Posted Nov 18, 2003 15:21 UTC (Tue) by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link]
Novell's management changed often, didn't it? Wasn't McBride with Novell around when the Novell-SCO Unix deal was done?
OTOH, SCO has issued so many contradictory statements in the past which, in the end, were only intended to be inflammatory, keeping the heat around their lawsuit (which, at this point, is their primary asset) going - who knows what intention to sue they really have ...
Posted Nov 18, 2003 15:45 UTC (Tue) by hppnq (guest, #14462)
[Link]
You don't think that McBride -- who
was working for Novell at the time the System V rights were sold -- has been planning this far ahead, don't you?! ;-)
(DR-DOS was sold around that time by Novell to Caldera, as well. Mmmh.)
Posted Nov 18, 2003 18:10 UTC (Tue) by TwoTimeGrime (guest, #11688)
[Link]
> You don't think that McBride -- who was working for Novell at > the time the System V rights were sold -- has been planning > this far ahead, don't you?! ;-)
That depends on whether he was a Microsoft pawn then as he is now. Microsoft can't even think that far ahead so I doubt it.
Posted Nov 18, 2003 15:32 UTC (Tue) by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link]
I guess SCO are implying Unix space, not OS in general. If so, one might say that Novell operated in DOS/ Windows related space. Linux, however, clearly belongs to Unix space; whether developed independently or not doesn't even matter ...
I am very curious to see the exact agreement between Novell and SCO, though. SCO already misquoted their IBM contracts in an outrageous fashion.