|
|
| Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" |
 |
|
Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:08 PM EDT
|
A couple of journalists noticed the timing of SCO's Open Letter, that it was released
at the same time as LinuxWorld. IT Jungle's Timothy Prickett Morgan wasn't sure what to make of it: It takes a certain amount of chutzpah and planning (or a lack thereof) for the SCO Group to have scheduled the SCO Forum event for users of its OpenServer and UnixWare Unixes during the same week that the LinuxWorld trade show was garnering most of the headlines in the IT industry. . . .
Considering all of the animosity that SCO has generated by attacking the Linux community--as embodied in its lawsuits with IBM, Novell, and Red Hat as well as Linux user and former SCO Unix customer AutoZone--McBride has a tough job trying to get some good press, and trying to do it during LinuxWorld is just one more indication of the cheek that the management of SCO has had since the lawsuits started. . . .
He also claimed that the Unix System V Release 5 kernel at the heart of OpenServer 6 has better security than Linux, and that SCO has a customer-driven roadmap being coded to by professional developers. The implication is that Linux is created by a group of random bozos who can do whatever they want to do, but anyone who has worked in a merit-based technocracy (or a technology-based meritocracy, if that is how you want to think about it) knows this is not true. eWeek's headline on their story showed that they got the purpose behind the timing, "SCO Tries to Stave Off Linux." SD Times' Alan Zeichick has an article in their newsletter that I wanted to highlight, because he reveals something new.
SCO's "Long Live Unix" Open Letter wasn't the only effort to distract reporters from LinuxWorld: The LinuxWorld conference must be a pretty important event if Linux's two biggest enemies are trying to distract the reporters covering the show.
Microsoft was attempting to woo reporters and editors out of San Francisco's Moscone Center and over to a nearby restaurant with the offer of a three-hour lunch and presentation. There was no solid agenda that I could see, but it seems the plan included demos and one-on-one meetings with Microsoft product managers. You can guess for yourself what the purpose was. "Quite a coincidence that you're doing this during LinuxWorld," I said to the nice public-relations person who tried to get me to attend. "It sure is," she laughed. I declined.
The other distraction came via e-mail: The SCO Group's response to LinuxWorld was a press release titled "Long Live Unix: An Open Letter from Darl McBride." So, Microsoft and SCO, in common cause, once again. Microsoft has too much money if they can spend it like that, I think. Their PR person thought it was funny, but it's not. It's also not funny to contemplate what other dirty tricks they can afford and may be pulling or will pull when they get enough patents in their portfolio. It didn't work with Zeichick, but it may have with others, I suppose. SCO's letter didn't work on him either. He concludes by saying that while he has never used OpenServer 6 and has no comment on its technical merits, he would not currently buy it: However, until McBride settles his lawsuits and shuts down his FUD factory -— or produces his evidence and proves his case in court —- I have no desire to support his company (and tacitly endorse his tactics) by buying his software, knowing that my check would fund his anti-Linux legal war chest. I think there are probably many who feel the same way. If Microsoft keeps it up, attacking Linux in petty, underhanded ways, folks are likely to apply the same reasoning to Microsoft and conclude that they don't deserve their money and support. Thanks to GNU/Linux, there is now a choice, a meaningful one. If enough people did that, Microsoft would clean up their act in a hurry, not because of being struck by lightning on the road to Damascus -- let's not hope for character miracles with Microsoft -- but because they'd have to, to stay in business at all. The cynical side of your brain responds: People don't care. Look at all the dirty tricks Microsoft pulled in the past and got away with. Yes, my friends, but there are two differences now. One is that they never before attacked noncommercial players. Linux was developed by volunteers. Folks love them for what they did. It just isn't the same as going after a commercial competitor. Second, they played their games without most people noticing, at least not until the first antitrust trial. The Internet changes everything, you know, just like they told us. It really does. And one of the things it changes the most is publicity, how much people will notice, and what they can do about it. For example, when a PR person ends up in a story, it is a PR failure. It's too late for SCO to figure it out, I think. But Microsoft can still save itself, if it is smart. There is no spinning the Internet. Their PR people can't control it, though I'm sure they try. No one can. Common, ordinary people can write whatever they truly believe, reveal whatever they discover, and tell the simple truth, and they do. SCO found that out the hard way. The jury is out on Microsoft. They still have time to choose a higher road. Red Hat's Mark Webbink called on Microsoft to do just that in his speech at LinuxWorld: Red Hat has called on Microsoft to resist threatening developers and customers with prosecution over possible infringements of patented technologies in Linux.
