decoration decoration

When you want to know more...
For layout only
Site Map
About Groklaw
Legal Research
ApplevSamsung p.2
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Gordon v MS
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
MS Litigations
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
OOXML Appeals
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v Novell
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Unix Books


Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

You won't find me on Facebook


Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Friday, August 13 2004 @ 02:48 PM EDT

I have a copy of the SCOForum program now, and it shows that the early Internet report that the title of Rob Enderle's talk as listed on the program was "Free Software and the Fools Who Use It" was exactly accurate. That is the title on the program I have.

On the SCO site, it lists the title differently, as "Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy It." Of course, Mr. Enderle mentioned in the talk that he rewrote it at the 11th hour, so that is likely the explanation, but the point is that the early report about the title was completely correct.

You don't need to take my word for it, though, because here is a snapshot of the section of the program showing the title of his talk.

Enderle as announced by SCO


The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum | 324 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I propose we write our own speech:
Authored by: Darkelve on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 02:54 PM EDT
"shills, and the idiots who listen to them."

:D (big grin)

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 02:59 PM EDT
Normal for SCO, and SCO Supporters.

Say one thing, then change it. Then claim you never said it in the first place.


[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: inode_buddha on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:00 PM EDT
Thank goodness, now I have both copies!

"When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price." --
Richard M. Stallman

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:03 PM EDT
Shouldn't the copy of the image be marked as "copyright SCO" or
something? :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Renewable energy
Authored by: capitalist_pig on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:07 PM EDT
Seriously, our renewable energy problem would be solved if we put a windmill in
front of Enderle.

PJ should stop feeding the troll. This guys is basically a professional
blowhard, and I suspect that he's in the covert astroturf business as well. He
probably takes money for his "opinions," and has somehow managed to
maneuver himself into a position where he can act as a quotemill for lazy IT

This guys is right about as often as Sylvia Browne, but she still tops the
bestseller lists with her predictions as well. It's all marketing, and he's
just good at marketing himself. You don't have to be right to market yourself
in journalism (especially IT journalism)-- you can be a raving fool and just
*say* that you're right.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:08 PM EDT
I had made comments to the effect that you had quoted the speach wrong and
therefore had misrepresented the other side or in other words, were doing bad

I humbly apologise and take it all back. I'm actually happy that You were right
and I was wrong (or mostly misled by the culprit himself)

have a nice day.

[ Reply to This | # ]

How long till SCO yanks it?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:12 PM EDT
Any guesses as to how long before SCO decides to remove their
edited transcript of Rob Enderle's keynote address completely?
They obviously don't realize just how embarrassing it is to them
in all its facets (accuracy, logic, relevance, comprehensibility,
cohesion, interest, etc., etc., etc.) or they wouldn't have posted it
in the first place, but I suspect one of their friends at a Larger,
Smarter company will clue them in at some point...

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:14 PM EDT
Maybe it's just me... But SCO seems really small (and really controlling).. The
half day shown on the program shows all the company principals as the presenters
(other then Mr. Enderle and he might as well be in their small gang)

I've gone to many forums from SAP to BAAN to HP and powerhouse I've been in IT
about 20 years (No wonder I feel so old!) and the although somebody from the
board may be there and may do a presentation they aren't the entire show....

Sounds more like a cult to me where they are trying to brainwash people into
following them wherever they go.... and the way to do that is to have the

Brian Stephens

[ Reply to This | # ]

All versions of his speech
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:15 PM EDT
In order to determine the actual history of this speech and its title, we need
to have access to all versions he has ever written. This includes the scraps,
notes, scribblings, thoughts, etc, whether recorded on paper or otherwise.

Cough 'em up, Rob. Your reputation is to give more then expected and I'd like
you to maintain that rep. Thanks.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Perhaps the change was in line with truth...
Authored by: veatnik on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:31 PM EDT
Perhaps the change was made because he felt uncomfotable telling a lie. I know
that I consider no one I know who uses free software a fool. Perhaps Mr.Enderle
agrees with me on this point.

Furthermore, the fact of the matter is anyone that thinks they are buying
software (free or commercial) is an idiot (Please excuse the name calling).
After all when you pay for commercial software you actually are buying a license
to use it (usually with severe limitations on what your rights).

With free (GPL) software you can buy media, support, manuals, and etc. But not
the software itself, the copyright stays with the originator (Just as most of us
would expect).

