|
|
| One Hand Doesn't Know What the Other Is Doing In the Canopy Group |
 |
|
Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 07:31 AM EST
|
The Pentagon has just purchased a Linux supercomputer from LinuxWorx. "Linux Networx is building a new, high-performance 2,132-CPU Linux cluster supercomputer for the U.S. Department of Defense as part of an IT modernization program being undertaken by the agency.
"In an announcement today, Salt Lake City-based Linux Networx said the Evolocity II cluster will be used by the Army Research Laboratory Major Shared Resource Center (MSRC) as part of the Defense Department's High Performance Computing Modernization Program.
"The supercomputer will be used to increase the research capabilities in the lab, said Charles Nietubicz, acting deputy director of the computational and information sciences directorate at the Army Research Laboratory. The machine, being built at the Army's Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Aberdeen, Md., will be used for weapons research, including calculating projectional dynamics for weapons systems, battlefield weather simulations and battle survivability, he said.
"It will also be used by the lab to help develop advanced technology that can be used in the future by the U.S. military.
"'Networx has proven [that] cluster technology is reliable, robust and mature enough to be selected in even in the most demanding environment,' Thomas Kendall, lead systems engineer at the Army Research Lab said in a statement. 'This system will be a key component of the [lab] and the entire DOD Modernization Program.'" Here's the irony. LinuxWorx is a Canopy Group company, as you can see from this webpage that you can only see on Wayback. Canopy Group no longer shows their companies on their revamped website. You'd never know from their website that they have any connection to SCO or to LinuxWorx. Here is a press release from 2000 announcing the funding by Canopy, which includes this: "About The Canopy Group
"As a venture-capital, management and resource Corporation, the Canopy Group is devoted to growing the high-tech industry through funding and influencing emerging technologies. Focused on technology, Canopy tries to add technologies that complement the portfolio as a whole - it never invests in two similar companies or technologies that could compete against each other.
"About the Linux Operating System
"Linux is a computer operating system that is distributed freely on the Internet. As an open source project, Linux allows developers to share information, code and suggestions to continuously maintain and improve the system. Linux Networx selected the operating system for its stability, reliability and rapid development." How cynical this appears. At the same time, presumably, that one Canopy Group company is negotiating with the DoD to get this account, another, SCO, was sending letters to Congress alleging that Linux is a national security threat. Do they know better, folks?
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: brenda banks on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 07:45 AM EST |
seems like the longer this goes on the more is found that are contradictions
from themselves.
we dont even have to spend time searching for the contradictions ,they show up
because of themselves and press releases.sad sad sad
---
br3n
irc.fdfnet.net #groklaw
"sco's proof of one million lines of code are just as believable as the
raelians proof of the cloned baby"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 07:56 AM EST |
I would not bet that it was not all being coordinated; then again I
wouls not bet that it was. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 08:05 AM EST |
It is interesting that one comment - regarding the DEAD END picture, was that
Canopy is the building on the left in the picture (accross from the SCO
building).
I'd say that Canopy is close to SCO...
I wonder where the building(s) for the other Canopy family members are?
Is it in the same area as the DEAD END sign?
PS - I wonder if having a senior US Senator (who has a realtive who is a lawyer
for SCO vs IBM) who is also from UTAH, if this FACT when DOD budgets are done,
would drive DOD business to certain companies in UTAH? Could it be that this is
just politics and that the DOD has not choice but to make it's folks who approve
their budgets happy?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Waterman on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 08:16 AM EST |
| Linux Worx posted a comment that Canopy Group does not invest in competing
technologies. They are at least half right, SCO's UNIX offering don't any more.
:-) Almost seems that Canopy is hedging their bets. Or is setting Linux
Networx up to be the patsy for SCOG's lawsuit tactics. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: greg_T_hill on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 08:47 AM EST |
Gotta wonder, is this cluster properly licensed by SCO's
standards? If it is, quite the coup for the SCOG. If not, it is a
statement of the SCOG's continuing irrelevance except as
entertainment. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: T. ProphetLactus on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 08:55 AM EST |
I wish someone would advise Canopy about the benefits of relocating
'offshore'....although 'offplanet' (in a different way than the scogs have
chosen) would be preferable. This has to be every bit as cynical as MS making
large campaign contributions to BOTH political parties in an election.
TPL[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 09:19 AM EST |
I think that Canopy has some questions to answer for the SEC and possibly some
other law enforcement agencies. While what is happening may not be technically
illegal (that's for law enforcement to decide) it almost surely is immoral
(claiming rights to someone else's property - LINUX - is theft, pure and
simple.
---
Wayne
telnet hatter.twgs.org
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PeteS on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 09:23 AM EST |
| As I have a little knowledge of LinuxWorx clusters from the industry, I find
this very amusing.
SCO Group's offerings do not have the ability to run
these clusters as the interconnect is
not supported by either UnixWare or OpenServer without using one of the
following:
1. A stack provided by the switch vendor that has been ported to
UnixWare or OpenServer, which has not been done AFAIK
2. A stack provided by
themselves, which does not appear to exist [it is not a trivial project to make
such a software stack]
3. An Open
Source stack, such as the the Linux InfiniBand
Project, along with the DAPL
foundry , The Open IB
Stack and maybe even The
Direct Access File System
Of course, if they chose to use Open Source
stacks, they would still have to port to their OS, and have to license them
properly, which given their current stance is unlikely.