Mark Webbink, Red Hat’s deputy general counsel, on Wednesday called on Microsoft to make a written pledge not to threaten developers with infringement claims.
In the event of disputes, Microsoft should approach Linux distributors with complaints and avoid SCO Group’s tactic of prosecuting customers, he says. That indicates to me that Red Hat must be expecting Microsoft to go after developers and end users. But it's out in the open now. If they do that, we will know it's the low road they have chosen, and they'll get the same reaction SCO has gotten. No one respects a bully.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: fishyfool on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:19 PM EDT |
| so PJ can find them [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Corrections here - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:30 PM EDT
- Typo - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 10:29 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: fishyfool on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:21 PM EDT |
Because thats the way it's done
Please post links as HTML[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: luvr on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:43 PM EDT |
"But Microsoft can still save itself, if it is
smart."
One of the mistakes that Microsoft is making, in my
opinion, is paying far too much attention to Linux on its website.
I'm
beginning to wonder how many people are learning about the sheer existence of
that thing called Linux straight from the Microsoft web site. Granted,
Microsoft reports negatively about Linux (of course they do), but once more and
more Linux success stories become publicised, their current attention to Linux
can only help, can't it?
"Thanks to GNU/Linux, there is now
a choice, a meaningful one."
Slightly off-topic: I have just
assembled a new computer, which I would like to connect to my home network via a
WiFi (802.11g) PCI card. I would be most happy if I could make this my first
Linux-only computer. Does anybody have experience with WiFi PCI hardware that
works with Linux? (Natively, I mean - not through ndiswrapper. If compiling from
source, or recompiling the kernel, is a requirement, however, that's
OK.)
Sorry for the technical-forum-kind-of-question. Hope you don't mind.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- WIFI cards - Authored by: cybervegan on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:55 PM EDT
- Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" - Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:55 PM EDT
- wireless - Authored by: DebianUser on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:58 PM EDT
- wireless - Authored by: argee on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 09:07 PM EDT
- highly touted list... - Authored by: meshuggeneh on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:01 PM EDT
- Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" - Authored by: Buddha Joe on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:02 PM EDT
- Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:03 PM EDT
- 802.11g - Authored by: overshoot on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:43 PM EDT
- Linux HW Lists - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:56 PM EDT
- Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:08 PM EDT
- Bad Experience with Netgear - Authored by: Steve Martin on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:23 PM EDT
- Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:27 PM EDT
- It's hard to not succeed... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:45 PM EDT
- Wifi The Easy Way... - Authored by: muon on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 12:01 AM EDT
- Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 09:40 AM EDT
- Orinocco and Cisco - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 09:58 AM EDT
- Microsoft's focus on Linux - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 03:56 PM EDT
- Reaction to SCO's Open Letter, "Long Live Unix" - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 08:23 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:52 PM EDT |
"...That indicates to me that Red Hat must be expecting Microsoft to go
after developers. But it's out in the open now. If they do that, we will know
it's the low road they have chosen, and they'll get the same reaction SCO has
gotten. No one respects a bully..."
While it is certainly true that no one respects a bully, it is equally certain
to me that Microsoft does not now and will not in the future see itself as a
bully when they begin threatening developers. To Microsoft, this will be nothing
but their customary 'business as usual' tactics.
What Microsoft undoubtedly hasn't realized (and probably can't comprehend) is
the long term negative effects it will have on their profits, their cash, their
consumer loyalty and, eventually, even their viability as a continuing concern.
Given this, any pragmatic view of the near term future should definitely include
blustering and hyperbole directed at the FOSS developer community, followed by a
multi-faceted assault against the developer community that incorporates elements
of their patent and/or copyright arsenal through civil litigation, congressional
lobbying for special interest legislation and a veritable mountain of FUD
permeating a wide variety of media.
Any cursory examination of their track record reveals tactics such as these.
The battle will probably be a tough one, but ultimately, we will all get to
observe a protracted and agonizing corporate suicide, in a manner of speaking.
---
(GL) Groklaw Lurker
End the tyranny, abolish software patents.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 03:58 PM EDT |
"Common, ordinary people can write whatever they truly believe, reveal
whatever they discover, and tell the simple truth, and they do."
