Dear Developers,
As you all know, the new SuSE 11.0 is out and everybody is raving about it. Only I have some issues with this version the biggest problem is that the support for commercial software- or legacy extensions is incomplete or interfering. An example of the list of unsupported or incompletely supported software.
- skype application
- visual paradigm
- grisoft antivirus
- firewall applets
- java development
- realtime support
- etc…
Today I tried to install Visual Paradigm commercial license for which I paid $2500 for the commercial license. And this distribution, which costs $100 commercial license; gives me the following error message.
My company is developing software for Linux and Windows, but we need to take commercial systems into production and without support for commercial applications, we pay each day for lost development, -testing, -report and -coding costs. The issue with this version, and previous versions, is that people need to take it into production but developers appear not interested.
/usr/share/themes/Gilouche/gtk-2.0/gtkrc:30: error: lexical error or unexpected token, expected valid token
Anybody have the solution to fixing commercial support section?
Thank you in advance,
ing. E.H.A. van Tetering
Software Engineer
Skycos Technology
Skype works fine for me. On 64-bit arch you have to install libqt4-32bit, libqt4-x11-32bit and any dependencies of them first.
Never bothered with AV, but then I don’t have any Windows machines to worry about.
Don’t know about the rest.
IANAD (I am not a developer) BTW.
Dear Member,
No that was not what I was referring to. I also have the applications installed and they are partially functional. My point is, that I cannot take this system into production because of the following.
- for each application one types on average hunderd commands
- every installation is non standardised and is obfuscated
- configurations and other generic settings are obfuscated
- realtime or networking usability is not applied smoothly
- system is not tested on usability and generic frameworks
This is the general rule for commercial and paid for (!) licenses.
What I mean is that during configuration where the time issues are important. Every installation requires additional configuration and this takes time, even though the applications install smoothly on other platforms, there is much system administration work.
Application are not guaranteed to work quality assurance tests are missing.
Applications like commercial and paid for firewall and antivirus licenses work, but only partially, and they are interfered with. They do not work out of the box smoothly. This is a problem for people who want to bring the system into production.
Well you should hassle Skype about their apps since it’s a closed source app and they provide the package. Perhaps the problem is that they do not integrate their app into the repositories so the dependencies are unknown until you install it. It’s as functional or not as it ever was in 10.x.
I don’t know about the rest. Maybe developers read this forum, maybe not.
Visual Paradigm - Google Search shows that there is a Visual Paradigm for Linux. I’d visit one of those sites for help.
BTW, one of those links is to a Visual Paradigm community and you can get a community version free.
For my tuppence and doing what few will…
Now this blog is very mmm, not sure how to describe it some will write it off as satire. IMO this is a frustrated linux user that sees a few bits that are holding Linux back.
Now I think much of what has been said stands true, which then leads to in a commercial environment. I wouldn’t of thought openSUSE would be the best but perhaps SLED/SLES or RHEL.
This was supposed to be fixed by the LSB. Linux Hater’s Blog: Standardizing Linux Suckiness
Linux Hater’s Blog: Standardizing Linux Suckiness 2.0
As for the ones that wish to dismiss it so lightly so be it, this hasn’t been posted for flames, but to concur that others do also think the same.
Regardless of my own opinion.
Not really, I actually like linux. I even have a fully functional linux version running under other distributions. The thing is that it is not linux that it is not working or that there are faults. The biggest thing is not complaining or not addressing issue I am addressing. Most of the things addressed are actually avoided by developers because they think it hurts linux.
This is not the truth why would they make such a nice interface for people not to work with it? What I say is the truth and people with any knowledge know this about this distribution. There are always more than one reason for something not to work and it is definitely not market share. What I am adressing is that it is not the way to run an operating system and that is also not linux developers intention. Things cannot change if you do not address them and I do not cut deals with my friends either to get people anything better with my slice on it.
can you certify this distribution to work out of the box commercial off the shelf?
.no.
I’m not actually sure what you’re saying.
Now with out getting into my own opinions.
If I read that right you’re saying it is the distro’s fault that an ISV isn’t supporting it properly. Now I’m not quite sure that is correct just as I don’t really think its ISV’s fault that it doesn’t work on X distro.
What those blogs highlight is if x,y,z distro all use a similar base ISV’s would do more development for linux, this I can’t disagree with. There would also be more man hours looking at the same version to, for development and bug shooting. But could I ever see RH or Novell getting in the same bed for example?
Excellent remark!
During my graduation I worked with *redhat, *because support for realtime clusters was widely available. When working with my own distribution I use *slackware, *because that compiles everything. When testing whether my hardware works I use ubuntu because they have the right commercial attitude. When expecting something new I work with international business machines linux because they develop for the latest hardware.
When I work with SUSE, there is a whole new ballgame there. The main developers are our neighbourly german friends. We live and work in peace together very tightly; and redhat and suse sometimes share the bed together?
You know who should share the bed?
**
-
thinkfinger and finger printproject
-
redhat, novell and firmware cutters
-
ubuntu and german allied friends
-
gnome and kde window developers
**
Is that peace or what?
The problem is sometimes.
I had a discussion once why cant installing RH rpm’s and Novell rpm’s be the same, it can work but not consistently.
I actually worded it as similar to the trees, debian/ubuntu though that seems to be slipping to, gentoo and its derivatives what they do is work from the same pot as such(Or did going on comments about deb/ubu you can find).
If all the rpm distro’s threw into the same pot and cherry picked it would be a win win, for us as users, for developers, both distro and ISV.