---
Today's
subliminal thought is:
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 09:24 AM EST |
In a way, SCO themselves are guilty of this type of behavior. At the same time
they're arguing the GPL is invalid, illegal and unconstitutional and writing
letters to Congress about the evils of open source, they've stated their goal is
to get royalties for all future sales of Linux. Also, by making GPL software
impossible to distribute, they would be killing off their own Unix products,
which likely depend on lots of GPL software like GCC.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kberrien on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 09:27 AM EST |
To really make it stick that Canopy is actively supporting Linux commerce while
taking such an agressive stance against it (as part of SCO), you really need to
know how much Canopy is involved in both SCO, and Linux Networx.
The officers of Linux Networx have just as much right to sell in the
marketplace, and enrich their stockholders as does Darl need to
"protect" his stock holders "IP".
If it were known in detail (and shown) that Canopy was highly active on a
continuing basis with both parties it would be more interesting.
SCO's linux issues seem purely aimed at the pockets of outside customers, and
not Canopy members. Otherwise, SCO should show some IPSource income from its
sister companies buying SCO IP licenses for its Linux use and sales. SCO's own
web hosting company (running Linux) hasn't even bought their licenses, thus SCO
is presently benefiting from *unlicensed* linux installations, and so is the
rest of Canopy.
I would venture when IBM says, "yes, form letter or not WE DO want the
merge file, duh!" They will find not a letter to the company(s) in the same
business park.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 09:54 AM EST |
... two similar companies or technologies that could compete
against each other.''
Well, SCO and Linux Networx
aren't competing with each other:
- One sells large scale
Linux clusters. The other sues companies (or at least claims they will) that buy
and use Linux systems.
- One sells Linux-based systems. The other
doesn't.
- One seems to be making a profit selling Linux systems. The other
can't seem to figure out how to sell anything much less at a
profit.
I'm sure there is other evidence that these two companies don't
compete with each other. Shouldn't be too hard to find.
:-) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:01 AM EST |
| ...it's "Linux Networx".
Sorry for the nitpick. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:13 AM EST |
if linux networx pay SCO for a linux licence
and Linux networx make the DOD to pay the price what can be said?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:20 AM EST |
"Canopy adds value to our operations without getting in the way" -
Darl McBride, President & CEO, SCO[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:27 AM EST |
| From the Canopy website : "Canopy Group provides a superior level of
corporate support to its companies, allowing them to leverage Canopy's legal,
financial and human resource services. Canopy legal is responsible for all
in-house council, coordination of outside legal council, and assisting Canopy
portfolio companies. An on site, team-based, approach allows us to maintain a
high level of quality, speed, and integrity in developing and executing
transactions". [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:30 AM EST |
Also from the Canopy website "Canopy Group continues to operate by founder
Ray Noorda's vision of "co-opetition," where synergies across the portfolio are
optimized at the same time that each company develops independent market
success".
Presumably this is an example ...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Ray's dream - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 01:19 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:50 AM EST |
Note this is pure fancyful myth, if it bears any
relation to reality then that is the fault of reality, as
I know of no such case.
Ponder for a moment.
If you stood at the top of a VC chain and owned a company
which was underperforming and not moving product you may
put the boot into the managment team.
Then you see that the tatic this team take is opposed to
the to a lot of the rest of your business. You see this as
a risk but figure if the they win you hold a trump card.
If they loose you hold the other trump cards.
Hey it makes sense from where I sit on top of rocky
outcrop on Mars :-) now where is my scanner. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:56 AM EST |
This is a Win-Win situation for Canopy. One company makes a bunch of money
selling Linux, the other makes a bunch of money sueing the customer who bought
the Linux...
WFM... (NOT!)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ldiamand on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 11:12 AM EST |
As far as I can tell, Darcy Mott is both a member of the BoD of SCO and of Linux
Networx.
It would be interesting to get his perspective on which of these two companies
is doing The Right Thing (TM).
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ericl on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 11:26 AM EST |
It's a win-win for Canopy...SCO sues and Linux Networx pays up for a license and
collects free publicity--meanwhile the money simply circulates internally for
Canopy and doesn't cost them a cent. Wait for Blake Stowell to make a big
announcement that the DoD has agreed to pay them a hefty sum. Actually, I can't
wait for McBride to sue Canopy (for promised incentives or some such). He'll sue
anybody--remember, as VP at Ikon, he sued the CEO of his *own* company and
supposedly got $3 million for it. Note to Ralph Yarrow: watch your back--Darl
McBride is no friend of yours. McBride's history has always been to look out for
no. 1, and you ain't it.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 11:38 AM EST |
| Check out what canopy group runs: Linux. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 11:59 AM EST |
So if Linux Networx has a SCOG Linux License and DOD(maybe) has a SCOG Linux
License, what impact doe it have to the GPL?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 12:08 PM EST |
What does the Linux operating system have to do with cluster computer systems?
