Beta
×

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!

Increased Linux Use With SCO's Defeat Predicted

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the penguins-in-more-places dept.

Linux Business 280

twitter writes "The defeat of SCO's infamous copyright attack has Forbes wondering if a GNU/Linux boom is upon us. They discuss how this will benefit Novel, IBM, Chrysler, AutoZone and Red Hat. 'The SCO Group frightened potential business users away from Linux with lawsuits demanding billions in royalties. But the litigious company's claims were shot down in a ruling that will likely boost uptake of the operating system.'"

cancel ×

280 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Forbes? (-1, Flamebait)

dedazo (737510) | more than 7 years ago | (#20216927)

Is this the same company you have repeatedly accused of being "paid M$ shills"? And now they're right on the money?

I guess when the pickins are slim you need get 'em where you can.

Forbes? Today, yes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20217053)

Confirmation bias in action. Twitter's sources are only as reliable as their recent ability to reinforce his world view.

Although, to be fair, Dan Lyons was pretty damn close to a paid SCO shill at times.

Yes, because they are Forbes. (2, Insightful)

twitter (104583) | more than 7 years ago | (#20218145)

Is this the same company you have repeatedly accused of being "paid M$ shills"? And now they're right on the money?

They are hardly, "right on the money", but at least one reporter there has woken up and it's better late than never. My hope is that this represents yet another company that's defecting from the M$ monopoly. Their defection would be remarkable when there is so much M$ advertising money at stake. The stock prices reported are accurate facts, their predictions are interesting because they have their head in the big dumb company world, and their defection could be a sign of shifting alliances.

A gnu/linux boom because the SCO threat is gone would be a double win. Any boom is a win, but one that proves the SCO attack succeeded will be fuel for the next M$ anti-trust case. Delayed justice is not very good, but it's better than none.

Re:Yes, because they are Forbes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20223523)

Summary of above:

One Forbes reporter now agrees with me. This reinforces my assessment of worldwide conspiracy theories.

Re:Yes, because they are Forbes. (2, Insightful)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223533)

Any boom is a win, but one that proves the SCO attack succeeded will be fuel for the next M$ anti-trust case.

But in the meantime, it would also be confirmation to Microsoft that it's attacks are working, and thus encouragement to continue.

I do agree with you, though... seeing a usually pro-MS business publication being bullish on Linux really is something to celebrate. I can only hope that more (e.g. the WSJ) follow Forbes' lead.

What's the opposite of FUD? (1)

Tatarize (682683) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223705)

What's the opposite of FUD? -- SCO doesn't matter. The stupid as court let them drag their feet before determining what we determined in ten minutes... they were so totally full of crap that it wasn't even amusing.

Re:What's the opposite of FUD? (2, Interesting)

something_wicked_thi (918168) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223927)

I was thinking the same thing. We need another acronym. I vote for POO - Presumption, Overconfidence, and Overzealousness.

Re:What's the opposite of FUD? (4, Interesting)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224755)

The stupid as court let them drag their feet

The general feeling on Groklaw seemed to be that, while SCO and BSF undoubtedly dragged their feet as long as they could, Judge Kimball (and to a lesser extend IBM) were happy to give them enough rope, simply to stop SCO from finding grounds for an appeal, and kicking the whole sordid mess off afresh again in size months time.

As it is, because SCO were given every possible chance to make their case, they are going to find it very difficult to go running to a higher court wailing "it's not fa-a-air!"

And that, I think, has to be a good thing.

Who's "You"? (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223703)

Is this the same company you have repeatedly accused of being "paid M$ shills"? And now they're right on the money?

Who has accused Forbes, twitter? Or are you calling out Slashdot? Slashdot publishes all kinds of stories from all kinds of people who walk up and post. They're often contradictory, depending on the perspective of the submitter. Slashdot isn't a newspaper with an editorial board that decides it knows what the world is like, what's happening. It's a public printing press staffed by its readers. It doesn't have an Op-Ed page or an official position on any subject. Except maybe that "Nerds Matter".

Yeah, its quality kind of sucks, its news is fairly unreliable. But Slashdot isn't a basis for making decisions, it's a conversation piece. Like a fake unicorn horn in a 400 year old glass case: not authentic, but fun to talk about. With the benefit of links to the stories elsewhere on the Web, for you to check for corroboration. But with the downside of snipey discussions like these, peopled by the mis/uninformed, the inarticulate and even saboteurs.

The pickin's are slim, but there's plenty of 'em. If you need to get 'em at Slashdot, take what you can get.

Re:Who's "You"? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224591)

"paid shill"?

I'm not sure even Microsoft has enough money for that sort of bribe.

What Forbes is is naturally aligned to the Robber Baron. It's a publication for Robber Barons or would be Robber Barons. So it has a certain natural bias and a general cluelessness about the actual technical details if they aren't in the areas of finance.

Forbes is like your CEO.

Forbes is simply what would happen if Bill Gates created a magazine.

Re:Who's "You"? (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224739)

I agree with you 100% about the actual mechanism by which Forbes shills for MS.

But I note that I didn't say that Forbes is a paid shill. I merely quoted that sentence from a post which in turn quoted an original post which said that about Forbes. The post I quoted accused the OP of saying "paid shill" as if Forbes' status had consequence, though someone (the OP'er or Slashdot itself) has said that Forbes' status has no consequence. An accusation that someone was being contradictory.

My post said nothing about Forbes' status. I said only that the contradictions were irrelevant because of how Slashdot works.

In short, I think you replied to the wrong post.

lol (3, Funny)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223525)

*Companies formerly threatened by SCO peek out from their spider holes*

"Is it safe to use Linux now?", they say timidly.

Re:lol (4, Funny)

CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223567)

Does this mean 2008 will be the year of the Linux desktop? ;-)

Re:lol (1)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223597)

Is there a "+1 Obligatory" mod we could give this guy?

