done their ergonomic, UI, Human Factors studies very well. No, I would say that anytime you allow Microsoft to get to v7 of something, they are going to do it very well ... they do not allow themselves to get sidetracked by trying to get on the cover of PC Week ... > But IMHO, MSFT will try to reproduce the past here - talk up the > apps on their platform (the Directory) while minimizing the > competitions leadership. ... because applications are what people are after ... they don't care about plumbing! And Microsoft will succeed if they do this, because it is what should be done. Plumbing is plumbing ... if Novell allows itself to continue to only focus on plumbing, then they will fall into the commodity plumbing market. Sure ... someone in a corporation is going to be worried about quality plumbing ... but all of the employees have a focus on the applications that use the plumbing. > For Novell to succeed they MUST HAVE LEARNED the lessons from the > past otherwise they are doomed to repeat them. One advantage Novell > has right now, MSFT does not have the strangle hold on PC makers as > they once did. That leverage is waning - even if EVERY Win2K server > ships with Active Directory doesn't mean people will be deploying > it right out of the box. I'm curious, when you talk about the "strangle hold" that they no longer hold ... has any company now delivered a fully featured OS alternative to Windows? I'm not saying that there are not other OS platforms ... but I'm looking at what people realistically run on all employees desktops? Linux is not there yet ... a little more work on applications support and then migration tools and it will be closer. Although AD might not be used, the majority of the boxes will probably ship with Windows ... I agree with you completely here! > Novell needs to: > > 1) Create a robust developer support program to nuture interest in > developing apps for NDS (even if it means sharing code! or creating > paths into parts of NDS they don't want to share). They don't even > need a huge army of developers - wars are not always won on > numbers alone. They need to get programs like Schemax out there for free to developers, and a "run-time" for customers ... this would increase the rate at which new extensions are added to the directory. It's still just too hard! As for the numbers of developers, I have to disagree with this statement ... you need to look at this as a "biological" evolution and statistics ... the more developers, the more likely you'll have one pop something innovative. This is why Silicon Valley does so well ... the density of tech people increases the odds of the right ones coming together ... > 2) Demonstrate the importance of the Directory as the defining > factor of how well a Directory App works. Let's face it, a building > is only as good as it's foundation.... I agree. More directory apps are needed, which means that you need more developers and more tools that ease the development requirements. It's funny, I have been trying to use the Novell ActiveX controls and have found numerous limitations in these controls that make it difficult to develop applications ... and yet what is even more difficult is trying to find how to tell Novell this, and to get the features added in a timely fashion! ;-) > 3) Leverage open standards to an advantage. If MSFT writes apps to > use LDAP - create hooks into those apps using LDAP, DirXML or any > other product. Basically, use re-direction in Directory calls as > they had done so in their NDS for NT product. Interoperate them to > death. This is another difficult concept for many people to understand. The IETF standards are simply written by anyone who has the knowledge and time to write them. They are normal people working for normal companies ... but are willing to take a risk and try to address some void in the standards space. If you decide to build a company on the practice of "following standards" then you need to accept the fact that you are a follower! If you want to lead in the standards space, then you need to be driving the standards and create new standards ... not just follow standards. Following is following no matter what market or setting it occurs in ... and following certianly is not leading. Scott C. Lemon