×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MySQL CEO Insists He's Not Supping With The Devil

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the eye-of-the-beholder dept.

Caldera 197

jg21 writes "In the continuing saga of the decision by MySQL previously discussed here on Slashdot to make a deal with SCO Group, the company's CEO Marten Mickos has now granted an interview in which he addresses the inevitable criticism that the deal has provoked in the F/OSS community. His main defense seems to be that other companies have ported to SCO too. He admits money too played a part." From the article: "We believe that porting a GPL version of MySQL for the SCO OpenServer platform gives thousands of users more options when it comes to choosing a database -- which is a good thing. The deal produces revenue for us and this allows us to hire more open source developers. We didn't make the decision lightly; we knew SCO was a sensitive subject with the free software and open source communities."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

197 comments

Not So Free Software (4, Interesting)

cowboy76Spain (815442) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853859)

I wonder why this is an issue. If someone wants to port its own software on a new platform, who should argue against it?

Re:Not So Free Software (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853905)

Typical -- you're letting the MySQL boss frame the argument as a simple "What little us? We just ported the software to run on SCO."

MySQL signed a full-scale deal with SCO (including a joint marketing deal )... it wasn't just "porting the software". MySQL jumped into bed with them and snuggled up.

What happened to geek criticial thinking and not being fooled by spin?

Bullshit. (4, Insightful)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853921)

MySQL signed a full-scale deal with SCO (including a joint marketing deal )... it wasn't just "porting the software". MySQL jumped into bed with them and snuggled up.

Oh, bullshit. SCO and the OpenServer platform are dieing. This was a quick cash grab and nothing more.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854301)

dieing

dieting? dying?

Re:Not So Free Software (2, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853939)

They are neither assisting or hindering SCO's attack on Linux. They have made a business decision which will increase sales of their software, and may improve sales of SCO's software.

This has no bearing on SCO's lawsuit against IBM. Doesn't affect Linux. Just benefits SCO and users and increases sales of mySQL

Re:Not So Free Software (1)

IGoChopYourDollars (924633) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853964)

They are neither assisting or hindering SCO's attack on Linux.

Weeeellll...one could argue that they are technically "helping" SCO by increasing the value of SCO's platform, hence potentially leading to more sales for SCO, and thus lengthening SCO's existence and its ability to attack Linux. So even if indirectly, they *are* helping the attack on Linux, no?

Re:Not So Free Software (4, Insightful)

Red Alastor (742410) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854024)

The value of the SCO platform can hardly increase to a point where it is a good idea to buy it. MySQL or not, they are dying. The only people that can benefit from the deal (beside MySQL making a buck on it) are SCO's actual customers who might need MySQL. Once SCO dies, they will have to migrate. Probably to Linux. Guess what they'll use there ?

So they got a contract and potential new users.

Re:Not So Free Software (1)

Canadian_Daemon (642176) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854066)

If you are taking Mysql's 'helping' to be indirectly assisting SCO's attack on linux, then you should also note that the publicity given to SCO by { your post, my post, /. articles in general} also add to SCO's attack on linux, as more people see SCO as a legit company who's being unfairly treated by Linux hippies who stole their code and are distrubuting it for free. ( note, I'm not saying that Linux did steal code, but a PHB isn't likely going to see both sides of the argument)

Re:Not So Free Software (2, Insightful)

Proc6 (518858) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854031)

They are neither assisting or hindering SCO's attack on Linux. They have made a business decision which will increase sales of their software, and may improve sales of SCO's software.

They are neither assisting or hindering that country's attack on another country. By selling weapons and ammunition to them they are simply increasing sales, which may help them win the war, but they are not helping.

What?

Re:Not So Free Software (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854258)

They are neither assisting or hindering that country's attack on another country. By selling weapons and ammunition to them they are simply increasing sales, which may help them win the war, but they are not helping.

Dude, you are comparing selling software, to war. I think that is a bit of a stretch, even on Slashdot. He writes his software, he sells his software. Who are you, me or anyone else to tell him who to sell to ? I think that SCO are sleaze, and I think any company that does buisness with them will tarnish their reputation, but "WAR"? Even on Groklaw no one accused the guy of war crimes !

Re:Not So Free Software (1)

venicebeach (702856) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853966)

I wonder why this is an issue. If someone wants to port its own software on a new platform, who should argue against it?

The company who develops that platform intends to destroy one of the other platforms you sell your sotfware for. That's why it's an issue.