Maybe (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223733)

As long as it isn't mine. Tried it several times since 2001 (as recently as June/July), still would rather use FreeBSD or Windows, but Linux does make many users happy, so as long as it keeps them happy, that's a good thing.

Re:Maybe (1)

fotbr (855184) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223911)

Well said, and same situation here.

Re:lol (1, Troll)

Shano (179535) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223865)

Ooh, I remember the year of the Linux desktop.

In fact, I seem to remember about 10 years of the Linux desktop, and not seeing a lot of Linux desktops.

Re:lol (2, Funny)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224527)

Yes, 2008 will be the year of the Linux desktop. Unfortunately, it will also be the year of the laptop...

Re:lol (1)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223913)

M$ will just buy more pawns.

Re:lol (1)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223925)

Actually, M$ is one of the ones looking out from the spiderhole.

Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO (2, Informative)

Nanite (220404) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223527)

A little company with a lot to protect in the PC market. 20 Mil is such a paltry sum though, they probably don't even remember making the donation.

Re:Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO (1)

jdubchak (1121059) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223775)

Sun had as much to do with the "Bank rolling" as did M$. I find it interesting that the community isn't nearly as vitriolic with the former as they are with the latter.

Re:Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO (4, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223777)

A little company with a lot to protect in the PC market. 20 Mil is such a paltry sum though, they probably don't even remember making the donation.
Ding! That 'lil company in Washington has already abandoned SCO. It got what it wanted: FUD. Now its out making more FUD, claiming that Linux infringes 235 patents. They've used their FUD tactics and kickbacks and by planting their operatives to kill ODF in the standards community with OOXML.

SCO may have lost the battle, but it was already a victory for Microsoft no matter what happened. The war is far from over, but we'll win it by keeping on churning out our best software and leaving the FUD battles to the evangelists like Perens, ESR, RMS and others.

Here's the fact: Microsoft's actions prove that Linux and Free/Open Source Software scares it shitless!

Re:Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO (1)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223869)

Exactly. SCO were cannon fodder for MS, nothing more.

Much the same as Novell and Linspire look to be setting themselves up to be...

Won't change a thing (4, Insightful)

Bertie (87778) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223571)

Nobody believed them anyway.

Did they?

Re:Won't change a thing (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223641)

That's what I was thinking. Did anyone actually cease using Linux or put off Linux adoption because they were afraid of SCO? I wasn't aware that people were taking SCO's claims that seriously.

Re:Won't change a thing (1)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223801)

Even if they had been worried about the lawsuit, companies like Novell and Red Hat were prepared to cover their customers. I am not sure how much that was *worth* - if Linux had gone down the tubes then Red Hat and Novell would have gone down as well.

Re:Won't change a thing (1)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224397)

I can't provide details, but yes. I know of companies that have had a VERY anti-Linux (in terms of allowing its use) stance over the past few years and the SCO case was a big contributing factor.

Whether or not the "thou shalt not use Linux" contingent in those companies will change their tune with this news, I do not know. My guess is they'll find another excuse.

Re:Won't change a thing (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224677)

That sounds pretty retarded. Most IT staffs I've been a part of tend to be frustrated at their own inability to use Linux, either because of the lack of a specific application or technical inexperience with anything but Windows. I've never been at a company with an anti-Linux policy.

Re:Won't change a thing (4, Insightful)

M. Baranczak (726671) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224247)

Nobody believed them anyway.
There's a sucker born every minute. And right this very moment, some of those suckers are sitting in their offices, making decisions on purchasing software.

Balls of crystal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20223583)

I PREDICT...

The sun will rise tomorrow! Or maybe not, if it rains...

How is someone predicting something in any way "news"? Send the Amazing Randi after this charlatain! It's a certainty that Linux use will rise, even if the SCO thing didn't go away. And it makes us Linux lovers happy, but ya know, it ain't news 'til it happens.

Sheesh. Get off my lawn, you damn kids. And no, you can't have your (crystal) ball back.

-mcgrew

Meanwhile Off In The Real World (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20223603)

Microsoft is killing off open document format legislation all over the US.

Microsoft is establishing themselves in China where all open source crowd assumed was going to easily go to Linux.

Apache has a year or so left before it is overtaken by Microsoft.

Even though it took an embarrassingly long time Microsoft has finally gotten a handle on viruses/spyware etc. to the point where no one is running screaming from their platform anymore.

So, yeah, high five open source community!

And as to SCO, they did their part and have long been forgotten by Microsoft as they move on to bigger and better weapons against Linux and open source software.

Re:Meanwhile Off In The Real World (1)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223855)

Wait until Darl McBride (?) or one of his inner circle publishes the inside story - how a well known PC software company bankrolled SCO's scorched earth attack on IBM and Linux. Ooops.

Linux chain reaction (5, Insightful)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224233)

"Even though it took an embarrassingly long time Microsoft has finally gotten a handle on viruses/spyware etc. to the point where no one is running screaming from their platform anymore."

When did this happen? Viruses/spyware was one of the largest stimuli for me to finally suck it up and emigrate for good (I was under no circumstances going to reinstall XP or buy Vista). And I'm not alone. Now I've found that Ubuntu does everything I want it to do, my friends will be getting a taste too.

It would not surprise me in the slightest if we were to see Linux achieve double digit market penetration (i.e. 10%) within 2 years. It's kind of like being one of the first kids to play multiplayer Doom and then Quake. You think to yourself "Damn! This is fun! I wonder why everyone else isn't doing this?" And soon enough (given several years), everyone IS doing it. It spreads from person to person virally.

The phenomenon itself parallels atomic physics; as soon as you have on average every split atom triggering another atom to split, you get a chain reaction. This is the same with people and ideas, software (or human diseases). It's just that the chain reaction aspect seems less obvious to us because of the time scale. It might be 2 months before I get around to install Ubuntu on a friend's machine, whereas a neutron emitted from a nucleus will strike another atom on the other side of the bomb in much, much less than a second.

