On another note, talking with a user on IRC some point came into the talk. In these years openSUSE tried to be a lot of things. It tried to be everything to everyone, to be a desktop distribution, a friendly distribution, a versatile distribution, a server distribution… The problem is that in doing all this, openSUSE did not try to be simply…openSUSE. It did not try to build its own identity, it actually did a lot to change what SuSE used to be to many, in an attempt to become something else, which was not clearly defined.
I think the strategy should be oriented to give openSUSE an identity, which does not have to be the identity SuSE had, since times have changed, needs have changed. However, that identity has to be clear, and possibly different from the identity of other projects. Defining an identity cannot make everybody happy, but it is not important. Someone will leave, other people will come, if they will find a positive environment and a goal they share. This, in the end, will be positive, and hopefully it will bring some fresh air to the community too.

OpenSUSE is a compilation of thousands of software packages, developed by thousands of developers. Only a few in Novell and such. There are great guys at Novell, but there are much better one all over the world commited to their own projects and jobs.
When you say: “Now let me speak to RAS (Reliability, Availablilty, Serviceability)”, SMB or SOHO (Small to Medium Business / Small Office – Home Office), have you learn something usefull on those crash courses. OpenSource is also about attitude.
You seriouly need to read documentation about the software you use (using linux you will read a lot).
I use, installed OpenSuse in better mainframes that probably you will never see in person, and it’s not about stability of opensuse, it’s about stability of every software package you use. opensuse is just a tool to ease management of software packages. Now it’s up to you to search for RAS (Reliability, Availablilty, Serviceability). LOL…

And concerning Novell: being linked to a company is not just a bad thing. Perhaps we can learn from Ubuntu in that prospect. What did good old Mark say, if I remember correctly: Ubuntu is not a democracy but a meritocracy (Is that even pronounced right?). We should be not over democratic, we need a good team within the community and for the community, to set goals and a direction.

I won’t repeat much of what has been said but if you’re seeking solid product identity, dropping GNOME would be a good start. Splitting your development to support multiple interfaces is a big mistake (neither M$oft nor A**le do do it) and a drain on your resources. The time, effort and $$$ is much better spent making KDE your signature product (besides, GNOME pretty much belongs to UbUn2) instead of being another me-too Linux.

I’ve been and IT consultant for nearly 3 decades and I’ve spent half that time waiting for a Linux distribution I could put into a production environment (not so much to put in Linux but to lower costs) and still nothing. And the reason?? Too much talk, not enough action.

Keep it simple. Pick an interface and make it super slick, stable and ready for prime time, generate a (limited) hardware compatibility list and put it out there (for SLED) even if it means making a deal with the devil… or De77. After that’s done, build a bunch of drivers for the community (beggars can’t be choosy… I’m a beggar too so don’t flame me) and generate some revenue. The more you generate, the better off the community will be (it’s simple economics). There will be those in the community who get steamed but really… we all try every decent distro that comes out anyhow so let’s not kid ourselves.

I also like Jacks comment above about Corporate being clever … might I add that they are only as good as the sum of the talent they have working for them, and they really really do need to note that down as lesson number one. If the pee enough of the talent off they might find they have a paper empire indeed.