I guess the title should have really been.
"Software and the Idiots Who (think they) Buy It."
This even applies to those spending large sums of money for a business
opportunity (Like around $10M). I'd say that they should read the contracts but
I think the management at the time was very aware of limitations surrounding the

[ Reply to This | # ]

This is getting old...
Authored by: eamacnaghten on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:35 PM EDT
PJ: We all know Rob Enderle is against Open Source/Free software, and is in favour of proprietary software companies like Microsoft and (now) SCO/Caldera, not because of the merits of that, but for what seems to most of us irrelevant and unrelated personal experiences he has had. How do we know? Because he told us this himself (in that SCO Forum keynote).

We all know he not only bends the truth a bit, but ties it in knots of wondrouse complexity. The tangled web he has weaved himself, lets face it, is a thing to behold.

I think that lingering on him and what he says is now a waste of time, he is not going to change his attitude, and giving him publicity by mentioning him on Groklaw is probably counter-productive. My feeling is that as his main objectives now seem to be getting a negative response from the Free/Open Source advocates he has downgraded himself to be a troll, and should be treated like all trolls should be. Time to "plonk" him and put him on ignore. Let's not feed him.

Web Sig: Eddy Currents

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: pb on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:36 PM EDT
does it matter specifically which offensive title Enderle
used for his venom? I don't think it changes his message
one iota.

Really, it's like arguing over whether Kerry deserved his
first purple heart or not, when you're comparing his
military service with Bush's. Or anything else from a
number of trivial things that the media obsesses over
constantly. Oh well.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: RockHopper on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:40 PM EDT
Great now you have confirmed that there were members of your vast spy network
planted at SCOForum.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:45 PM EDT
it's not a surprise that he took it back.

"free software and the fools who buy it" => "linux" is
free software and people who buy SCO licenses for it are fools, which i wouldn't
recommend if i were an investor.

"free software and the fools who use it" => nothing comes for free,
people who buy SCO licenses for linux know this, people who don't (...)


[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: The Title of SCOForum itself?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 03:58 PM EDT
"SCOForum and the fools that speak at it?"!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Enderle's next speech
Authored by: jerm on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:00 PM EDT
Rob Enderle has done a magnificent job of wrecking his credibility (assuming he
ever had any). The next time he gives a speech and recounts his previous
occupations, I sincerely hope he will be including "IT Industry
Analyst" among them.

Publishers, please note: Many of us here at Groklaw are industry insiders.
We're the people your advertisers are hoping to reach. Representing shills like
Rob Enderle as journalists in your publications is an affront to many of us, and
you do so to your own detriment.


Real programmers don't comment their code. If it was hard to write, it should
be hard to understand.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Totalcost of 0wnership of windows
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:01 PM EDT
It is finaly proven: Windows has a lowerce total cost of 0wnership: here at slashdot

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: John M. Horn on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:04 PM EDT

Clearly Mr. Enderle has abandoned all tact and decorum - as is (or was) evident
from the text of his speech on the SCO web site. Unable to convincingly make his
point, whatever that may be, regarding Open Source he resorts to Junior High
School name calling and attacks upon Groklaw.

Unfortunately for M$ and SCO, they are decidely not getting their money's worth.
Far from being FUD at it's finest, Mr. Enderle comes across as being uninformed
about Open Source in particular and the whole technology industry in general.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, PJ! Shame on you! Look what you've done in bringing this
obviously towering intellect to his proverbial knees. You have left him with no
device to continue the spread of his FUD save for the tactics resorted to by
twelve year olds the world over.

Mr. Enderle, give it up. A man of your obvious mental limits, er, that is
prowess, a paragon of untruth, er, truth and virtue, only demeans himself by
attacking Groklaw. Collect your paycheck and move on, for many new speeches
await you. And just to provide a smidgen of encouragement, here are a few
possibilities to impress future employers...

1) "Conservation and the Fools Who Recycle"
2) "Whales and the Fools Who Watch Them"
3) "Nuclear Waste/Power and the Fools Who Fear It"
4) "Rain Forests and the Fools Who Conserve Them"

Well, this should be enough food for thought to get you started on a whole new
career. I'm sure I speak for somebody somewhere when I wish you a hearty 'Good

John Horn

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: Nick_UK on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:04 PM EDT
This has been said so many times, but I am going to say it

You could not write a book of fiction what has happened
with SCO and all their FUD without people raising an
eyebrow or two to 'that would never happen'.