The success of Linux Networx' clustered computer systems is directly related to
the benefits offered by the Linux operating system. The Linux operating system
is the heart of communication between the processors that are linked together in
the cluster. Linux offers extreme high availability, or having the system run
reliably all of the time, scalability which allows users to easily add
computational power by adding more nodes instead of more CPUs.
Why does Linux Networx use the Linux operating system?
Because Linux is an open-source project (meaning the source code can be
downloaded free via the Internet), thousands of programmers are constantly
working to identify improvements and work out bugs. This "group
effort" facilitates a system that is highly reliable, stable and evolving
rapidly
Who are some of Linux Networx clients?
Linux Networx has delivered 100's of systems to some of the world's most
prestigious organizations, including Dow Chemical, the United States National
Security Agency, Hewlett-Packard, Sandia National Laboratories, Los Alamos
National Laboratory, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General
Electric, Raytheon, Georgia Tech, Harvard University, CRB Robotics, Compaq, the
University of Utah and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.
http://www.linuxnetworx.com/company/faq.php
Even more interesting is that Linux Networx uses Red Hat Linux:
http://www.linuxnetworx.com/products/distro.php[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 12:14 PM EST |
What if this is all part of a plan to test and validate the GPL. Maybe SCO is
supposed to crash and burn.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: fmouse on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 12:16 PM EST |
There's a very scary consistency in these positions that I would guess (perhaps
incorrectly!) that the Canopy Group folken aren't even explicitly aware of.
Linux, as a technology is good, and it's even good to pay lip service to its
open source roots. It's stable, secure, and increasingly capable. Open source,
as a social phenomenon, is basically a 1st cousin to communism, and a threat to
the capitalist system of proprietary software. Could it be that the Canopy
Group's schizophrenia reveals an unstated, perhaps an implicit, effort or desire
to separate the product from the producers?
My fear is that whatever happens to the SCO lawsuit, and even if SCO goes down
in flames, Darl McBride's rants and raves about the GPL and the open source
community may live on to haunt us, especially as issues such as spam and viruses
threaten the Internet with chaos. The answer to chaos, in the minds of many in
government and industry, is increased centralized control over software, what's
in it, how it can be used, who can use it, especially on the public Internet
which is increasingly vital to America's national security and financial health.
Open source is about community (same semantic root as "communism")
decentralized development, international cooperation (i.e. open borders) and
similar concepts. I need not elaborate on how frightening and/or abhorrent this
is to ascendnet elements in American government and business which wield
substantial political power.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: glchisum on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 12:26 PM EST |
I smell a rat, actually several of them. We have all observed the type of
techniques used by SCOG to try to win their case, including the sending of such
a stupid letter to the US Congress. That letter, portrayed Linux and the Linux
Community as communists who were seeking to aid and abet those who actively
oppose the goals and values of the free world.
Now, I have just checked the old Canopy home page and the plot is beginning to
become clear. Some observations: Nathan Hatch is (was?) the Executive VP of a
Canopy company named Helius. There is a Hatch on the SCOG legal team. (I can't
remember the first name). I would bet that both of these guys are sons, or
grandsons, or some sort of relative of the great redneck rightwing kazoo of
Utah, the pitiful Orrin Hatch, senior senator for the state of utah.
The names are a clue and the rhetoric from SCOG certainly fits. I hope PJ lets
this post stand, but if she doesn't that is ok. Love ya PJ. An essential element
of freedom is the exposing of the truth
gary chisum
---
What doesn't kill you, only makes you stronger!![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 12:38 PM EST |
| It seems that the Canopy Group may embrace 'Chaos Theory' a little to literally. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 01:02 PM EST |
At best canopy is a minor share holder of Linux Networx.
As has been previously noted this comment could have been made about many of the
clusters Linux Networx has sold, and
that SCO petition.
Besides never attribute to conspiracy what can be attributed
to incompetence.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: pooky on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 01:16 PM EST |
Well, the question now begs whether SCO sent this company a letter or not? Their
business is building cluster systems based on Linux, that would seem to me to
indicate that they have probably put a fair number of processors into the field
running Linux. Or, are they exempt for one of the following reasons:
1) They are not considered an "end-user" because they don't heavily
use Linux themselves, only sell it to others.
2) They are a Canopy company and are "exempt" from being prosecuted by
SCO.
Option 1 doesn't seem to hold much water, they might give Linux to others (which
makes them copyright infringers by the way SCO) but they manufacture a product
based on Linux, which separates them somewhat from the likes of RedHat and
Debian. A cluster system is much more than just a Linux distribution.
Option 2 is disturbing because it would seem to indicate that SCO is not
applying consistent standards in picking who to go after. I cannot believe SCO
is not aware of LinuxNetworx's business. Anyone who puts 2000+ node systems
based on Linux into customer hands would seem to me to fit the definition of a
large user. So again the question is, is LinuxNetworx a target?