Re:Not So Free Software (1)

Ryouga3 (683889) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853978)

By that logic, you can't port to Windows and Macintosh because Apple & Microsoft compete. But in the scheme of things, who cares?

Re:Not So Free Software (2, Insightful)

venicebeach (702856) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854014)

SCO is not just competing with Linux. They have challenged the legal basis for the whole platform in court, and have threatened those who use the software with additional lawsuits. Microsoft/Apple is not a good analogy.

Re:Not So Free Software (2, Insightful)

Arker (91948) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854083)

Considering there seems to be good reason to suspect MS of bankrolling Calderas little suicide mission, and have certainly been guilty of more than their share of dirty pool throughout their history in any case, it's not such a bad analogy at all. OpenOffice, Apache, etc. are all ported to Windows, and no one makes a stink out of that. It's done to bring Free Software to the poor unfortunates still using that OS, not to make MS happy, but if MS were willing to pay for that development would that suddenly make it wrong? Of course not.

Re:Not So Free Software (5, Interesting)

Arker (91948) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853999)

The only reason it's an issue is because web sites like this one are heavily infiltrated by astro-turfers that will try to make it an issue so their masters can then squeal about 'linux zealots.'

MySQL made a deal, they got paid money to support a platform. That the client, in this case, happens to be the litigiousbastards [sco.com] was sure to raise a few eyebrows, and did, but not much more than that. Business is business. I hope Mårten made sure their check cleared before he let anyone put in any hours on that project... *shrug*

Re:Not So Free Software (2, Funny)

eh2o (471262) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854069)

I'd rather see MySQL AB get their money than Boies and associates.

Re:Not So Free Software (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854017)

I also do not understand. the software is available under the GPL and is open source, if someone does not like it, fork the code and make your own OpenSQL server from mySQL.

the amount of whining is amazing, it's open source take it and make your own ball.

Re:Not So Free Software (2, Insightful)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854046)

Right. Not as if running Free/Open SOurce on Microsoft platforms is that uncommon these days....

This being said, I think that Mickos came across very well in this interview. He did exactly what the company should have done from the beginning which is to say indicate that this is just about bringing MySQl to more customers.

My prior concerns had more to do with other public comments than with with the SCO partnership per se.

It's rather simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854156)

The reason why this is an issue is because:

1. A lot of OSS people were using MySQL

2. The company that MySQL is in bed with has a very well documented history of suing their partners and customers.

So it's a very good bet that SCO will sue MySQL at some point. Who knows; they might even sue MySQL customers. SCO is good at making things up and filing lawsuits.

Who knows; maybe by the amount of experience SCO has gained, they'll have
learned how to do so successfully this time. Perhaps they'll even end up
owning a part of of MySQL. Given the stupidity of the MySQL CEO, I'd say
there's a chance that SCO might even take control of MySQL. They certain
would, if they could. Their current business model appears headed for the tank.

This is why many are switching to other options. We won't need to worry about
any SCO involvement in the future.

Re:Not So Free Software (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854191)

Because of the fact that if I use mysql at work, sco could sue my employer and my job would be on the line.

Paranoid? Yes, but this is SCO and all the people they sued so far were Openserver customers switching to Linux. What was the deal anyway between mysql and sco? Did sco get some special IP sharing agreement? How do I know?

Not eating with the devil? I believe it. (-1, Redundant)

way2trivial (601132) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853865)

Go PostgreSQL (4, Insightful)

GiorgioG (225675) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853869)

In the long-run I think Postgres will eat MySQL's lunch because now, there's a native Windows version *and* the whole dual licensing crap will make most small commercial software developers move away from MySQL (I know I won't be developing any applications (all non-PHP work) using MySQL)

Dual licensing for PostgreSQL... (1)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854058)

True, you are not required to purchase a license to use with proprietary apps, but if you want to, say because your PHB asks you to, you can certainly purchase licenses from Command Prompt, Inc or EnterpriseDB, each of which offers a few useful value adds and are both very active contributing members of the community.

I knew SCO blew, but wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853872)

Definition: sup verb To take into the mouth and swallow (a liquid)

Stupidity (3, Insightful)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853883)

I think MySQL would be wise to shut up about the whole MySQL / SCO thing and hope it goes away. I can't understand why they keep talking about it, this can only hurt them.

Re:Stupidity (2, Insightful)

Kemuri (204937) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853913)

I think, I'm pretty sure, it's the press and fanatics that just keep on dragging it over and over again, maybe based on again another (IMHO useless) Slashdot story.