Yet here we go again! One thing is done, seen, changed,
denied - yet the smell still lingers.


I also read Mr. Enderle speech when it was first published
at, and I swore I read the 'fools that use it'
title. Of course, when the debate (and switch happened),
I wasn't sure nor could prove it.

Good stuff.


[ Reply to This | # ]

A point about the leaflet!!!
Authored by: Nick_UK on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:19 PM EDT
If Mr. Enderle re-wrote the speech at the 11th hour, then
how did all the leaflets get changed? Normally 1000's
(OK, maybe 100's in SCO's case) get printed at an earlier

It's not as if they would re-run the print job for an 11th
hour change for one speaker, surely?


[ Reply to This | # ]

R.E. rewrote speech as last minute
Authored by: om1er on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:29 PM EDT
I know why Mr. R.E. re-wrote his speech at the last minute: the original version

He gave the new and improved version - aren't you happy for that? :-)

Are we there yet?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOForum on the comedy network
Authored by: Seagull on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:43 PM EDT
Has anybody made a copy of the original (unedited)version of the enderle speech?
I'd so love to see that.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I thought SCO hated Open Source, but wait . . .
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:56 PM EDT
According to Linux Insider (yeah, I know, but hey, like Mr. Enderle says, I
don't code and my life is so pathetic I've got nothing better to do than to pick
on a little programming company that's just trying to make a buck), SCO actually
LIKES Open Source. See link below.

And all this time, we were sadly mistaken. Hate Linux, yes, and well they
should (Linux, spelled backwards, is "devil" if you add and change a
few things, much like SCO does with the facts). But loves Open Source. Wow,
were we ever mistaken.

[ Reply to This | # ]

No difference
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 04:59 PM EDT

So, the difference between:

"Free Software and the Fools Who Use It"
"Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy It."

Is exactly what? They are both highly offensive and only there because dear Rob can't come up with a valid argument against FOSS, so he needs to spew insults. Not to mention he is a liar accusing others that speak the truth of that very thing.

A pitiful creature he is indeed.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: blacklight on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 05:06 PM EDT
"Of course, Mr. Enderle mentioned in the talk that he rewrote it at the
11th hour, so that is likely the explanation, but the point is that the early
report about the title was completely correct."

Rob the Shill is playing either "Hit the Moving Target" or "Dodge
the Ball" with us. It is immaterial whether the title of his rant is
"Free Software and the Fools Who Use it" or "Free Software and
the Fools Who Buy it": both titles accurately reflect his opinion of free
software and of those who use/buy it. And I certainly don't care enough to split
hairs as to which title he used, because he in fact used both!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Fools Buying?
Authored by: Observer on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 05:13 PM EDT
Either way, buying or using, he's still calling either SCO or their customers idiots. The SCO version of Unix is stuffed with Open Source software (Samba, Apache, Bind, etc.). Of course, RE demonstrates in many ways that he has no clue what "free" software really is, and since you have to pay to use SCO software (even the "free" part of it), then he doesn't really count that as being free.


The Observer

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Fools Buying? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 05:26 PM EDT
Enuf already!
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 05:22 PM EDT
I've had enough with Enderle. Let's get on with the business of systematically
destroying SCO's case. This idiot is a distraction that is sapping energy away
from the real enemy of freedom and innovation: SCO.

[ Reply to This | # ]

My personal opinion
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 05:25 PM EDT
I just read the "speech." Mr. Enderle's talents do not include:

1) Debate
2) Grammar
3) Manners
4) Telling the truth
5) Diplomacy

His talents do include.
1) Changing the subject
2) Giving straw man arguments
3) Pumping up his ego

My personal opinion of him: a myopic pinhead with delusions of being adequate.

PJ, you are doing a great job, stick to the facts.

Later, Dive / Fly / Ride / Sail Safe

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why does this guy get under my skin?
Authored by: cab15625 on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 05:27 PM EDT
I've been having a hard time getting to the bottom of this question, inspite of
being somewhat introspective. All I know is that everytime he opens his mouth
(or opens his "vroom vroom" laptop to type something), he just BUGS
me. Sure he paints a very distorted picture of us, but so do diDio, Lyons, and
who knows howmany others.

