|
SCOForum 2004 - Day 2 |
|
Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 07:25 AM EDT
|
Lots of reports from SCOForum 2004. Darl is baaaack, talking freely and in his inimitable fashion to one and all in the press. And what is the main theme? Put the lawsuits in the background, please. It's not about litigation. Why are you all focused on that? In SCO's new world it's all about UNIX now. SCO eats, sleeps and drinks UNIX. And as a secondary theme, it's please, please, please don't listen to Groklaw.
What I gather from reading between the lines of reports in the media and general feedback is that they seem to have gotten a clue they are unlikely to win in the courts, and so they are trying to get the world to forget the litigation and see them as a Unix company with a future instead. They don't "need" to sue any more customers at this time, they are saying. I guess that means, if you buy their new products, they won't sue you like they sued IBM, AutoZone and DaimlerChrysler. Not at this time. So a major shift is underway.
On the second day, Groklaw came up again and again. Rob Enderle, I'm told, referred to Groklaw in an "IBM's running dog" kind of way and said he hoped any from Groklaw would be offended. I've heard they may be putting the speech up online, after which we can decide if we are offended or not, based on the actual words used. It's always best to get confirmation of rumors and eyewitness reports before getting offended, don't you think? His speech, originally announced as having the theme of how SCO can win in the courts was reportedly changed to another theme: "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It". [Update: you can listen for yourself, an mp3 of the talk.]
I'm sure he meant that in the nicest possible way, speaking of venomous bashing. Oh, and he suggested to those who wish to slam the company that they should get a clue and invest in the company instead. "It's the best investment you'll ever make." No kidding. That's what it's been reported he said. He has a position: "FUD is the mantra of the people who don't want to hear". He said Linux "spies" were in the room. If Linux was legitimate, they wouldn't need spies. Heh heh. But that wasn't the only reference to Groklaw on Day 2.
Darl, a little bird informs me, reportedly asked any in the crowd who post on Groklaw to stand up and be recognized. I don't know if the plan was to attack anyone standing up verbally or just have them dragged out, tried before a military tribunal and then shot at dawn. That might take too long. Maybe they'd just stone them to death on the spot. Anyway, if there were any Groklaw posters there, they were smart enough not to let themselves be goaded by him into responding. And then Chris Sontag gave his
speech all about how Groklaw is all wet and SCO does too have a chance to win the various lawsuits. "If you read Groklaw, you'd think our case was finished. Nothing could be farther from the truth." He then presented the SCO revisionist history of the various court cases. So, all in all, I'd say Groklaw is now SCO's Magnificent Obsession. Mutual, I'm sure. Chris Sontag announced that they are working to bundle a SCOsource license with UnixWare and OpenServer. That's one way to bump the numbers, huh? Since hardly anyone has bought so far, despite SCO telling us over and over that they only decided to offer the license because customers requested it, maybe bundling will get it out there. And perhaps some creative accounting will ensue. And why are customers not clamoring for licenses so far?
A most fascinating interview with McBride by Robert McMillan explains:
"IDG News Service: Why haven't more customers signed up for your SCOsource licensing program?
"Darl McBride: There have been a lot of third parties that have jumped into the fray and put indemnification programs in place -- big vendors coming out trying to say 'Don't worry about it, it's not a problem.'"
The McMillan interview includes some strong hints of a split into a litigation company, or as they put it a SCOsource company, and a Unix company someday: "IDGNS: Would it make sense to split the company in two, with one part focusing on the core Unix business and the other focusing on SCOsource?
"McBride: Essentially we have done that internally. We pretty much have those divisions in place right now. The argument that you're bringing up, I have been asked about a fair number of times from the financial community: Does it make sense to have an actual organizational split? We haven't got to that point in our thinking yet, but we continue to look at all of our options as we continue down the road.
"I wouldn't rule it out in the future. I certainly understand the positive arguments for it. We haven't gotten to the point yet, where we think that is the play we should be taking on, but it could evolve to that point, and I could see a number of reasons why that would be a good play." I wonder which company will get all the assets? They applied for the Unix System Laboratories trademark, he tells McMillan, because they want to go back to the same kind of USL licensing program of yore. "We think that there's a very bright future in the company to return to the model that we had in the past with Unix Systems Laboratories," McBride says. And you Unix greybeards can refresh my memory: Did USL ever make a profit on Unix licensing? A few more details have emerged about SCOMarketplace, whereby they will invite developers to apply online and bid on work: "On the software developer side of things, I believe there's going to be a move to a develop-for-fee model, rather than develop-for-free, which is currently in vogue. One announcement that we are making at the show is called the SCO Marketplace, and that's a marketplace exchange whereby we are going to allow developers to come and bid on work-for-hire projects that we have, to fill in the gaps where we're going with our development plan.
"We think in the future, software developers are going to be more motivated by getting paid for their work rather than contributing and not getting paid." I interpret that to mean, you get to sell your soul twice over and you'll have very little in return. Making deals with the devil don't usually pay off, I don't think. As you can see, the Marketplace is entirely SCO's, because it's a work-for-hire arrangement, whereby they get your IP and everything else that could possibly be marketed, and maybe your firstborn too, and you get the fee and the honor of helping SCO out, after which you will be tainted by having seen Unix code, I expect, which would limit your ability to donate to FOSS, not to mention your employability. Did they spend so much money on lawsuits, they don't have enough engineers now? The scheme seems to be an attempt to get the kind of numbers that you can only get in FOSS, and of course, being SCO, probably to try to undermine the free/open model. They believe that offering money will cause a lot of hungry-for-work coders to line up and that will be the end of Linux? I hear he asked the audience which would you rather do, work for money or work for free? And some folks who seemed to one observer to have been planted in the audience yelled out with forced gusto, We want money, and We want to be paid, and other silly things. Where do they find people willing to do that? McBride told McMillan the budget for SCOMarketplace will be in the millions "for starters", but when pressed he said the budget has yet to be determined. So I wouldn't run out and buy a new car yet, based on this promise of money falling on you from heaven. The problem with Darl's vision is that even if some do sign up, needing money desperately or whatever, they can never duplicate the numbers working on FOSS. (There is also the issue that working for money instead of for the joy of it impacts the quality of the work. Yes. It does.) And numbers of developers are everything in software, as SCO's own Mr. Gupta acknowledged: "Sandy Gupta, vice president of engineering at SCO, maintained that the initiative will help build a stronger relationship with external developers.
"'It is really important to have a strong developer programme around our products,' he said.
"Internal engineering teams at SCO will work on the core operating system technologies, while external developers can add to software available on SCO's platforms, the company claimed.
SCO chairman and chief executive Darl McBride indicated that the initiative could lead to the development of an intellectual property marketplace, with SCO distributing applications developed by independent software vendors.
"'There are a lot of developers out there trying to work out how to get distribution and how to make money. Where SCO Marketplace goes is potentially quite exciting,' he said." I am sure you are all duly excited. Especially all you ex-SCO engineers. Now you can bid online to do what you used to do inhouse with medical benefits and all. That would seem to be SCO's best hope of attracting outside contractors, all the layoffs who now may be having a hard time finding companies eager to hire SCO ex-employees. I genuinely feel for those guys. With all the talk at SCOForum about new products, I found this of interest: "Sandy Gupta, vice president of engineering at SCO, said: 'We knew we had to move both product lines forward.