All others have done it, so get over it. The code is GPL, and there is a company that pays (lots of) developers for everyone to enjoy it and give the world a choice.

Re:Stupidity (4, Interesting)

venicebeach (702856) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854001)

It seems that Forbes has been drumming this conflict up a bit [forbes.com] .

Interesting Groklaw article [groklaw.net] about some fishy reporting on the issue by Forbes.

Re:Stupidity (3, Insightful)

absinthminded64 (883630) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854134)

Yes that was a very good read. The name Forbes lost all credibility when Groklaw called them on their CBS reporting styles.

When you find a bad egg you tend to throw away the entire carton.

Re:Stupidity (1)

LionKimbro (200000) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854070)

I think MySQL reasons that it relies on the goodwill of the general FL/OSS public. Non-experts might not notice if MySQL worked to keep mum, but influentials [ciadvertising.org] would notice the absence.

Re:Stupidity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854251)

If Mickos wants to quell the doubts that he's done a deal with the devil, then he
should reveal the details of the deal struck with SCO. Anything less is not going
to wash.

And how is this different from... (4, Insightful)

MosesJones (55544) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853890)


Yahoo handing in a demonstrator....

Google agreeing to censor....

And a massive amount of US companies doing extremely dodgy deals with disreputable regimes, you know like Dick Cheney meeting Saddam Hussein.

So MySql (a relatively poor database before SapDB came in) have agreed to work with SCO to get a bit of cash. Not the most moral decisions but certainly against what those who dealt with Saddam Hussein or the Chinese Goverment its pretty small fry.

Re:And how is this different from... (2, Interesting)

VJ42 (860241) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853953)

It's not, and that's why I'll probably continue using MySQL, google and Yahoo! (I live in the UK, so Cheney's not my problem). I'm used to using a MySQL\PHP\Apche development envionment, and it works. I'm not about to change over a petty dispute. However, that's not to say i won't change if there is a better development envionment out there. If there's somthing better that I can learn, pickup and go quickly I will, but only if it's better suited for the task.

Because SCO will sue us for using MySQL! (4, Insightful)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854179)

How do we know SCO won't turn around and claim that the code in MySQL is tainted??? This is EXACTLY what they did to IBM.

It's in the SCO press release that the money is to be used to produce a COMMERCIAL version of the database.

That's right looks like they duped the MySQL CEO who didnt read the contract before signing.

http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1720 [sco.com] 37 [sco.com]

From the SCO press release:

"The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") (Nasdaq: SCOX), a leading provider of UNIX(R) software technology for distributed, embedded and network-based systems, today announced that it has entered into an agreement with MySQL AB to jointly deliver a certified, commercial version of the popular MySQL database"

His software's free, and that's good enough (4, Insightful)

fuzzy12345 (745891) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853897)

First, I've never been a fan of mySQL for the simple reason that I was a 'REAL' (ACID) database guy and felt that mySQL gave database a bad name. Nonetheless, it sure beat hell out of flat files and, just as PHP might be inferior to 'industrial' computer languages, if people (who otherwise wouldn't have gotten a database at all) used PHP+mySQL to create stuff that otherwise wouldn't have gotten built, kudos to them.

Then came the debate as to whether mySQL was pure enough in Licensing. Once again, I didn't care, but thought "how can you criticize a man for giving you something for free?"

Now comes the flap about what else this company does to pay the rent. They still allow free use of mySQL, there's still other alternatives if you don't like his terms, I'm still using more industrial/ACID solutions, and others are still throwing rocks at the mySQL people.

The undisputably weird thing is that the good folks giving away mySQL are taking more abuse from the community than if they'd never given it away at all. How's that for incentive for everyone else???

Re:His software's free, and that's good enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853936)

Mysql has a huge installed base and this pisses people off, GPL or no GPL.
Envy.

Re:His software's free, and that's good enough (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853998)

PHP might be inferior to 'industrial' computer languages

Free != inferior. Similarly, just because someone attaches a price tag to something doesn't mean it's automatically 'bad ass'. After all, you can put a price tag on anything, even a steaming pile of shit.

And I suggest you take a better look at PHP, how widely used it is, and the heavyweights that are using it, before calling it 'inferior'.

Re:His software's free, and that's good enough (4, Informative)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854177)

Free != inferior. Similarly, just because someone attaches a price tag to something doesn't mean it's automatically 'bad ass'. After all, you can put a price tag on anything, even a steaming pile of shit.

