Feedback: McNealy and Linux

> they need to outsource data centers or buy them ready-made with
> pre-assembled, preconfigured, standard systems.
 
Rough translation: "We'd much rather they were in our core market, not
doing their own thing for half the price. Linux is eating our lunch in
server space and that worries us, but we're aware that to say so will
only undermine our position faster."
 
> Best of all, Solaris is "indemnified" and runs no risk of being
> slammed with copyright suits like the SCO Group's against IBM
> Corp., McNealy said.
 
Of course it runs no risk - and neither does any other OS. The SCO Group
aren't committing barratry against an operating system, they're
committing it against a single company. You can't sue Linux, because
there is no overseeing corporation. You could only sue distributors,
and good luck getting at Mandrake, SuSE or anyone else not
headquartered in the litigation-happy USA.
 
TSG are also committing barratry against many Linux users, but that's
basically only in support of their main barratry against IBM. Even if a
miracle occurred (not all mircales are nice ones), justice were
travestied yet again, and they won an ability to charge licence fees,
because they won't show the code, the clock would start only a
reasonable time after the case was settled. Plenty of time to switch to
FreeBSD beforehand if an outcome that stupid looms, which should be
really, really streamlined by 2005. Debian has had a FreeBSD port for
years already, so a switch for Debian users would be pretty much
painless.
 
In so many ways, TSG's moves make no sense unless you follow the money
and discover Bill and Melinda Gates as directors of the companies
principally responsible for propping up SCOX shares despite the clear
pointlessness of their legal case.
 
Which companies in the world stand to benefit most from a slowdown of
Linux deployment? Microsoft and Sun. Which companies have paid Danegelt
to TSG? Microsoft and Sun. See, it's not so complicated after all.
 
IBM, SGI, Hewlett Paquard and so on have discovered that it's easier and
more effective to let other people willingly do most of the maintenance
and development for their hardware and system packages.
 
> McNealy called Linux hobbyists "jalopy-ists" who build systems
> piece by piece.
 
Well, you can do that if you want. Linux is all about choice.
 
However, most Linuces arrive pre-packed. Their packages and patches are
far easier to manage than Sun's.
 
> McNealy referred to a North American enterprise that has a
> "director of Linux kernel release engineering."
 
That would be Red Hat? (-:
 
Cheers; Leon
 
--
http://cyberknights.com.au/ Modern tools; traditional dedication
http://plug.linux.org.au/ Committee Member, Perth Linux User Group
http://slpwa.asn.au/ Committee Member, Linux Professionals WA
http://linux.org.au/ Committee Member, Linux Australia