Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian)
TheAustralian looks
at Sun's latest Linux product. "The Sun Java Desktop system,
which was previously code-named Mad Hatter, runs on the open-source Linux
operating system and includes a variety of programs that replace
Microsoft's internet browser, productivity suite, and other parts of the
Windows package."
(Log in to post comments)
Screw Sunw - Msft has much more integrity. Posted Sep 16, 2003 20:24 UTC (Tue) by walterbyrd (guest, #11620) [Link] At least msft is honest about their hatred of linux. Sunw pretends to the friend of linux, while in the backroom, sunw is trying to kill linux as we know it.Actually, I think what sunw wants is to hijack linux. Sunw wants to own linux exclusively, or ruin linux for everybody. Sound crazy? Take a look at scox's 10-Q that just came out yesterday. Seems that sunw is shoveling even more millions to scox. In return, scox "allows" sunw to claim that sunw has the only legal version of linux - which is a total lie. Msft and scox are both scummy companies, more like organized crime sydicates than real businesses. Now that sunw is bed with those companies, I consider sunw just as bad.
Screw Sunw - Msft has much more integrity. Posted Sep 16, 2003 21:30 UTC (Tue) by ccchips (guest, #3222) [Link] Yeah...and that implies that all the free contributions to Linux belong to Sun Microsystems all these years?Expect to see some pretty serious lawsuits if they think so.
Screw Sunw - Msft has much more integrity. Posted Sep 17, 2003 5:43 UTC (Wed) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link] Ummm... Sun Microsystems own copyright to any code that they donate to Linux or any GPL project, just like everybody else. They are also bound by the license they agreed to, the GPL, just like everybody else.
Screw Sunw - Msft has much more integrity. Posted Sep 16, 2003 21:43 UTC (Tue) by stumbles (guest, #8796) [Link] No don't sound crazy at all, its the same thing I've been thinking. Though I do think its not just Sun. While they are speaking out both sides of their mouths, so has SCO (well mostly out their arse) and I suspect a number of "big businesses" are contemplating the samething. While I do beleive GPL is fully enforceable, we have seen how lame the US government is when big dollars are concerned.
Resistance is futile Posted Sep 16, 2003 21:51 UTC (Tue) by dwalters (subscriber, #4207) [Link] Well even if Sun would like to hijack Linux, or own it, or ruin it for everyone else (all of which is just pure speculation), they won't succeed.After the dust has settled from the SCO Wars, GNU/Linux will come out smelling of roses, the GPL will remain strong and intact, and GNU/Linux will still "belong" to everybody and nobody at the same time. Sun will eventually realize that their best interests (and maximum profitability) will be served by being a good Open Source citizen like IBM. Resistance is futile.
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian) Posted Sep 16, 2003 22:25 UTC (Tue) by cdmiller (subscriber, #2813) [Link] I take it the SUN license fee of $50 per year is only for support / warranty protection and the non free programs they are shipping?- cameron
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian) Posted Sep 17, 2003 2:09 UTC (Wed) by walterbyrd (guest, #11620) [Link] >>Well even if Sun would like to hijack Linux, or own it, or ruin it for everyone else (all of which is just pure speculation), they won't succeed.<<Speculation? I take it you have not followed the scox case very closely. Why has sunw been shoveling millions to scox? Why is mcnealy parroting mcbide? Why is scox giving sunw boat-loads of $1.83/share scox warrants every quarter? Why has scox declared that sunw's linux, and only sunw's linux is supposed to be the only legal linux? Take a look at scox's last two 10-Q's. There can be no question about it: sunw is completely in bed with scox.
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian) Posted Sep 17, 2003 7:20 UTC (Wed) by jonabbey (guest, #2736) [Link] As long as Sun is continuing to drive Open Office / Star Office on Linux, it's senseless to compare them to SCO.Yes, they would prefer that Linux not eat their SPARC business, but Microsoft's barrier-to-entry lockout is a bigger threat to Linux than SCO is, imho.