"'Our engineering team can now work on one consolidated source. We can do more features, our independent software vendors can do more applications and our independent hardware vendors can do more drivers.'....
Jeff Hunsaker, senior vice president and general manager of the SCO Unix division, said: 'We are starting to provide clarity to our customers about the Unix division: that it is being modernised and it has a future.'
"He added that, until SCO's legal battles are over, the emphasis will be on upgrading existing customers." I understand that to mean that the lawsuits are really interfering with their ability to move the Unix business forward at this time. And by the way, one of the products they announced started as a Linux product and then was ported to Unix [Update: The proof url, http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=03000000GT2I, no longer resolves and so far I've been unable to find it elsewhere]: In addition to the release of the preview edition of OpenServer, SCO also made available OfficeServer 4.1, which targets the same customers as Microsoft's Windows Server products.
Same Software, Different Kernel
SCO Group says it derives about two thirds of its revenues from OpenServer. The application is based on SCO Unix, which first shipped in 1989. The current version, OpenServer 5, was launched in 1995. SCO estimates there are about 500,000 installs of its flagship product. . . .
SCO has its sights set on Linux in the courtroom, as well as in the marketplace, and it is using a former Linux application to battle Microsoft on small-business terrain. Confusing? Of course it is. But it is not hard to decipher.
OfficeServer was born as a Linux program in the 1990s, well before SCO became embroiled in lawsuits with IBM and Novell . SCO began developing OfficeServer in 1994 and eventually ported it over to Unix.
I thought I'd just get that on the record in case some MIT deep diver finds similar code someday. One report mentioned it as a great release for SCO, without mentioning its roots:SCO has even come up with the first new software program in years that its partners actually can sell to their existing legacy base: SCOoffice Server 4.1. This new program is a powerful but simple-to-use mail and collaboration server for OpenServer.
Now, you may be asking, what's the big deal about a mail server? The big deal is that the customers of SCO VARs (value-added resellers) are a very conservative lot. They tend to be small businesses that use an operating system for one or two particular, vertical jobs.
With SCOoffice 4.1, the resellers finally have something new they can offer their customers that they really want. Many resellers told me they already have customers waiting for SCOoffice.
On the company shift away from the litigation, they
indicate it has been difficult to get the new word out, because of all of us Groklaw types talking about their litigation all the time: With that kind of attention, it has become difficult for SCO to make the transition toward highlighting its product, said Jeff Hunsaker, senior vice president of worldwide marketing. He told LinuxInsider, "It's been hard to move the company in the direction of innovation. But months ago, we realized that our entire focus couldn't be what was happening in the courtroom."...
SCO's move toward focusing less on the litigation began with its employees, partners and customers several months ago, McBride said.
When the case first began, McBride and other executives spent a great deal of time explaining why the company was undertaking legal action and what it hoped to gain. Shifting focus now is a challenge, he noted. Let me ask you this: If they thought they were going to win, would they be shifting the focus away from the litigation? Here's the funniest part of this last report: The company is eager to make more worldwide efforts as well. "Asia is everybody's diamond mine," Hunsaker said. "It's a huge market. We have partners in China, so we're in a good position."
He did acknowledge that recent moves by China and Japan toward Linux presented an obstacle for SCO's expansion in Asia. "It's tough to fight for market share when you have the government pushing Linux," he said. Indeed. Poor things. The whole world, especially China, is going Linux. Those bullies. Everybody picks on SCO. In SCOland, the future is bright: While he positioned the company's legal efforts as its "defense" of Unix, it's the Unix products team -- repeatedly pointed out as 95 per cent of the company's workforce -- that are to be its "offense" in a battle to keep Unix alive, which is the overall theme for the quest McBride styled for SCO....
He outright dismissed reports that SCO was "losing" the case, saying that while the wheels of justice turn slowly, the company is confident it will prevail when the matter goes before the court in November of 2005.
And while McBride admits that the company has lost market share, lost partners and customers over its perceived focus on litigation over innovation, he insists that [t]he company will be able to make back that ground and then some if it wins its legal battles, and told its remaining loyal partners that this battle is for them.
And how was all the SCO propaganda received? I'll let you be the judge. Here is a headline for you:
"Linux is mine, all mine, cackles distracted SCO head --
Darl McBride has no doubt he is right. It's just everybody else that is the problem". Update 2010: You can listen to Chris Sontag's talk now also, as an mp3, including the film about McBride as Rocky Balboa first and then turning into Wesley in The Princess Bride. The sound quality is poor, as you might expect, but you can get the flavor, and then McBride speaks. Here's a slide from Sontag's talk:
In 2010, the jury in SCO v. Novell ruled that this slide is not true. SCO never received the copyrights from Novell. Here are a couple of more slides:
And the famous, or infamous, tree used in the SCO v. Novell litigation:
And here are some slides from Darl McBride's talk:
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:40 AM EDT |
Hmmm
Re: "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It"
Sendmail
Apache
MySQL
Samba
Skunkware
etc
Are those shipped by SCO?
Quatermass
IANAL IMHO etc[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" - Authored by: oldgreybeard on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:50 AM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Pay for It" - Authored by: blang on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:41 AM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:14 PM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" - Authored by: darkonc on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:34 PM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Sue It" - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:32 PM EDT
- How about PERL, TCL etc... - Authored by: hardware-guy on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:07 PM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:17 PM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" - Authored by: frk3 on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:26 PM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 09:44 PM EDT
- "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 12 2004 @ 11:30 PM EDT
|
Authored by: clark_kent on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:45 AM EDT |
"reportedly asked any in the crowd who post on Groklaw to stand up and be
recognized"
Who me? Never. I would never post on Groklaw. I don't even know what Groklaw is.
What is Groklaw? Law of the Groks?
What are you afraid of Darl? You must be seeing things.
Lock up this man. He is insane. There is no voice on the internet against his
work. There is only money and greed and Microsoft. Maybe Bill Gates is bothering
him. He should be afraid of Bill Gates and Windows, not this "Linux"
stuff.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: oldgreybeard on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:45 AM EDT |
Thanks
---
LAMPs light the way.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Corrections here please - Authored by: Anonomous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:13 AM EDT
- Corrections here please - Authored by: Anon Ymonus on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:39 AM EDT
- TECO? - Authored by: Weeble on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:03 PM EDT
- TECO? - Authored by: jesse on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:36 PM EDT
- TECO! - Authored by: Ed L. on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:28 PM EDT
- TECO? - Authored by: Peter H. Salus on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:52 PM EDT
- TECO? - Authored by: _Arthur on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:16 PM EDT
- TECO? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 06 2004 @ 02:58 AM EDT
- TECO? - Authored by: raoulduke_esq on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:26 PM EDT
- Corrections here please - Authored by: Anon Ymonus on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:26 AM EDT
- Enderle versus clues - Authored by: haakon on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:28 PM EDT
- Deals With the Devil - Authored by: Rodrin on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:51 PM EDT
|
Authored by: oldgreybeard on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:46 AM EDT |
Thank you.