Of course they may get their accounts deleted if they attempt to do it here.
Maat.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Tsk, tsk, tsk! - Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:04 PM EDT
- Tsk, tsk, tsk! - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:13 PM EDT
- Tsk, tsk, tsk! - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:14 PM EDT
- PARENT POST IS A TROLL!!! Please remove.. (n/t) - Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:23 PM EDT
- Yeah right! - Authored by: blacklight on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:42 PM EDT
- Yeah right! - Authored by: lifewish on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:09 PM EDT
- About as old as the SCO law suit. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 06:07 PM EDT
- A gentle reminder that this is not a forum for completely open discussion is well received n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 07:00 PM EDT
- Yeah right! - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 02:00 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: inode_buddha on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:04 PM EDT |
| Going After Developers:
A little late, isn't it? http://www.ntk.net/media/develope
rs.mpg What about *users*? Last I checked the great strength of FOSS is
that the users are also the developers. ---
-inode_buddha
Copyright info in bio
"When we speak of free software,
we are referring to freedom, not price"
-- Richard M. Stallman [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kawabago on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:20 PM EDT |
He is driven to weild as much money and power as he can get his hands on, any
way he can get it. Money and power are like a drug to him and he craves them
just like any other addict, with no remorse for the harm he does getting them.
---
TTFN[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: capt.Hij on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:24 PM EDT |
The cynical side of your brain responds: People don't care.
Look at all the dirty tricks Microsoft pullled in the past and got away with.
Yes, my friends, but there are two differences now. One is that they never
before attacked noncommercial players. Linux was developed by volunteers. Folks
love them for what they did. It just isn't the same as going after a commercial
competitor.
Everytime MS enters a new market this kind
of argument pops up. The best example is the Xbox. A number of people said that
MS will fail because they have never had to deal with the truly
hyper-competitive situation of video game consoles. MS seems to be doing well
with their XBox even though it is still a loss leader. They are putting enormous
pressure on the other console makers.
MS has an incredible ability to
adapt and reinvent itself. This is part of its success. Unfortunately, some of
the folks who run it confuse business ethics with the ethics of the jungle and
believe that no tactic is "unfair." Given that MS is a monopoly it seems
to me that the only conclusion is government intervention. Unfortunately, I do
not see that coming anytime soon.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:41 PM EDT |
Personally, I'd rather not see M$ save itself. I'd prefer
that M$ go down, whether it be in flames or whatever.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 04:59 PM EDT |
"It's too late for SCO to figure it out, I think. But Microsoft can still
save itself, if it is smart."
I thought we were "not hop[ing] for character miracles with Microsoft"
since we indeed know it would take your proverbial lightning bolt...
;) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:05 PM EDT |
I am running a small company and we are now at the moment of choice - which
software to use. Microsoft solution looks better in some aspects (including
price), but if I pay them I would have an uneasy feeling that my money are
helping to make some bad things that I do not want actually to happen.
Like MS guys said recently: "we need to stop Google". I do not want
this to happen. No, it's OK with me if MS make better products than Google, and
gets ahead of them as a result, but "to stop"? If you want to be the
first - run faster, not push others from the track...
So probably we'll pay more for non-MS products, but I will have a better sleep
instead.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yes, publicity changes things - Authored by: lifewish on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:12 PM EDT
- holding your data hostage - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:50 PM EDT
- If Microsoft is cheaper, then only for a limited time - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:51 PM EDT
- Not either/or - Authored by: arch_dude on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 08:50 PM EDT
- Yes, publicity changes things - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 01:29 AM EDT
- Yes, publicity changes things - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 13 2005 @ 08:13 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:18 PM EDT |
Okay, just to be clear, I am not a M$ fan. I agree that these guys have pulled
many a nasty trick in the past.
However, I am not one to believe that trying to woo reporters away from linux in
unfair competition, or evil in any way. That's just playing the game, as far as
I'm concerned. Even FUD is an acceptable tactic provided that it doesn't become
slander. What marketing group doesn't spin their position?
Where I really get angry at the companies like SCO and M$ is that they get nasty
when they can't win by playing the competition game. Then they use government to
regulate the market in their favor through patents, copyright, and the very
legal system itself to attempt to gain an advantage. Giving spin to the press is
one thing. Giving FUD to congressional representatives to pass laws favorable to
themselves is a mockery of democracy. Using lawsuits and court documents to make
FUD look more real is a travesty of justice.