If not, SCO is saying that everyone "except" Canopy companies are
violating their rights. And we are talking about "SCO's" rights, not
Canopy's. Canopy if it buys into this theory SCO has about Linux would seem
ethically obligated to force LinuxNetworx to buy licenses from SCO, which should
show up as SCO revenue, however we haven't seen that yet. SCO is not touting
them as a licensee, which I think they would jump at the chance to do so saying
others see the legitimacy of their claims.
No, it's more likely, IMHO, that LinuxNetworx is being ignored by SCO because
they are a Canopy company, which might give some other end-user a great line of
defense against a SCO lawsuit in forcing SCO to answer the question of why the
other Canopy company isn't being targetted in a court of law.
-pooky
---
Veni, vidi, velcro.
"I came, I saw, I stuck around."
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 01:57 PM EST |
That isn't the same Trolltech that distributes Qt (part of Gnome desktop) under
GPL for some applications, and under a commercial license? The same Qt used in
Linux-based Zaurus PDA, the one that SCO said they would charge $32 / device in
after-the-fact license fees?
Anybody know if any other Canopy companies are in a confusing (purposely
misleading????) market position wrt Linux?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 02:24 PM EST |
I only recognize three of the companies listed on the Canopy page, namely
LinuxWorx, SCO, and Trolltech.
I don't know what LinuxWorx is doing. They appear to be supporting Linux, but,
then again, their clustering solution could involve some proprietary software
which provides some lock-in potential. Who can say?
SCO is obviously attempting to damage Linux, and slow down its adoption.
And Trolltech is also doing something that is bad for Linux. Trolltech's
GPL+Proprietary licensing scheme would be okay if Trolltech was selling an
end-user application. But Trolltech is selling middleware, namely Qt, on which
many other companies' applications depend. Thus, while KDE uses the GPL'd
version of Qt, companies like Borland (Kylix), Adobe (Photoshop Album), Opera,
Hancom Office, The Kompany, ATI, SuSE (Yast), and others, are dependent on the
proprietary-licensed Qt. If this trend continues, then proprietary Qt could
become an indespensible component of Linux, which would give Trolltech the same
sort of proprietary-middleware leverage over the Linux platform that Windows
gave Microsoft over the open PC platform.
So, of the three Canopy companies I know:
One may or may not be helping Linux.
One is intentionally damaging Linux.
And one is positioning itself to have a proprietary-middleware lock on Linux.
It's a bad situation.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: arch_dude on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 02:27 PM EST |
Opinion:
If Linux Networx acquired an "IP in Linux" license from SCOG, then
their contract with DoD is likely to be invalid.
Either they somehow forward-licensed the "IP in Linux" to DoD, or they
did not.
If they Forward-licensed the IP, then they have violated the GPL by imposing an
additional restriction on the GPL'ed software, and they therefore cannot
distribute the software.
If they did not forward-license the IP after acquiring a license for themselves,
then they are still in trouble. Acquiring the license is an acknowledgement that
they consider Linux to be encumbered, so they would be selling DoD a product
that they know they cannot sell.
This will of course be true of any contract with any Linux distributor that
acquires a SCOG "IP in Linux" license.
One way out of this would be to deliver the hardware to DoD and ask DoD to
acquire Linux from someone else who has not signed a SCOG contract. But this is
not generally how DoD (or other cluster customers) prefer to operate.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 02:33 PM EST |
Does anyone know of any indications of a connection between the Canopy Group and
Microsoft?
Other than Microsoft's investment in SCO, that is.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Microsoft? - Authored by: fmouse on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 09:21 PM EST
- Microsoft? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 23 2004 @ 09:49 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 02:41 PM EST |
Found this 1996 article, There appears to be 4 Norda quotes at the bottom which
all make sense now. :)
KenWood
THE H-REPORT
What Is Noorda Really Up To?
by Christine Hudgins-Bonafield
Ray Noorda says he's spending his retirement getting to know his grandchildren.
He may be, but that's not all he's doing. As the pundits praise Novell's Bob
Frankenberg for "cleaning up" after Noorda's Unix and WordPerfect
acquisitions, the indomitable Noorda is at it again.
Noorda, and those who manage his millions, have been quietly putting together a
kind of networking industry in miniature. There's a counterpart to Microsoft in
a Linux OS startup called Caldera. For Netscape, there's an unannounced startup,
Terran, specializing in a framework for Internet browsers, servers and applic
ations. For Sun's Java, the re's a recent investment in a scripting language
startup, Nombas. Noorda startups exist for factory automation, backup, disaster
recovery, fault tolerance, peripherals, and imaging and animation. There's even
a systems integrator and a yet-to-be-announced lab, Keylabs, that will help
determine how all of this paraphernalia works.
Altogether, we've found Noorda's Orem, Utah-based NFT Ventures/Management to
have invested in about 20 network and computing companies-not to mention some 11
car dealerships and a startup promoting a granola-type energy bar (obviously
designed for weary software developers). Many companies we've identified have
yet to be announced, and we're told we've missed about three that will surface
later this year. We bet one of them will specialize in object broker
technology.