Which is technically more advanced? PostgreSQL or MySQL? Which is more Free? Which costs less? In every case the answer is PostgreSQL. So I agree with you.

And I suggest you take a better look at PHP, how widely used it is, and the heavyweights that are using it, before calling it 'inferior'.

As someone who regularly programs in Perl, Python, and PHP, I would say that PHP is incredibly advanced for niche applications (preprocessing text/html/xml files) and not advanced at all for anything else. It always feels extremely kludgy in areas like GUI programming or general purpose scripting (both Perl and Python are better fits here), but if you want a program that generates, say a config file, PHP is not a bad fit.

Part of the problem with MySQL though is that it achieved earlier popularity for two reasons:
1) Its main FOSS competitor, PostgreSQL was a bear to use in the 6.5 days and
2) MySQL being a for-profit company was able to leverage centralized marketing.

However, many key features were missing from MySQL early on including any semblence of ACID compliance (still not really there in 4.x in that the consistancy and integrity factors are still not nearly complete). Secondly Date's Central Rule still does not apply to 5.0 in that strict mode can always be turned off (even by a client app), so data integrity constraints can be circumvented by applications. For those of us who understand what an RDBMS is supposed to do both mathematically and business-wise, MySQL is a case of asking for trouble.

At the same time, PostgreSQL has solved nearly every usability issue it had in the 6.5 days. Right now debate seems to center around what the standard says about padding and collating sequences, case folding, and handling space padding of char variables in concatenation. No more wishing you could drop a column from a table (you could not prior to 7.3, I think). As of 8.1 the last major usability issues will be *gone* from PostgreSQL. I refer of course to the requirement to vacuum. autovacuum is now part of the backend process. And xid wraparound is solved too. A warning is automatically generated when xid's start to run out, and the rdbms is now smart enough to shut down rather than let it roll over and cause data loss (this almost never happened, because on nearly any production database, performance would dictate vacuuming long before this would become an issue). At the same time, I am not aware of anything that MySQL can do that PostgreSQL can't do as well. For example:
1) 8.1 will have TPC, and the JDBC driver will support XA
2) Replication/clustering possible using add-ons like Slony and PgPool or PgCluster.
3) If you need access to external servers/table types/etc. there is DBI-Link which is a subset of the SQL/MED standard.
4) Daisy chaining triggers :-)

Re:His software's free, and that's good enough (1)

mr_z_beeblebrox (591077) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854198)

Free != inferior. Similarly, just because someone attaches a price tag to something doesn't mean it's automatically 'bad ass'. After all, you can put a price tag on anything, even a steaming pile of shit.
And I suggest you take a better look at PHP, how widely used it is, and the heavyweights that are using it, before calling it 'inferior'.


Ha, he and his vbscripted access DB laugh in your general direction.

Re:His software's free, and that's good enough (2, Informative)

wolrahnaes (632574) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854248)

Speaking as a programmer who primarily works in LAMP (not out of preference, more out of pure laziness), PHP is definately inferior to a huge list of other languages when compared just as a programming language. It's interpreted, so it's not exactly fast. OOP in PHP sucked badly until version 5.

On the other hand, it serves the needs of a very large market. It was built from the ground up for use in dynamic web sites, it's integration with MySQL is quite good, it is readily extendable, and it's easy to learn. It's also a safe language. This is something that shared hosting companies love. They can give their customers the flexibility to run their own programs without much worry of a server-wide breach. On a properly configured server, a badly coded application can only cause problems for the user running it.

Scenario. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854116)

So, SCO gives money to MySQL AB to "develop" mySQL on SCO's platform. This has already happened.

Later, SCO pulls MySQL AB into court over "violations" and "disputes" over who owns what rights to what code and how that code can be distributed ... (see SCO's current case against IBM).

Then it all comes down to the judge and the contracts. And MySQL AB having to cough up everything for YEARS for the discovery phase of the trial.

So, an error in a contract ... or the wrong bit of code ending up in the wrong release ... and then there's a problem. MySQL AB loses the case and all of a sudden SCO owns the code to MySQL (as an asset).

Tainted Code!! (1)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854173)

How do we know SCO won't turn around and claim that the code in MySQL is tainted??? This is EXACTLY what they did to IBM.

It's in the SCO press release that the money is to be used to produce a COMMERCIAL version of the database.