---
LAMPs light the way.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- [OT] Groklaw-holics Anonymous.... - Authored by: frk3 on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:15 AM EDT
- OT: Can speech be patented? - Authored by: swiftest on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:20 AM EDT
- McBride interview in VARBusiness magazine - Authored by: gumnos on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:45 AM EDT
- Bad news from Munich (Germany) - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:49 AM EDT
- OT and links here - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:51 AM EDT
- Red Hat CEO Urges More Code Sharing - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:57 AM EDT
- OT: Company owning your ideas... is this for real? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:25 PM EDT
- OT and links here - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:27 PM EDT
- Hey PJ, you must be so proud... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:36 PM EDT
- [OT] RedHat and IBM together - Authored by: inode_buddha on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:03 PM EDT
- OT and links here - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:06 PM EDT
- Caldera??? - Authored by: photocrimes on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:22 PM EDT
- Article on The Register - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:50 PM EDT
- OT: Shock! Horror! Didio doesn't act like Didiot - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:05 PM EDT
- OT and links here - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:03 PM EDT
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:04 PM EDT
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:51 PM EDT
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 07:05 PM EDT
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:20 PM EDT
- IBM-206 SCOG's memo opposing the PSJ motion - Authored by: Thomas Frayne on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:59 PM EDT
- SCO's "Smoking Gun" vs. IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:12 PM EDT
- Forbes has been busy - Authored by: blang on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:30 PM EDT
- Just saw this article... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:09 PM EDT
- First SCO Linux licences in UK? - Authored by: lordmhoram on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 09:38 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:47 AM EDT |
The editor is usually to thank for the headline, but Todd R. Weiss, the reporter
covering the story, is surely the man who wrote this lovely summation at the
end:
If only everyone was as sure as McBride's of SCO's chances,
then his decision to bet the company on a series of difficult lawsuits would not
be questioned. Until the company has a single legal success, however, his
confidence will not be widely followed.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:47 AM EDT |
Well if they are opening a "SCOMarket" to somehow attract developers
and
create a twisted version of a F/OSS thing (I recall "cosource", and
one other
company who I have since forgot, also tried a payed model for developing
OSS features with bidding, but without the ownership issues), why don't they
just go hole hog and offer something like "SCOForge; the place where you
write the code and we own it for you"! :)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OT: SCOForge... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:11 AM EDT
- Elance has a pay per software project marketplace - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:36 AM EDT
- Will code for food ... - Authored by: dkpatrick on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:38 AM EDT
- OT: SCOForge... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:45 AM EDT
- Not a very bright idea, IMHO - Authored by: MikeA on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:13 PM EDT
- Work for Auction? - Authored by: chicken on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:57 PM EDT
- Work for Auction? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:45 PM EDT
- Remember "cosource" et all - Authored by: macrorodent on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:14 PM EDT
- OT: SCOForge... - Authored by: Tsu Dho Nimh on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:54 PM EDT
- OT: SCOFudge - Authored by: tangomike on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:57 PM EDT
- Mozilla is paying people to find bugs, - Authored by: Franki on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:12 PM EDT
- OT: SCOForge... - Authored by: bruce_s on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:41 PM EDT
|
Authored by: oldgreybeard on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:48 AM EDT |
Thank you.
---
LAMPs light the way.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:57 AM EDT |
But none on OSRM... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Lots of reports from SCOForum 2004.... - Authored by: frk3 on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:00 AM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Nick on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:47 AM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:00 PM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Nick on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:02 PM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:07 PM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:20 PM EDT
- Don't forget Bruce Perens! - Authored by: TwinDX on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:07 PM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:35 PM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Brian S. on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:26 PM EDT
- Not quite - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:00 PM EDT
- Not quite - Authored by: ralevin on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:47 PM EDT
- Not quite - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:23 PM EDT
- Well put (nt) - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:15 PM EDT
- Very few blame PJ. - Authored by: Brian S. on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:38 PM EDT
- *sigh* Poor PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 10:44 AM EDT
- What?? EXPORT UNIX??? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:21 PM EDT
- Lots of reports from SCOForum 2004.... - Authored by: pyrodave on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 09:52 AM EDT
|
Authored by: capitalist_pig on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:08 AM EDT |
Don't lose focus folks. One thing that I'm worried about is that this fight has
exhausted the FOSS community. If SCO does indeed tuck it's tail between it's
legs and back off a bit, don't allow that to result in a loss of the "fire
in the belly" that we've always had.
What we're fighting for is for a free and open *basic infrastructure* of human
communication, commerce, science, and technology. What Linux and OSS is about
is making the basic platform free so that the playing field is level and so that
people can have control and understanding of the technology that they use.
That's what we need to focus on.
Somebody needs to thwap Enderle with a cluebat and point out to him the
following concepts:
- The concept of a market correction
- The concept of free and open basic infrastructure and how it contributes to a
healthy economy
- The difference between money and value and between money and economic
efficiency
- How corrections and reductions in cost *benefit* the economy by increasing
efficiency.
The latter point is the big cluebat for Enderle's rant. By spending less on
basic software and operating systems, which are done things and are old hat,
companies can spend more on *innovative* software and on their own R&D
efforts. Corrections and commodification, what OSS is doing in the marketplace,
allow resources to be *shifted* into innovation rather than into paying tribute
to fat monopolies on existing products. What's going on here is a correction
and a shift in resources, not a loss of resources. Cluebat. Thwap.
One thing that amazes me is this: these guys keep beating on the capitalism
drum, when they clearly do not understand basic capitalist concepts like those
outlined above. (or... they don't want to understand them.)
To a certain extent arguing with these guys is like debating with
creationists... it has to be done, even though it's like talking to a brick wall
and a broken record. It has to be done for the benefit of society as a whole,
since unchallenged baloney is dangerous.
"Things are often confounded and treated as the same, for no better
reason than that they resemble each other, even while they are in
their nature and character totally distinct and even directly opposed
to each other. This jumbling up things is a sort of dust-throwing
which is often indulged in by small men who argue for victory
rather than for truth."
- Frederick L. Douglas, from a speech on the unconstitutionality of slavery
in Scotland in 1860.
What is so frustrating is that the SCO crowd argue for victory. We're arguing
for truth.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Don't lose focus - Authored by: DFJA on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:23 AM EDT
- Who said it? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:51 AM EDT
- FOSS community not exhausted... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:58 AM EDT
- Don't lose focus - Authored by: gtall on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:03 PM EDT
- Do us a favor?? - Authored by: savage on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:21 PM EDT
- Re Cat scan - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:04 PM EDT
- Don't lose focus - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:33 PM EDT
- Don't lose focus - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:15 PM EDT
- Don't lose focus - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:04 PM EDT
- Don't lose focus - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:38 PM EDT
- Don't lose focus - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 01:05 PM EDT
|
Authored by: rand on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:14 AM EDT |
My favorite take on the subject is by
Jerry
Pournelle:
Years ago, I told the VP of marketing at AT&T
that if they bought KFC, they'd end up advertising hot, dead chicken. He sighed
and said, "The worst of it is that we'd probably advertise warm, dead
chicken."
It applied just as well to USL.
