|
|
| UPDATE to Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO? |
 |
|
Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 08:50 AM EST
|
Groklaw readers have, as always, uncovered even more evidence in response to one of my articles, "Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?" and it is valuable information, so I decided to put it up here to make sure it isn't overlooked. They have looked through Linux for contributors from Caldera and SCO and they also found some more evidence that you will find pertinent. I removed date and time information and sig lines and any extraneous material for clarity. The full comments are in the comments section of the original article.
*****************************
Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?
Authored by: Anonymous
Maybe someone could start to find all the ex- sco, caldera, etc employees that
have put things into the Linux?
That could be real handy soon.
Your wish
Authored by: p0ssum
is my command.
aragorn:/usr/src/linux# find . -type f -print | xargs egrep -i
"@sco|@caldera"
./CREDITS:E: sp@caldera.de
./fs/freevxfs/vxfs_olt.c: printk(KERN_NOTICE "vxfs: please
notify hch@caldera.den");
./net/ipx/af_ipx.c: * Portions Copyright (c) 1995 Caldera, Inc.
./net/ipx/af_spx.c: * Jim Freeman
./drivers/net/slip.c: * from Jim Freeman's
./drivers/net/tlan.c: * Tigran Aivazian :
TLan_PciProbe() now uses
./drivers/char/drm/drm_context.h: * 2001-11-16 Torsten Duwe
./drivers/scsi/ips.c:/* 4.00.06a - Port to 2.4 (trivial) -- Christoph Hellwig
*/
./drivers/scsi/advansys.c: Erik Ratcliffe has done
testing of the ./drivers/sound/sonicvibes.c: *
Meissner
./drivers/sound/rme96xx.c: - Marcus Meissner
./drivers/sound/nm256_audio.c: * 19-04-2001 Marcus Meissner
./drivers/sound/maestro.c: * v0.15 - May 21 2001 - Marcus Meissner
./drivers/sound/esssolo1.c: *
up. Marcus Meissner
./drivers/sound/esssolo1.c: * Marcus Meissner
./arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.0 16 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian
./arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.01 18 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian
./arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.02 21 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian
./arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.03 29 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian
Caldera first funds Linux SMP development in 1996 by Alan Cox
Authored by: Anonymous
First, Don't forget the one and only Alan Cox's SMP webpage from around 1996 ! It's located at:
http://www.linux.org.uk/SMP/title.html
where he writes:
"At the moment I am developing using a Caldera provided ASUS P54PNIP4 motherboard with 32Mb of RAM."
So back then they knew enough about it to care to buy a motherboard so that Alan could develop (no, not steal) this code.
I derive my my belief that this was written "around 1996" from the fact that the Wayback machine's first archive of this page is from the 11th December 1997, almost 6 years ago, and the document they archived contains a PICS rating of:
1996.04.16T08:15-0500
The Wayback machines archive of this document is at:
http://web.archive.org/web/19971211104421/http://www.linux.org.uk/SMP/title.html
Caldera first funds Linux SMP development in 1996 by Alan Cox
Authored by: Alex
Actually, he wrote a note thanking Caldera for their support in 1995. You can
find it by clicking on the line which reads:
"And also see the README.SMP with the code and download the documentation
in Andrew EZ format"
Alex
Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?
Authored by: tazer
I think Caldera was well aware of the contributions its employees were making.
At least you would think that 6 of your employees contributing to an OSS project
would be difficult to not notice.
I'm not providing the actual email addresses for these individuals, but the
domain names associated with them are either caldera.com or caldera.de.