That's right looks like they duped the MySQL CEO who didnt read the contract before signing.

http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1720 37 [sco.com]

From the SCO press release:

"The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") (Nasdaq: SCOX), a leading provider of UNIX(R) software technology for distributed, embedded and network-based systems, today announced that it has entered into an agreement with MySQL AB to jointly deliver a certified, commercial version of the popular MySQL database"

SCO, Oracle, and Berkely the axis of evil (1)

absinthminded64 (883630) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854364)

SCO isn't the only party you have to worry about.

Now that Oracle owns a company whose technology mySQL is dependant upon they should probably be considered a threat as well. They are also an agressive company (ask PeopleSoft) and mySQL uses DB technologies from Berkely too? Others?

We could potentially have a situation where a litiguous bastard company like SCO makes a claim and demands $$ for that IP. The only difference in this case is that those claims would not be baseless.

Microsoft (reaper of other's creations) bought Sybase's database technologies fair and square. MSSQL 6.5 was a significant revision, and 7.0 was a complete rewrite (so they said.) Improving on existing technologies isn't a bad thing but in the OSS world it should be considered very carefully.

Who the mySQL CEO is hanging out with is not the issue. Where money is moving to/from isn't the issue.

The issue is that some litiguous bastard company has tried to bite us and we need to make sure we dont let it happen again.

The clear winner is Postgresql which has been developed from the ground up and isn't a convenient wrapper for other's technologies. ?? Maybe mySQL can use some of that money to negate their dependance on foreign IP. If not then postgresql is the answer.

Cash up front, thanks. (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853898)

I hope they got cash up front or else it could end up being a write off pretty soon!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/08/ibm_drops_ sco_countersuit/ [theregister.co.uk]

"While IBM continues to believe that SCO infringed IBM's valid patents, IBM agreed to withdraw its patent counterclaims to simplify and focus the issues in this case and to expedite their resolution. The little discovery that SCO has produced regarding IBM's patent claims makes clear that there is insufficient economic reason to pursue these claims. Since SCO's sales have been, and are, limited, a finding of infringement would yield only the most modest royalty or award of damages and would not justify the expense of continuing prosecution of these claims," said IBM.

Re:Cash up front, thanks. (5, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853977)

If you had bothered to read the Groklaw interview almost 2 weeks ago
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200510112 11450706 [groklaw.net]
you would have found out that SCO paid mySQL.

Money taken from SCO is less money for their FUD machine.

It also gives people stuck on SCO a chance to migrate their stuff slowly to other platforms.

  1. Move existing services to mySQl on SCO platform
  2. replace SCO platform with *BSD or *Linux

So how is that a bad thing again?

Re:Cash up front, thanks. (1)

rm69990 (885744) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854195)

And if you had bothered to read and actually comprehend his comment, you would see that he never said otherwise. He was saying he hoped MySQL got their money from SCO up-front, or else the effort for porting the database could end up being a write-off. Which would explain why he posted a summary from an IBM filing talking about SCO running out of cash.

I'm assuming he didn't use actual company names in his comment because he figured people on Slashdot had brains. He obviously hasn't been around here long :-P

Re:Cash up front, thanks. (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854368)

My points were two-fold:
  1. This is OLD news - almost 2 weeks old. So old, it doesn't qualify as "news" any more.
  2. Like most /.er, he didn't bother RTFA before posting - or he would have had the answer to his "I hope they got the cash up front" comment.

SCO will sue us for using tainted code! (1)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854204)

How do we know SCO won't turn around and claim that the code in MySQL is tainted??? This is EXACTLY what they did to IBM.

It's in the SCO press release that the money is to be used to produce a COMMERCIAL version of the database.

That's right looks like they duped the MySQL CEO who didnt read the contract before signing.

http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1720 [sco.com] 37 [sco.com]

From the SCO press release:

"The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") (Nasdaq: SCOX), a leading provider of UNIX(R) software technology for distributed, embedded and network-based systems, today announced that it has entered into an agreement with MySQL AB to jointly deliver a certified, commercial version of the popular MySQL database"

In other words (-1, Troll)

brennz (715237) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853903)

We are going to support a company that has made a direct attack on the OSS community because it is profitable for us.

We don't really care about OSS as development paradigm and a philosopy which is truly superior to closed source.

We are money grubbing corporate types that will do whatever is expedient in order to make a buck.

We are in this for the money.

Kitsch

Re:In other words (1, Insightful)

Weedlekin (836313) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853950)

Isn't "money grubbing" and "do anything for a buck" a pretty good description of all corporations?