As I've said in previous posts, these corporate leaders who claim to treasure
free markets and capitalism, become corporate socialists, attempting to destroy
their competition through government interference.
In closing, my comment on corporate socialism is no offense to those who support
socialist political or public policy. I simply find it hypocritical that those
who publicly favor capitalism misusing law and government to destroy competition
and secure their own positions.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Griffin3 on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:19 PM EDT |
| n/t [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Saturn on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:24 PM EDT |
I posted this in the OT section of a previous article, but I think it bears
repeating and highlighting here as it is rather more on topic.
Caldera
(now SCO) published a white paper in November 1999 by Dean R. Zimmerman (see prev Groklaw reference
to Dean R. Zimmerman) called "OpenLinux and Open Source" which is (spookily) almost a
point by point rebuttal of all the comments made by Darl McB in his "Long Live
Unix" letter.
"The biggest barriers to adopting Linux and
other Open Source software
aren’t technical. They’re human. They have to do more
with perception
than reality. They are the results of monopolistic, misguided
and mismanaged
FUD campaigns.
It will take a litle[sic]
time for the users and the business community to recognize
that FUD-mongers have
a hidden agenda, and that their claims are
void of substance. As they do, and
those times aren’t too far off, Open
Source will become the common, preferred
way to develop and distribute
high quality, stable, and reliable
software." ---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My own opinion, and very humble one too.
Which is probably why I'm not a lawyer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: cf on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 05:41 PM EDT |
Microsoft has too much money if they can spend it like that, I
think. Their PR person thought it was funny, but it's not. It's also not funny
to contemplate what other dirty tricks they can afford and may be pulling or
will pull when they get enough patents in their portfolio.
I
think that if one takes the long view, the chief victim in Microsoft's dirty
tricks campaign is ... Microsoft. These ploys are eventually seen for what they
are and the [any alternative to Microsoft] product gains stature among those who
know what's what.
Remember when the astroturfing incidents first came
to light? Anyone remember what product or issue they were writing about? I
don't, but I do remember they apparently had to resort to paid anonymous posters
to get anyone to say something good about whatever it was. Remember the faked
video demonstration in their anit-trust trial? It seems the were convinced their
software could not legitimately demonstrate the point they wanted to make so
they had to "tweak the dials" behind the scene. Remember the unsolicited
testimonial commercial of a happy Windows user... who also happened to be one of
their PR whores? What about the (Microsoft paid for) "independent"
reports?
I've started what could be an endless list, but here's the
point: each and every one of these incidents is a declaration to the world, with
Microsoft's signature proudly displayed, that their products cannot compete
based on technical merits.
These "extra-curricular" activities may
impress the PHB's, but in the end I don't think that matters. They'll sell lots
of product that way, for awhile, and continue to build up a huge store of
distrust, resentment, and dissatisfaction among the people who matter in the
end, the users.
Microsoft is waging a war but they are aiming at
targets that can't be killed as long as information remains free.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 06:41 PM EDT |
Sorry for being tiresome, however the Red Hat quote
appears to be "If Microsoft has IP that needs to be
respected, [then] come to the companies; leave our
customers out of the middle - it's the civil thing to do"
whereas
"Red Hat has called on Microsoft to resist threatening
developers and customers with prosecution over possible
infringements of patented technologies in Linux"
is an abstraction which out of context is in danger of
giving the impression that Red Hat are indicating that
there are [Microsoft] patented technologies in Linux.
Of course others might think I need to get back under my
stone.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Nick Bridge on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 06:44 PM EDT |
You're being way to easy on Microsoft.
SCO haven't pulled a fraction of the dirty tricks MS has. And they won't be
around to pull many more.
Microsoft on the other hand will be lobbying congress, converting their monopoly
into other markets, and generally being a bully for years.
I can't wait for the PS/3 to hit: there'll be no reason to own a PC anymore. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: RedBarchetta on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 07:59 PM EDT |
SD Times' Alan Zeichick:
"The LinuxWorld conference must be a
pretty important event if Linux's two biggest enemies are trying to distract the
reporters covering the show.