AT&T did so well
they dumped the division, creating USL. USL did so well all twelve or so
partners stepped aside and almost bribed Novell to take it of their
thands. Novell did so well they cut the price and virtually gave it away to
OldSCO. It was so successful there that OldSCO cut the price further
and ripped it out surgically, like a growing tumor, and dumped it on
Caldera, then -- out of glowing pride, no doubt -- changed their name completely
and joined the dot.com witness protection program. Caldera did so well with it
that they've had to adjust their staff -- what is it now, minus-60%? -- to
handle the volume, then threaten. beat up and sue all the soon-to-be-former
customers they inherited. --- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" (IANAL and
so forth and so on) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:22 AM EDT |
He complained that when things are free, there are no taxes to be collected,
and without taxes, you don't get politicians, firefighters, police,
etc.
Gosh, I'm sure every volunteer out there is rolling the duct tape
around their head tight after this latest SCOthink. Perhaps the Boy Scouts of
America, Optimists, Jaycees, volunteer doctors and nurses, church volunteers,
attorneys working pro bono on causes, environmental advocates, etc. should be
forced to stop providing free service because the government is not getting
its tax? Darn if I knew Darl wasn't a libertarian.
I'm particularly
confused about the firefighters reference. In my community, the firefighters
are volunteers; e.g. "free" in SCO's derogatory reference. Should we not
then require volunteer firefighters to pay for the honor of fighting fires, so
that taxes can be applied and so on? I guess I'm going to have to tell my
community I can no longer donate a few hours a month to keeping the little LAN
and PCs running, since no payroll tax is being collected?
I think Darl and
crew have given us a wonderful insight into how the silver spooned, priveleged
elites, view the role the rest of us play in their world. We are clearly not
free to self-organize, to self-determine how to spend our money and energy.
Liberty? Not in Darl's universe.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:28 AM EDT |
PJ you must be very proud. It seems that SCO has become so rattled at the bright
light Groklaw is shining on them (SCO being basically a coakroach) that they
have now decided to give you free publicity! How many of the attendees had not
heard of Groklaw until them? How many are now going to have a good hard look,
and may be realise that the Truth Is Out There![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: blacklight on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:30 AM EDT |
"Chris Sontag announced that they are working to bundle a SCOsource license
with UnixWare and OpenServer." PJ
The German word "die Gift" rhymes with the English word
"gift", except that "die Gift" translates to
"poison": noxious gifts include the Trojan horse, poiseoned apples,
smallpox-tainted blankets, crack and heroin samples and now SCOSource licenses.
In light of SCO's behavior, a UNIX or SCOSource license is a "license"
to intrude into the licensee's affairs, to sue the the licensee, and to restrict
his or her freedom to choose the OSses he or she wants to run his or her
business on. And SCOG's interpretation of the terms of its licenses is
one-sided, to say the least. The question is: do SCOG's customers have the
freedom to reject the licenses (and their onerous terms) that SCOG is trying to
push on them? If not, those customers had best head for the exit doors as fast
as their little legs can take them.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:30 AM EDT |
Say...
It just occurred to me. I wonder if SCO didn't sweet talk IBM into
agreeing to move the August 4th court date so that it would cast any shadows
over SCO's little group grope.
It's also interesting that whatever the SCO
legal team had said to shut him up over the last few months seems to have had an
expiration date or that Darl's expansive ego managed to ignore. (Darl: "Hey
David, just how can I be expected to remain silent when I'm working the center
ring at SCO Forum?!")
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:34 AM EDT |
[quote]
I hear he asked the audience which would you rather do, work for money or work
for free?
[/quote]
The above argument above is used quite often by opponents of FOSS. I'm convinced
however in Darl's case it's not due to his lack of understanding of Open Source
but rather he is a thief - plain and simple.
The truth is whenever the GPL is used specifically the work a programmer does is
NEVER for free. The payment for the open source programmer is being able to
receive improvements to his code. The GPL ensures "I will let you use mine,
if you let me use yours" - that's the payment. People who license under
say a BSD-style license are really working for free (Enderle has no problem with
the BSD license btw).
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: MikeA on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:36 AM EDT |
"With that kind of attention [Groklaw], it has become difficult for SCO to
make the transition toward highlighting its product, said Jeff Hunsaker, senior
vice president of worldwide marketing. He told LinuxInsider, 'It's been hard to
move the company in the direction of innovation."
PJ, if I didn't know
better, I'd say he is trying to set the stage for claiming that Groklaw has
impeded their ability to do business. They have made hardship claims like this
right before filing a quarterly report with the SEC, and include the claim in
the report as well. (That way, their own statements are already in place to back
up their claim.) It seems odd to me that they would openly mention Groklaw as
much as they did.....that's not something you really want to bring up in front
of potential investors.
--- Change is merely the opportunity for
improvement.....
but I can't think of a better signature yet. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: TwinDX on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:38 AM EDT |
Darl has bleated on before about not having some kind of source control to make
sure that code contributed to FOSS projects (well, the kernel mainly) is clean
and not derived from proprietary projects.
What are the odds that when the shoe's on the other foot they'll gladly take
anything regardless of its pedigree just to bump up the available packages? Are
they going to have an independent inspector to certify that there's no GPLed
stuff being ripped off and packed up into the SCO dungeon, do you think? Maybe
the legendary MIT mathematicians will certify everything is clean for us with
suspicious minds...
BTW - a little off topic - do we know if Darl et al respected the intellectual
property of The Princess Bride's creators for their little seminar? Did they get
all necessary permissions to show clips of it, or is it a derivative of SysV and
as such they own it?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: seeks2know on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:39 AM EDT |
Rob Enderle, I'm told, referred to Groklaw in an "IBM's running
dog" kind of way and said he hoped any from Groklaw would be
offended.
Anyone who has half a clue about any IT topics
will see Enderle as a complete buffoon.
Why waste energy feeling offended
by Rob?
Actually, I'd be more offended if he spoke highly of Groklaw.
--- There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and
pursue it steadily."
-- George Washington
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:40 AM EDT |
"it's all about UNIX now"
Nice. Must be time to upgrade that old hack of a Linux server. Please send my
unixware with the next pig to fly this way.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: phrostie on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:55 AM EDT |
"Chris Sontag announced that they are working to bundle a SCOsource license
with UnixWare and OpenServer."
does this mean unixware has linux code and needs a licence?
---
=====
phrostie
Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/snafuu[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:13 PM EDT |
You know, if they would shift their focus away from litigation, I wouldn't mind
if they do it by betting on a stupid business model. I mind it when they try to
make me bet on their stupid business model.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jpetts on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:17 PM EDT |
Y' know, the more I hear about Darl's ravings, the more I think we should be
calling him Daffy Darl: he reminds me so much of Daffy Duck in the old Loonie
Tunes and Merrie Melodies cartoons.
Think, for example, when he is
trying to persuade Elmer Fudd (nice name, by the way) that it's really rabbit
season, but he's always the one that takes the bullet in the end; and Bugs Bunny
is always there smiling, keeping his cool, and avoiding the problems. See Rabbit Fire, Rabbit Seasoning and Duck! Rabbit, Duck! for the full
story!