Re:In other words (1)

lord_rob the only on (859100) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853981)

What's wrong with that ? MySQL A.B. is just a company that hires programmers who need to be payed at the end of the month. Why shouldn't it accept the job for the beauty of "OSS as development paradigm" ?

FailzorS... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853906)

all along. *BSD Stagnant. As Linux world. GNAA members lesson and members all over = 1400 NetBSD decentralized Paper towels b3en sitting here empire in decline, Though, I have to users of NetBSD 800 mhz machine users all over the you got there. Or Distribution make I have a life to to underscore many of us are their hand...she

Sorry, pal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853922)

We don't believe you.

Actions speak louder than words.

Your Turn Next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853940)

His main defense seems to be that other companies have ported to SCO too. He admits money too played a part.

OK, you're here. This is the bridge they're all jumping off and it looks like your turn will be coming up real soon.

Well, I'll be leaving you now.

Market Grab? (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853941)

Consider this: SCO and the OpenServer platform are dieing, so is this nothing more than a quick and easy cash grab for MySQL? Perhaps, but maybe there is more.

There are at least a few people still locked into the OpenServer platform, but sometime in the future, they will have to migrate to Linux after the final nail has been driven into SCO. When they eventually do migrate to Linux, they will have to make some choices as to what database to migrate to as well. Will it be Oracle? Will it be PostgreSQL? Well, if they have already beem using MySQL on OpenServer, they will probably stay with MySQL on Linux. Do you see where this is going?

Re:Market Grab? (1)

Kemuri (204937) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853979)


Interesting indeed!

OpenOffice runs on Windows aswell, PostgreSQL too. Hell, lots of opensource projects do!!!
And what you hear from the cities that move their IT to Linux: first move to OpenOffice on Windows, then smoothly go to Linux.

I don't see flames on OpenOffice and PostgreSQL running on Windows. Well, PostgreSQL is supported on SCO aswell (I think by EnterpriseDB), so I still don't get why all the bitching goes on MySQL AB. :(

Re:Market Grab? (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853990)

True, true, but money exchanged hands here, and making money selling software is a dirty thing at Slashdot...

Re:Market Grab? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854012)

Hey what the fuck are you doing here? Fucking muslim terrorists - get the fuck out of here!!!

MUSLIM ON SLASHDOT???!!!!!!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854054)

Are you a fucking MUSLIM??!!

Re:Market Grab? (1)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854099)


I don't see flames on OpenOffice and PostgreSQL running on Windows. Well, PostgreSQL is supported on SCO aswell (I think by EnterpriseDB), so I still don't get why all the bitching goes on MySQL AB. :(


EnterpriseDB certainly got a bit hard time for it on the PostgreSQL email lists. There were a lot of people who voiced similar concerns. EnterpriseDB said "hey look. This is business as usual and is about helping our customers. Don't read any more into it than that." And that settled it.

MySQL AB got a bit of a hard time and they attempted for a while to justify this partnership in terms of opening a dialog with SCO (search Groklaw for the stories relating to MySQL). This is what rubbed me the wrong way. Not the partnership itself. I guess they must be reading my comments because they have changed their rhetoric. If MySQL had always said what they said in this interview, their position wouldn't be that controversial. But this is the second time they have changed course in how they present it and so I don't actually know what their execs are thinking.

But (1)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854079)

SCO OpenServer ships with PostgreSQL, and one of the core commercial PostgreSQL spinoff companies (EnterpriseDB) entered into a similar partnership with SCO.

Here is the thing. Even with this new round of partnerships, SCO today has fewer partners than at any time in their recent past. SCO needs these partners more than they need SCO. So I would not be at all surprised if SCO isn't offering some pretty compelling advantages to these would-be partners for providing them with some semblance of credibility.

Yes, but I disagree. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854130)

There is nothing stopping any company currently running a SCO OS from also running a Linux OS and looking at migrating right now.

There's no need to transition them with mySQL on SCO to get them to use mySQL on Linux.

If anything, it would be easier to do 1 migration straight to a 100% Linux system than to make 2 migrations (one from old database to mySQL on SCO and the other from mySQL on SCO to mySQL on Linux).

FUCK SCO! TIME TO KILL IT! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13853947)

FUCK SCO! SOMEBODY SHOOT A BULLET THROUGH IT'S BRAINS! That would be the only sensible thing to do. It's about time to waste that little piece of shit.