Stefan Probst was listed in 265 CREDITS files, the earliest being linux-2.0.34
(06/04/1998) and the latest being linux-2.6.0-test11 (11/26/2003)
Ron Holt was listed in 123 CREDITS files, the earliest being linux-2.0.32
(11/17/1997) and the latest being linux 2.3.22 (10/15/1999)
Jim Freeman was listed in 64 CREDITS files, the earliest being linux-2.0.32
(11/17/1997) and the latest being linux-2.1.124 (10/04/1998)
James Banks was listed in 146 CREDITS files, the earliest being linux-2.0.34
(06/04/1998) and the latest being linux-2.3.29 (11/24/1999)
Greg Page was listed in 367 CREDITS files, the earliest being linux-1.1.85
(01/22/1995) and the latest being linux-2.3.31 (12/08/1999)
Cristoph Hellwig was listed in 19 CREDITS files, the earliest being linux-2.4.5
(05/25/2001) and the latest being linux-2.5.5 (02/19/2002)
Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?
Authored by: Alex
On the subject of whether SCO can disclaim the actions, you should also note
that the person supervising Hellwig is a really big cheese in the Linux world.
Ralf Flaxa is the programmer who wrote Caldera's celebrated LISA installer, he
is (or was) the technical lead for the Linux Standards Base, he's the author of
a book on Linux, he was the director of Caldera's German programmers, and the
recipient of as many credits as anyone listed above.
Trying to claim that he acted without permission from Caldera will be
difficult.
Alex
Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?
Authored by: tazer
Indeed you are correct, in regards to credits. It would appear that Ralf Flaxa
is mentioned in all Linux kernel CREDITS files. My algorithm could be off, but
out of 545 releases, his name turns up in 545 times.
It looks as though he's with SuSE now and interestingly enough, Olaf Kirch was
also employed with Caldera and Olaf as well appears to be mentioned in the
CREDITS file of every kernel. It looks as though these are more honorary
mentions than anything.
SCO is still hosting this document of his:
http://docsrv.caldera.com:8457/cgi-bin/man?mansearchword=LST&mansection=7
Speaking of Ralf Flaxa, and his contributions to the LST, this tidbit is
interesting:
"LST (Linux Support Team), the version of the Linux OS later purchased
by-and now the basis for-the Caldera distribution."
So Ralf Flaxa was the co-president of LST and Stefan Probst was the president
and ceo of LST.
According to Matthew Peterson, of Caldera:
(http://www.linux-kongress.org/2000/abstracts.html)
(http://www.openslp.org/)
"Early in the process of developing other management tools, Caldera
Systems started the OpenSLP project as an effort to develop an open-source
implementation of the IETF Service Location Protocol that would be suitable for
commercial and non-commercial application."
Woe is me, Caldera wrote open source software with the goal of making it
suitable for commercial purposes? Not that this is a kernel contribution, but
still, I didn't think open source software became ready for the enterprise
without some sort of illegal code contribution.
This all tells me that Caldera was well informed about Linux and its
development. Even a few of their employees were 'in the thick' of things,
some from the very beginning. I don't know how they could claim they didn't
know anything.
Very Interesting.....
Authored by: p0ssum
Here is an excerpt from LKML(Linux Kernel Mailing List):
"On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> Just remember, Caldera is a LINUX company -- they will
> take the best of both, and use it to improve Linux .... "
>
> :-)
"Hi Jeff,
"Good stuff, but what I am still wondering is whethere is
indeed anything in UnixWare (or any other commercial
UNIX) that can be used to improve Linux. Pray do tell
us, what do you think such areas might be?
At the moment, I can't think of any, and I did work as a
UnixWare7 kernel escalations engineer for 2 years :)
"Regards,
"Tigran"
The Tigran is Tigran Aivazian a former SCO(as you can tell from the UnixWare reference) stating that he doesn't believe that there is anything in SCO or other commercial Unices that could be useful to Linux. Here is the Link. Kicker is this was written in 2000 and he was working at Veritas at the time......
Very Interesting.....
Authored by: Anonymous
Here is the rest of the previous post in the thread. Even more interesting.
Link.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:07 AM EST |
| heh... what i would give to be in the court room when *that* email is read :^) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Mark Levitt on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:13 AM EST |
Regarding the SMP stuff, I think SCO is aware of their contributions and
assitance and are already working to counter any damage.