Ubuntu is mostly there. It is there enough that I believe if I installed it myself on a poweruser friend's computer, helped sort out some driver issues, he'd be able to take it from there with the occasional internet search. And it is better than MS in a lot of important areas: stability, security, efficiency (in Watts), ease of installing new software (Synaptic). Not having to worry about spyware or viruses is HUGE. And it's free, by emigrating you've permanently opted out of the eternal upgrade for $$$ cycle, along with acquiring a mental Unix toolkit that will enable further migrations if necessary (e.g. to BSD or other free ixes).

And it is the power users who are critical to this chain reaction. It's not grandma using mail and web who will be installing it on friend's computers. It is the power user. So by all means, get your grandma and girlfriend using it, but if you really care about adoption rates, find another power user and guide them through an installation. Note that something like Ubuntu is gold to a power user (someone who is doing free tech support for friends and family) because it has the potential of being much lower in maintenance. No finding new spyware removers, reinstalling, or any of that. Convert, done.

After that, it's just a matter of time before you have hardware manufacturers and gaming companies coming over too. Then it's over. Within a year you'll get everything of note imported or created. Be it photoshop or office, the bugs will be ironed out extremely quickly. Word will become like Wordperfect used to be. There will still be a few people whining "But word used to work so much better!", but they will be ignored.

Re:Linux chain reaction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20224415)

Ok

Re:Linux chain reaction (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20224661)

And back in the real world......

Yes linux will be adopted just for the sole reason "it's free." However it will never compete with a desktop or A/D.

"After that, it's just a matter of time before you have hardware manufacturers and gaming companies coming over too." --- Yea right, I have been hearing this for the last 10 years from the Linux community.

"Then it's over. Within a year you'll get everything of note imported or created. Be it photoshop or office, the bugs will be ironed out extremely quickly." -- Really? Wow, so why has it taken so long now?

Sorry guys, Linux is good no doubt but I am telling you now, it will NEVER compete with Microsoft. I, as a Sysadmin for a Fortune 500 Company, can tell you that no SysAdmin wants to deal with recompiling kernels, writing scripts for hours on end when I can just install Microsoft, lock it down and forget about it.

Yes Microsoft has spyware and viruses and if anyone remembers the report released in 2005 about Linux having more holes then Microsoft that will shoot your main point out of the water. The majority of people that have problems with spyware and viruses are companies that do not have knowledgeable admin's that do not use PKI, firewalls, standard users accounts, etc.

BTW, here is the report on how linux has THREE times as many security holes as Microsoft:

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html [us-cert.gov]

Sorry Fella's you lose and please don't give me the standard B/S about different Distro's and how you can lock it down, I just made that same point with Windows....don't turn into the Macintosh crowd about how secure your O/S is :)

This is the same story I heard after XP was released, how the mighty linux O/S will dominate the field and still MAC OS X is beating it.

It will always be an enthusiasts Operating System.

houston's ev1.net (1)

mwilliamson (672411) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223611)

Didn't Houston's EV1.net decide early on to bend over and take it from SCO? I wonder if they can sue SCO for fraud now, or at least what they paid for "a SCO linux I.P. license". If everyone who paid for a Linux license would file suit against SCO, it may help shoot the dying beast in the head and put it out of its misery. (and provide amusement for the rest of us)

Re:houston's ev1.net (1)

websitebroke (996163) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223665)

This of course, is assuming that there is any money left in this beast after Novell and IBM are done with it. I bet the nazgul pick the carcass clean.

Re:houston's ev1.net (1)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223729)

The company is worth peanuts as it is. The pending lawsuits should be enough to shrink the company's assets to nearly $0 after attorney fees.

Re:houston's ev1.net (1)

Oddscurity (1035974) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223921)

From what I understand they've prepaid their lawyers to the tune of $33M. I'm not sure where I read it, could be either here or Groklaw.

Re:houston's ev1.net (1)

gweihir (88907) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224021)

The company is worth peanuts as it is. The pending lawsuits should be enough to shrink the company's assets to nearly $0 after attorney fees.

Actually it should be a huge negative sum. Remember that all these "license fees" now belong to Novell. SCO does not have a dime. I hope they cannot pay their scum lawyers.

Also, I seem to remember a Sec invstigation into stock fraud against the SCO management. Maybe Darl will go to prison after all...

Re:houston's ev1.net (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224167)

but Novell was never paid for these licenses. So, does this make them void/invalid and require new licenses from the company who really owns the product? If so, it would leave those fools who signed up with SCO to be the ones who fight over the carcass instead of making Novell do it.

What this would also be good at would be invalidating Microsoft's and Sun's licenses since those were worth something like $25 million combined and these were directly used to finance SCO's fight against Linux.

LoB

Re:houston's ev1.net (1)

gweihir (88907) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224567)

but Novell was never paid for these licenses. So, does this make them void/invalid and require new licenses from the company who really owns the product? If so, it would leave those fools who signed up with SCO to be the ones who fight over the carcass instead of making Novell do it.

Good question. In any case SCO has lost the money. They either have to give it back or give it to Novell. My bet would be that they have to give it to Novell and Novell then has the choice of giving the money back or granting licenses. Another question would be whether the livense-selling by SCO was fraud to begin with.

Finally. (1, Redundant)

RandoX (828285) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223615)

The year of the Linux Desktop.

Re:Finally. (1)

tiananmen tank man (979067) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223791)

Desktop users were in fear of being sued for using linux?

Re:Finally. (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223939)

That "year of the Linux Desktop" saying always sounded odd to me. Always made me think of Babylon 5.