I'm starting to understand a bit more about myself thanks to this dweeb. He
twists little things we say to misrepresent us to his target audience. He
attributes things that have nothing to do with us to noone in particular in such
a way that it sounds like he is implicating us. And the only way to unwind his
tangled web is to go through line by line and refute every little phrase. It's
worse than debugging assembler code!

And the worst part is that a large portion of his target audience may never read
the disections we carry out.

[ Reply to This | # ]

A First for Groklaw?
Authored by: snorpus on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 05:54 PM EDT
Did anyone else notice?

I go back almost a year here, and I can't recall ever seeing a graphic before. Maybe there's hope for seeing the red dress someday. <G>

I'm not sure the subject warranted it, but I guess it shows that all rules can be broken, once in a while.

By the way, let's hope all the Groklawyers in southern and central Florida are doing OK, as well as our own friends and relatives.

73/88 de KQ3T ---
Montani Semper Liberi

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: gdeinsta on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 06:05 PM EDT

Just so you know - the word "idiot" is from ancient Greek and in the Attic dialect it meant one who refuses to participate in civic affairs. I doubt very much that Mr. Enderle knew this, or he would not have used the word, since open source is a civic affair and closed source is not. The society that built democracy around the agora (the town marketplace, where people hung out and talked); that elected non-technical offices by lot, so that any citizen could end up serving in those offices; that had committees of voters instead of courts; that society would have detested and even feared closed source. They would have said What is closed source trying to hide? or How is closed source being used to gain an advantage over the rest of us?. Most likely they would have outlawed closed source.

[ Reply to This | # ]

To those that wish for life after Enderle
Authored by: Ed Freesmeyer on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 06:10 PM EDT
I don't think you will get any argument from PJ or anyone else that we've had
enough of R.E.

Having said that, I also believe that this article was necessary for several
reasons and on several levels:

1. This article needed to clear up (with incontrovertable proof) the claim that
Groklaw was mis-representing Mr. Enderle's speach. That has now been done.

2. Mr. Enderle has been bad-mouthing FOSS for quite some time now, but up until
SCOForum has been in the "me too" category with Ms. Didio and Mr.
Lyons. That has now changed.

3. At SCOForum he both specifically attacked Groklaw's credibility and reader
base as well as specifically identifying himself as siding with the proprietary
interests against anything having to do with FOSS. By doing this, he took a
step out from the crowd to become a true leader in the 'attack pack' against

4. Mr. Enderly has effectively declared a publicity war on FOSS which is no less
dangerous than the SCO attacks on Linux. He has made himself a valid target for
FUD-busting in the grand tradition of Groklaw. Not attacks, not personal slurs,
but spotlight-intensity focused FUD-busting with valid, supporting arguments.
Now that Mr Enderle has declared his position and his intentions, I look for his
credibility to nose-dive among journalists and their readers as well. Remember
- many of his readers also read Groklaw and word-of-mouth can be very effective
as we've already demonstrated to Mr. McBride and his team. Eventually, the
editors that publish Mr. Enderle's work will catch on (assisted, I suspect by
those true journalists that read Groklaw). Mr. Enderle, like Mr. Ken Brown
before him is a deceitful tool at the beck and call of the anti-FOSS backlash
and I expect that by over-exposing himself, he has terminated his usefulness.

5. By stepping forward, Mr. Enderle may have just opened the next phase of the
anti-FOSS attack - publicity (bordering on slander). This can be fixed, but not
without vigilence and periodic monitoring of Mr. Enderle's output. If each of
his utterences are publicly shredded, it should not be long before he stops
being published and becomes a truly non-issue for FOSS.

6. I think this article is an attempt by PJ (a journalist) to bring some
integrity back to the field of journalism (and perhaps to expose/neutralize one
of journalisms more obvious embarrassments). For that I applaud her.

7. Many of us may be tired of Mr. Enderle by now - I know I am - but that should
not remove the reponsibility (or the opportunity) for Groklaw to expose and
debunk his particular brand of FUD.

8. Besides it's a slow news day and PJ needed *something* to post - give her a
break - OK ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

STG claims to own 'USL' Unix
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 06:12 PM EDT
(Maybe Off Topic)

Perhaps someone has noticed slide 3 of Sontag's keynote ?