Then again, Robin
Hood Daffy shows him trying to convince Porky Pig (the Linux market?) that
he can rob yonder wealthy traveller (IBM, RedHat, DC or AutoZone?), and fails
dismally again and again. One thing we won't see Daffy Darl do, however, it give
up and join Porky Pig...
In Duck Dodgers in the 24 1/2th
Century we see him appropriating Porky Pig's ideas as his own, another trait
that fits well with Daffy Darl's approach.
Duck Amuck emphasises Darl's
penchant for changing his approach in response to a changing environment. The
Free Software community, while not actively distressing Darl like Bugs does
Daffy, certainly changes the landscape often enough, and Daffy Darl can't, he
just can't resist reacting to it all. Or maybe it's Groklaw: is Bugs
Bunny really an avatar for PJ here?
And finally, one of my all time
favourites, Ali Baba Bunny.
Daffy's behaviour here ("Mine all mine! Down, down, down! Mine! Mine! Mine!") is
so Darl-like, it's uncanny!
And I resist strongly the anny suggestion
that Darl is Wile E. Coyote: for one thing he's up against a penguin, not a
roadrunner, and for another, I can't help feeling sorry for poor ol' Wile E.,
all the time hoping that the smug roadrunner would get it in the neck.
However,
Wile E. is definitely creative with his Acme products, and proclaims himself to
be a super genius. While these are definitely Darlish, I think that the
correspondences between Daffy Duck and Daffy Darl are just so perfect that they
might have been twins separated at birth.
There are many, many more
examples that might be cited, but the above gives enough detail to make my
point, I feel.
It remains only to say that Chuck Jones was clearly channelling
Nostradamus when he created his annoying, unforgettable, and unlovable Daffy
Darl (oops: s/arl/uck/).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: John M. Horn on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:18 PM EDT |
Raoulduke esq, wrote on Yahoo:
"Overall, I have never seen such a smug and smarmy presentation. Darl
McBride, Jeff Hunsaker, and Chris Sontag were far more genuine and believable
[than Rob Enderle]."
I find it difficult to conceive of anyone, even 'Smarmy' Rob, delivering a
presentation that could make the three stooges look 'genuine and believable'...
I have absolutly no doubt that the report accurate, its just that, it is so
difficult to, well, to visualize such a thing. Can anyone who wasn't there
really grasp the sheer magnitude of 'smugness and smarm' that must have dripped
from Mr. Enderle. This must have been a sight to see!
I almost would have liked to have been there (well armed with a large bottle of
Tums, of course)...
John Horn[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Prototrm on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:23 PM EDT |
...if the entire audience had stood up at the Groklaw reference. Can you picture
Darryl's face, knowing he was surrounded by The Enemy?
LOL!
This whole thing just goes to show how much of an impact Groklaw is making.
Bullys just hate it when people stand up to them![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: kawabago on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:29 PM EDT |
For wrongful dismissal of course! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: darkonc on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:31 PM EDT |
Linux "spies" were in the room
Wasn't it Darl who referred to himself
as James Bond??? Oh well.
In any case: You're not a spy if you're wearing
the uniform of your army. Unfortunately the Linux contingent doesn't really have
an official uniform, so I suggest that Linux proponents wear penguin suits to
Day 3 (if there is one).
In case of emergency, you can always use the
a-la-Batman penguin suit (a black tuxedo, umbrella, top Hat and Cigarette
Holder).
--- Powerful, committed communication. Touching the jewel within
each person and bringing it to life.. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:41 PM EDT |
that we had in the past with Unix Systems
Laboratories
That statement alone gives the impression they
used to be USL. I hope anyone that gets curious about that actually looks into
it before posting something like "SCOG would like to go back to their original
name". Yeesh. A clue to Darl and Company: Follow your own SEC company trails
back to who you originally are. It's available to the public and anyone that
doesn't want to get taken by a snake-oil seller will pay attention to it before
believing your words.
RS[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: whoever57 on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:51 PM EDT |
I can't help but remember the
Blackadder
episode in which Blackadder engages the services of a mad captain (Captain
Rum), played by Tom Baker. To every sensible suggestion from Blackadder, the
captain replies: Opinion is divided on the subject .... All the
other captains say it is; I say it isn't."
Here is a
sample:
Edmund: Look, there's no need to panic. Someone in the
crew will
know how to steer this thing.
Rum: The crew, milord?
Edmund:
Yes, the crew.
Rum: What crew?
Edmund: I was under the impression that
it was common maritime practice
for a ship to have a crew.
Rum: Opinion is
divided on the subject.
Edmund: Oh, really? [starting to get the
picture]
Rum: Yahs. All the other captains say it is; I say it
isn't.
Naturally, I see McBride as the mad Captain Rum. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:52 PM EDT |
Uhm, techworld also has an article about this...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 12:56 PM EDT |
Obviously, their business isn't going as well as planned now that they've
shifted focus away from the law suit because, if you remember, they planned to
do the exact opposite awhile back, soley focus on it's IP fight in order to gain
revenue, that's why their business was booming, so to speak, earlier where
market shares is concerned. Now that they're not producing enough evidence to
back up their theory and not making their propoganda stick in the courtrooms,
stock AND PR is crashing. People don't trust SCO anymore (what gave that away?)
so people are going to Alternative products, even other UNIX based projects...
anything but untrustworthy SCO.
It seems to me he might need some medication to quiet those battles in his
head... May I prescribe Paxil CQ?
He went from thin-layered professionalism to an out right attack on people
personally AND actually tried to single people out to flog them? OMG! I laughed
so hard, I think I pee'd alittle bit.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: AG on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:06 PM EDT |
The point these people just don't get into their heads is that this is not about
fancy names (USL) and marketing. This is about Linux being superior in
performance, architecture, features and hardware support. They can pump billions
into advertising 20 year old UnixWare crap, but it won't get any better from
that. They would have to invest man-centuries of development time, which is
really difficult now that they laid off most of their developers. And its simply
too late. The Linux ABI is now well established. Even Sun is going to emulate it
on top of Solaris. UNIX is dead. UnixWare even more so. Get over it and move on.
AT&T, USL, Novell, and oldSCO all did. Why can't Darl?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: seeks2know on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:10 PM EDT |
The McMillan interview includes some strong hints of a split into
a litigation company, or as they put it a SCOsource company, and a Unix company
someday..."
In other words, McBride has trashed the good
name of Caldera as a respected Linux company and scared off all their loyal
customers.
Then pretending to be OldSCO, he trashed their good name and
scared off many of their customers
Now he needs to pretend to be USL so
that he can retain the few remaining customers who still run on their ancient
code base.
Assuming that McBride gets the approval to use the USL
trademark over the objections of The Open Group, how long will it take Darl and
company to trash USL's good name?
It's apparent that even Darl can see
that the horse he is riding is dying. --- There is but one straight
course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."
-- George Washington
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Totosplatz on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:28 PM EDT |
The following text is a quote from this interview article; it is part of one of Darl's
answers:
We feel very strongly about what that will be, but at the end of
the day, you know O.J. is walking around free today, so we've got to factor that
inFrom where we sit right now, regardless of what the score currently is, we
like where we are going with respect to the end of the game.