Notice in the latest interview with Blake Stowel were he says:
“various schedulers and high-end symmetric multiprocessing technology [into
Linux].”
http://sdtimes.com/news/091/story15.htm
Notice he says "high-end" SMP. I suspect, when their contributions
are shown, they are going to argue that yes, they did help to develop
"basic" SMP capabilities that might allow, say, 2 processors, but
that they didn't contribute code that could allow Linux to scale to 8 or more
CPUs.
And, of course, according to them, the only way Linux could now scale to 8 or
more CPUs is because IBM did it.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:13 AM EST |
Jun Nakajima worked for old SCO out of Murray Hill, NJ and
made several contributions to the IA64 code. Given that
the IA64 is considered an "enterprise" level processor, this
would seem to be highly relevant. Here are his posts to the
linux-ia64 list --
http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/linux-ia64/0010/0694.html
http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/linux-ia64/0010/0689.html
http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/linux-ia64/0010/0687.html
http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/linux-ia64/0010/0684.html
http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/linux-ia64/0010/0669.html
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tazer on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:31 AM EST |
While this isn't specifically about x86 hardware, the first occurance of
anything that appears to be SMP related, in Linux, occurs in the linux-1-1-78
release.
./linux-1.1.78/arch/sparc/config.in:bool 'Sparc SMP support' CONFIG_LINUX_SMP
n
Prior to that, all I come up with is this:
./linux-1.1.33/net/unix/sock.c: * these counts. With an SMP Linux you'll
need to protect these!
So, it may be that SMP, for SPARC systems at least, was being developed during
that time, and at the very least, consideration of the then current designs were
being given to future SMP support.
drwxr-xr-x 16 root root 4096 Jul 21 1994 linux-1.1.33
drwxr-xr-x 13 root root 4096 Jan 9 1995 linux-1.1.78
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: anwaya on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:34 AM EST |
| In this interview
published August 28, 2002, We find:
Taking on the 'Linux is
free' myth, McBride offered to sell the audience a plastic cup of
water. Then he
held up a nicely labeled bottle of pure water, which easily sells
for
$12/gallon or more. This is how you'll make money, he said. You'll have
the SCO brand
once again, and our Linux will be powered by UnitedLinux,
certified enterprise-ready by IBM and H-P.
That would be a
Linux like SCO Linux 4, with SMP, JFS, NUMA and RCU...
He knew what was in
UnitedLinux. He knew where it was going. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: davidw on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:54 AM EST |
Nothing new to add, but unfortunately there were a fair amount of resellers
present. Fortunately, most of them seemed pretty sceptical of the whole scheme,
and most just wanted to know *what should I do today*? Naturally, the SCO folks
present didn't answer questions like "will I get my money back if SCO
loses the case?" or "when will you show the code
publically?".
It's a pity these guys haven't been shut down europe-wide like they were in
Germany.
---
http://www.dedasys.com[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:57 AM EST |
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9757
Aparently, SCO signed and agreement with Lindows to protect them and their users
from legal battles.
Since Lindows was under the GPL...
---
No guns, no bombs...just brains
The way it should be.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Alex on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 11:03 AM EST |
Here are a bunch of e-mail addresses for SCO people, most of whom are
programmers, which I found on google last night. I've "scheduled"
them for future research, but I don't know if I'll ever have the time - I'm
getting much busier these day - so jump in and see what you can find.
jkj@sco.com
jun@sco.com
radekm@sco.com
belal@sco.com
thull@sco.COM
tigran@tyne.london.sco.com
markhe@sco.COM
sergey@sco.com
patrick@balti.london.sco.com (might be patrick@sco.com) P. Caulfield
faithz@sco.com
rr@sco.com
Remember that when you type an e-mail address into google you need to surround
it with quotes. Then add whatever you're looking for. For example:
"faithz@sco.com" NUMA
will find all the instances e-mail from this person about NUMA.
Anyway, have fun.