The slide makes a point of identifying 'USL' Unix via Novell and Caldera.

Perhaps we are seeing the seeds of a kind of 'revisonist re-branding' ? ('USL'
Unix vs AT&T Unix)

Perhaps this is tied into their attempt to usurp the USL trademark ?


[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: jrzagar on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 06:20 PM EDT

And just exactly how many Free Software packages are part of SCO's products?

Isn't it bad to call all your customers fools?


[ Reply to This | # ]

(OT?) Another instance of 'The best way to Lie ...'
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 06:28 PM EDT to tell only part of the truth'.

In Sontag's keynote, notice slides 24 and 25.
It is certainly confirms some posts that predicted TSG would 'spin' the court
results in misleading ways.


[ Reply to This | # ]

Enderle's next article predicted:
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 06:48 PM EDT
Enderle's next article predicted:

1. The photo proves Groklaw is a nest of spies - despite all PJ's denials.

2. The photo is published without SCO's permission. It shows how much respect
these Linux people have for copyright.

3. Groklaw are nitpicking on the title of my talk (this article) and timing of
publishing my talk (previous article), rather than the substance of my articles

4. There are some very nasty comments about me, alleging mental illness,
alcoholism, and worse. (and IT managers do you really want your infrastructure
to depend on a bunch of zealots who will shower you with abuse and worse, for
daring to express a contrarian view)

5. If all they have is nitpicking on irrelevant details (3), and personal abuse
(4) - maybe they don't have a good answer to my arguments.

Of course, all the above are rubbish, but you know it's coming. That's what
happens when you get involved in a "debate" with a troll.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: fmouse on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 07:03 PM EDT
PJ, this guy is a cosmic troll. Other than some mention and attention to his
talk, let's not forget that the big picture of FOSS/Linux has far more to offer
all of us than we get by focusing too much attention on people who are truly
negative in outlook.

People who engage in artless paranoia and name calling, as this fellow did,
speak eloquently about themselves, and most reasonable people can see it pretty
easily. It behooves all of us involved with FOSS to just back off and watch
while people like Mr. Enderle dig their own graves, and meanwhile let's move

[ Reply to This | # ]

A new TC0 cost study on SlahDot
Authored by: icebarron on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 07:04 PM EDT
You guys really need to take a look at the new study on's a

Peace to one and all

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: dracoverdi on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 07:14 PM EDT
The interesting thing here is that he was not only trolling, but off (his own!) topic, as well. I see that a lot in posts, but it's surprising in a keynote speech. What do you call an OT keynote speech? An Off-Keynote speech?

The problem with ignorance is that the afflicted are unaware of their ailment

[ Reply to This | # ]

Links goes here
Authored by: johan on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 07:43 PM EDT
apparently everybody to busy to flame to put the headers in...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Fundamental Business Model Misunderstanding
Authored by: Greg on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 07:47 PM EDT


Would it be possible to have someone write a
paper that outlines the fundamental business
model that Open Source or FOSS uses.

In my understanding that would be a model that
includes a type of business pattern that other
industries have adopted.

This pattern that Open Source and FOSS follows
is called a co-operative.

Other industries that use it include:
1) Farmers
2) Electrical Distribution
3) Food Markets

All to allow people to bring their produce
or services to one location such that
customers can be serviced fairly.

This usually emerges in situations where
the dominance of one player can easily
push smaller players out of the market
and then establish a monopoly.

So this is where "software" is today.
In the areana of very large players all
working hard to own the space they
play in due to the effects of controlling
the technology that allows the monopoly

If MS can manage to topple the OSS and FOSS
groups they would command complete market
dominance over the entire software world.

So the very basics of the business models
are being debated here without Groklaw
truely understanding this debate.

If there is one thing that Groklaw can do
to fail it is to fail to grasp a very
simple thing.

"Nothing is Free"

Yes, the people that create the software
and create the services may do this
in their spare time. But they do not
do it because it is a complete "donation".

The developers donate their time and efforts
to ensure that they have a place in the
world later. So that they can use the
products in their own work to use it
in some manner that will add value and
keep their own existance alive.

In short, the only people to really
blame for this phenomenon is Microsoft

Please understand the continued dominance
of the software market only generates
more developers that are put out of
business or have more and more limited
opportunities due the the dominance
of Microsoft.