Amazing
how Darl allows things like the above to slip out. These little slips reveal, I
believe, his own truest opinion about what he's up to: a very long shot at
getting a cookie from the cookie jar and not getting caught at it.
By the
way, thanks to "Gumnos" for the reference to this interview article in his Groklaw post (sorry, that link
points to the top of the thread in which Gumnos' post is made, I don't know how
to fix that; scroll down a bit.).
--- All the best to one and all. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mhoyes on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:58 PM EDT |
I've been a developer for a little over 25 years now and looking at all the
statements being made I have some questions.
Now for me, I love to code the fun things, and really hate coding business
applications (how many ways are there to do payroll, AP, etc?) Now, in all that
I have seen, there has never been a mention from the F/OSS crowd that says a
developer can't or shouldn't be paid. In fact, I enjoy receiving money for my
efforts. It sort of acts as an incentive to try to come up with more things to
do. But, once a program is written, it is not costing me anything to distribute
it (unless I am burning it to CD or something), so why would I charge an arm and
a leg for people to use it? The way it looks to me that the proprietary
companies state it, they should be able to develop a product, lock the market
place up so that no one else can do a similar program, then sit around and get
money for every sale as if it was being written fresh for each customer.
So, my questions are, am I understanding things right? Is it really about the
money and only the money?
Thinking about it, it seems that the large companies are still stuck in the
model of "goods" for money. 30-40 years ago, this made since as it
took effort to create physical objects and you paid for the creation effort.
Now, however, a lot of the "products" sold are essentially free, once
created and it costs very little to produce 1000 as it does to produce 10 or
10,000,000. Now, some companies seem to be switching to this model well, where
the software is basically free, but the support is what you are paying for, and
consultants can be called in to customize the applications to your needs. But
others seem to view the products as objects still, and so should get a large fee
for the imaginary cost of creating it.
I don't see any way of making the current money system work with a new mode
service. How do you change the basic thoughts of management to reflect the
changes in society. Up to now, it has always taken a major upheaval to cause a
change because the current leaders are so entrenched in the current system.
Unfortunatly, this is usually a violent happening.
Maybe the F/OSS group can take this opportunity to figure out the best way to
make this a peaceful change instead. How do you teach a new method of
thinking?
meh[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: pooky on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 01:59 PM EDT |
Darl's overconfidence is the sign of a delusional mind. I really think that he
and the other execs at SCO think they are on a holy mission to save the software
industry from opensource and the GPL.
The future is bright eh? Lesse:
1) SCO's stock price is tied mainly to the litigation and thus so is SCO's
ability to raise future capital through stock issuance.
2) Their largest recent investor is about to sue them for being lied to by SCO
executives. Doesn't exactly bode well for future investment.
3) Few will buy their licenses because there is no reason to.
4) Few will buy their software products out of fear of becoming a lawsuit
target.
5) Many are dumping SCO products for Linux because, well, Linux is a great
platform and it costs way less then OpenServer or Unixware (as evidenced by a
50% drop in OS revenue last quarter from the prior year)
6) They have been ostricized by nearly everyone to the point where other
hardware companies won't produce OpenServer or UnixWare drivers any longer.
How exactly is the future bright again? Please Mr. Enderle, explain it to me
because I'm confused as to how this company could possibly be considered a good
investment when they are running around saying that the litigation is a
backround issue and thus not that important. Not to mention they are losing
money by the truckload each quarter. It's like watching rats trying to escape a
maze. This company has:
a) insane executives
b) no focus
c) no way to compete with Linux other than suing the companies who push it and
use it to generate fear.
Wake up Enderle, SCO is *NOT* Microsoft.
-pooky
---
Veni, vidi, velcro.
"I came, I saw, I stuck around."
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:06 PM EDT |
So, boiling this down a little:
o Bundling SCOsource license: we couldn't sell this turkey to anybody, so now
we're giving it away.
o SCOmarketplace: nobody new wants to be seen working for us, so we have to
grab developers off the street.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: StLawrence on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:28 PM EDT |
While there is still one day left of the SCO conference, would somebody there
please ask if the new SCOMarketplace initiative will include indemnification,
to protect developers who do business with SCO from subsequent lawsuits
by SCO?
"If you lay down with the dogs, you'll wake up with fleas..."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: blacklight on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 02:56 PM EDT |
"Rob Enderle, I'm told, referred to Groklaw in an "IBM's running
dog" kind of way" PJ
A parallel: Mao Tse Tung's propagandists used to refer to us as
"imperialists' running dogs". Guess who is still around, and who is
not? To belabor the obvious, I'd rather be a live running dog than a dead SCOG.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:05 PM EDT |
A few more details have emerged about SCOMarketplace, whereby they will invite
developers to apply online and bid on work:
"On the software developer side of things, I believe there's going to
be a move to a develop-for-fee model, rather than develop-for-free, which is
currently in vogue. One announcement that we are making at the show is called
the SCO Marketplace, and that's a marketplace exchange whereby we are going to
allow developers to come and bid on work-for-hire projects that we have, to fill
in the gaps where we're going with our development plan.
"We think in the future, software developers are going to be more
motivated by getting paid for their work rather than contributing and not
getting paid."
------
The irony here is that I could swear that IBM patented something rather like
this already. There was an article on Slashdot some time ago about IBM
patenting a method to pay OSS contributors. I guess I'm not 100% sure that it'd
actually infringe, but that'd sure be one ironic case if IBM ever sued SCO for
infringing it.
As for SCO, they've apparently hired back at least one engineer--they're now
addressing ancient (over one year old) security issues in their software on
Bugtraq.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Whoaaaaa baby! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 12:08 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Alpha Prime on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:15 PM EDT |
Let's see, "Free Software and the Fools who use it.". What a title, what a
premise. Wonder if they use the net at all? All of the infrastructure is built
on free tools (software). They send mail across the net using free tools. They
post on their web site using free tools. Their website is resolved using free
tools. The internet would not be here without free tools. They must use these
free tools, so...
I guess they must be fools too!
.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rand on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:16 PM EDT |
Just realized:
SCO Marketplace is SCOGroup's opportunity to set loose a whole gang of
unsupervised, code-stealing, unwashed commie pinko variable-obfuscating
programmers into the world of squeeky-clean unsoiled proprietary UNIX surce
code. It's their chance to pollute their own code base with everything they
accuse us of doing. Maybe a whole new litigation industry will be created! Maybe
OSRM will be able to offer UNIX code insurance! It's the dawning of the new
age, with the first product being SCO® LitterBox™ Server!
---
carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" (IANAL and so forth and so on)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- How about IP-Box? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:25 PM EDT
- SCO Marketplace - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:01 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:31 PM EDT |
I hope Enderle's speech gets put up on the internet, and read by mainstream IT
people. It will do a lot to destroy his credibility. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Enderle - Authored by: ujay on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:49 PM EDT
- Enderle - Authored by: frk3 on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 11:14 AM EDT
- Enderle - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 11:08 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Nick_UK on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 03:53 PM EDT |
Great report on The Reg. :D
http://www.ther
egister.co.uk/2004/08/04/sco_nomore_suits/ore_suits/"
Nick
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: grannyknot on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:03 PM EDT |
"Linux is mine, all mine, cackles distracted SCO head --
Darl McBride has no
doubt he is right. It's just everybody else that is the
problem".
