-
09-10-2003, 01:48 AM
#391
SCO helping GNU/Linux
This is NOT a rant thread, so let's try to keep it civil.
I've been pondering this in the back of my mind for a couple months now. I've just been thinking that all this SCO vs IBM publicity might be helping GNU/Linux more than anything else. I was just wondering if anybody else was thinking this?
-
09-10-2003, 01:58 AM
#392
Actually I thought about that. Maybe it's just me, but I never saw boxed Red Hat and Suse Linux right up there next to the Windows XP cd boxes!
-
09-10-2003, 02:03 AM
#393
I've given this some thought as well, and I agree. Whenever anything (such as a company) is seen as a bully, the human instinct seems to be to support the underdog. That said, *some* people might see SCO as bullying in this respect, and hence throw their weight, in terms of purchasing boxed distros, behind Linux.
Not a bad thing...any publicity is good publicity right?
-
09-10-2003, 02:24 AM
#394
I'd have to agree that any publicity is good publicity in that some of the articles about SCO & Linux have been in the New York Times & other major publications. This means that more people may want to learn about linux & possibly leave windows behind them if they give it a try .
-
09-10-2003, 05:36 PM
#395
I think that SCO has indeed succeeded in painting itself as the bad guy to non-linux users the same way the RIAA has to the American public. Heck, my mother even said she doesnt think she'll buy CDs again after seeing on the news about them filing a lawsuit against a 12 year old girl!
In the long run, SCO only damages itself by making claims that it can't back up, and in the end make people curious as to what's so good about linux that SCO's out to destroy it.
By the way, I called up SCOsource the other day, and discovered a toll free line to some very good amusement! Just try inquiring about the linux license. I never really got a chance to talk to anyone yet (after calling every day this week), but as soon as I do, I'm going to ask, "Will this license protect me from possible litigation?" if they say yes, then I'll ask "What about the press release from SCO in .au stating that you have no plans in the future to sue linux companies?"
EDIT: in the end, i think this has been good for us. Like I've stated earlier, SCO made it's debut on CNN the other day. The only mention of them? "Red Hat sues SCO, stating anti-competitive activities and violation of the Layhem(sp?) Act." I was tickled with joy.
-
09-11-2003, 04:37 AM
#396
I don't agree with you, Sepero, at least when it comes to Switzerland/Europe, because the knowledge about the SCO case is really sparse overhere, even among IT pros. The only ones paying attention so far is the Linux community.
When it comes to promoting Linux, I believe that adds on TV, having the boxes in the shelves at your computer store, and us installing it on friends/relatives' computers will be more important factors in the long run.
-
09-11-2003, 04:45 AM
#397
talking about ads, just i saw an IBM commercial for linux during the us open final. l i thought it was pretty nice.
tuco.
ps. now that i remeber, i found a post on slashdot taht talked about it. here's the article:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...ow?msid=164838
Last edited by tucolino; 09-11-2003 at 04:51 AM.
-
09-11-2003, 07:48 AM
#398
The American fiaSCO goes to show you that Linux is the platform of choice for everyone. The fact that IBM dropped Unix for Linux hurt Sun and SCO, so they retaliated, Microsoft style.
Apparently the fiaSCO might strengthen the GPL however it's up in the air regarding the American law system. It would be better to flip a coin quite frankly. Anyway, outside of America, the Linux platform is doing extremely well, and the fiaSCO definately helped to expose Microsoft crimes.
-
09-16-2003, 11:13 PM
#399
a question
if ligitimate companies purchase the $699 per CPU SCO Linux Run Time license (see: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1253090,00.asp ) would this not...
a) pull users out from under the protection of the GPL which Linux is licensed under and replace the license with a non-open propriatary license
b) potentially cause end users to be unable to move to another kernel (i.e. upgrade to a non SCO kernel after the facts are finally laid down) without incuring further charges from SCO (which the end user agreed to by purchasing / signing the modified license)
until SCO has legal footing on which to base their claims it is unsafe for them to sell, and for the end user to purchase these licenses.
any thoughts?
-
09-18-2003, 10:55 PM
#400
Alarm Bells are Ringing!!!
-
09-18-2003, 11:29 PM
#401
Re: Alarm Bells are Ringing!!!
yeah I guess so $6.05 a share
I was looking up the wrong company SCOR SPONSORED ADR
Last edited by bosox79; 09-19-2003 at 12:20 AM.
-
09-18-2003, 11:53 PM
#402
Heh...
How did I earn the distinction of starting this thread?!?!?!?!?
That e-trade link is just a lookup page. SCOX is still around $20. What am I missing?
Need help in realtime? Visit us at #linuxnewbie on irc.libera.chat
Few of us will do as much for our fellow man as he has done.
--Andrew Morton on RMS
-
09-19-2003, 12:19 AM
#403
-
09-19-2003, 12:43 AM
#404
The mods took a few threads about this and merged them togeather. then they each played russian roulette, and picked straws, and then played pin the tail on the donkey, and you got picked.
irc.freenode.net #justlinux The Not So Official JL IRC Channel.
¤ Debian ¤ Apt-Get ¤
-
09-19-2003, 12:44 AM
#405
Originally posted by sharth
The mods took a few threads about this and merged them togeather. then they each played russian roulette, and picked straws, and then played pin the tail on the donkey, and you got picked.
sounds about right to me
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|