The MAIN "SCO" (rant) thread (Please post in here) - Page 13


Page 13 of 39 FirstFirst ... 39101112131415161723 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 571

Thread: The MAIN "SCO" (rant) thread (Please post in here)

  1. #181
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    So if Microsoft contributes to Linux some application under the GPL, than suddenly Microsoft is a great company? Sounds like a convenient way to get their foot in the door.

    Think about the GPL. What type of organizational structure would work with the GPL, probably heavily service based, like IBM. I think that Microsoft and Sun would not be able to support Linux very well because they want control.

  2. #182
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    309
    Originally posted by Citadel
    So if Microsoft contributes to Linux some application under the GPL, than suddenly Microsoft is a great company? Sounds like a convenient way to get their foot in the door.

    Think about the GPL. What type of organizational structure would work with the GPL, probably heavily service based, like IBM. I think that Microsoft and Sun would not be able to support Linux very well because they want control.
    Stop and explain to me why Microsoft isn't a good company? They've done pretty well, it seems. They've been able to become number one in their field, I'm sure there's a reason for that.

  3. #183
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Lee's Summit, MO
    Posts
    605
    Citadel --

    You really don't have a clue do you? One thing I've noticed that people haven't mentioned yet invloving Sun and Slinux is Mad Hatter. A desktop GNU/Linux distribution.


    There's also no mention in any press releaseses from any company.


    Sun's expanded license permits Sun to use some software from Unix System V Release 4 for software components called drivers, which let computers use hard drives, network cards and other devices. Sun needed the software for its version of Solaris that runs on Intel servers, Sun spokesman Brett Smith said.

    What a load of crap. Apparently the author believe that this is the first time Sun has developed a version of Unix for the x86 platform. Sun bought it's license in 1994. Everything the article claims Sun was seeking from SCO was already granted by this.

    "We paid a big, big bag of money a decade ago to get IP (intellectual property) rights to do what we wanted to do with Solaris," he said at a press conference announcing a new line of Intel-based servers on Monday. "We've got a free and clear SCO license. Your audit committee won't get a letter if you are using Solaris." --Scott McNealy, chairman, Sun Microsystem (a similar statement was made by Hewlet-Packard)

    Although Sun has broader rights than do other Unix licensees such as IBM and Hewlett-Packard, it doesn't have the right to release Unix source code or Sun modifications to it as open-source software, SCO spokesman Blake Stowell said.

    Hmm, forgetting that HP bought out it's license too huh?



    Amazingly enough, this article was published July 10th, yet there are NO similar articles or press releases from either Sun nor SCO as well as the sources scattered throughout the article.

    Sun wants to control Linux or else kill it off,
    How do you figure? Sun has given quite a bit back to the community.

    IBM would be a much better organization than Sun or Microsoft to support and nurture Linux because IBM's business model is organic, it's based on service.
    No it's not. IBM also develops a lot of software for GNU/Linux most of them proprietary (ie DB2). Give me a break.

    The article is on linux.org right now. Sun financially backed the SCO by purchasing Licenses and so did Microsoft. They also backed the SCO by supporting it.
    They also backed SCO by supporting it how (other than through aledges finances)?

    I could find no such filing from Tuesday as the article claims, You can lookhere if you want to try.
    Social Engineering Specialist
    Because the is no patch for human stupidity

    I spent a night in Paris. Wanna see the video?

    This post has been brought to you by the STFU Foundation.

    The Origins and Future of Open Source Software
    A NetAction Whitepaper by Nathan Newman

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    Originally posted by redhat81
    Stop and explain to me why Microsoft isn't a good company? They've done pretty well, it seems. They've been able to become number one in their field, I'm sure there's a reason for that.
    Microsoft has total control over their platform and they force users to upgrade by making existing libraries and services obsolete. Linux relies on an organic model in order to avoid vendor lock-in. It distributes control of libraries to the users through the GPL. The libraries will not become obsolete unless the users agree to them becomming deprecated. There is no overall strategy for Linux to force users to upgrade because there is no one single entity with controlling interests. Microsoft is not a good company just like dictatorship is not good for the freedom of the people.

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    Originally posted by El_Cu_Guy
    Citadel --
    You really don't have a clue do you? One thing I've noticed that people haven't mentioned yet invloving Sun and Slinux is Mad Hatter. A desktop GNU/Linux distribution.

    How do you figure? Sun has given quite a bit back to the community.

    No it's not. IBM also develops a lot of software for GNU/Linux most of them proprietary (ie DB2). Give me a break.

    They also backed SCO by supporting it how (other than through aledges finances)?
    I'll attempt to respond to some of your questions. First of all whether I have a clue or not can only be answered on an individual bases because it will vary by individual. Second, Sun has given to the community however I am looking at the organizational structure and saying that Sun is not the right organization to support GNU Linux. I believe that Sun has controlling interests and it is not structured as a service organization. Third, IBM focuses on middleware. It has an organic service based organizational structure, so if it provides some resources for software development as well as financing, it should not retain controlling interests in the platform but instead should profit through services. IBM is moving toward Linux with the right organizational model that will support it without controlling interst, that is a work in progress, but it is a natural fit, it will work by nature. Yes, IBM relied on Unix, but it has moved services to Linux and continues to do so.