You know what they say - insanity is just a minority of
one.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Franki on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:08 PM EDT |
Can you sue those pecker heads for calling you IBM's whipping boy?
They are big on slander cases, why not give them another one.
The fact that they focused on Groklaw and any members hidden in the audience is
interesting, I wonder what would have happened had someone stood up. Would they
have been showed the door? Or would Darl and co attempt to gang up on said
person and try to break him? It's a shame we didn't have somebody really versed
in all this there in case it's the later, could have perhaps made the SCO losers
look bad in front of their own "rent a crowd".
Relax Darl, when SCO goes down the tubes, there is always a job for you at
Microsoft somewhere (unofficially of course, even they don't want to be
officially linked to you any more.) Either that or you could apply as the new
information minister for Iran or Syria or perhaps North Korea.
Even if SCO do make a reasonable new Unix product, they have buckleys of selling
it to new clients as long as Solaris is out there. And any other
"legal" UNIX derivatives. And that's if they can hold back Linux in
the US. Which is of course a HUGE "if".
Regards
Franki
---
Is M$ behind Linux attacks?
http://htmlfixit.com/index.php?p=86[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Slander? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 01:44 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Franki on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:23 PM EDT |
If Darl could have got the same interest in SCOforum that groklaw gets on nearly
every single article, he might not have needed a rent a crowd (not counting HP
of course).
1000+ down to 300+ is a pretty big drop in interest for a company that used to
make its money from an actual product.
(now they just lose money so the product doesn't really matter.)
Now ask yourself, How will Darl, Chris and co go down in history? I suspect it
will be as the inept managers that "managed" to destroy a reputable
brand name by taking on unethical lawsuits in the hope of making money without
working for it. (by suing a OS made by people that are working to create a
product without getting money for it.)
Its a shame, if any of the management had intelligence that outweighed their
shoe size, they might realise that the young Linux geeks of today are often the
CTO's and sysadmins of tomorrow.. and that these guys will pick anything over
SCO UNIX once this is all done. (assuming you can get SCO unix when this is all
done.)
regards
Franki
---
Is M$ behind Linux attacks?
http://htmlfixit.com/index.php?p=86[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 04:33 PM EDT |
working for money instead of for the joy of it impacts the quality of the
work. Yes. It does.
No. It doesn't.
The quality of a piece of work
reflects the abilities and attitudes of the person who does that work.
I am a
software developer. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jpvlsmv on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:34 PM EDT |
"OfficeServer was born as a Linux program in the 1990s, well before
SCO became embroiled in lawsuits with IBM and Novell . SCO began developing
OfficeServer in 1994 and eventually ported it over to Unix."
So by
SCO's erm... logic, OfficeServer must now be licensed under that "viral" GPL,
right?
I mean, they must have used the Linux Shared Libraries to create
OfficeServer.
Either that, or the copyrighted API.
And since they say
that OfficeServer is the combination of OpenServer and Unixware, that means that
these older products have to be licensed that way to, right?
--Joe [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 05:44 PM EDT |
IBM calls for other companies to also pledge not to attack Linux. And I suspect
the threat of an IBM countersuit will be better protection than
insurance or
indemnification.
IBM Pledges No Patent Attacks
Against Linux
----------------
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:04 PM EDT |
I swear the man is bipolar
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- SCOForum 2004 - Day 2 - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:55 PM EDT
- Besides... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 07:01 PM EDT
- SCOForum 2004 - Day 2 - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:34 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Retep Vosnul on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:04 PM EDT |
-- McBride said he's annoyed by critics who claim that SCO has moved from being
an operating system vendor to becoming an intellectual property licensing
company. "When people say SCO is just a litigation company, it really bugs
me," he said.--
How many lawyers does it take to build a proper OS ?
How can that man sleep at night knowing he talk with his..[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:17 PM EDT |
Please stand up if you are from SCO? I'm sure theres
gotta be some SCO spies in here. If so, please stand up!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Nnyan on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:32 PM EDT |
www.forbes.com/business/2004/08/04/cz_dl_0804sco.html [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tredman on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 06:35 PM EDT |
I just received the latest dead-tree version of eWeek, and there's an article
in it by Scot Petersen called "Bloggers In The House", about a large contingent
of webloggers at the Democratic National Convention. At there very end of it is
a quote that I think is not only high praise for bloggers like PJ, but also a
really nice kick in the pants to companies like TSG: The
Internet tends to reward passionate individuals who are willing to make [little
or no] money. I think that pretty much sums up F/OSS as
well. Tim
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: darthaggie on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 07:01 PM EDT |
I have some questions for Darl & company about SCOMarketplace.
How do
they plan to weed out backdoors or other malicious code?
Do they have a
mechanism in mind to insure that someone else's copyrights or patented
algorithms are not illegally donated to SCOMarketplace?
Will the contracts
go only to US citizens, or is it open to all comers? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- An idea - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:03 PM EDT
- Questions about SCOMarketplace - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:09 PM EDT
- No kidding, - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:25 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Dave on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 08:58 PM EDT |
From the LinuxInsider
article linked to in the story:
"When I came in, the
previous CEO told me about what IBM had done," he said. "We were backed into a
corner. We could either lay down and let the IBM train run over us, or we could
protect our property."
Have we ever heard this before? I don't
recall any indication that Ransom Love had any issues with IBM. Caldera and IBM
had been working, seemingly happily, as partners in the United Linux
effort.
I thought the story had previously been that it was Darl who,
shortly after taking command at SCO, ordered the internal investigation that led
to the realization of how valuable SCO's "IP" was and how it was being violated
by IBM.
If any of IBM's lawyers are reading this, perhaps this would be
an interesting topic to explore with Mr. Love in his deposition...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Nope - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:07 PM EDT
- Nope - Authored by: Weeble on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:41 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Latesigner on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 09:27 PM EDT |
"What I gather from reading between the lines of reports in the media and
general feedback is that they seem to have gotten a clue they are unlikely to
win in the courts, and so they are trying to get the world to forget the
litigation and see them as a Unix company with a future instead."
It seems that this is as close as SCO can get to the universe the rest of us
live in.
It must have taken enourmous effort, but not as much as thinking they still have
a future.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: DBLR on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:27 PM EDT |
Has anyone read
this Forbes story. I quote: SCO alleges that since 2001,
AIX has contained code for which IBM does not have a license. Moreover SCO
claims to have found internal IBM e-mails in which IBMers acknowledge this
shortcoming.
Also this: McBride says that as part of the Monterey deal,
Santa Cruz Operation gave IBM the right to use a version of Unix called System V
Release 4 (SVR4)--but only on Intel-based microprocessors, and only if IBM stuck
to the partnership.
Charles ---
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve
neither liberty or security. Ben Franklin [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: brian on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 10:40 PM EDT |
PJ says:
"And then Chris Sontag gave his speech all about how
Groklaw is all wet and SCO does too have a chance to win
the various lawsuits. "If you read Groklaw, you'd think
our case was finished. Nothing could be farther from the
truth." He then presented the SCO revisionist history of
the various court cases."
