| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times)Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times)Posted Jun 12, 2003 20:10 UTC (Thu) by error27 (subscriber, #8346)In reply to: Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times) by erat Parent article: Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times) The thing that hurt Caldera's PR was Ransom Love. He would always say things to upset people. He would say things like "Linux users don't understand PR. They should try move out of their parents basements and get jobs or something. And also the GPL is stupid. People me because I'm honest." It's funny that he's been so quiet recently. But probably wise.
(Log in to post comments)
Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times) Posted Jun 12, 2003 21:06 UTC (Thu) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] I don't really know what motivates people to bash based on little or nofactual information. But I think that non-bashers were somewhat cool to the way in which per-seat licensing kept popping up at various places in Caldera's business model. The was justifiable, healthy skepticism about whether that model was ultimately viable for an open source company, and hence skepticism about Caldera's commitment to open source.
Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times) Posted Jun 12, 2003 21:42 UTC (Thu) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] The 'The' starting the last sentence above should have been a'There'. Sorry about the typo.
Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times) Posted Jun 13, 2003 2:13 UTC (Fri) by erat (guest, #21) [Link] There's a difference, though. You're talking about licenses, and I'm talking about an OS. I'll agree that Caldera had some unorthodox views of open source and free software licensing, and in the effort of seeking middle ground between open and proprietary worlds they made a few mistakes, but at all times Caldera was a pro-Linux company.
Will SCO's Suit Chill the Penguin? (E-Commerce Times) Posted Jun 13, 2003 2:59 UTC (Fri) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] I'm talking about one key factor for why they had less than stellar P.R. with theLinux/open source community. That factor was intimately intertwined with with the community's general lack of trust. In retrospect, the community was kind of correct because the owners of company took it in a number of different directions when they decided that was a better way for them to make a buck (embedded DOS alternative, proprietary Unix, etc.). I'm not disagreeing with the points that people may have a) treated Caldera unfairly and b) shortchanged or been unaware of their contributions. But I'm saying that there were things about Caldera that always set them apart from the other Linux companies in a way that made them seem less committed to both Linux and the direction in which the bulk of the community wanted Linux to go.
|
|
||||||||||||