It was the year of fire, the year of destruction, the year we took back what was ours. It was the year of rebirth, the year of great sadness, the year of pain and a year of joy. It was a new age, it was the end of history, it was the year of Linux on the Desktop.

Sadly, I do think that we may be waiting until 2261 for that one to happen too.

FTA (4, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223631)


The SCO Group did not return a call seeking comment on Monday.

Maybe their phones were disconnected for non-payment?

Re:FTA (2, Funny)

shadowspar (59136) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223783)

Either that, or there are no employees left there to answer them.

Re:FTA (1)

Captain Sarcastic (109765) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224249)

Maybe their phones were disconnected for non-payment?


No, the problem was that they're in the process of moving.

Perhaps they're setting up shop in Lagos, Nigeria, so they can pay their creditors with $20,000,000 cashier's checks and ask them to send the change back to their post-office box.

I missed the boat (1)

gr8_phk (621180) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223633)

I read about the ruling over the weekend. It never occured to me to short SCOX on Monday even though I thought about it on past occasions. OTOH, if I did think of it I probably would have seen how low it was already and not done it.

Dumb Dumb Dumb. It was like free money.

Re:I missed the boat (2, Insightful)

maroberts (15852) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223761)

You probably couldn't have shorted it. There have to be shares available in order for a short position to be taken up.

Re:I missed the boat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20224369)

and someone has to believe that you are wrong and bet against you.

Grrrr (3, Informative)

Alioth (221270) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223639)

Please. The name of the company that makes things like Netware and did a deal with Microsoft is Novell, not Novel. It's not that hard to get right!

Re:Grrrr (4, Interesting)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224281)

Apparently [wikipedia.org] it was hard to get right:

The name for the company Novell was suggested by George Canova's wife who mistakenly thought that "Novell" meant "new" in French. (In fact, the feminine singular of "new" in French is "nouvelle").

Reports of a Linux Boom (2, Insightful)

jessecurry (820286) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223701)

Reports of a Linux boom have been greatly exaggerated... it's been slowly picking up market share over time and will continue to do so... nothing sensational is going to happen... it's a good OS... it's getting better every day... as the OS is made "idiot-proof" all of the idiots will adopt. A great strategy would be to get linux in the elementary and middle schools, get 'em young.... keep 'em for life. It's an ellipses heavy tuesday.

Re:Reports of a Linux Boom (1)

slobarnuts (666254) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223769)

A great strategy would be to get linux in the elementary and middle schools, get 'em young.... keep 'em for life. It's an ellipses heavy tuesday.

What, like the OLPC laptops?

Re:Reports of a Linux Boom (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224183)

A great strategy would be to get linux in the elementary and middle schools, get 'em young.... keep 'em for life.

Yeah, that worked out great for Apple.

Apple was falling flat on it's face at the same time it was giving out free goods to public schools. The few that stuck with Apple in their times of need are now helping to drive the Apple market with their expendable income since they're finally growing up a bit and not spending every spare dime down at the local bar. Apple is having mild success with a younger crowd because of the iPod hipster factor but how long will that really continue? The iPod will help keep Apple afloat if they take a downturn in the desktop market but that has nothing to do with having their PCs in the schools.

The problem with Linux right now is software support. Pure and simple.

Re:Reports of a Linux Boom (3, Interesting)

Locutus (9039) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224337)

>The problem with Linux right now is software support. Pure and simple.

and what software for K-12 is not supported on Linux?

BTW, Apple did a pretty good job getting school kids familiar with its product. What happened was about a billion dollars in Microsoft marketing of FUD that Apple Mac was dead because Windows 95 made it obsolete. I was there and I had school teachers asking me about Windows PC's "because Apple was going out of business". There were no exploding Macs or anything like it, just millions and millions of Microsofts money going out to the press to spread the FUD. Apple survived by the skin of their teeth and even had to take money from Microsoft and agree to drop Netscape for a Mac version of MS Internet Explorer.

Linux and OSS are a perfect match for K-12. It's inexpensive, completely open for their learning experiences if that is what they want to do, it works. Atleast here in the US, school systems are constantly fighting for their budgets and floundering with expensive support of Microsoft Windows software and their hardware requirements.

LoB
 

Meet new FUD, same as old FUD (0, Offtopic)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223747)

In Capitalist West you note SCO Linux FUD expired.
In Soviet Redmond Novell Linux FUD wired to you.

SCO's products enough reason to use Linux (1)

shadowspar (59136) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223753)

I think that the writing was on the wall for SCO long, long before this lawsuit got under way. The company I was working at back in 2000 had a number of boxes running SCO, presumably because they needed a *nix that ran on Intel x86 hardware. I remember looking through the godawful tangle of symlinks that was SCO's /etc directory and wondering why anybody would pay for it when the Debian build on my desktop seemed a lot more robust and did a better job of meeting my needs, for free. Seems I wasn't the only person thinking this.

Re:SCO's products enough reason to use Linux (1)

jmyers (208878) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224025)

SCO Xenix was a great product for its time, I used it from 1985 until about 1990
SCO Unix was a great product for its time, I used it from about 1990-1995.
SCO Open Desktop/Open Server or whatever they called it was the horrible aberration with all the symbolic links, etc. By the time this product came out the other Intel Unixes (Linux, etc) had caught up to SCO. SCO Unix as a viable product ended in about 96, the only thing that kept them alive after that was a loyal VAR channel (developed when the product was the best Unix available for Intel).

Anyone using SCO in 2000 was on a dead end street.

Re:SCO's products enough reason to use Linux (1)

sparkz (146432) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224727)

The symlinks were pretty nasty, but there was a certain logic behind the setup. It was disorienting if you're an expert on other UNIX systems and new to SCO OpenServer, but not actually bad, just different, IMHO. The product itself was okay; I was the SCO "expert" for (ironically enough) an IBM reseller I worked for in '97, and - amongst the short list of UNIX-type systems you could run on x86 hardware, SCO was pretty good, with better driver support than just about anything else (though that would have been about the time that Linux caught up and started to overtake). I even did some work on somebody's SCO OpenServer 5 box in January of this year!