So, what is Noorda up to? And why is he pitching Internet browse rs, scripting
languages and operating systems? People have diverging, and sometime venomous,
opinion s. Frank Dzubeck, president of C ommunications Network Architects,
believes Noorda is returning to his venture capital roots-blending companies the
way he did early in his career. That Noorda, the one-time General Electric
engineer with a reputation for saving startups, was tapped to help a floundering
17-person Novell.
Dzubeck believes Noorda the entrepreneur simply got bored at Novell. "He's
never been a strategist, and as an entrepreneur you don't have to be a
strategist," says Dzubeck. "When you get huge, you have to deal with
strategies. Novell got too big for him. Everyone called him senile and all that
garbage. It was never the case. He just lost interest. His driving force was
entrepreneurial and he's gone back to his roots, what he loves best and what
stimulates him most."
Others are less generous. One longtime associate says Noorda has never had a
strategy other than throwing money at people he likes. Gartner Group vice
president Scott Winkler says Noord a's strategy is the same shoot-from-t he-hip,
ignore-the-rest-of-the-world thinking he had at Novell. "I don't think he's
learned his lesson."
Decisys president Dave Passmore suggests that none of the well-known NFT
ventures, considered individually, can tilt the Microsoft playing field more
than a degree or two. But he suggests that if Noorda can "take this
collection of technologies, create an Internet-related platform and then use his
proven strengths in creating distribution channels, he might be able to create a
winner." But the fact that NFT's highly promoted "Canopy" market
support umbrella lies dormant isn't a good sign (for details, see Network
Computing's Web site at http://techweb.cmp.com).
Noorda and NFT managers Rob Hicks and Mark Rogers aren't saying much about its
strategy other than repeating Noorda's message that NFT is all about
"NetWare in Your Face. " That phrase typically raises more questions
than answers. Noorda told us i n an interview that it's all about pushing
NetWare "from the background" right up to the graphical user
interface. "We're picking up on those things Novell hasn't had the answers
or the resources to enter into."
So, what is Noorda really up to? Our best hunch is that at age 71, Noorda is
still reaching for the golden ring. He's even thinking about once again taking
on outside investors in NFT. Evidence of Noorda's quest can be seen in NFT's
very nature. The VC firm obviously carries some companies beyond the four-year
profitability-or-drop deadline typical in the venture capital community. It also
seems to have intricately interwoven goals for its startups-something not
evident in other VCs' portfolios.
For example, Noorda says Willows Software is central at this time for NFT.
Willows is providing software that will be used with a variety of NFT company
products-from Terran's Internet framework to the Caldera OS-to achieve
multiplatform portability. In other word s, Noorda plans to use Willows
technology to ma ke many applications run on Unix, Windows and the Mac.
"Our objective," he says, "is to grow the industry through
cross-platform technology." He adds that NFT is continuing to invest in
Willows.
Noorda and Hicks say Caldera's Linux, along with NetWare, will become a
strategic platform for several NFT products. Nombas' high-level scripting
language is also expected to traverse the NFT investment product set. Finally,
the Terran Internet framework is obviously intended to work with other NFT
products to provide an integrated fabric for business-based Internets and
LAN-based Intranets in advance of Netscape.
Overseeing such a plan-among so many diverse and distributed players-probably
doesn't leave a lot of room for telling stories to the grandkids. Then, again,
it seems like the parables we picked up from NFT companies may work for
grandchildren as well:
·What is good for NetWare is good for the Noord a family (Noorda may still be
the largest Novell share holder).
·A bundle of sticks, appropriately aligned, is much stronger than any single
stick.
·When you are little, it's not a good idea to take on giants even if you possess
similar weapons. The little folk must work together. They may not overcome the
giants, but together they can at least make a claim of their own.
·You're more likely to build the biggest tower if you have a framework in mind
before you start putting blocks together.
February 27, 1996
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- This one - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 06:14 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Stonecrusher on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 02:49 PM EST |
Actually, the relationships between many of the 39 (at last count of the ones I
have referrences to so far) are pretty incestuous. I've found a great many who
have worked with each other at various companies, Novell among them, a good
percentage who have gotten at least their BA's from Brigham Young University,
and more than you would think that use Linux for their operations. As for the
control of SCO by Canopy, I would hazzard a guess this particular company may be
"someones" pet. Back in `96, Caldera came into a settlement from MS to
the tune of $250 million over an outdated, little-used version of DOS they
picked up for bargain basement prices. This is the same Caldera we now refer to
as "newSCO", who just so happens to be doing it once again. Also
remember, there are a good many of the players in this little soap opera we're
watching who might know more than anyone thinks, since they were all in
positions at Novell prior to moving on to either the Canopy Group or the board
of SCO, specifically but not solely Ray Noorda, Ralph Yarro, and our very own
Darl McBride (who was Vice President and GM of Novells Embedded Systems Division
1988-96 if my referrences are accurate), just to start the list. It is an
extrememly tangled little clan, this Canopy Group, and I am finding the digging
into their investments rather mind-numbing after just a few hours of it. Just in
Altiris alone there are at least 4 members of the "management team"
who list Novell as a previous employer. Most of the truly "tech"
companies on the list (one seems to be nothing more than an online shopping
portal of all things, though they have their own "shopping
assisitant") meld and merge and co-mingle like love struck amoeba.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dodger on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 02:49 PM EST |
Don't you think that someone should suggest that Canopy should put a halt to
it's 'hedged' position? Either drop SCO or drop Linux Networx. Or better yet,
let SCO choose Linux Networx as it's company to sue, so the rest of us can get
on with our lives.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: xtifr on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 04:22 PM EST |
Before reading too much into all of this, it might be worth investigating
just how much control Canopy actually has over LinuxWorx. The web page listed
by the wayback machine includes companies in which Canopy invests, but does not
control (e.g. Trolltech) as well as companies in which Canopy has a controlling
interest (e.g. SCOG).
