Phil Windley in a recent Between the Lines posting entitled 'Split Novell?' mused that Novell's relatively poor identity management business performance (in comparison to the industry in general) was perhaps a result of poor strategic synergy between their operating system (Suse) and IDM product lines. Not being a financial follower of the IDM market I cannot say for certain whether he is right or wrong, but I do agree with his basic assertion that Novell should be split in two. For a while now I have felt that their emphasis on Suse Linux is to the detriment of their excellent product offerings in the identity and network services markets such as eDirectory/iManager, IDM, iFolder and ZenWorks.
Commoditising the operating system
The success of Novell during the 80's and early 90's was due in no small part to their tried and tested Netware operating system. Unfortunately the operating system market has changed, Windows has matured and Linux has gained a strong foothold as a ubiquitous, free platform for reliably hosting network services. With the gradual demise of Netware, Novell had an opportunity to step out of the low-level operating system market and focus on the aspects of their business that where going strong. In this process they could have left the grunt work of maintaining the base operating system to partners such as Red Hat, Suse and even Microsoft. This would have provided a clean and relatively open migration path for existing Netware customers who are committed to a Novell infrastructure (i.e. eDirectory/Groupwise/Zenworks) and for the most part ignore the underlying operating system so long as it was stable and supported by a reputable party.
Instead of adopting a lightweight approach Novell opted to maintain their tried and true business model through the purchase Suse Linux as a straight replacement for Netware in their product arsenal. This meant that instead of placing development emphasis on getting their network and identity products seamlessly working on a range of partner operating systems attention was focused on fusing Novell's existing identity and network services into Suse Linux. The culmination of these efforts has resulted in Open Enterprise Server (OES), an excellent Netware 6.5 replacement that continues with the Novell tradition of marketing a tightly bound operating system/network services stack. Unfortunately this focus on a closed server/services model has been to the detriment of the network and identity services' deployment flexibility and marketing appeal as these valuable offerings must be coupled to and marketed alongside their related server products.
A fuzzy cross-platform commitment
Many of the identity and network services produced by Novell are technically cross-platform to one extent or another. Traditional products like eDirectory can run on just about any hardware/software combination whilst many of their other services run within inherently cross-platform run-time environments such as Java or Mono. Unfortunately the difference between technically cross-platform and a practical reality whilst relatively small is significant. In general the problems are in the details or related to how difficult a Novell service is to install, setup and maintain on a non-Novell system. However in extremes cases it can result in the service not working at all, for example even though the iFolder Server/Client is Mono-based (and technically Linux distribution agnostic) it doesn't yet compile or run correctly on significant distributions such as Debian/Ubuntu. Even though tailoring and packaging these services to run on non-Novell systems is not difficult, the fact of the matter is Novell views their services running on anything other than their operating system as second class citizens. Such capability is kept around for marketing purposes to say how it 'might' be done, but realistically what needs to happen is something significantly different and less flexible. If you doubt this try setting up a suite of basic Novell network services (eDirectory, iFolder and Groupwise) on a Red Hat server. Whilst it can be achieved it is overly time consuming and the result not nearly as seamless as a pure OES. At a system level very little is different between the two approaches but the significant different lies in the automated installation steps provided for the Novell operating system.
A separation of power
Another argument for the delineation of Novell between its services and operating system business would be in clearing up its relationship with open and closed source partners. Presently Novell occupy a difficult place as they attempt to straddle the closed and open source worlds with their closed identity and service products on one side and Suse on the other. Given this schizophrenia it is not unsurprising that many feel they are not doing a good job at managing either side of their businesses, especially when it comes to public relations and marketing. As a consequence of this difficult market position they are seemingly destined to loose no matter what; deals made with Microsoft are viewed in a poor light whilst at the same time future legal threats to Linux/open source cast a potentially menacing shadows over their core business. In contrast an identity and network services orientated Novell would be free to make deals with Microsoft and work with the popular Linux distributions simultaneously without publicly having to present a split personality. This would be a far more flexible position to be in than the place they are at the moment; sandwiched between the open source community and Microsoft, all the while being attacked and cheered by both sides.
Could Novell survive without an operating system?
The underlying logic that belies this hypothetical argument is that a software company focused on high-quality identity and network services can survive without the need for a dedicated and tightly controlled operating system platform. For 99.99% of the software companies around this logic holds true, so why this should not be the case for Novell is a matter of debate. On one hand is the argument that only a tightly integrated services/operating system stack will enable Novell to provide the level of support and stability business customers demand. However whilst there are some definite advantages to this model the majority of software vendors provide services just as reliable as Novell's without the need to control every facet of the operating environment. The tantalising fact is that the majority of Novell's own services are designed with this level of flexibility in mind, it is only the self-imposed ball and chain of their operating system commitment that keeps this from flourishing. Perhaps the greatest barrier to realising such a company is psychological rather than practical as two separate entities centered around identity/network services (Novell Services) and operating systems (Suse Linux) would individually be smaller than the current 5,000 employee company Novell is today.
A Novell unburdened by an operating system would be leaner and more dependent on operating system partners such as Red Hat, Suse, Ubuntu and Microsoft to provide a full range of services. Whilst not as grand as their current strategy this focused approach would give the customer the ability to immediately deploy the Novell services they require on the platforms they trust. This at the end of the day should be the goal of an identity and network service-centric company rather than preserving server market share or establishing desktop domination.