Alex
---
Destroying SCO one bozon at a time[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 11:19 AM EST |
| Tigran did indeed post this to the Linux-Kern
el list: "Good stuff, but what I am still wondering is whethere is indeed
anything in UnixWare (or any other commercial UNIX) that can be used to improve
Linux. Pray do tell us, what do you think such areas might be? At the moment, I
can't think of any, and I did work as a UnixWare7 kernel escalations engineer
for 2 years :)"
But he followed it immediately by this afterthoug
ht: "I do correct myself - there is one thing in UW7 that is definitely
worth
using under Linux - the VERITAS vxfs journalling filesystem, i.e.
;)"
Which isn't quite such happy reading... being JFS an' all that... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 11:20 AM EST |
It would be very nice to get our hands on some kind of formal Caldera document
with regards to their IP policy and more specifically the policy of
contributions to linux. In a company like that i'm sure they had a policy.
Then again I bet any copies were destroyed before the trial.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 11:58 AM EST |
The full thread had some posts quoting from Caldera marketing brochures
advertising SMP, JFS, etc. I think it would be good to call these out as well
because they can hardly argue "rogue engineer" for features they are
advertising.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jraustin on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 12:56 PM EST |
I know this is off topic in this thread, but I was really wondering what Wind
River joining OSDL says about how they view SCO's claims. SCO says that Wind
River is on their side of the table, Wind River seems to think otherwise. The
timing also seems to send a message.
On the other hand, could this be one of the companies that SCO says bought a
licence. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Licensees - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 01:12 PM EST
- OT: Wind River Defection? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 08:28 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 01:05 PM EST |
Based on a previous suggestion here, I did a simple google search that
yielded this interesting link to a PDF brochure still on Caldera's
site:
http://www.caldera.com/images/pdf/scolinux/SCO_Linux_DS3.qxd.pdf
Among other things, the brochure states:
"The core of SCO
Linux Server 4.0 is the 2.4.19 Linux kernel. New features include broadened USB
support [..] improved journaling file system support [..] NUMA support [..]
and many other performance enhancing capabilities."
"Journaling
File System - Journaling file systems add a higher level of reliability and
faster recovery time. JFS, ReiserFS, XFS and Ext3 journaling file
systems are included in SCO Linux Server."
Now what was
that I read about SCO not knowing about it's contributions? Not only did they
know, but they also made a brochure TOUTING it's
capabilities!!!
...
if (!sco_wincase) {
die("Darl
lives in infamy");
}
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: aug24 on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 01:18 PM EST |
| ...and I found a powerpoint presentation (
Google Cache
,
SCO's own website), date March 2003, which is exactly when SCO
started suing IBM, listing the good things in SCO Linux.
Specifically,
it states on slide 38 of 47 that SCO Linux contains...
JFS
(Journaled File System Developed by IBM)
A 64-bit file system with all the
appropriate file system structure fields at 64-bits in size, allowing support
for both large files and partitions. JFS provides a log-based, byte-level file
system that was developed for transaction oriented, high performance
systems.
Left hand, right hand...
Justin. ---
--
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 02:22 PM EST |
I'm amazed time'n'time again by all the fine research by PJ & Co, but do
we have any indications that IBM actually uses this stuff ?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: linuxbikr on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 03:04 PM EST |
| This is a little off-topic, but related to the ongoing discussion. Here are
some excerpts regarding SCO from "Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source
Revolution". The complete book is freely available online for those interested in further reading.
In fact,
proprietary software vendors have already suffered a number of quiet casualties.
Linux and Free BSD have really eliminated opportunities to successfully sell a
proprietary Unix on PC hardware. One such company, Coherent, has already
foundered. The Santa Cruz Operation (SCO) has gone from a leading Unix vendor to
an afterthought in the span of a couple of years. SCO, the company, will
probably find a way to survive, but will its flagship product, SCO Unix, be
another casualty of Open Source?
Who'd ever thought it would be their
new attitude towards Open Source that would do them in?