The article says:
"In his initial comments, he also mentioned the negative
analysis on Groklaw. He then presented a different "UNIX
Tree" than Darl the day before; on this tree, the trunk
was labeled "SCO IP (UNIX)", and the tree branches were
labeled BSD, HP/UX, SGI IRIX, DYNIX/Ptx, AIX, SCO
OpenServer, and SCO UnixWare."
Now it is official.....If you thought the BSD case is over
look above....I also wonder what HP & SGI are going to do
when Darl decides to up the "your code is free of our IP"
extortion again....
B.
---
#ifndef IANAL
#define IANAL
#endif[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: brenda banks on Wednesday, August 04 2004 @ 11:34 PM EDT |
at scoforum
i have seen no reports of any comments about the millions of lines of code?
am i missing it?
wonder why no reporters ask about that anymore?
maybe because the reporters know they were misled
---
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 Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 12:04 AM EDT |
SCOForum 2005 will be at Bob's Burger & Brew. They have graciously allowed
us to merge two tables together, which should be more than enough for the
expected attendies.
Entrance fee is $1,000 (plus lunch).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 12:09 AM EDT |
The psychology of antisocial behavior is evident here. Each in their own
way says more than they intend at the SCO Forum. At least now, TSG
partners and customers can follow Groklaw. Is anyone falling for the
TSG lines of bull? How could anyone believe TSG now?
McBride has his money and wants to continue to get more. He thinks
he can beat the odds and pull more fast deals. He wants to scam a jury.
Enderle wants to bait the FOSS community but ends up angering the
whole software community. He has a lot of chips on his shoulder. He
really wants to hurt people.
The brother rats are actively engaged in their scams. The truth and the
community matter nothing to rats and everything to us.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 02:32 AM EDT |
Humm they lost an accountant the job has been open since July 22 2004 and they
are looking for a senior software since January 13 2004.
Could this also be the sign of times no one willing to work for a company that
has an uncertain future due to BS litigations?
Drax Wraith[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Futoque on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 03:15 AM EDT |
I thought that this was an interesting part of the description of their faux
open development model:
"Internal engineering teams at SCO will work on the core operating system
technologies, while external developers can add to software available on SCO's
platforms, the company claimed. SCO chairman and chief executive Darl McBride
indicated that the initiative could lead to the development of an intellectual
property marketplace, with SCO distributing applications developed by
independent software vendors."
It looks to me that what they want to do is keep the Unix kernel away from their
contract workers, and keep that in house while the other work has more to do
with the tools and other assorted things that run on top of it. It seems to me
that this would be a really bad way to build a community around your code. The
code that they will be contracting out will most likely be for special
customers, or the replacement/enhancement of the FOSS packages that they already
bundle with UnixWare. I'm pretty sure they will make sure that the new code is
not available under the GPL. Any of their enhancements to the GPLed packages
they are distributing will not be made available as source, so they will not be
able to legally distribute them.
It looks to me like SCO is really just announcing that they will be paying for
peripheral projects, or special request work while leaving the core of UnixWare
to their very small group of engineers.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 03:24 AM EDT |
It is amazing that Darl wants to build a Unix company. Who would buy a car from
this previously-owned vehicle salesman? He hopes that everyone will forget that
he killed a respected company by pursuring a litigation-for-cash business.
Following that failure he hopes to resurrect a (failed) image (USL) and build it
into viable operation using a dying technology. Even with a name change
everyone will remember that buying a SCO (or USL) product leads to a possible
law suit. (His history shows his only successes have been in the courts). Now
that his planned IBM takeover is still smoldering, he has visions of controlling
Unix through another deception. Darl, you are one sick puppy.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 04:48 AM EDT |
"The whole world, especially China, is going Linux."
Not necessarily. Munich has halted it's migration due to patent fears brough on
by OSRM's announcement. China will continue to create it's own version, which
you can be sure will be riddled with backdoors (go check the recent round ups).
The OSRM has instituted it's own FUD attack on Linux.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 09:02 AM EDT |
It'd be mighty easy to take that work-for-money and insert GPL code, then claim
that SCO UNIX violates the GPL. Eventually, they'll be distributing all of Linuc
under the GPL. Oh wait, they already are.
Of course, if you got GPL code to work inside their unix, I bet they'd claim it
was derivative, so they owned it to begin with. Wich raises the question, will
you be paid for dervitive code? (That they allegedy already own, but hasn't been
written yet)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: numtek on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 09:06 AM EDT |
Was there any (part of a) speech recorded, and put online?
I would very much appreciate more audio, I already have two audiofiles from sco,
and I'm searching for more.
Any help is welcome, it is for a funny plan:)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 09:07 AM EDT |
It seems to me that Darl is now moving forward with Phase II of his BIG PLAN.
It makes sense that this would have been Darl's victory speech that he would
have given after his Linux Victory. Since there was no Linux victory he's
moving forward with Phase II anyway since he only has the one game plan.
According to his game plan, when he had won against Linux he would be telling
the world that things really have changed for the better. That all the devoted
linux developers didn't have to despair anymore about the demise of their OS.
But Instead they could now start coding for Darl only now they would be getting
PAID for their work. The world is now a wonderful and structured place, birds
singing, sun shining, SCO is wonderful, etc.
Daren[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: pyrodave on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 09:38 AM EDT |
PJ, please tell us approximately how many new members have registered since Day
2's close :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 05 2004 @ 01:26 PM EDT |
I doubt that "Santa Cruz gave IBM a license for System V Release 4, but not
on PowerPC" is anything but more FUD.
SVR4 goes back to 1989. IBM's fully-paid up license to AT&T/USL (before
Santa Cruz came into the picture) is from 1996. SGI had an agreement at a
similar date, and that's definitely for SVR4 (as IRIX certainly contains SVR4
components).
We don't know if IBM licensed all the later versions of AT&T's SOFTWARE
PRODUCTS under SOFT-00015, but they must have done so for at least SVR3 - and I
doubt they didn't do it for SVR4 as well.
Of course, such agreements wouldn't be attached as exhibits by SCO, but I doubt
IBM would have any problems coming up with the entire set of SOFTWARE PRODUCT
schedules with AT&T over the years, including one that covers SVR4, if they
indeed used SVR4 code -- and given SCO's lineage, they may be in a better
position to find them *all* ;).
There is the small matter of "Software Agreement Supplement 170" dated
1989 between IBM and AT&T -- by coincidence, about the time SVR4 came out.
It's referenced in Amendment X, yet SCO hasn't attached it as an exhibit.
How strange.
Note that Novell consistently said that SCO had no rights to terminate IBM's
license for "SVRX", which is the generic name for System V releases
1-4.
I would also have needed less discovery to discover this shocking lineage from
SVR4 to AIX5L. No need for hidden e-mails, the product features page says:
"This release also contains UNIX System 5 Release 4 (SVR4) standard
components ..."
I doubt they'd have printed that in nice fat letters without a license to those
SVR4 components.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 09 2004 @ 07:04 PM EDT |
Full text of keynote
http://www.sco.com/2004forum/agenda/Enderle_keynote_SCO-Forum2004.html
(Yeah, I know its already in here somewhere, but I'm not going hunting for it!
:) )[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|