Re:SCO's products enough reason to use Linux (1)

simong (32944) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224091)

I was contracted to build a SCO UnixWare box in about 1998 as a mail server. It was so frustrating to configure with virtual hosts (impossible, as it later turned out), and support was non-existent on the web and only available on the presentation of a credit card on the phone that I advised the client to bin it and use Red Hat. It looks like I wasn't alone either.

Official response from SCO (4, Informative)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223773)

The company is obviously disappointed with the ruling issued last Friday. However, the court clearly determined that SCO owns the copyrights to the technology developed or derived by SCO after Novell transferred the assets to SCO in 1995. This includes the new development in all subsequent versions of UnixWare up through the most current release of UnixWare and substantial portions of SCO UnixWare Gemini 64. Also, SCO owns the exclusive, worldwide license to use the UnixWare trademark, now owned by The Open Group. SCO's ownership of OpenServer and its Mobile Server platforms were not challenged and remain intact. These SCO platforms continue to drive enterprises large and small and our rapidly developing mobile business is being well received in the marketplace.

What's more, the court did not dismiss our claims against Novell regarding the non compete provisions of the 1995 Technology License Agreement relating to Novell's distribution of Linux to the extent implicated by the technology developed by SCO after 1995. Those issues remain to be litigated.

Although the district judge ruled in Novell's favor on important issues, the case has not yet been fully vetted by the legal system and we will continue to explore our options with respect to how we move forward from here.
http://www.sco.com/company/news/statement.html [sco.com]

Re:Official response from SCO (2, Funny)

Salo2112 (628590) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223971)

That sure is a lot of verbiage to say "Novell put sand in the KY and widened our hineys."

The rise of the commodty software (1)

downix (84795) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223787)

I wonder if the rise in popularity of such community-developed software will almost make software into a commodity, generally available for all. Perhaps Marx was not wrong in his assertion that a group dynamic can be as productive as any other, but it took a truely equalizing force, such as the internet, to put it to the true test.

Joe User's association (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20223805)

1. SCO doesn't own Unix
2. Novell does
3. Microsoft has an agreement with Novell
4. Therefore...
5. ...

Insert at #5 any meaningful answer that will prevent users from thinking that MS owns, or could claim to own, even the minimal part of Unix.

Re:Joe User's association (2, Funny)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224199)

Well, long ago, Microsoft wrote a Unix system called Xenix. They sold it to SCO, who renamed it Netware.

SCO continues to thrash around. (1, Informative)

arkham6 (24514) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223811)

Statement from SCO Regarding Recent Court Ruling

The company is obviously disappointed with the ruling issued last Friday. However, the court clearly determined that SCO owns the copyrights to the technology developed or derived by SCO after Novell transferred the assets to SCO in 1995. This includes the new development in all subsequent versions of UnixWare up through the most current release of UnixWare and substantial portions of SCO UnixWare Gemini 64. Also, SCO owns the exclusive, worldwide license to use the UnixWare trademark, now owned by The Open Group. SCO's ownership of OpenServer and its Mobile Server platforms were not challenged and remain intact. These SCO platforms continue to drive enterprises large and small and our rapidly developing mobile business is being well received in the marketplace.

What's more, the court did not dismiss our claims against Novell regarding the non compete provisions of the 1995 Technology License Agreement relating to Novell's distribution of Linux to the extent implicated by the technology developed by SCO after 1995. Those issues remain to be litigated.

Although the district judge ruled in Novell's favor on important issues, the case has not yet been fully vetted by the legal system and we will continue to explore our options with respect to how we move forward from here.

http://www.sco.com/company/news/statement.html

Re:SCO continues to thrash around. (1)

The Analog Kid (565327) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224073)

It doesn't matter. With a stock price of $0.40 and still falling (as of 9:49 AM EST) they'll soon be delisted from the Nasdaq and will go bust. No one believes their story anymore (like they shouldn't have in the first place) and no one really cares about them anymore.

Re:SCO continues to thrash around. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20224121)

But good sir knight, you have no arms and no legs.

Tis only a flesh wound.

What are you going to do, bleed on me?

No more sock puppets.... (1)

Jerry (6400) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223817)

It seems Microsoft will have to either sue or shut up.

They can't continue making public claims and not mitigate "damages" by pointing to a culprit and specifying THE EXACT lines of their code which they believe is in Linux. That will lead, of course, to the issue of the validity of their IP claims since most suffer severely from prior art.

Not so fast my friend (4, Interesting)

ICLKennyG (899257) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223839)

So this is what was keeping Linux market share from increasing? I thought it was that most people were too used to windows and not willing to learn a new operating system. Thanks for clearing that up. Can we please get a bit of perspective on this. Linux is doomed to a fringe market share unless something extremely bad happens from Microsoft... yes even worse than Vista. This suit was not hindering all that many people from installing Linux. I know here at work we were running it on our servers, with nothing but mild amusement every time one of these stories came down. Linux will primarily be run in the server space with fringe desktop user space for the foreseeable future. Those who's management is in bed with Microsoft for what ever reason will continue to run Windows Server in their servers. Those who hate M$ and don't have any problems with some of the unsupported functionality will run Linux. This suit changes nothing.

Re:Not so fast my friend (4, Insightful)

kebes (861706) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224219)

So this is what was keeping Linux market share from increasing? I thought it was that most people were too used to windows and not willing to learn a new operating system.
Well, such things are rarely due to a single issue. The fact that most people are comfortable with MS Windows (and generally dislike change or learning new things) is a huge roadblock to widespread acceptance of Linux, to be sure. However, in addition to this, the trepidation of many companies regarding the legal status of Linux kept them from considering Linux as a viable business option. (Like it or not, the FUD works on some companies.) Now that Linux has been shown to be: (a) non-infringing, and (b) backed by stable, powerful companies (Novell, IBM, etc.), this makes it a much more reasonable option for businesses. So while this court case may not quadruple Linux usage overnight, it is certainly a powerful step in that direction.