This is also hardly the first irony uncovered
about Canopy's investments. We have SCOG denouncing the GPL as an
unconstitutional commie plot, while Canopy is investing in Trolltech, a company
whose business model
relies completely on the protection from proprietary exploitation provided by
the GPL. (The Trolltech page referenced above talks about "Free Software" vs.
"Commercial Developers" even though those categories overlap, and they really
mean vs. "Proprietary Developers", but that's irrelevant
here.)
(Note for those who are unfamiliar with Trolltech: the company
makes the Qt graphical libraries that form the basis for the independent, GPL'd
KDE desktop used by many Linux distributions.)
Given that LinuxWorx is
pretty clearly a Linux company, they might even have people reading Groklaw, so
maybe someone from the company can give us a little insight into this. If not,
a quick email might solicit answers. I suspect that LinuxWorx might be rather
upset to be called "a Canopy Group Company" -- Trolltech was. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: garbage on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 05:38 PM EST |
Hey PJ, has any one suggested to you to do an interview with Yarrow ?
Perfect opportunity to put this in his face.
Some websites do email interviews, have you considered that?
I suggest you have better karma than some nobody like me.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: devhen on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 06:20 PM EST |
Throughout this post "Linux Networx" is mistyped as LinuxWorx."
Just thought I should piont that out.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: msquared on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 06:30 PM EST |
Regardless of both alleged and factual ties that Canopy has
between SCO or
LinuxNetworx, here are 2 indisputable
facts:
1) From mid-1996 until
last week, Canopy's website was entirely a logo-fest of banners, quotes, and
boastfull PR about the
Canopy companies and their execs (including a good Darl
quote)
2) Canopy's new site is totally devoid of ALL references
to
any Canopy property.
Why the dramatic change? The new Canopy site looks
sterile
and hastily stripped of content. I would love to ask a
Canopy PR person
this question.
Actually this was my original point when I emailed PJ
30
minutes before the Groklaw headline appeared.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 21 2004 @ 10:04 PM EST |
Getting to know The Canopy Group By KenWood
The
Canopy Group (TCG) is obviously doing damage control.
Personally, When I found
out that SCO was owned by TCG, I looked at all Canopy partners to make sure i
was not doing business with any of them.
Call it a boycott if you will. The
Canopy Group is not just covering up its conflict of interests (SCO/Linux
Networx),
They are trying to protect ALL of its companies from this HUGE 'SCO
vs. LINUX' fallout.
Current Canopy Companies:
SCO The Ministry of Truth, 0wNz Unix.
Hates Linux, hippies and neighborly people who help one another.
Linux Networx Sold a huge Linux system to
the DoD. Has various Gov. customers(see "SCO")
Altiris Asset management products for your MS,
Unix, LINUX and Mac systems.
AvenueMe A shopping portal which runs on MS
Server 2003
AxiomPress Wholly Owned
Subsidy of GEOLUX (see GEOLUX below)
Center7 Technology to manage your
technology.
Strategic Partners include: The Canopy Group, Sun Microsystems,
Oracle, Foundry Networks, MTI, UUNET, Level 3 Communications, Broadwing
Communications, Quest Communications and SCO.
Cerberian Controls how your Employees access
the Internet. Has partnership with ZoneLabs.
ClearstoneHealth Part of
GEOLUX
Cogito Website is under
construction, Makes a Knowledge management system which claims to break down the
walls of proprietary document formats and vendor lock-in. hmm...
Communitect (The connection was
refused)
Data Crystal 404 not
found
Devicelogics
Front
Page says this: DeviceLogics, Inc. today announced that it has acquired DR-DOS
from the Canopy Group, a Utah technology venture group, and has plans to release
in Spring 2004 an 8.0 version of DOS :-). (i did not add the smiley it was part
if their website)
Further reading of their Press release says this:
LINDON, Utah—November 18, 2002—DeviceLogics, Inc. today announced that it has
acquired DR-DOS from the Canopy Group, a Utah technology venture group, and has
plans to release in Spring of 2003 an 8.0 version of DOS.
All your DOS
are belong to us. Also: One of there partners is linuxland.de who in turn partners with
Redhat, Suse, Mandrake, VMware, CodeWeavers....
DigitalHarbor NMAP scan
anyone????