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    309
    Originally posted by Citadel
    Microsoft has total control over their platform and they force users to upgrade by making existing libraries and services obsolete. Linux relies on an organic model in order to avoid vendor lock-in. It distributes control of libraries to the users through the GPL. The libraries will not become obsolete unless the users agree to them becomming deprecated. There is no overall strategy for Linux to force users to upgrade because there is no one single entity with controlling interests. Microsoft is not a good company just like dictatorship is not good for the freedom of the people.
    Yes, and Sony has a lock over the Memory Stick. RCA had a lock over the Television. Sony had a lock over Beta, Applied Materials has a lock over "virtually every microchip in the world".

    You're making no sense, though.

    An 8 year old version of Windows is just as obsolete as an 8 year old version of Linux. You have to upgrade both of them to be able to use all of today's libraries, etc. Don't tell me you're still running RedHat 5? Of course not, you upgrade.

    I think everyone's problem here is money. If every Linux distro cost as much as Windows, nobody would call it superior at all.

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Inner City Dublin.
    Posts
    356
    Sun can still be turned.
    SCO should be larted with impunuity.

    Sun seems to be in the schizophrenic position where some elements of management fancy the idea of Linux, in various forms and some elements want to promote Solaris, or so the grapevine tells me.
    Last edited by Piix4; 07-11-2003 at 02:03 PM.
    #define malloc_piix4(n) n=malloc(sizeof(wallet));

    malloc_piix4(the_money);
    Hug a tree.

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    If you can use the Microsoft platform and you think that you are in control than that is fine, but I can't say I feel the same. That's okay if I'm not making any sense to you but that's sure doesn't mean that I am not making any sense to other people. Microsoft has total control over their platform and it is controlled from the top, so if the upper management wants to change something, than all Microsoft users are forced to accept it. This is not true with Linux because it is an open source platform, no single entity is controlling the entire platform and making all of the decisions. Microsoft will force you to adopt new libraries that they repackage every few years because old libraries are discontinued and nobody can prevent that from happening because the libraries are not open source. Microsoft can force you to use their offerings by tying them to the kernel, they can introduce incompabilities, and they can ship their own offerings with the platform and therefore gain strategic advantages over competition. A Microsoft user might as well give up and use all Microsoft offerings. That is not what happens on Linux though.

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Lee's Summit, MO
    Posts
    605
    So what's the difference between that and any other library? Newer softwre requires newer libraries no matter the platform. Unless you plan on using butt-old versions that is.

    Blah blah blah, misinformed ramblings and other stuff that makes no sense.

    Anti-Microsoft is one thing but please no what the hell you're talking about first. Is this just a "get my friggin facts straight" post or did your POSIX Sun/SCO/MS v Linux rant run dry?
    Social Engineering Specialist
    Because the is no patch for human stupidity

    I spent a night in Paris. Wanna see the video?

    This post has been brought to you by the STFU Foundation.

    The Origins and Future of Open Source Software
    A NetAction Whitepaper by Nathan Newman

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    I must have hit a nerve or else you would not be so hostile. Good.

  11. #191
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    4,310
    no, its just that FUD gets old quickly.
    irc.freenode.net #justlinux The Not So Official JL IRC Channel.
    ¤ Debian ¤ Apt-Get ¤

  12. #192
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    I agree, FUD is not good.

  13. #193
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sweden / Linköping
    Posts
    49

    Question Sco?

    well..
    I read something about something called SCO earlier today,
    Im not even sure it´s spelled/called SCO... but if it´s not, Im sure u guys can correct me.
    I belive it involves Linux in some way, and now im curious,

    What is SCO?
    P4 2.3 Ghz
    384 mb RDram
    80 gb hdd
    Dell thingie

  14. #194
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    39,320
    Have a search in this forum for 'sco' (and the SCO thread just below yours) and you should find all you need to explain.

    www.sco.com
    SEARCH FIRST... ASK SECOND Read the JL 'Community Help Posting Guidelines' before posting in the forums.

    Precompiled Redhat NTFS Modules

    Linuxplanet Tutorials

    If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem. ... Please do not send me a PM asking for help...

    Please read the search suggestion thread in JL Ideas

  15. #195
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    332
    Equating Sun with SCO is utter nonesence. The latter is trying to destroy the open source movement, the other is in large part responsible for its existence.

    Who opened up NFS? Who started OpenOffice.org? Who offered Java for free and opened up its source code? What about allowing all of the Jakarta Java projects to exist? What about Java being cross-platform and available on Linux? Who sells not only Linux servers but Linux *DESKTOPS* as well?

    Anybody who compares Sun to Microsoft and SCO should seriously have their head examined!
    So many cool OS's to play with (Linux, Mac, OpenSolaris, FreeBSD) and so little time

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •