Novell today introduced the Mono Kickstart program to provide for the first time developer support to organizations using Mono for new application development or migrations. Mono Kickstart includes 25 developer support incidents along with one server or 50 desktop licenses for $12,995. Additional developer support incidents, server licenses and desktop licenses can be purchased separately.
Novell Kickstarts Availability of Linux Desktop Applications
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
For the rest of us small business owners, is there a free or open source version?
i got sticker shock
Sticker shock indeed. Not much of an incentive really.
But, you have to understand the quality you can get from the people at Novell involved in the Mono project.
I would expect a USD $ 250.00 fee per incident(like some others charge), but I agree they are the specialists in what they are offering.
Additionally, you can report and search in their bugzilla for free.
Earning some money from services with free software is not a wrong business model.
You mean open-source developer support for Mono? I’m not sure exactly what you mean. Try the mailing lists (http://www.go-mono.com/mailing-lists.html), although there isn’t any guarantee that any replies you get will be open-source licensed.
nuts. $480 a phonecall (lets not factor in the ‘licenses’ those are already intangible).
“Earning some money from services with free software is not a wrong business model.”
Apparently, it’s the only business model when dealing with “free” software.
There you go, Novell is back. After years of struggling they have really found their way. This is how they are going to make money. It differs not from companies like IBM or Red Hat. First you put time and effort (basically people and money if you’re a company) into OSS software that you know has a viable chance of surviving (IE godd software). At the same time you spend 1 or 2 years figuring out how it works internally (IE, the switch to Linux/OpenOffice at Novell that has been going on). And finally, you have the knowledge and expertise to deal with customer’s problems.
Which apparently is worth a lot of freaking money. But if you’re problem is being solved by changing the actual code, that money is well spent.
Imagine, your ‘incident’ is basically a missing feature (or oversight). It has a fair chance of being added to the software, since Novell coders have access to the source as well as your problem. Now that should be worth some $$.
However, if the first question support has to ask is: “Is your computer turned on? Yes, the button on the front sir.” then it might not be such good value for money, but then again, for that money you’d think twice before asking silly questions anyway.
This is what Mono needs really, but of course we’re going to get a lot of people coming out saying how small businesses and those now famous small development shops can’t afford all of this stuff.
Look, try running your own software development business, OK?
if it was, would you need support?
microsoft charges $200 per incident last i had to use it at work, it didn’t include source code modifications to suite your needs. does this include that? if so, it may be worth it, i suspect not though, since they could really lose their shirts if the people answering these calls were the equivilent of a flat-fee $500 software developer. ie: they fix your issue no matter what the cost is.
i doubt that.
i would put my money on it being similar to MS’s model where they try to find a workaround FIRST (if it really is a bug), and if they can’t, file it as a bug and say sorry. that’s not worth $200 to me, much less $500 or $12995.
Does this include a license from Microsoft to use the .NET IP?
First of all Mono implements a STANDARD that was submitted by Microsoft so they cannot and do not license it. Microsoft does implement other non-standardized things in .NET but Mono is completely usable without them. There are .NET specific things that are implemented in Mono but you don’t need them at all to develop Linux apps or even Windows apps, you would only need them to run .NET apps on Linux.
First of all Mono implements a STANDARD that was submitted by Microsoft so they cannot and do not license it.
By the terms of the agreement they have for submitting these standards to the ECMA Microsoft has to license any IP they have on them on reasonable. However, be in no doubt that the core ECMA standards and the content in them is Microsoft’s IP and they see it as such.
There is NO reason whatsoever that they can’t decide to license it in the future.
just because MS submitted something to a standard does that in any way give up their right to “owning” what they submitted. Even if it does it seems to me what you extend from that standard M$ could just claim that obviously you copied stuff from them on extending that and obviously the building blocks are the same so it wouldnt be hard for M$ to win in court. It is like they would already be half correct that it was built on the same core….
I mean cisco as well as M$ and others works on various “standards” but they often have their implementation of it that is closed and that they “own” so it seems to me that taking that and making your own implementation you are just begging for a lawsuit…
IANAL so I dont really have a clue but it just screams “watch out” to me….
“Does this include a license from Microsoft to use the .NET IP?”
I’m not sure what you mean. There is no mention of “IP” in US law or any or countries law. Possibly could you mean patents? I’m sure you don’t mean copyright or trademark. And if you *do* mean patents, what are the patents that a mono user would violate(in US patent numbers)?
Just do a search for anything patented by Microsoft or any company Microsoft has bought out or any Company Microsoft may buy out solely for patents to use against enemy number 1.
>And if you *do* mean patents, what are the patents that a
>mono user would violate(in US patent numbers)?
How’s this?
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-984052.html
>Microsoft declined to elaborate on its plans for the
>patent, but intellectual property attorneys said that if
>it’s granted, the company could dictate how, or whether,
>developers of software and devices can link to the .Net
>initiative.
>
>”It looks pretty broad,” said Jeff E. Schwartz, a partner
>with McKenna Long & Aldridge. “It could be fairly
>significant.”
The article links to this:
http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fappft1.usp…
More reading:
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/37988/37988.html
>Microsoft has applied for a patent that covers various APIs
>related to the Microsoft .NET technologies.
Also, please take a look at the ECMA Code of Conduct on Patents:
http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/codeofconduct.htm
>The General Assembly of Ecma shall not approve
>recommendations of Standards which are covered by patents
>when such patents will not be licensed by their owners on a
>reasonable and non-discriminatory basis.
Sure sounds like I may need a patent license (even if a “reasonable and non-discriminatory” one) for an ECMA standard.
So I ask again, for my $13K do I get a patent license from MS?
”
companies love to use volunter work instead of paid employees’s work. shame on you all
”
Do you mean the volunteers working at Novell (and former Ximian, which Novell owns now) that have done the majority of the work on Mono?