Re: Open Letter to Novell

Joseph Marton wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 17:31:55 +0000, Wallgames.com wrote:
> 
>> Please do not suggest that they switch to a different accounting
package,
>> or purchase a more expensive QuickBooks product.
> 
> We're using QB Premier 2006 and have had all sorts of problems, many of
> which are due to the fact that the company file is stored on a NetWare
> server.  That's why we're actually looking into moving to QB Enterprise. 
> Yes, it's more expensive, but it fully supports Linux.  IMO that's the
> real solution.  I'm not sure there's much Novell can do to force Intuit to
> support NetWare when everyone is supporting NetWare less and less.
> 
But a "Novell" server is no longer necessarily a "NetWare"
server. 
Novell SHOULD be ensuring that their network operating system can be 
used to run the applications that their clients want to run.  It's 
really hard, especially in a smaller environment, to justify multiple 
operating systems for specific applications.  If I have to run Windows 
for one thing, and it can also do file, print, web server and database 
functions, why should I also stick in a Linux box?  (Assuming that 

On Thu, 15 May 2008 19:02:51 +0000, Kathryn Carruthers wrote:

> But a "Novell" server is no longer necessarily a
"NetWare" server. 

Tell that to Intuit and other companies.  I agree with you, but
unfortunately many people equate Novell & NetWare.

> Novell
> SHOULD be ensuring that their network operating system can be used to run
> the applications that their clients want to run.

I think they're doing that, trying to get people to port the apps to
Linux.  Intuit has done this with QB Enterprise.  If Novell or Red Hat
were to go to them to say that QB Pro/Premier also needs to run on Linux,
the response would probably simply be "QB Enterprise already does
this." 
The two products are targeted at slightly different markets.

> It's really hard,
> especially in a smaller environment, to justify multiple operating systems
> for specific applications.  If I have to run Windows for one thing, and it
> can also do file, print, web server and database functions, why should I
> also stick in a Linux box?  (Assuming that personal preferences aren't
> relevant to business decisions).

But one could say just the opposite as well.  If I have to run Linux for
one thing, and it can also file, print, web server_,_ and database
functions, why should I also stick in a Windows box?  (Notice the emphasis
on the extra comma there as per a recent thread, making sure that Shaun
notices.)  Now granted that's a bit of a stretch since there's probably
not much that actually *requires* Linux, but if Linux will run everything
then why not use it?

I know all this doesn't help Bob if the customer doesn't want to pay for
QB Enterprise, but we all know the big push from Novell is Linux and
rightly so.  At this point if something doesn't work on NetWare, well,
c'est la vie.

-- 
Joe
"Those of you who think you know everything are annoying to those of us who
do."