Dell presents a dual-O/S solution, but it uses Novell's SLED, which is not free

Over two years ago, Microsoft and Novell signed an interoperability deal. Part of this agreement was a patent deal that suggested that Linux infringed on Microsoft's IP. Since then, Microsoft has signed a number more of these deals with various companies, but the Novell one is still the most famous.

Mary Jo Foley notes some of the highlights of Microsoft's patent/interoperability deal with Novell, following Microsoft's own press release celebrating the deal. She says something, however, that I'm not sure I agree with

You'll find an MP3 of a conference sponsored by the Massachusetts Technology Leadership Council on the Novell-Microsoft deal held in Boston on September 26th here, where representatives from Novell and Microsoft defend the patent deal.

Among the companies which foolishly signed a software patent deal with Microsoft we have Novell and Kyocera-Mita. Both deals involved Linux specifically.

Microsoft is regretting the way it handled the patent protection deal with Novell and other Linux vendors, according to open-source advocates.

Bits from the press about Novell and virtualisation for the most part. MANY people may not remember this, but Ron Hovsepian admitted giving power to Microsoft in the datacentres. It was part of the deal that Novell should permit Windows to run as a host and SUSE usually be a guest.

The press if going ga-ga after Justin Steinman’s claim that Novell is doing well despite and because of the deal with Microsoft. But Justin is a PR agent, and the reporters do not bother to perform a quick and independent sanity check.

I've been thinking about something for a few days now. It's about the latest Novell-Microsoft deal that was announced on August 20, where Microsoft agreed to buy another $100 million worth of vouchers from Novell. I was wondering: how come two public companies can make a deal that seems to me to be material and yet keep pieces of the deal secret?