Microsoft was attempting to woo reporters
and editors out of San Francisco's Moscone Center and over to a nearby
restaurant with the offer of a three-hour lunch and presentation. "
[..]
"Quite
a coincidence that you're doing this during LinuxWorld," I said to the nice
public-relations person who tried to get me to attend. "It sure is," she
laughed. I declined."
PJ:
Their PR person
thought it was funny, but it's not.
Quintessential
Microsoft, wouldn't you say? It's competitive behavior is always below any
proper standard of decency or decorem.
Believe me... the PR people have
lot's more groveling to do if they want to prevent something as sure as Linux.
Aaahhh... the things one must do to retain their job. It's reminiscent of the
depression era (history).
(and whoever said PR people had any sense of
propriety? they're right up there with car salesman and carnival
barkers)
---
Collaborative efforts synergise. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: pfusco on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 08:12 PM EDT |
| I am not a psychiatrist and dont want to play at being one, but that being
said.... Bill Gates has had a dream, and that dream was and is to be the driving
force in the world to come. To make the worlds infrastructure based on his
creations and dreams.
Theres nothing wrong with that per se:
What is
wrong is how he is attempting to do it. Through theft of the intellectual
property he is so desperately trying to protect and theough bullying and
destroying better ideas and the implimentation of those ideas ie: Netscape,
WordPerfect et all.
Through second rate implimentations of others ideas ie:
Apples GUI and tools found in the Mac OS.
Simply put Bill Gates hasnt had an
original idea in (I wont say his whole life) his professional career. He is
desperately afraid of failure as was spoken of in other posts. And doesnt know
how to reach out for help in building a better software application(s). Because
by reaching out to others it means that he has failed in providing his dreams
the reality they deserve because he and/ or his hand picked associates hadnt
done the job themselves. ---
only the soul matters in the end [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ijramirez on Friday, August 12 2005 @ 09:21 PM EDT |
| you can get it to work only with NDISWRAPPER [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 15 2005 @ 01:38 PM EDT |
It won't surprise me that once this sco fiasco is over and sco is done microsoft
will open their fraudulant patent arsenal against open source.
That is the only way they can fight it - outlaw it. They obvisouly can't fight
it with a quality product. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 15 2005 @ 10:07 PM EDT |
"But Microsoft can still save itself, if it is smart. There is no spinning
the Internet. Their PR people can't control it, though I'm sure they try. No one
can...SCO found that out the hard way"
Actually SCO found out the stupid way. I mean the SCO lawsuit fiasco will be
studied in business and law schools as an example of what not to do.
With Microsoft things are very different. MS has enough money (i.e. power,
unfortunately) to be playing cat and mouse with Linux sometimes.
They do not have to control the internet - they simply have to continue to
influence decision makers. The best case that I can imagine is that in a
generation, enough Linux enthusiasts will have perculated up to decision making
positions to start bringing linux into their operations.
But by then the computing landscape will have changed to the point where MS will
not be making money by selling an OS but something entirely different...albeit
just as crappy and buggy.
An example: I have just joined a company that is for the most part OS agnostic
(good mix of unix + XP) and to me at least is surprisingly well informed about
OSS & Linux. But in a meeting I heard a PM mention the possibility of using
Linux for a large in-house project and this was immediately vetoed by an IS
director. The reason being that a warning had come out of head office about the
fact that Linux was "the #1 target for hackers" (that is verbatim). I
asked where this info came from and was told that the US Department of Defence
has listed Linux on top of there OS's that were vulnerable to attack because of
its source code was open.
NO I'm NOT kidding.
The decision had been made and there just was no trying to reason - like
"can I see the report" or "where are the facts coming
from?"
As far as I know that is so completely wrong in that numerous security sites,
banking organizations, etc could provide quite the opposite data.
Until the current VP vacates his office, Linux IS REALLY out of the company's
options - case closed.
How does one convince top company thinkers that they are wrong when obviously
(to me at least) they have already been "convinced" by microsloth
propaganda. How do you change the mentality of a politburo? You cannot because
they are not interested in truth, logic, etc. They have other agendas, which
have nothing to do with efficiency, correctness of design, ease of scrutiny and
auditability, etc, etc.
Wish someone could give me advice on what to say to the VP of IS about Linux and
OSS if ever I was to get stuck with him in an elevator...oh yes lets keep it
civil.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