There's freedom and "freedom" (0, Flamebait)

October_30th (531777) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853962)

We believe that porting a GPL version of MySQL for the SCO OpenServer platform gives thousands of users more options when it comes to choosing a database

That is a valid point. Too bad the GPL zealots are for freedom only when it benefits their own idea of what "free" is.

What, specifically, are you talking about? (1)

jbn-o (555068) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854247)

Too bad the GPL zealots are for freedom only when it benefits their own idea of what "free" is.

Please do specify who you're talking about and provide some quotes to back up this namecalling.

Re:There's freedom and "freedom" (2, Insightful)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854250)

Too bad the GPL zealots are for freedom only when it benefits their own idea of what "free" is.

Yeah! By the same token, it's a huge shame that the US doesn't support North Korea's ideas about freedom.

Don't try to fool us! (-1, Flamebait)

DrunkenPenguin (553473) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853965)

The deal produces revenue for us and this allows us to hire more open source developers.
 
Fuck you! That's BS!

Re:Don't try to fool us! (1)

rm69990 (885744) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854218)

Perhaps, if you would do some research instead of just pretending you know what you are talking about (wtf am I talking about, that is the norm on Slashdot???) you would notice that SCO paid MySQL money for this deal. Read it up on Groklaw.

......idiot

Supping? (2, Funny)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853968)

Supping? As in to take food and especially liquid food into the mouth a little at a time - Websters

Okay...

Re:Supping? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854039)

The phrase "supping with the devil" comes from the old saying:
When you sup with the devil, you should bring a long spoon (or other variants).
Google reference to its use in the 14th century, here. [phrases.org.uk]
It is used to mean that one should take care to distance oneself from corruption, in case you suffer for it. It sometimes has an added part to the effect of "or you may become the meal".

mysql or postgres (5, Interesting)

ajdlinux (913987) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853969)

MySQL only became popular because it's faster than postgresql for less complex database work. Postgresql is a better database. I just wonder why SCO went for a deal with MySQL instead of just taking the BSD-licensed Postgres. (I would use postgres myself if my webhost and CMS supported it)

Also, mySQL has a totally wrong view of the GPL: see this discussion on debian-legal [debian.org] .


-- Get free domain names [ezyrewards.com]

Re:mysql or postgres (1)

3770 (560838) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854239)

Why SCO made a deal with MySQL instead of Postgres? You answered your question in your own post:

(I would use postgres myself if my webhost and CMS supported it)


Industry support.

Re:mysql or postgres (1)

dedazo (737510) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854310)

Probably because they looked at MySQL 5.0. It's no Postgres, but it's a big step in the right direction.

On the other hand... MySQL is popular because it 'fits' the development approach many open source projects have embraced for a long time - power, flexibility and simplicity, even with its limitations.

I hope MySQL can still be used the same way so everyone can have the best of both worlds. Sometimes you just need a storage engine for your blog or whatever, you know?

Re:mysql or postgres (1)

ajdlinux (913987) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854354)

yes,it's limited but simple. I just hope that MySQL AB doesn't proprietarise MySQL. But from that thread on debian-legal, i think MySQL doesn't really understand Free Software or the GPL propery.

Okay, how about these? (4, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853983)

Gaim has been ported to Windows for some time now, yet I haven't seen one diatribe against the Gaim developers. Shameful!

Dolby Labs? They should have revoked Apple's right to use AAC the moment Fairplay came to exist. What a sham!

And Cygwin? We should all boycott Red Hat for that deal with the devil. How dare they!

Slashdot? They refuse to auto-detect Internet Explorer, and then serve up a blank page in those instances. How two-faced of them!

Re:Okay, how about these? (2, Insightful)

theLOUDroom (556455) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854100)

Gaim has been ported to Windows for some time now, yet I haven't seen one diatribe against the Gaim developers.

Microsoft hasn't filed a multi-billion dollar lawsuit claiming that all of linux is their property.

There's a difference between dealing with the devil and dealing with a competitor. Microsoft isn't that great, but at least still tries to make money by selling product. SCO has shifted their focus as a company to suing people who use linux.

See the difference?

It's like the difference between a car company that isn't very good, and a patent lawyer who abuses the system, demanding royalties for inventions that aren't novel nor his own.
One of them, at the end of the day, is still producing something, while the other one is simply a cancer on society.
Helping SCO directly hurts Linux, it's that simple.

Dealing with one is forgivable, dealing with the other is unconscionable.