Starting nmap 3.30 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2004-02-21
11:32 EST
Interesting ports on 65.90.54.99:
(www.digitalharbor.com)
(The 1641 ports scanned but not
shown below are in state: filtered)
Port State
Service
21/tcp open
ftp
80/tcp open http
443/tcp
closed https
Device type: general purpose
Running: Linux
2.4.X|2.5.X
OS details: Linux Kernel 2.4.0 -
2.5.20
Uptime 140.889 days (since Fri Oct 3 15:15:05 2003)
Nmap
run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 118.515 seconds
DirectPointe Half their Partners are Canopy Companies,
List also incluse MS, HP, INTEL, AT&T, XEROX.
Fatpipe Watch where you stick that thing!
(Sorry, I'm lacking information)
GEOLUX Owns Four "Canopy"
companies.
NetCraft says: The site www.geolux.com is running Apache/1.3.22
(Unix) (Red-Hat/Linux) mod_ssl/2.8.5 OpenSSL/0.9.6b DAV/1.0.2 PHP/4.1.2
mod_perl/1.26 on Linux.
GMMI/Ridgeline?? www.gmmi.net is a FreeBSD 4.4
Machine with over 20 open ports.
Helius Quoted From Helius Website:
"NT has
increased in popularity among schools and businesses alike," said Myron
Mosbarger, president of Helius. "Linux has a loyal following among network
administrators and is particularly strong in Europe. Now with version 2.0
supporting NT, NetWare and Linux, more networked organizations than ever before
will have high-speed Internet access regardless of their location. While many
speak of satellite-based Internet for LANs as something four to five years in
the future, Helius offers it today."
iArchives Yet another Canopy Information
storage and retrieval company. It's run by some former Novell folks. Of course,
Novell is a former Canopy company. (but we like Novell)
ITZ Another of those GEOLUX
type things.
Januslogix ...Is
that a silent J????
1- DRAPER, UTAH - Novell co-founder Craig Burton has a
long memory when it comes to network issues.
2- Burton, who is credited with
creating file server technology and metadirectories, has founded a new company
called JanusLogix.
3- Craig Burton is stepping down as CEO of JanusLogix.
Craig's been looking for additional funding for JanusLogix for a while and its
been hard to come by.
4- Thanks Craig :)
LearningOptics is just more
GEOLUX
Luxul Not very
exciting
MaxStream "The Worldwide
Leader in Wireless Device Networking" ...That no one here has ever heard
of.
Mi-Co NMAP!!!
Starting nmap 3.30 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2004-02-21 14:14
ESTInteresting ports on cheetah.mi-corporation.com (209.116.71.23):
(The 1629
ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed)
Port State
Service
22/tcp open ssh
25/tcp open smtp
80/tcp
open http
110/tcp open pop-3
111/tcp open
sunrpc
143/tcp open imap2
389/tcp open ldap
443/tcp
open https
465/tcp open smtps
636/tcp open
ldapssl
682/tcp open unknown
993/tcp open
imaps
995/tcp open pop3s
2000/tcp open
callbook
3306/tcp open mysql
Device type: general
purpose
Running: Linux 2.4.X|2.5.X
OS details: Linux Kernel 2.4.0 -
2.5.20
MTI does Network Storage
Systems- unbeatable workgroup consolidation for Windows, Linux, and
NetWare.
MyFamily.com Site is
hosted on MS Windows2000 w/ IIS 5.0? Obviously, this site is not very
important.
North Face
Learning Running Solaris 8, But not currently running.
PerimeterLabs spiechen dutchie? not
me.
planetearthtools has a
Huge selection of tools ...or ...three screwdrivers.
PowerInovati
ons are partnered with several Canopy companies including Linux Networx.
ALso partnerd with Disney.
http://www.smartchiptechnologies.com
No comment. I work in this industry. :)
SurfChina Great new ways to exploit the
Chinese labor pool.
TrollTech Free
software for open source developers!
http://www.viawest.net Nothing unusual
here.
http://www.vultus.com Looks
like its owned by SCO.
wrenchhead
Nothing to see here.
So there you have it. The Canopy Group is trying to
covers the asses of the above listed companies. They know that a war against SCO
is a war against Canopy, which is a war against all Canopy companies. This is
why they have hidden all their companies from showing up on their website.
I
need not mention how stupid they look trying to be SCO and Linux Networx at the
same time, while running half its operations on linux servers.
I know what
its like to be a small(250M/yr) company thats part of a big(18B/yr) company. All
legal matters get approved by the parent company as to avoid embarrassing
situations like this one. We don't want to tread on our sister company's
customers.
KenWood
Please share and distribute this information as
you wish.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 01:09 AM EST |
Just a guess but this looks like to me a way for SCO to sue a major Linux
user/provider and win. The company would take the fall and the loss in hopes
that others would see this and settle out of court starting a trend. That way
parent company Canopy would benefit even through the loss of a subsiderary.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: grayhawk on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 01:59 AM EST |
Maybe someone should e-mail Darl and let him know his own outfit is bilking him
out a customer and the cash that goes with it and their doing it with Linux. I
wonder whose distro they are using????