This suit was not hindering all that many people from installing Linux. I know here at work we were running it on our servers, with nothing but mild amusement every time one of these stories came down.
I'm glad that your company did not buy into the FUD. Not all companies are as knowledgeable about Linux, FOSS, and the associated legalities.

This suit changes nothing.
So you say. Yet, Forbes at least appears to be of the opinion that this does make a difference, so to the extent that Forbes is able to correctly analyze the business sector, or to the extent that businesses value Forbes' opinion, this will make a difference. Now, you or I may not care what Forbes has to say about technology: we already have well-formed opinions. However a vast number of companies (or managers, rather) do not care about such details. For some of them, an article in Forbes will make them take notice far more than the recommendation of their own IT department.

My point is: like it or not, public perceptions do alter the adoption of technology. This means that lawsuits (even if baseless) and media attention (even if belated) can and do affect adoption.

Re:Not so fast my friend (2, Insightful)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224407)

Those who hate M$ and don't have any problems with some of the unsupported functionality will run Linux.
See my point! They don't even have to spread their own FUD anymore!

Why do you feel you need to draw a line in the sand. Grow up.

An injured animal (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223867)

An injured animal might bite back even though it is doomed. Time to put it out of its misery.

Forbes right on top of last week (2, Insightful)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223875)

The mouthpiece of conventional wisdom. I'm been seeing more interest in Linux stemming from the progress in Ubuntu development than anything.

I never got the impression that anyone choosing Windows over Linux was doing so because of the SCO case. It may have been just one more excuse but I can't think of a time it was the primary reason a customer picked .NET over a LAMP stack. YMMV, of course.

I believe we will see more interest in Linux, mainly because interest was already picking up, not because of this ruling. And that includes Linux on the desktop. Again, mainly because it makes a nice desktop, not because of this case.

If Microsoft loses share in the server or desktop market they've got no one to blame but themselves. Vista was a giant FUM-BLE at a time they really needed to hit one out of the park. If you don't mind me mixing sports metaphors. ;) But the big problems aren't related to Vista. Byzantine license requirements, ever escalating fees, product activation, DRM, back-stabbing EULA's...those problems will continue to haunt Microsoft.

Re:Forbes right on top of last week (3, Interesting)

east coast (590680) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224067)

If Microsoft loses share in the server or desktop market they've got no one to blame but themselves. Vista was a giant FUM-BLE at a time they really needed to hit one out of the park. If you don't mind me mixing sports metaphors. ;) But the big problems aren't related to Vista. Byzantine license requirements, ever escalating fees, product activation, DRM, back-stabbing EULA's...those problems will continue to haunt Microsoft.

This is one of my big problems with the Linux community: You guys keep waiting for MS to fuck up.

Give me a reason to get rid of them first! Where is the software support, for one?

It actually makes me feel stand-offish about doing anything more with Linux knowing that they (as in the community) are waiting for someone else to fail enough to drive business their way instead of succeeding enough in their own right to give me a reason to look their way. Basing the value of your product on a competitors failures doesn't make me feel too confident. Endless stories of a new Linux revolution while the marketshare hardly creeps up doesn't make me feel too confident. The fact that major apps and games publishers are still taking a wait-and-see attitude towards Linux doesn't make me feel to confident.

For as much trash talk I hear about Vista around here I'm not seeing too much of it on the streets. The handful of Vista adopters I know don't seem to be having such a hard time with it and it seems that the situation is only getting better for Vista. And these guys aren't geeks, mostly. It's the fabled Joe Sixpacks I know who are adopting Vista. The geeks I know are sticking to XP. Even the biggest Linux advocate I know (whom I also respect his opinion) is running XP on his laptop and his main home desktop. As far as Linux goes he's still little more then a hobbyist. After talks with him I don't think he's going to switch to Linux as his main any time soon.

Give us a reason to switch. Don't wait for MS to file for Chapter 11. It's not going to happen anytime soon. As long as the Linux community and software publishers don't step up to the plate I don't think I'm going to see a time where I am forced to switch out of desperation.

So if the big plan in the community is to wait for the old guard to be weak, sick and feeble before they make their attack I'm afraid you guys are going to be hanging out in the bushes for a long long time. And no, talk of another wooden rabbit isn't going to do much to sway me. But I'll keep an eye open because it is mildly amusing.

Re:Forbes right on top of last week (1)

kebes (861706) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224453)

Where is the software support, for one?
Was that rhetorical? Seems like you can get Linux software support from IBM [ibm.com] , Red Hat [redhat.com] , Novell [novell.com] , Canonical [ubuntu.com] and many others. This is in addition to the extensive free, community support, of course. The fact that you can actually "shop around" for your support when considering Linux is actually a huge advantage of FOSS over proprietary solutions (where typically you are stuck with a single vendor for support).

You guys keep waiting for MS to fuck up. Give me a reason to get rid of them first!
On that point I of course agree with you. FOSS should be striving to be better than anything else... not hoping that the competition stagnates. Yet it's important to see that the community is, in fact, doing just that... and has been the whole time. Yes, plenty of people hope for MS (or whoever) to "drop the ball" so that FOSS gains visibility. But the people actually doing the designing and coding are very much focused on making the best product possible. This is why, for many tasks, Linux is by far superior to the competition. This is why many of us actually prefer to use Linux on the desktop.

There are innumerable examples of FOSS and Linux being better than the equivalent proprietary solution. If you have not identified any examples where FOSS is beating proprietary, then you really have not investigated free software very deeply, and I recommend you give it further analysis.