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian) Posted Sep 17, 2003 11:36 UTC (Wed) by cross (subscriber, #13601) [Link] See, for example, the Jonathon Schwartz (of Sun) interview with Internet News athttp://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/10794_2243431_1 Particularly in part 2 where he says things like: "The one thing they didn't realize they wanted was the capacity of their vendors to indemnify them against the risks that went into the products that they were using. And just as there are a bunch of mothers of 14-year-olds getting subpoenas because their kids are sharing music on the Internet, there will be a bunch of CIOs to testify with respect to the intellectual property that they are using." and a few paragraphs later: "But there are two problems [with open source development]. One is that IBM appears to have committed a landmark mistake in the [alleged] leakage of its IP license from SCO into the mainstream distribution of Linux. My bet is that as a result, there's going to be a bunch of end users, who, just like the mothers of 14-year-olds who trade files, will be getting letters telling them that they have an obligation to compensate for the liberties they took with that IP." Interesting that he thinks CIOs will face trial ("testify with respect to") but end users will just get letters. I assume he means that end users will just settle when threatened whereas corporations will fight. In either case he's clearly equating even buying and using commercial Linux distributions like RedHat with distributing copies of RIAA owned music over P2P networks.
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian) Posted Sep 17, 2003 14:44 UTC (Wed) by pyellman (guest, #4997) [Link] > As long as Sun is continuing to drive Open Office / Star Office on Linux,> it's senseless to compare them to SCO. Ridiculous. There is every reason to compare them to SCO. I've now seen the "Sun released Open Office, so their Linux/Open Source's friend" argument one too many times. It's time to put that one to rest. It's not rocket science: Sun (read: McNealy) has been looking for a way to break MS's desktop monopoly pretty much forever. It's McNealy's obsession, and is thoroughly documented. Sun currently sees Linux as a possible means to that end. That is their only interest in "supporting" Linux, and was the basis of their decision to release of Star Office/Open Office. On the other hand, Linux on the server presents the #1 threat to Sun's existing, core business, and threaten's Sun's very survival. Sun will and is making every effort to derail Linux's advance in that area. Sound schizophrenic? Of course. Is it a crazy plan -- to try to eliminate Linux on the server and in the enterprise where it is currently has the most momentum, while simultaneously expanding and co-opting Linux's future on the desktop? Sure. But exactly the kind of thing to expect from McNealy. Engenders exactly the kind of schizophrenic behavior we've seen from Sun. That's the reality of the situation. Internalize it, and move on. Peter Yellman
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian) Posted Sep 17, 2003 15:37 UTC (Wed) by wweber (guest, #11678) [Link] Just how much does Sun Microsystems gouge people for their software, anyway? AFAIC, any alternative to an all-Microsoft technological world is a good thing. Is Sun trying to burn the bridges of interoperability, or are they up to some other nefarious Seattlite scheme? To me, an outcome worth trying to prevent is that of all *nix-like operating systems disappearing, and the computing world becoming 100% Microsoft. Do you want a "Trusted Computing" world to take over, simply because the non-M$ OS factions couldn't overcome their fragmentation? If so, I hope the hungry tabbies of all Sun employees chew up all your computer cables.
Sun's Windows killer unveiled (TheAustralian) Posted Sep 17, 2003 15:50 UTC (Wed) by jeremiah (guest, #1221) [Link] I see nothing wrong with SUN's tact. SUN doesn't appear to be trying to take things away from OSS community. I see their donation to SCO as a marketing move, not a legal one. They can now say if you are our customer you are legally indemnified. IBM won't say that. Sure the IBM/Linux combination should scare the hell out of them, but their main business is not the desktop, nor is it software. They like IBM are providing complete "Solutions." They want to set up a company's entire net infrastructure. Mad hatter seems to more like a move to get into the rest of the company. It is probably looked at as a way to push forward their Server business. People will always need Big Iron hardware, they might just be more apt to get it and the services revoling around it if it comes with integration for all of a comany's systems. inc desktop. I'd love to be the marketing guy who get's to say buy our "super server" and will replace all of your office systems and productivity software for free with no licening costs. 1500 machines...sure no problem.</ramble>
Huh? Posted Sep 17, 2003 21:41 UTC (Wed) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] How do you distinguish between legal and marketing moves? It seems SCOmakes no such distinction. From the looks of things, Sun was involved early on. They had a press
Who needs it? Posted Sep 17, 2003 15:30 UTC (Wed) by walterbyrd (guest, #11620) [Link] I run both XP and Linux, no problems with either. I use OpenOffice on both. Why do I need this mad-mcnealy product?
Look at the bright side Posted Sep 17, 2003 16:12 UTC (Wed) by dwalters (subscriber, #4207) [Link] Most of the comments above depict a negative view of Sun's involvement with Linux.Let's look at the positive side of this. Mad Hatter/Sun Java Desktop will result in Linux on more desktops: A Good Thing. Even if you believe Sun would like to control Linux, take comfort in your knowledge that they won't be able to (just as SCO won't be able to). In the end, Sun, whatever their intentions, will just have helped bring GNU/Linux to more end-users.
|
|||||||||||