Will I ever see the day?
You know what I think? I think Microsoft is triggering warfare. We should help eachother, people should work together on linux. There is only a few of us and millions of them.
herbievantetering wrote:
> You know what I think? I think Microsoft is triggering warfare. We
> should help eachother, people should work together on linux. There is
> only a few of us and millions of them.
>
>
And how is Microsoft triggering warfare?
herbievantetering wrote:
> Not really, I actually like linux. I even have a fully functional linux
> version running under other distributions. The thing is that it is not
> linux that it is not working or that there are faults. The biggest
> thing is -not complaining- or -not addressing- issue I am addressing.
> Most of the things addressed are actually avoided by developers because
> they think it hurts linux.
>
> This is not the truth why would they make such a nice interface for
> people not to work with it? What I say is the truth and people with any
> knowledge know this about this distribution. There are always more than
> one reason for something not to work and it is definitely not market
> share. What I am adressing is that it is not the way to run an
> operating system and that is also not linux developers intention.
> Things cannot change if you do not address them and I do not cut deals
> with my friends either to get people anything better with my slice on
> it.
>
> can you certify this distribution to work out of the box commercial off
> the shelf?
>
> .no.
>
>
I think you are looking at th wrong version then. You might want to look
into SLED which Novell has gotten certified for a few different apps
such as Oracle. Being this is a community driven distro and not a
commercial driven distro, I don’t think you will see much support for
openSUSE getting certified just as you will not see it on Fedora either.
You should indeed consider SLED and Ret-Hat if you want to pay for linux.
Yours Sincerely
foo-nix
Dear Developers,
This is a forum, you should not take forums too seriously. The fact remains, SUSE 11.0 does not have the quality for a number of commercial applications. I really do not care what applications SUSE 11.0 is certified for, it is not certified for most of the applications it has been tested with. This distribution is too expensive to bring into production for any consultancy company. I do not care how many Oracle certifications they have, if Oracle is the target, the Oracle will be in bad shape, because their support costs are too high. Novell should take demands of software engineers and developers seriously. I am fed up with SUSE 11.0, with the demands of their developers, and with false claims.
average license costs for this distribution:
$100 per license
$1500 per laptop
$5000 per oracle
$3500 per modeler
$4000 other licenses
This is not Microsoft, this is SUSE 11.0. The application does not support any of the tested commercial applications and other applications work only with support enabled. The distribution is biased and sells a biased localised brand. The support environment does not certify anybody of a working applications and only localised application arrangements seem to be effective.
I am from the Netherlands, I will not pay for what they sell and what I have tested is definitely not a certified international desktop environment and not fit for production use. Either they adapt their desktop environment or lose some of their current customers due to overhead cost damage. I will not bend to any demands or any cost damage done to my company due to extra overhead for testing and installing claimed to work applications. I consider their brand damaging.
herbievantetering wrote:
> Dear Developers,
>
First off, most people here are end users. There are a few
developers/maintainers that visit since the merger/relaunch but your are
really just speaking with users like yourself that volunteer to help.
You might better be suited to bring these concerns up on the mailing
lists with the developers tend to be.
> This is a forum, you should not take forums too seriously. The fact
> remains, SUSE 11.0 does not have the quality for a number of commercial
> applications. I really do not care what applications SUSE 11.0 is
> certified for, it is not certified for most of the applications it has
> been tested with.
openSUSE 11 isn’t certified with anything iirc. It is a community distro
and as such, most companies won’t certify against it. SLED on the other
hand is the commercial version that companies will certify against.
This distribution is too expensive to bring into
> production for any consultancy company. I do not care how many Oracle
> certifications they have, if Oracle is the target, the Oracle will be
> in bad shape, because their support costs are too high. Novell should
> take demands of software engineers and developers seriously. I am fed
> up with SUSE 11.0, with the demands of their developers, and with false
> claims.
>
Not sure what claims are false as I haven’t seen any claims the openSUSE
11 is certified for any specific software.
> AVERAGE LICENSE COSTS FOR THIS DISTRIBUTION:
>
> $100 PER LICENSE
> $1500 PER LAPTOP
> $5000 PER ORACLE
> $3500 PER MODELER
> $4000 OTHER LICENSES
>
Got a link to where you got this information? 1 Boxed SLED version is
$50USD. As for openSUSE 11, it is $59.95USD. These are off the site. And
where are you getting $1500 for laptops unless you are trying to include
hardware costs too.
> This is not Microsoft, this is SUSE 11.0. The application does not
> support any of the tested commercial applications and other
> applications work only with support enabled.
What are you looking for it to support?
The distribution is biased
> and sells a biased localised brand. The support environment does not
> certify anybody of a working applications and only localised
> application arrangements seem to be effective.
>
How is it biased?
> I am from the Netherlands, I will not pay for what they sell and what I
> have tested is definitely not a certified international desktop
> environment and not fit for production use. Either they adapt their
> desktop environment or lose some of their current customers due to
> overhead cost damage. I will not bend to any demands or any cost damage
> done to my company due to extra overhead for testing and installing
> claimed to work applications. I consider their brand damaging.
>
>
And that is your right. If you have an issue with Novell, it might be
best to take it up with the correct department with them. I do think you
are trying to use openSUSE 11 for something it was not intended for and
never said it could be used for. I would love to see these apps that you
need to use and you say openSUSE 11 are certified for. Until then I
think you are looking at the wrong product.