Linux has already "won" in many different domains... the fact that it continues to strive to "win" in other domains (e.g. commodity desktop usage) just shows that the community isn't content to stagnate: they want to keep evolving the software into something better and better.

Re:Forbes right on top of last week (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224497)

New flash..

Linux isn't a company. There are over 12,000 programs in Ubuntu (as an example). That is over 12,000 programmers.

Your assumption that everyone is waiting for Microsoft to die is such a windows user point of view. Linux users that only use Linux never even THINK of Microsoft, its out of sight, its out of mind. The only time it ever comes up is when Microsoft start spewing BS about patents and that is it.

Why do you need a reason to switch? If you want to try it out then just do it! You can download a vmware image, you can boot up on a CD. Its not like you're screwing up you life by trying something different.

Re:Forbes right on top of last week (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224507)

Linux has already made itself superior to Windows in a number of ways. No one is 'resting on their laurels' or 'waiting for microsoft to screw up'. Linux developers continue to do their thing, occassionally managing to beat Microsoft at it's own game of "innovation" (which usually just means ripping off Apple again).

          If there's a reasonably cool idea out there in some product that represents genuine innovation or a level of progress above and beyond Linux/Windows/MacOS, then some Linux developer is working on a version (in parallel or as a clone).

          Based purely on quality and features, Microsoft lost that battle a long time ago and never really tried.

          DOS and Windows has always been about "compatability".

Re:Forbes right on top of last week (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224109)

Byzantine license requirements, ever escalating fees, product activation, DRM, back-stabbing EULA's...those problems will continue to haunt Microsoft.

All corporations spiral into blandness as soon as the guy that built it and kept telling everyone what to do leave. microsoft is ran by Bean counters now, nothing is important to microsoft other than profits. The men making the decisions are making them based on profits and not technology or innovation. This is why Microsoft is starting it's spiral into blandness, why the phone companies and cellular companies are more of jokes than leaders, and the leaders are the young upstarts.

Basically , fire all the lawyers and accountants and get people with vision and the balls to do something innovative in there. But that will never happen, innovation is dead as soon as the bean counters take hold in a company.

Re:Forbes right on top of last week (1)

YoungHack (36385) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224451)

> I never got the impression that anyone choosing Windows over Linux was doing so because of the SCO case.

This happened at my workplace. Of course the manager that bought into all of the FUD was an idiot and has since moved on to some other suckers. Once he left, Linux started to pick up much faster for us.

For us, that means the ruling will cause no change. Wherever that manager works now, however, it could make a difference.

Not Dan Lyons (3, Insightful)

asifyoucare (302582) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223923)

Imagine that, Danny boy isn't too keen to comment. Still it is a bit depressing to realise how much of the article is only approximately accurate.

For example the court did not rule that Novell owns copyrights to Unix - rather, the court ruled that no copyrights were transfered to (old) SCO in the Asset Purchase Agreement.

Similarly the article says "Santa Cruz Operation, which later became SCO" with the implication that the SCO in that sentence is the same SCO as in the headline. It is not. It is hard to blame the writer because SCOX has encouraged this exact confusion. Still, even Dan Lyons would have got THAT right.

Also the article stated "IBM, which failed in its attempt to market a proprietary operating system of its own ...". We techies know this refers specifically to OS/2. but it is hardly accurate to say that IBM has been unsuccessful in marketing its own operating systems. I could forgive this in a tech publication, but the typical Forbes reader would probably think that IBM had no successful operating systems.

Re:Not Dan Lyons (1)

Taxman415a (863020) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224029)

Dude, at least make a partial attempt to check your facts, especially when you're being snide about someone else's supposed errors. The ruling states "For the reasons stated above, the court concludes that Novell is the owner of the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights." http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200708101 65237718#comments [groklaw.net] in what appears to be the first sentence of the conclusion.

Re:Not Dan Lyons (1)

asifyoucare (302582) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224265)

Well, yeah, but apart from that? :)

But with egg on my face, I cannot see how the court was in a position to state that Novell was the owner. It is clear enough that whatever copyrights were held by Novell were not transfered to Old SCO, and I suggest that this is as far as the court should have gone. But the court didn't hear enough evidence on the history of Unix to ascertain exactly what copyrights were held by Novell in the first place, and certainly not enough evidence to conclude that Novell held "the copyrights".

The article I criticised at least mentioned that some of Unix had leaked into the public domain, but the extent of the leakage is not settled.

Re:Not Dan Lyons (2, Informative)

Locutus (9039) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224529)

having read the article, I felt it was either thrown together or built from pieces of a larger article. The sections just didn't flow very well and there was no depth to any of it. IMO, this seems to be a poor hack at getting something regarding this news into their content.

Notice that they totally missed that Microsoft had put $15M into SCO for a UNIX license and Sun put in $10 million for their UNIX license. Now, it turns out that SCO does not own UNIX and though they were allowed to sell licenses, they were legally obliged to pay 95% of those fees to Novell. IMO, this is atleast as important to the story since both these companies are still around and still fighting against Linux. Not to mention that Novell has some legal issues to deal with related to those licenses and their validity. As the owner of the product, do they not have the right to void such licenses since they were never paid?

LoB

Microsoft Wins (1)

JeremyGNJ (1102465) | more than 7 years ago | (#20223931)

Notice how the article talks about RedHat and Novell. Nowhere does it mention Debian or Slackware.

The result of this lawsuit is that Novell now holds the intellectual property that SCO claimed has been integrated into Linux. I wonder what it would take for them to use it for something?

Secondly all this does is solidify the idea that "If you're going to use Linux, you need legal protection from this sort of thing" It kind of legitimizes the type of deal that Novell has made with Microsoft.