The sooner the community understands
the "new" business model is that of a "Co-operative"
effort and how it adds value to the
marketplace and the reason for this change
is infact the businesses practices of
Microsoft, the sooner the business model
Microsoft advocates can be destroyed.

PJ, please listen.

The closer you drive to the truth the
more the decisions in Microsoft will lead
to the final chapter.

The later this final chapter evoles the
more time Microsoft has to redefine their
existance and change the rules.

The OSS and FOSS will have won when there
exists the following:
1) MS Windows runs on top of Linux (BSD or what ever)
2) All of Microsoft Applications are ported to Linux
3) All of MS partners have ported to Linux

The very edge that Microsoft has is that they
control the operating system and the very
APIs that run their applications.

They have a competative advantage that is not
driven by market decisions. Microsoft makes
the decisions and the market follows.

Thus that mechanism must be broken.

You have 24 months to break it.

Otherwise Microsoft will hit the reset button.

And the Business Model Microsoft has promoted
will be advanced again, with Linux.

And the efforts that OSS and FOSS will be for not.

In a way it is like the Movie Matrix.

If the exact virus (Business Model) is not
found within a time frame the game is just
reset and the whole thing starts again.

The SCO and Patent thing is all a stalling
technique to get to that point.

And I know this because this is what I would
do to take over the FOSS and OSS. In addition,
I know that the next version of MS Visual
Basic development environment will be GCC
compatible (Which is what Linux uses). I know that
C# will be able to run on any platforms.
And I suspect that even if they wanted to
open the MS code base, that it is so full of
backdoors and screwed up code that it would
be more of a LIABILTY to do so.
So they have to imbed Linux into Windows
and slowly migrate the code over to it.

More importantly that has to be the last straw.

They will not do that unless they have no other
choice and the Business Model they have
been pursuing will not change.

The question that have is this:

Who will be sacrificed to kill the MS business model?



[ Reply to This | # ]

Oh irony.
Authored by: rsmith on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 07:57 PM EDT
I've been looking at "the Enderle Group" website. Basically the
enderle "group" consits of Rob, his wife and a couple of hired
(parttime?) help.

Now if you look at the website, it has a very nice banner featuring some
impressive words:

- integrity
- credibility
- perspective
- intelligence
- balance

The irony is that I can't find _any_ of those characteristics in his SCOforum

Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

[ Reply to This | # ]

it's all part of the SCO strategy
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 08:31 PM EDT
upon closer inspection of the two titles, you'll notice that they are, in fact,
same, based upon the SCO theory of 'non-literal copying' ;>

[ Reply to This | # ]

Enderle's Counterpoint Service
Authored by: johan on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 08:36 PM EDT
As PJ has pointed out, one of the procucts offered by Enderle is the Counterpoint service. Here is a quote from the description:

As the traditional research companies dropped into decline they begin to put more and more pressure on the analysts by reducing central services and requiring ever greater amounts of billed consulting. As a result analysts were less able to do quality research and were more likely to jump to easy, but poorly founded, conclusions. These companies also learned, over time, that vendors were more likely to buy consulting from firms that were targeted by this negative research.

I think this is an accurate and to the point description of some of the problems with research reports today. It not only has become easier to just write a shill piece and pass it of as research. In fact, it is what the customer expects, and what the trade press accepts.

What is remarkable in its blatancy, is the solution offered by the Enderle Group:

Counterpoint [...] provides consulting services during the review process of a poorly founded negative piece on a vendor or its products and, should it be needed, will showcase the research errors, statistical mistakes, and unfounded conclusions that often define such a piece.

So what Counterpoint is then, is a way of buying quotes, whitepapers, punditry, etc. to counter such "errors". Enderle is carefull to then qualify that this service is not available to counter "well founded research containing solid conclusions", but who is to make this distinction? The customer buying the Counterpoint product? Regardless, the fact remains that what he is selling is his opinion.

If Mr. Enderle agrees with the conclusions of a report -- even though it was not based on "well founded research" -- but somebody pays him to provide a "Counterpoint", then he will gladly stand up and spout whatever he was paid to day.

Given that this is a primary product of the Enderle Group, I think it would be appropriate to add the following disclaimer to all of Enderle's statements, columns, whitepapers, reports, and quotes:

This paid for opinion might or might not be the opinion of Robert Enderle.