Gosh (3, Interesting)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 8 years ago | (#13853996)

They make it sound like porting mysql to openserver will require a very significant effort. Why would anyone pay for a supposedly unix-ish system that's so much unlike any other that most popular software can't be built on it without significant planning and reworking? I doubt that porting is really such a big deal as that, but still they deemed it worthy of press releases announcing their efforts and partnership.

Re:Gosh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854094)

I hate to break it to you, but unlike *BSD and Linux, Openserver is actually a registered UNIX OS.

To answer your question: GNU/Linux developers generally don't pay much mind to standards.

Re:Gosh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854152)

So fucking what? All that anyone cares about for porting is whether it is POSIX or not. UNIX is a trademark, and a useless one at that.

Re:Gosh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854311)

UNIX = POSIX, C99, and IEEE 1003.1 compliance. GNU/Linux brings no such insurances of interopability to the table. Hell, Linus didn't even look at POSIX until after linux-1.0 was released.

Use of the UNIX trademark is restricted to registered UNIX systems, which allows suppliers to make and substantiate clear claims of conformance to the standards.

GNU/Linux developers are so ridiculously averse to UNIX standards that it's practically impossible to find a piece of "Free Software" that doesn't rely on non-standard linux-specific hooks.

Decisions... (3, Interesting)

Decameron81 (628548) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854007)

MySQL made a simple business decision... right or wrong is completely subjective here. Eventually they will pay by losing some customers, but appart from that I see no reason why they should be defending their decision.

In other words, I don't think that my enemy's friends are my enemies.

On top of that, has the author considered that our priorities may be completely irrelevant to someone else? It's not like we can all take care of everything... like destroying Sco, and saving the world, and curing cancer, and feeding the poor, etc, etc, etc. At some point we have to start ignoring some of these priorities.

Can SCO be trusted? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854035)

Can you really trust SCO to honor the GPL? I mean come one after all they have done recently why would ANYONE trust them to honor any kind of contract? Let alone something invovling the GPL.

Free as in Speech (3, Insightful)

headLITE (171240) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854071)

Since when is giving free software to people running non-free operating systems a _bad_ thing? They're spreading Freedom-as-in-Speech to a world that lacks it. What could _not_ be good about that? They're giving freedom of choice to people that need it. They're infecting SCO users with OSS ideas. Why the fuck would someone who understands the whole OSS idea not like what MySQL is doing here?


The key fact some OSS zealots miss is that SCO users only USE products from SCO, they ARE NOT ACTUALLY SCO. Granted, SCO pays MySQL. They're still not who's going to profit from the deal the most. The actual users are going to be. They may be forced to use SCO software. Occam's razor dictates they are because using it voluntarily is, at this time, indefinitely harder to explain.


Please stop trying to keep those poor souls from switching to open source software.

Marten Mickos is looking for some solid ground (1)

TarrySingh (916400) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854081)

and a big goat like SCO can help him with a lawsuit should Larry (Ellison) barge n and buy him (MySQL).

money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13854132)

Hope they get the money from SCO first.

Brutal to ev1, forgiving to MySQL? (1)

Anthony Boyd (242971) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854174)

We didn't make the decision lightly; we knew SCO was a sensitive subject with the free software and open source communities.

That sounds a lot like saying, "we knew it'd piss them off, but we did it anyway!"

Look, I know I'm on the wrong side of this -- Slashdot groupthink is clearly forgiving of this, and I'm just not. But if ev1 had its feet held to the flame, I don't see why MySQL should walk away unscathed. Bottom line: it was a bad decision, and while most of the MySQL users won't care, some do, and they're entitled to vote their conscience.

I can see it now. (2, Funny)

stuttering stan (889500) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854189)

SCO: I hear that you're looking at migrating to another vendor, who is it? Microsoft, Red Hat...?
SCO Customer: You're not gonna pull that "AutoZone" crap on me, are you?
SCO: No, no, not at all. Hey, aren't you using MySQL for your applications?
SCO Customer: Yes, but it's the GPL'ed version, not the one you licences from them.
SCO: I think that's something for the courts to decide, after the loooong and expensive discovery process.
SCO Customer: WHAT THE...?!?!
MySQL: Hey! Why are you harrassing my end-users?
SCO: Don't you mean our customers ?
MySQL: Huh? Oh yeah, never mind.

Excusatio non petita, acusatio manifesta (1)

faragon (789704) | more than 8 years ago | (#13854326)

As Columbo [wikipedia.org] could argue, this the interview is precooked, seems to me a mere excuse for saying 'Hey, don't hate us, we're still good boys'. Pathetic.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...