Re:Microsoft Wins (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224761)

it shows you how ridiculous the US legal system is in this regard. SCO was able to bring a case against many companies without showing to a judge or jury there was any validity to their claim. How many years did it take for Novell to get this through the courts? 5 years! 10s if not 100s of millions of dollars were spent on this and it was all a smoke and mirror game.

And the tricks Microsoft played in backroom deals to help fund SCO was amazing. They paid SCO $16 million for a UNIX license? Sun, a company who's products are UNIX paid less than Microsoft for a license. $10 million IIRC. And then, we learned of how Microsoft help broker the millions put into SCO by a Canadian investment company and a Canadian bank. These are publicly traded US corporations doing this crap.

I hope Novell has some recourse to burn these companies and burn them well. And maybe AutoZone and Daimler Chrysler can jump in too.

LoB

Thanks, SCO, for the riposte! (2, Interesting)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224061)


To anyone claiming 'this changes nothing', you're overlooking a great opportunity. Practice this phrase with me:

"Yeah because that worked out GREAT for SCO!"

Now, prepare to use this move to any and all of the following objections:

A) Linux is full of stolen code, and using it means you'll get sued.

B) Linux suffers from tons of IP problems, and using it means you'll get sued.

C) Microsoft is going to sue you for using Linux.

The thing that SCO did for us was dismiss the 'forgone conclusion' that the ability to sue is equivilent to the ability to WIN said suit.

Having survived this beast makes for a stronger FOSS community, so long as we don't forget it. Of course with all the noise SCO and Darl made when they thought they were certain to win, that isn't too likely...

Thank you sirs!

Re:Thanks, SCO, for the riposte! (1)

JeremyGNJ (1102465) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224107)

Wow, you TOTALLY misunderstand the rules. The court that that SCO cannot sue because "it does not own the Unix code in question". Novell does. There's nothing stopping Novell from filing a similar suit.

Re:Thanks, SCO, for the riposte! (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224179)


I got that part, thanks.

And if Novell kills Linux, what exactly would they have left? Do you suppose they WANT to be Microsoft's lap dog? Because it would be either that or nothing. A non-Free Linux has no future.

Besides, Novell themselves have redistributed the code under GPLv2. As far as I know, they can't undo that nor can they remove the freedoms given after the fact.

If the crunchy bits of the code go GPLv3 this gets even more sticky.

My point, and the lesson learned from SCO: There's no slam-dunk here.

Re:Thanks, SCO, for the riposte! (1)

JeremyGNJ (1102465) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224213)

SCO was a linux distributor too. They would not want to "kill linux", however they might want to have a linux "with more stuff than the other guys, cause they cant use our UNIX intellectual property".

Re:Thanks, SCO, for the riposte! (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224353)


I may be the only one that thought this, but I always assumed that SCO wanted to kill/absorb Linux in favor of their proprietary Unix. Their expensive, inferior product was dying a death of free markets and they wanted the law to bail them out.

If that's not your view of what SCO was seeking, please share.

Novell doesn't, as far as I know, have a viable product that is not Linux. Again, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that SuSE is what they're currently selling.

I don't see the parallel.

I am intrigued, though.

Re:Thanks, SCO, for the riposte! (1)

JeremyGNJ (1102465) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224505)

Novell *could* pick out the parts in Linux that SCO was claiming it owned via Unix copyrights and tell all other vendors that they cannot include those parts because they are copyrighted. Force those parts out of Linux.

Then they could include all of those parts as part of SuSE, while other Linux vendors cannot use them. It becomes "value added" service of Novell/SuSE.

It *could* happen like that, not saying it *will*.

Did any business take SCO seriously? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224201)

At first, some companies back in 2003 may have been scared of Linux because of the lawsuit, but later polls seem to suggest that the SCO lawsuit has done little to affect Linux adoption. Any company concerned about Linux would have had to do a little research to see the SCO scam for what it was. After all they sued Daimer Chrysler (one of their former customers) for doing little more than switching to Linux 7 years before the suit. And when they sued them, it was shown that SCO really had no reason, and it was summarily dismissed.

Right now Linux adoption on the desktop is probably more affected by three factors: 1) The ease of use of Ubuntu, 2) The lackluster offerings of Vista, 3) The buzz/hype surrounding Mac OS X. On the server side, the adoption of Linux is still governed by TCO, hardware, and reliability concerns.

Re:Did any business take SCO seriously? (3, Informative)

DannyO152 (544940) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224409)

Autozone got sued for switching because SCO alleges that there was a point during the transition when Linux applications are linking to unix libraries. Daimler/Chrysler got sued because they didn't respond within 30 days to a letter sent to the wrong address and, eventually, SCO alleged that when DC said "we are not using Unix" they didn't answer the question "which servers are running Unix" and SCO claimed that they had audit rights to Linux usage. For the latter two points, the Michigan state court sent SCO packing with another expensive goose egg.

Too late (1)

CottonThePirate (769463) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224293)

I was really surprised how many upper level folks at my rather large organization at the time paid attention to SCO. It hit at just the right time when Linux was being seriously considered by timid managers, the lawsuit threat scared them and they didn't want to get stuck. It was sad, all the tech guys would say it was crap, but the idea of a lawsuit is scary to some. (myself included). The last year or two the case was known to almost everyone to be without merit, but it's the opposite of shock and awe, it came about so slowly that there was never a great "Linux is ok again" moment.

The Forbes view of the world (1)

simong (32944) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224375)

Which has little to do with those who work in IT and much to do with those who pay for IT. It may have made some US CEOs think twice but it wouldn't have affected the workers on the ground. Next week Forbes will tell its readers that mauve has the most RAM.

sure (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#20224583)

'The SCO Group frightened potential business users away from Linux with lawsuits demanding billions in royalties. But the litigious company's claims were shot down in a ruling that will likely boost uptake of the operating system.'

So what's the excuse for the non-adoption of Linux for all those years before the SCO mess?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?