That would only be fair, right?

Most serious publications have an explicit policy of a division between editorial and advertising departments, and for good reasons. It makes you wonder about the editorial integrity of publications such as eWeek or TechNewsNow or LinuxInsider (well, maybe) since one of their pundits actually advertises that he is for sale.

What's next? A section on eBay for opinions?

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Whats Next? - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 14 2004 @ 03:51 AM EDT
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 08:54 PM EDT
Who cares ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

So I missed something. Who's Ron Enderle?
Authored by: LionKuntz on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 09:34 PM EDT
So I missed something. Who's Ron Enderle?

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT Just to keep things interesting at this quiet time. NT
Authored by: Brian S. on Friday, August 13 2004 @ 10:51 PM EDT

Brian S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: AutoZone news
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 14 2004 @ 12:02 AM EDT
AZ-35 now available. This is the order dated August 6th, in relation to the last hearing

I'm not going to retype the whole thing.

But here are a couple of interesting bits:

Plaintiff The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") has opposed the motion and, in so doing, has alleged AutoZone is infringing SCO's OpenServer software product in ways that are not issue in the related pending cases, and that SCO is suffering irreparable harm as a result of the alleged infringements.


2. Notwithstanding the stay of the case, the court wil allow the parties to take limited expedited discovery related to the issue of preliminary injunctive relief. In that regard SCO shall within fifteen days from the date of this Order, serve on AutoZone a statement of the basis for its claims of injunctive relief and the nature of the relief it seeks on those claims.

Note: 15 days from August 6th = 21st August.

Three random thoughts

- SCO are seeking injunctive relief related to OpenServer

- Why is OpenServer not mentioned in their complaint, or included in the list of copyrights that AZ is allegedly infringing according to SCO's complaint.

- How come SCO is still apparently representing to the IBM court (motion to dismiss or stay IBM Counterclaim 10) that the same issues as IBM's 10th counterclaim will be dealt with in AutoZone, when it has argued (and apparently intends to further argue with a future motion in AZ for a preliminary injunction) that AZ is about different issues from IBM.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Rob is using Linux himself
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 14 2004 @ 02:34 AM EDT
I've exchanged some words (via e-mail) with Rob after reading the Groklaw
"crit" as well as the text on the SCO site.

In response to my statment that it's rather harsh to equate users of Linus to
fools or idiots, he said that he was careful not to call all Linux users
idiots, and claimed that he was misquoted. He said the fools are those that do
not take into consideration the real costs of using OSS (remember that he was
talking to corporates). He also does not have anything against Groklaw or OSS,
but hates zealots (don't we all?).

And he said that he is using Linux himself.

My own, personal take on the whole issue:

Rob Enderle was hired by SCO to deliver the keynote address. Let's say the
Democrats hire you to talk at their convention, would you prepare a talk that
reflects positively on the Republicans? Nope ...

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Title of the Enderle Talk at SCOForum
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 14 2004 @ 06:47 AM EDT
Forget Enderle's speech. Look at the other items.

I can understand why it took Jeff Hunsaker 15 minutes to welcome all the
attendees. He probably went around the room and shook all their hands in person.
"It's really great to see all our customers here. I hope both of you found
the venue OK?"

But why did it take a whole hour to update everybody about SCOsource? I mean -
*how long* does it take to say, "Nobody is buying our licence"?

"SCO - for ... um, ... what's it for again?"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Bobby Winderle a year ago today
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 14 2004 @ 02:07 PM EDT
Reasons to Shun Open Source-ry
by Booby Winderle

And my response. A year ago. Pegged him for what he was. A year ago.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 15 2004 @ 12:26 PM EDT
So, while Mr. Enderle is attracting all of our attention -- what is he supposed
to attract our attention away *from*? Is SCO up to anything other than their
antics at SCOforum? What's the rest of Canopy doing these days?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sheriff Enderle
Authored by: Captain_Smegma on Monday, August 16 2004 @ 12:56 PM EDT
I was wondering about Mr. Enderle calling himself an "ex-sheriff." I
have not found any evidence that this statement is true through a Google search.
There is a Debbie Enderle working for a major cases unit in Florida, but that
is as close as I could come.

Where was Mr. Enderle a sheriff? From when to when? I would be very curious to


The Captain

Give no quarter!
Take no prisoners!
And eat the dead!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )