Linux vendors confused by SCO actions (ZDNet) [LWN.net]

Linux vendors confused by SCO actions (ZDNet)

Posted May 16, 2003 4:06 UTC (Fri) by mmarq (guest, #2332)
Parent article: Linux vendors confused by SCO actions (ZDNet)

Confused??????????????????.....
No drama, but there has been " a smooking big gun"(as should always) of a declared enemy and ENGAGED IN ACTUAL WAR (FUD)against Linux for to far and far to long ,... and it wasent SCO.

"They havent had almost none sucess because Linux wall is to thick and to high, although the guards are at sleep... and so SCO is an almost inside diversion for a front full scale heavy attack.

Isn't this carrying the love of peace for to far and for far to long also???

Let's forget about SCO for crying out loud,...SCO is good as dead for whatever may came,... i cannot see or ear IBM worried, nervous or confused, can you???

So it's time to put on the elmet, awake the guards and put up a fight that "they" will never forget, strick very hard rigth there, where it wurts the most to the enemy -DESKTOP; to the point of make them drink their own poison. IN UNION WE CAN FOR CERTAINT WIN, if it cannot be called Linux then we will call it another name, but we will not give in or give up, nor will we stop of tourning arround any obstacle with absolutly no compromise!

... "so strangers from distant lands... unit and win... or fall"

to post comments

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 4:34 UTC (Fri) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] (9 responses)

NEVER post comments while under the influence.

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 4:48 UTC (Fri) by Photon (guest, #11251) [Link] (6 responses)

If I'm not mistaken, and could be. Way back in the day, Microsoft purchased a share of the Santa Cruz Operation. Circa, uh... 1992? Well, actually, Microsoft did own a share of SCO, I was just curious if anyone has any information of a continuing relationship.

Be well.

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 5:00 UTC (Fri) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] (2 responses)

Perhaps you're thinking of Xenix?

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 6:31 UTC (Fri) by janpla (guest, #11093) [Link]

When SCO boots up it lists some references to Microsoft - It wouldn't surprise me if we could find a direct connection to Microsoft hidden behind this intensely stupid maneuver.

Look at it from their perspective (assuming that they ARE behind it) - as long as they aren't found out in a too embarrassing way, this is a very 'cheap' and easy way to try to create problems for their arch enemies.

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 17, 2003 3:25 UTC (Sat) by Photon (guest, #11251) [Link]

Ah, yes Xenix! Hee, hee... You are correct sir! I had forgotten this altogether although I still have a very old framed picture of an SCO 8x10 add poster, (in the format of a movie trailer), proclaiming, "A Unix To Be Proud of!". .... and it runs on the IBM AT! :-)

Be well.

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 8:34 UTC (Fri) by vmlinuz (guest, #24) [Link] (2 responses)

This is not true for at least two reasons:

SCO and Microsoft had a business relationship many many years ago. By the time I joined SCO in 1998, that relationship had dissolved to the point where SCO were appealling to the German legal system (I have no idea why German...) to completely nullify the contract which still stated that any Unix operating system from SCO had to include certain Xenix compatibility features. These features were present in the initial release of Unixware 7 in 1998, but were removed in one of the first minor releases afterwards.
The company you're talking about is not, repeat not SCO. They are Caldera - you know, the Linux company from Utah, named after the bowl of a volcano? The first ones to have a pretty graphical installer on their distribution - which let you play Tetris while the packages were installed. Caldera bought a significant proportion of the assets of SCO in 2000, including their Unix IP and what was left of their Unix engineering organisation - I say what was left of, because they'd already laid a large proportion of their engineers, including me. Some time later, they noticed that the revenue and recognition from the SCO side of things was dwarfing the Linux side, so they renamed themselves the SCO Group - however most of the management of the new company is from the Caldera side, since it wasn't a merger between the two companies, it was a purchase of assets.
While I'm shocked and somewhat embarrassed by what is being done under the SCO name, I hold Caldera entirely responsible - and only pity those of my ex-collegues who are left working for what must be a shell of a company, and I wouldn't imagine to be a fun place to be right now. I like to think that while SCO certainly wasn't perfect, we were an engineering-led company which did some interesting stuff, not a lawyer-led company, foaming at the mouth and willing to bite anyone who comes near, and I wish they hadn't tarnished our history by dragging what was left of the SCO name through this mud.

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 13:08 UTC (Fri) by erat (guest, #21) [Link]

You are SO wrong about Caldera being behind this.

All of your experience in this realm is from the "old" SCO side. I worked for both Caldera
and post-acquisition SCO. I can tell you with absolutely, positively NO hesitation that the
company that calls itself SCO today is *NOT* Caldera. NONE of the current management is
from Caldera except for the CFO. NONE of the employees that are there today were there
back when I started with Caldera. NONE of SCO's business model even remotely resembles
Caldera's.

If anything, bringing SCO into the mix is what corrupted the whole pro-Linux business
model that Caldera had. Before the "acquisition", Caldera was a Linux company. With the
new management (a mix of imported execs like Darl McBride as well as SCO folks and a CFO
that somehow survived from the late Caldera years) the whole business model seems to
have changed.

So, stop blaming Caldera. Caldera went away when SCO folks were brought in.

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 22, 2003 3:42 UTC (Thu) by torsten (guest, #4137) [Link]

"I say what was left of, because they'd already laid a large proportion of their engineers, including me."

I think you mean laid off.

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 11:27 UTC (Fri) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link] (1 responses)

At least i'm not confused, and that can only reasure that there is no influence here.
When we talk about SCO, that means talking about history and with an ongoing publicity not payed for!
When you talk about influence, does that mean you will not put up a fight under any circunstance, and be the first(1º) to leave the ship if it takes water?

Let this be a lesson...

Posted May 16, 2003 12:12 UTC (Fri) by jdthood (guest, #4157) [Link]

> When we talk about SCO, that means talking about history
> and with an ongoing publicity not payed for!

Your English is not intelligible.
Try writing in your native language.