---
All ships are safe in a harbour but that is not where they were meant to be.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: mobrien_12 on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 02:53 AM EST |
A possible (and very sneaky) scenario would be for the one Canopy group company
to provide the Linux based supercomputer to the US govt., then the other canopy
group would sue the US govt. (remember, SCO says the GPL makes end users
liable). Everybody (in the canopy group) wins. Step 3, profit.
Although this is plausible, and interesting to think about, it's more likely
that the other Canopy companies think of SCO as the crazy cousin who shows up at
weddings. They just ignore them and hope they go away (thus the one hand not
knowing what the other does).
Anybody know if the Canopy group is close knit?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: h.gmerek on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 03:29 AM EST |
does someone know if "Trolltech" is still part of "Canopy"
???[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsmith on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 06:04 AM EST |
Canopy has filed with the SEC that they own about 39% of the common stock of
the SCOG.
That may not be an absolute majority. But it would most
probably be the largest shareholder. If you own that much of a company you would
have an obligation (to your shareholders) to know what this company is
doing.
And who knows, maybe some of the rest of Canopy's companies are
paying "scogelt". (see this
comment on /.) It would be a realtively easy source of
licences. ---
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately
explained by incompetence. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 07:52 AM EST |
AINAL
I know a bit about tech investment though.
Canopy are typical of tech investment firms that run a fund on behalf of other
firms eg institutional investors, pension schemes that kind of thing;
occasioanlly wealthy individuals. There may be several funds, and various
amounts of regulation apply depending on the fund dynamics.
They will have a portfolio of firms under these funds with varying assets. They
will very rarely have two firms with identical activities. Diversification
spreads the risk and is strategically important from a mergers and acquisitions
point of view. Also, if one firm fails it can back the wreckage into another
(funded) portfolio firm without needing to have a firesale.
So what canopy are doing here is entirely pragmatic. They are hedging just like
they should. If SCO go the way of the pear and Linux basically gets validation
then they have a nice little linux firm to go ahead with.
The losers if SCO goes down will be those who invested in the fund that is
earmarked for SCO, and who did/do so at a time after SCO's perceived value in
the market began/begins to wane. These losers are unlikely to be savvy
investors. Interpret that last statement as you will.
Now if Microsoft as some have alleged did push money into canopy with a view to
shooting arrows at Linux (And I cant believe they could be so indiscreet as to
do so directly) then Canopy have simply reacted to the opportunities and risks
that such action presents. They simply asked the question:
"What if IBM-wearing-Linux-hat wins?"
Canopy are simply middle men and as such care not where the money comes from or
goes to so long as a return is seen and they get a cut of that return. Moreover,
Canopy's regular investors dont care either, so long as the return across the
portfolio is a few ticks better than base or bonds or whatever other investments
are available to them.
Looking at IBM's posture, it seems there will be a winner and a loser. It will
be instructive post-fan-impact to see how Canopy's investors react when they
realise Canopy have been playing both sides of the fence. Partiularly if one
side is funded by money Microsoft has basically internally written off as a
"marketing expense" in its FUD war against Linux.
And they would have a right to get angry. Investment by entity A in entity B
with a view to discrediting entity C without entity B needing to make dollar #1
is in my view a gross distortion of the level playing-field that investors
require to make sensible choices. Indeed, sanctioning such activity is to me
nothing more than insider trading.
Naughty. Very naughty.
What I cant figure is why Microsoft are so wedded to their awful bloody OS. The
best thing for everyone would be for them to get with the program and give the
world MS Linux. Who knows, maybe thats what this has all been about.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: davehigdon on Sunday, February 22 2004 @ 02:12 PM EST |
Possibly this has been commented on in other posts but I think it bears
mentioning.
Another concern of Canopy is TrollTech, the makers of QT which is the undercore
of KDE, one of, if not the leading desktop window manager of Linux. That counts
as another Canopy company directly involved in Linux development.
Now, that said, TrollTech has released a version of QT under GNU license for
Linux, so they directly receive income from it (the version used in KDE). But in
return, the developer community provides product improvements to QT.
Additionally said QT experienced developer community will most likely use the
"Pro" paid version for full-scale commercial development on other
platforms, building upon experience.
It does seem to be that the escapades of an unruly child, SCO, stand to impact
the pocketbooks of other Canopy companies. No wonder they pulled the portfolio
page. I wonder how long Canopy will stand by while their "prodigal
son" brings woe upon the family.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 23 2004 @ 01:25 AM EST |
EVEN MORE INTERESTING!:
Bernard
Daines
Chairman and CEO of Linux Networx
In the late
sixties and throughout the seventies, Mr. Daines was employed at
Hewlett-Packard and IBM.
Fabio Gallo
Vice
President, Europe Middle East and Africa Operations
He also held
various executive positions at Silicon Graphics Inc. in the company’s European
organization. Among other assignments he ran SGI’s European Server and
Supercomputing business and managed SGI’s Marketing and Business Development
organizations. Prior to SGI Mr. Gallo spent 12 years at IBM in Sales,
Marketing and Sales Management positions, including European Marketing Manager
for the SP product line.
Several of the VPs were with
Novell...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