SCO, on the other
hand, makes money by selling the SCO Unix operating system, programs like
compilers and servers, and training and education on the use of the SCO
products. So while SCO has a nicely put together organization, it is in danger
the same way that a farm with one crop can be vulnerable to a single blight
destroying a harvest.
SCO, on the other hand, has a less flexible
model. SCO's pricing model sells the OS first, with additional costs for tools
that the Linux user takes for granted, such as compilers and text processing
languages. This model simply can't be sustained in the face of competition from
a robust free OS. Unlike Sun, which has added value in its broad hardware line,
SCO has no hardware to tie profits to. Their OS is essentially all they have,
and in SCO's case, that's not good enough. What will SCO do?
Their
response so far has not been enlightened. In the beginning of 1998, SCO sent out
a letter to its vast mailing list of users slamming open Unixes like Linux and
FreeBSD as unstable and unprofessional while offering a reduced price on the SCO
base OS. They were widely scorned for this move and had to do some serious
backpedaling. The letter insulted a number of people by blatantly lying about
the credentials of Linux. SCO didn't give their customers credit for being smart
enough to see through the FUD. SCO eventually published a retraction on their
web site.
In late 1998, SCO sent out a press release talking about how
SCO Unix now has a Linux compatibility layer, so that your favorite Linux
programs can be run under SCO Unix. The response was underwhelming. Why spend
money on an OS just to make it compatible with a competitive free
offering?
SCO is in a unique position to benefit from the Open Source
movement. SCO has some very valuable intellectual property that they can
leverage into a real position of power in the Open Source future. They must,
however, make a leap of faith. Instead of seeing Open Source as a threat that
would erode SCO's intellectual property, they need to see Open Source as an
opportunity to bring innovation to that intellectual property.
You can
read the full chapter section here.
Scroll down to the section entitled "Innovation Through the Scientific Method"
to see these excerpts in context.
Just thought I'd post them as a little bit
of perspective and history. I'm sure the author never thought SCO would come to
do what they have done. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: JMonroy on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 05:29 PM EST |
I understand now - the 1st reply author's point was this: SCO wasn't even aware
it had rights to the code in Linux until after the contracts were
reviewed. This makes SCO's distribution of Linux an "accident," a seemingly
valid defense.
In other words (as previously stated), after buying UNIX
from Novell, SCO was finally able to get home and open their new toy, and lo and
behold, a surprise inside! The rights to derivative code. SCO says
Sequent's code is theirs via the derivative clause in the IBM+SCO contract.
Now - opposingly one can argue that since IBM bought Sequent, it now
owns Sequent's code. I believe, and someone correct me if I am wrong, that IBM
is now copyright holder to Sequent's code as a result of this purchase. This
means it can do whatever it pleases with the code. SCO claims IBM had to ask
permission to release this code, which of course, it didn't. SCO says,
"contract violation!"
So it boils down to this - who owns the
code? SCO via the original contract with IBM? Or IBM, because it bought
Sequent? Which has precedent? I recall a thread recently on this very contract
clause...
---
if (!sco_wincase) { die("SCO"); } else {
die("SCO"); } [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Except - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 05:47 PM EST
- Except - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 06:17 PM EST
- Except - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 10:40 PM EST
- Got it wrong now... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 08:29 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Tim Ransom on Tuesday, December 02 2003 @ 06:42 PM EST |
Here's a
disturbing Bizarro World scenario.
SCO Threatens to Sue Big Mouth
Billy Bass!
Thanks again,[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jmichel on Wednesday, December 03 2003 @ 08:54 AM EST |
As others have pointed out there is nothing better than the joy of a good google
search. hch Ralf Flaxa. Here are links providing information from, and or
credits to hch@caldera.de (aka Christoph Hellwig). Another interesting part is
this person:
N: Stefan Probst
E: sp@caldera.de
D: The Linux Support Team Erlangen, 1993-97
S: Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH
S: Lazarettstrasse 8
S: 91054 Erlangen
S: Germany
He shows up in as many credits as our friend Christoph. I especially love the
two debian.org/lsbp-spec/ messages. The last sentence is interesting in that
LSB is not mentioned by SCO, that I know of. Though I have been wrong many
times before.
