In an ideal world, Microsoft would add full Linux support to its Windows Azure cloud, helping cloud integrators to blend Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), SUSE, Canonical’s Ubuntu and other Linux distributions with the Windows Azure platform.
Here’s the reality: Microsoft is preparing to enable Linux to run on Windows Azure. But it doesn’t sound like Microsoft will officially offer “support” for Linux on Windows Azure. That’s where SUSE could potentially be an ideal Microsoft partner.
Microsoft and SUSE have a longstanding Windows-Linux integration relationship. Some conspiracy theorists in the open source market dismiss the Microsoft-SUSE relationship as harmful. But I think channel partners and CIOs have genuinely benefited from the Microsoft-SUSE work.
Much of the Microsoft-SUSE relationship has focused on data center consolidation and data center integration opportunities. Microsoft and SUSE claim their joint relationship has served more than 725 customers worldwide. Also of note, former SUSE owner Novell has tested its cloud security service with Azure. Now, it’s time for Microsoft and SUSE to extend their private data center relationship into Microsoft’s public cloud.
Yes, there are more popular versions of Linux. Rackspace claims Ubuntu is the top Linux distribution used by its cloud customers. And Red Hat is building out its own cloud strategy. But the old Microsoft-SUSE relationship makes SUSE a logical choice for Microsoft’s “open” cloud efforts.
I’m betting somebody — perhaps Microsoft, perhaps SUSE, perhaps both — offers full SUSE support on Windows Azure by the end of 2012.
The 
Its naive to thing that MS wants to do with ANY modern Linux distribution.
Cause some parts of this code are licensed under GPL3. Which happened to contain clause that render ANY patents of Linux vendor useless if turned against software under GPL3. (Which is sane, if you profit from software X, then why should you be allowed to attack it with your patents?)
So there will be NO official support from MS.
No, MS DO NEED those patents to maintain at least small stronghold in mobile space, server space, etc…
You can see it already.
Apple do not take ANY GPL software to its app store (cause then Apple would be it distributor).
MS done it better since they OFFICIALLY disallow any GPL software in Windows Phone Marketshare, for the same reason.
I appreciate your comments but CIOs don’t get wrapped up in GPL3 discussions and software religions. They just want to know if Linux will run reliably in Microsoft’s Windows Azure cloud. And I’m betting Microsoft will ultimately give CIOs the answers they want.
That aside, I do appreciate your comments.
-jp
Logical progression my ***.
In fact I don’t even know why i’m commenting on this blog. Though whilst I’m here, I may as well point out that “the conspiricy theorists” were right. Microsoft got hold of novells patent portfolio and have been holding android distributors to account with them. The microsoft business model (in fact every big corporations business model) is dragging eveyone through the economic mud, and will continue to do so untill they can no longer exert control over the market.
The cloud is just the next step in the progression of that business model. Insted of just locking you out of the software installed on your own computer,”the cloud”, aims to lock you out of your data, software, and anything else you might be stupid enough to store in it. Why, because the need your money, and they will do anything to get it. Ask yourself, do directors have philanthropic meetings to decide if they should give their money away, or do they have meetings about streamlining and cost cutting?
FOSS is the opposite to this model, it provides access everywhere.
why would anybody restrict themselves like this???????
Freeweaver, I know you disagree with the article’s thesis but thanks for the note. I certainly understand the value of open source/FOSS but I don’t think corporate CIOs and many IT integrators get caught up in that discussion. When they deal with MSFT they want to know (A) is my data safe (B) is it accessible and (C) can I take my data elsewhere if I ever dislike your cloud…
-jp
@Freeweaver
Actually the conspiracy theorists and your statements are not actually correct…
Nobody ever really thought Novell’s patent portfolio was as good as it was…and everybody had an option to be able to purchase it (with and/or without the company), but only Attachmate stepped up…others simply chose not to, and they shouldn’t cry foul as a result.
And Microsoft doesn’t own the former Novell patent portfolio outright, nor can they use them aggressively
REF:http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/microsoft-gets-novells-patents-rights-but-must-share-them-with-open-source-software/8713
Microsoft’s aggressive moves against the community don’t appear to have anything to do with Novell’s patent portfolio. Note that the exact patents have not been disclosed by neither Microsoft nor any other parties involved in the whole Android/MS mess, but uncited sources have indicated that it is previous Microsoft holdings as Microsoft’s aggressions happened quite a bit prior to the sale of Novell’s patent portfolio.
There were conditions set up on Microsoft for the use of the selection of Novell patents they did get (they didn’t get all), and Novell’s patent portfolio had little to do with open-source…most of the really good patents were historically from stuff in the Netware days.
And there were Novell patents that did deal with open-source and web commerce which Novell did own, but they provided those to the open-source community, specifically the OIN (Open Invention Network) to protect against situations like Microsoft.
REF: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Invention_Network &
http://www.novell.com/prblogs/?p=81
I know folks really like to think that Novell did a deal with the devil when they inked a business contract with Microsoft 5+ years ago, but honestly, they should stop spreading FUD. Microsoft is an aggressor, because of it’s own actions. And while I’m not defending Novell necessarily, as I didn’t like the deal they did, it is not the conspiracy that folks are painting. I had friends who were involved with the deal and indicated to me that Novell did push Microsoft in paying Novell large amounts of money because Microsoft had violated Novell patents (from Netware days) and there was no reciprocity (meaning Novell didn’t sell out the open-source community in any way), but rather sought to protect themselves and their customers from any retribution from Microsoft. And Novell did their deal with OIN around the same time which does seem to affirm their intent to protect the open-source community and Linux.
If folks are looking for an enemy of open-source, they should focus on Microsoft as they are the ones who drew swords and are attacking Android, etc.
But honestly, the patent system with regards to software is broken…and as long as it is, patent trolls and companies making money off of software patents will exist. And the way to fix that is to lobby to change how we deal with software patents as it is doing nothing but driving up the costs of software (all types) and stifling innovation.