‘This is Ralf speaking as director of Linux development at Caldera
and as technical lead for the LSB sample implementation.
Ralf’
http://lists.debian.org/lsb-spec/2002/lsb-spec-200201/msg00044.html
http://lists.debian.org/lsb-spec/2002/lsb-spec-200201/msg00007.html
http://www.bluelinux.org/docs/html/blizard/html/cdrom_8cpp-source.html
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/linuxsh/kernel/CREDITS?rev=1.35
http://62.49.201.250/balloon/linux-2.5.70-rmk1/CREDITS
http://lxr.hybus.net/source/CREDITS
http://ftp.nl.linux.org/pub/linux/bk2patch/linux-2.5/SCCS/s.CREDITS
http://bernia.disca.upv.es/lxr/http/source/CREDITS?a=sparc64
I hope this is over soon, Friday would be good. :)
John
"Linux is good to me, it can be good to you too."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jmichel on Wednesday, December 03 2003 @ 09:20 AM EST |
I think the greatest benefit of this website is the future. After the dust has
settled I would be surprised if this information is not created as a case
study/research docket for Law Schools, at a minimum. If that doesn't happen,
then the Learned Person of our Schools are just blind.
There are lots of potential for making a knowledge trust out of the information
posted here. Think long and hard about the quality of this community and its
potential impact on the future learning.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: belzecue on Wednesday, December 03 2003 @ 11:35 AM EST |
Money talks, and it is screaming that SCO has no future. As if the pre-October
steady climb in short interest wasn't enough proof that investors expect SCO to
go belly up sooner rather than later, just look at the 75% increase in shorting
in the single month ended Nov. 14!
(1), (2), (3), (4)
Nov. 14, 2003, 1616098, 345608, 4.68
Oct. 15, 2003, 925518, 376803, 2.46
Sep. 15, 2003, 894777, 327845, 2.73
Aug. 15, 2003, 458520, 267924, 1.71
Jul. 15, 2003, 391346, 204006, 1.92
Jun. 13, 2003, 276810, 686127, 1
May. 15, 2003, 33397, 54870, 1
Apr. 15, 2003, 37437, 55726, 1
Mar. 14, 2003, 84150, 114525, 1
Feb. 14, 2003, 35651, 17187, 2.07
Jan. 15, 2003, 35966, 14710, 2.45
Dec. 13, 2002, 38677, 14671, 2.64
(1) Settlement Date
(2) Short Interest
(3) Avg Daily Share Volume
(4) Days to Cover[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: frk3 on Wednesday, December 03 2003 @ 04:11 PM EST |
I went back to SCO's web site for the first time since documenting their odd
shifts in the number of resellers and developers reported in their 2003 press
releases.
I found a link to "2000" press releases and started poking around
a little.
In the early part of 2000, I found some shifts of resellers (no
developer numbers are mentioned). However, only a few times were the numbers
really odd, so could write these off as simple errors.
However, a couple
things did stand out as kind of interesting to me related to Caldera and SCO
being cozy with each other prior to 2 August 2000 when a press released
announced Caldera's acquisition of "SCO Server Software and Professional
Services Divisions".
The URLs to the press releases I found of interest are
at the end of this post.
The most interesting one to me is the last one
where a "marriage" of Unix and Linux is discussed. Anyway, here are the
links:
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=38503
Interesting
as Tarentella and IBM part of OpenLinux Power Solutions Tour
2000.
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=38497
Caldera and
Tarentella team
up.
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=38489
Caldera
announces acquiring SCO Server Software and Professional Services Divisions,
Providing World's Largest Linux/UNIX
Channel
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=38484
21 August
2000 "800 resellers worldwide.
"Marriage" of Unix and Linux.
Although these
might not prove to significant in themselves, they may lead to other
interesting information, I am certain.
Regards,
Fredrick [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
